Ty, less face-to-face social interactions, and/or less time spent in natural environments? Screen media consumption is a cultural phenomenon with relevance to each of the main sections of our review–it does not stand alone. Research, admittedly only correlational, indicates that modern technological gadgets and the draw of screen-based media may be contributing to a displacement of nature-based recreation [32-34]. Over the last decade in North America, research indicates that adults and children are spending less time outdoors and significantly more time indoors [35]. The implications are obvious, and we will touch on these in more detail throughout our review–less contact with microbial diversity, changed dietary habits (which, in turn, alter intestinal microbial diversity), and less frequency of the Stone Age nature experiences Dubos considered to be necessary. Could there be a synergy between excess screen media consumption, high cognitive load, and limited time in nature? We will also add the variable of nutrition to this question later. Only through breaking down the silos might we understand if the detrimental health effects may be greater than the sum of these PubMed ID:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28506461 individually researched parts. Excess screen-based media consumption, information load, and so-called techno-stress have recently been linked with poor psychological health [36-47]. Notwithstanding the potential benefits of media that may get DS5565 specifically foster helping behavior, overall daily screen media use is associated with diminished empathy and the ability to read facial emotions (and other non-verbal cues) that indicate the emotion felt by another [48,49]. In 1970, Stanley Milgram published his “urban overload” theory, which posited that the cognitive demands placed on an individual in complex urban environments would diminish the ability to recognize the social cues that might otherwise evoke empathy and altruism [50]. In its wake, a series of experimental studies showed that high levels of cognitive load from environmental inputs were associated with diminished helping behavior–ranging from granting a favor in an office setting, returning an experimental “lost” letter, saving recyclables for a fictitious art project, to helping an individual locate a lost contact lens [51].Logan et al. Journal of Physiological Anthropology (2015) 34:Page 4 ofHowever, Milgram could not have imagined the extent to which global, mobile communication technologies and internet access would factor into the cognitive load of contemporary environments [52]. The overwhelming amount of consumer choices in contemporary society only adds to the decision-making load [53]. Cognitive load has been shown to reduce the subjective experience of empathy and diminish neural activity in brain regions associated with empathy [54]. Interestingly, investigations involving adults from remote rural regions (living semi-nomadic lifestyles) have shown that, compared to urban residents, they are far less distracted by irrelevant information during cognitive tasks [55]. Evidence does show that urban (vs. rural) upbringing is associated with elevated cortisol responses to acute stress and a blunted cortisol awakening response [56]. Some research shows that attention-deficit hyperactivity levels are higher in urban areas, yet the reasons for an urban ural gradient remain unclear [57,58]. At this point, it is unknown whether provider-diagnosed ADHD– which has increased threefold in children/teens in the US since.
