Argument Analysis of Brain, Interrupted, by Bob Sullivan and Hugh Thompson

Technology has evolved from simple inventions like the wheel to smart, intricate mobile devices that share the world’s information within the blink of an eye. Tweets, emails, status updates, text messages, and many other news-based actions seem to become quite a distraction and many people are too involved in the latest gossip to even recognize it. In the article, “Brain, Interrupted,” Bob Sullivan and Hugh Thompson effectively discuss the consequences that interruptions and multitasking can have on the Brain, however, they stray from the main subject they begin with: TECHNOLOGY affecting the brain.

On May 3, 2013, The New York Times had posted an article discussing the poor effects that can happen to the brain if you are multitasking and being interrupted. There have been claims from numerous Universities suggesting that multitasking can deaden our brain. Sullivan and Thompson give us the insinuated results that if one wishes to accomplish two or more tasks at once, they will not reach the maximum capacity of success that the brain offers to them. Research on this topic has been minimal so the authors decide to investigate more on this epidemic (Sullivan and Thompson).

The article does a great job at associating with the audience because most of America has experienced some form of distraction or has had to multitask. This is their hook: something relatable that all people can correlate to. The authors could have presented the subject without giving the impression that switching back and forth between tasks can make us “dumber” (Sullivan and Thompson). They could have given a euphemism to lower the audience’s chances of becoming defensive and be more open minded. By increasing their professionalism, they can reach their target ...

... middle of paper ...

... task at hand.

All in all, the article’s argument is effective and semi-well written for the approach they gave. They put in a ton of work and approached the study well, however, it failed to stay with the topic presented in the beginning, making this article unreliable. It could have been more professional, the research should have had more elements, and they should have increased the amount of details to make the article exceptional and valid because this study was composed specifically for this article. The presentation contains evidence that makes the audience realize that attempting to complete two tasks at once can lower performance overall and distract us from our main focus, but it does not make people dumber in this case.

1Works Cited Sullivan, Bob and Hugh Thompson. “Brain Interrupted.” NYTimes.com. The New York Times, 3 May 2013. Web. 23 Sept. 2013.