Intervention Description

Given the theory of change, an intervention, grounded in self-regulation theory, was developed to support single-tasking and the reduction of media multitasking. In relation to the model of media multitasking proposed in Chapter 3, the intervention primarily

targets individual factors. However, to a lesser extent, aspects of the technological and social environment, as situational factors, are targeted. Additionally, the intervention can be understood to primarily function through restriction and awareness. Consequently, in relation to the BCW framework the restriction and enablement functions were adopted to target all four components of behaviour described in the COM-B model. In this sub- section the development and nature of the intervention is described. Prior to this, the selection of self-regulation as a theoretical framework is briefly motivated.

While the role of self-regulation as a determinant of media multitasking has been high- lighted throughout this dissertation, four motivations, in particular, support the adoption of this theory as a theoretical framework for the intervention. First, as highlighted in Chapter2, the self-regulation of behaviour is theorised to be central to multitasking and self-interruption and, as concluded in Chapter 3, the convergence of evidence, at this stage, indicates that self-regulation influences media multitasking (Reinecke et al.,2018; Szumowska et al., 2018). Second, as indicated in Chapter 6, metacognition of media use holds potential for changing such behaviour. Theories of self-regulation empha- sise metacognition, through monitoring, as a key component of behavioural regulation in the aid of pro-actively attaining desired outcomes (Zimmerman, 2008). Third, re- searchers have argued the value of self-regulation as a means of reducing media-related self-interruption and multitasking (e.g., Rosen et al.,2013a;Flanigan and Kiewra,2017; Parry and le Roux,2019b; Szumowska et al., 2018). Specifically, Adler and Benbunan- Fich(2013) contend that self-regulation can support the inhibition of self-interruptions, increasing instances of single-tasking. Moreover, Szumowska et al. (2018, p. 191) argue that improvements in self-regulation “should counteract the tendency of frequent media multitasking to engage in switches between tasks”. Finally, given the goal-directed na- ture of media multitasking and the manner in which self-regulation theory focuses on the goals directing behaviour, such a theory provides an appropriate framework for an intervention targeting the promotion of single-tasking in relation to media multitasking. To support the effective self-regulation of media multitasking it was necessary to design an intervention which facilitated, firstly, goal setting, secondly, monitoring of behaviour in relation to these goals and, thirdly, responding to bring behaviour in-line with the goals. While some previous studies have considered interventions indiscriminately targeting all media use (e.g.,Irwin,2017), others have targeted use of a single artefact (e.g.,Hartanto and Yang, 2016). In this study it was decided to specifically target media multitasking involving the use of a smartphone. For the target population a majority of media use and, as a consequence, media multitasking, involves the use of such devices (Nielsen,

2016;Poushter,2016;Pew Research Center,2017). Bornman(2014) notes that, in many African countries, mobile phone ownership is over 90%. This percentage rises to over 90% when considering university students in South Africa (North et al.,2014).

Behaviour change is complex and, asMichie et al.(2011) note, often unsuccessful. More- over, efforts at improving self-regulation are often ineffective (Baumeister and Heather- ton,1996). As has been illustrated in a number of domains plans are necessary to achieve success at self-regulation. Specifically, Klimmt et al. (2018, p. 18) note that “abstain- ing from media use and communication access is now an action that requires intentions, planning, and specific arrangements”. Therefore, to support effective self-regulation of media multitasking the intervention involved the use of a pre-built mobile application —Forest.1 _{This application, available on both Android and iOS platforms}2_{, enables users}

to track their phone usage as represented by the session duration and number of screen- unlocks. Additionally, it enables users to adopt the Pomodoro Technique3 _{to managing}

their smartphone use. Use of such applications in social science research is not without precedent (Elhai et al.,2017;Rozgonjuk et al.,2018). Additionally, asChokalingam et al. (2018) indicate, for students in South Africa, use of such applications is uncommon. The intervention involved using the application to support the self-regulation necessary for facilitating single-tasking. To follow, the details of the intervention are outlined.

Smartphone Usage Goals: Based on usage statistics reported in previous studies participants were set a target of a maximum of one and a half hours (90-minutes) of smartphone usage per day. While there is a large scope for individual differences, across a number of studies employing experience sampling, diary tracking, self-reported, au- tomatically monitored, and observational methods, it has emerged that, on average, individuals use media for approximately nine hours per day (Voorveld and van der Goot, 2013;Magen,2017). While there is much variance across studies and individuals, between 30% and 80% of this use involves multitasking (Jeong and Fishbein,2007;Rideout et al., 2010). For smartphone use while, again, there is variance, studies indicate that students typically use these devices for more than three hours per day (Rosen, 2016). For South Africans aged 16 to 64, on average, three hours, 17 minutes per day is spent accessing the internet with a mobile phone (Kemp,2018). In terms of multitasking,Deng et al.(2018) found that such use typically involves over 100 switches between applications. Therefore, it is argued that the usage goal would, on average, require participants to reduce their

1

Seehttps://www.forestapp.cc/for more information about this application.

2_{While it is freely available on the Android platform, the iOS version requires a once-off fee. For}

this reason, this study required participants to be Android users.

media use and, consequently, the total switches involving media. Importantly, while the target may have required reductions in media use, the focus was not on the amount of time or extent of the reduction in use. Rather, the purpose of the target was to guide the self-regulation of behaviour with media in accordance with the pre-specified goal. To support participants in meeting this target and provide them with an awareness of their media use, the Forest application provides a dashboard displaying total use per day. Monitoring of Smartphone Usage: Building on this first component, the second as- pect of the intervention involved the self-monitoring of smartphone usage. While previous studies have relied on the provision of reminders, diary logging, or constantly displayed metrics, in this study monitoring of behaviour was supported through the aforementioned dashboard displayed by the Forest application. In this way, while constantly available, participants were able to monitor their media use at their own leisure. In contrast to unsupported attempts to improve self-regulation, providing participants with accurate reports on their behaviour, it was argued, would support them in monitoring their own behaviour. As with previous interventions promoting awareness of media use and multi- tasking, metacognition was a key target of this aspect of the intervention. The specific behavioural strategies to change, however, were left to the participants’ discretion. Addi- tionally, participants were required to submit a report of this dashboard to the primary researcher each day. This report provided data on the number of screen-unlocks and the time of day and number of minutes for which the smartphone was used. Figure ?? provides an indication of the phone-usage report.

Operating for goal-alignment While awareness may in-itself be a useful method of behaviour change, in self-regulation theory, the primary purpose of monitoring is the evaluation of current actions and, on this basis, responding as necessary. In this case, responses could be issued in one of two ways. First, as indicated by their usage reports, participants could, themselves, operate and bring their behaviour in-line with the target. Second, supported by the Forest application, participants were instructed to initiate set periods of time for which they wished not to use their smartphones. Using the pomodoro timer provided by the application participants were supported in bringing their behaviour in-line with the target. In the language of the application these sessions are termed ‘planting a tree’ and are run for a self-determined period of time. If the participant was successful at meeting their goal the tree ‘grew’ and, if they were not, the tree ‘died’. Along with the previous report, the participants submitted a report on their ‘forest’ each day to the primary researcher. This indicated, firstly, the number of restrictions initiated and, secondly, for how many the participant was successful at meeting their goal.

Figure 7.1: Screen capture of the phone usage dashboard displayed by Forest. The intervention was implemented for a period of 28 days. As Irwin (2017) notes, and as discussed in Chapter6, the duration required to identify an effect, if any, remains un- known. While some studies have shown effects of behaviour change or cognitive training on outcomes for cognitive control in periods as short as a single session (e.g., Josefsson et al.,2014;Jaeggi et al.,2014), others have shown effects after periods of three to four weeks (e.g., Nouchi et al.,2012;Anguera et al.,2013), and yet others have found effects after eight weeks or longer (e.g.,Jha et al.,2007). Additionally, as noted in Chapter 6, a majority of studies in this regard are brief in nature (occurring in a single session). Of the 15 studies reviewed only three took place for a period longer than a week. Given the disparate and, arguably, ineffectual results indicated in these studies, it was decided to implement the intervention for a longer duration. The chosen duration corresponds to Kushlev et al. (2016)’s suggestion that interventions involving reductions in media use be implemented for at least a month. As Webb and Bain (2011) note, compliance to intervention procedures is a key challenge facing intervention studies conducted in situ. Moreover, as noted in Chapter 6, adherence to intervention procedures has negatively affected the implementation of previous interventions in this regard. To promote adher- ence participants were provided with a financial incentive commensurate to their success at achieving the usage target. While the provision of financial incentives may support adherence, it is acknowledged that they may also have introduced biases into the study.