Controlled by information

Cognitive Fallout: Informational Omnipresence and its Effect on Memory Retention and Span of Attention

house Dr. Ryan C. Chester April 30, 2025

We live in an age where memory retention is trained to immediately fail, and the span of attention is conditioned to laps in microseconds. 

As the internet, internet of things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), and the omnipresent sense of pervasive technological access continues to fuel the desire for immediate gratification, the ability to function with higher-order thinking skills continues to deteriorate. Higher-order thinking is defined as the ability to perform inferential analysis, to cognitively synthesize various kinds of information, and to evaluate the integrity, quality, and coherency of one’s metacognitive aptitude; that is, the ability to intentionally evaluate how one thinks and reasons about any given topic (Kruger and Dunning, 1999). 

We can easily imagine how the cognitive fallout of higher-order thinking occurs by briefly noting the impact of the internet on the will to coherently reason. Kalinowski identifies the internet’s effect on memory as, “The Google Effect” (Kalinowski, 2018). The Google Effect is described as the neuropsychological phenomenon that automatically and instantaneously forgets information that is easily accessible online. The inquirer is faced with a convenience that is uncritically, and often unknowingly, embraced. The convenience can be stated as a question: Why exert the effort to commit the information to memory when we know that a quick Google query will likely provide the information we need? 

Similarly, the prevalence of AI related technologies has resulted in a phenomenon called “cognitive offloading, where people delegate mental tasks to AI rather than engaging deeply with complex ideas” (Adams and Alzaabi, 2025). The offloading of cognitive engagement engenders an incurious attitude, an aversion to question the underlying assumptions, and an overdependent reliance on AI to do the work of reason, which further results in “metacognitive laziness” (Goyal, 2025). The same process of cognitive offloading is found in IoT environments, where wearable technologies and programable devices offer consumers “greater levels of ‘presence’ and an illusion of non-mediation” (Hamilton and Yao, 2018). The combination of technological mobility and the sense of information’s omnipresence conditions the individual to passively relinquish the will to reason. 

While the effects of omnipresent information are important to identify, it is equally important to understand what kind of cognitive process is being affected in the main. Memory retention is not a category of higher-order reasoning but of lower-order reasoning (Suppawittaya and Yasri, 2021). The span of attention is considered a facet of cognitive thought that is “related to an individual’s adaptation level, extra motivation, and contact degree” (Lanyu, 2024; cf. Zhang, 2019). While attention is often treated as different from higher- and lower-order reasoning it is a necessary function of both. And since the discipline of attention and focus, like memory, is an important facet of lower-order reasoning, it is treated as such for this article. The training and discipline of a prolonged attention span in early development is critical toward gaining competency in higher-order reasoning. This means that higher-order reasoning skills are predicated on high-functioning lower-order reasoning skills, which includes memory retention and span of attention.

The issue at hand is that the impact of omnipresent access to information has dulled our wits and usurped our will to reason at the level of lower-order reasoning. This is not a siloed phenomenon of the youth but a socially enforced and mimetically influenced contagion that is affecting all ages of postmodern cultures. The saturation of on-demand information has adversely affected our lower-order reasoning skills to such a degree that our ability to perform higher-order reasoning tasks have become elementary in many respects. 

The question we must wrestle with is do we or do we not want to follow the herd. To drop out of the herd means to intentionally unplug ourselves from the convenience of effortless information. It requires us to invest in quality reasoning apart from technology; to probe for meaning through relationship while challenging the foundations of our own assumptions; to be hungry for clarity of mind while embracing failure as a necessary part of the process; and to reenvision the importance of memory retention and heightened span of attention as an exciting, integral part of the reasoning process. If we permit ourselves to imagine more without the tantalization of technology, we just might be able to experience more with a clarity of mind—and this is a tantalizing thought.

Perhaps we should take a break from the encumbrances of informational and technological convenience. After all, there is much to be gained by reasoning the old-fashioned way.

Citations

  1. Adams, Lindall, and Ibrahim Alzaabi. “ChatGPT: The End of Critical Thinking as We Know It.” Pages 157–188 in Blending Human Intelligence with Technology in the Classroom. Edited by Mohammed H. Alaqad, Ghadah Al Murshidi, Abdesselam Bougdira, Badria Almurshiki, and Ahmed Al Zaabi. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Scientific Publishing, 2025. doi: 10.4018/979-8-3373-0771-8.ch007.
  2. Goyal, Anubha. “AI as a Cognitive Partner: A Systematic Review of the Influence of AI on Metacognition and Self-Reflection in Critical Thinking.” IJISRT 10.3 (March 2025). doi: https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25mar1427.
  3. Hamilton, Kristy A., and Mike Z. Yao. “Cognitive Offloading and the Extended Digital Self.” Pages 257–68 in Human-Computer Interaction. Theories, Methods, and Human Issues: 20th International Conference, HCI International 2018, Las Vegas, NV, USA, July 15–20, 2018, Proceedings, Part I. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91238-7_22.
  4. Kalinowski, Barbara A. “Logic Ab Initio: A Functional Approach to Improve Law Students’ Critical Thinking Skills.” Legal Writing 22 (2018): 109–50 (122). doi: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2972284.
  5. Kruger, Justin, and David Dunning. “Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments.” J Pers Soc Psychol 77.6 (1999): 30–46 (31). doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1121.
  6. Lanyu, Du. “Attention Span.” Page 98 in The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology. Edited by Zhang Kan. Singapore: Springer, 2024. doi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7874-4_263.
  7. Suppawittaya, Piwat, and Pratchayapong Yasri. “The Comparison of Chunking Method to Enhance the Cognitive Capacity of Short-term Memory to Retain Textual Information among High School Students.” IJRSE 3.1 (2021): 27–35. https://jurnal-fkip.ut.ac.id/index.php/ijrse/article/view/502.
  8. Zhang, Jiawei. “Cognitive Functions of the Brain: Perception, Attention and Memory.” IFM Lab Tutorial Series 6. (2019): 1–33. doi. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.02863.