Smartphone out of reach? Workers still find ways to get distracted

Notably, even though participants engaged in fewer interactions with their phones when placed farther away, their overall cognitive flow remained fragmented. Task-switching between work and leisure was consistent regardless of smartphone proximity, suggesting that the underlying behavioral patterns of multitasking are device-agnostic.

Physically distancing smartphones from users during work hours significantly reduces their use, but it does not meaningfully reduce overall distractions or increase time spent on actual work, according to a new study. The research, led by Maxi Heitmayer of the London School of Economics and Political Science and published in Frontiers in Computer Science, challenges conventional assumptions about smartphone overuse and productivity in knowledge work settings.

The study "When the phone's away, people use their computer to play: distance to the smartphone reduces device usage but not overall distraction and task fragmentation during work" observed 22 participants across two five-hour work sessions, one with the smartphone placed within arm's reach and another with it placed 1.5 meters away. Participants used their own laptops and smartphones in a controlled lab setting designed to mimic real-world work conditions. All activities were video recorded, coded, and later double-checked through replay interviews with each participant.

The results revealed a significant reduction in smartphone usage when the device was placed out of immediate reach. On average, smartphone use dropped from 29 minutes to 15 minutes, and the number of interactions decreased from 18.5 to 6.5 per session. However, this did not lead to any statistically significant increase in time spent on work-related tasks. Instead, participants shifted their leisure browsing from their phones to their laptops, effectively maintaining the same level of non-work activity.

The total duration of work remained constant across both conditions, averaging 3 hours and 33 minutes. Participants also engaged in approximately the same number of total activities, around 60 per session, with no major changes in the length or frequency of work versus leisure periods.

The study also monitored disruptive notifications and found that their number had little impact on device usage. Participants received slightly more notifications when their phones were within reach, but overall, disruptions were minimal and not strongly linked to time spent on devices. Interestingly, in the condition where phones were farther away, participants were more likely to respond to notifications because they couldn't easily glance at the screen, suggesting that visibility, not just sound, drives reactive behavior.

End-of-day surveys highlighted another insight: participants accurately estimated their smartphone usage in the distant condition but significantly underestimated their use when the phone was nearby. This gap between perception and reality, the authors suggest, may contribute to misleading narratives about smartphone "addiction."

Notably, even though participants engaged in fewer interactions with their phones when placed farther away, their overall cognitive flow remained fragmented. Task-switching between work and leisure was consistent regardless of smartphone proximity, suggesting that the underlying behavioral patterns of multitasking are device-agnostic.

The study also uncovered order effects: participants who experienced the phone-out-of-reach condition first used their phones less frequently overall on the second day, even when the phone was nearby. This suggests a possible "mindfulness effect" from participating in the study, reinforcing the idea that awareness, rather than enforcement, may be more effective in managing distractions.

Heitmayer concluded that simply banning phones at work is not a sufficient solution. "Workers will find other ways to distract themselves. To address interruptions, we must understand habits and self-regulation strategies, not just physical device presence."

The study cautions against equating technological availability with productivity outcomes. It urges organizations to focus on building employee capacity for self-regulation and to rethink policies based on restricting device access.

Future studies should focus on exploring real-world applications outside of the lab setting and investigate how the nature of tasks and individual behavioral differences influence workplace distraction. The authors also advocate for studies using activity-logging software for deeper analysis of usage patterns and cross-device interruptions.