Why I’m disappointed

As I’ve been researching for my second book, I’ve come across some slightly disappointing findings. Rather, it’s my lack of finding anything that is disappointing. Specifically with two oft-quoted sources—one, a research study, and another, a pop-productivity method. 

Have you ever heard someone say that it takes 23 minutes to refocus after a distraction? If you search that, you’ll find dozens of articles from content creators and publications, all linking to this study. Except, this fun little factoid is nowhere to be found in the study. Go word-search for yourself. If you take the time to read it, you’ll find that people’s productivity increased after a distraction, albeit with more stress. 

Maybe you don’t consume as much productivity content as I do, so you haven’t heard this “23 minutes” myth. Certainly, you’ve heard of Jerry Seinfeld’s “don’t break the chain” productivity method of not missing consecutive days?

This method says to mark an “X” on a calendar every time you miss a day of creative work. Just don’t miss two days in a row. Except, in his own words on a Reddit AMA, Seinfeld said, “Somehow I am getting credit for making an X on a calendar with the Seinfeld productivity program. It's the dumbest non-idea that was not mine, but somehow I'm getting credit for it.” 

At least this one being attributed to a popular figure like Seinfeld does some general good for the world. I suppose the “23 minutes” study inspires people to put their phones on “do not disturb.” 

I’m just disappointed that fake information can be spread so quickly, especially since the internet allows us to find and cite sources in mere minutes. I’m guilty of it in the past, but prepping a book to go to print has me digging deeper. I’m glad I am, now.