# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Performing Ideas Interactive Presentation Template Nov 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Looking good in video conferencing with minimum technology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this 12 min video I talk about 12 things you can in just 20 seconds before your video conference call to make sure that you look good and you have confident body language while speaking to the camera. I don’t use any fancy setup - I’m just using my laptop and earphones to show you how these 12 ea

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
“Not all the things that are important to you are important for your audience”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is an interview with me recently published by the Barcelona Institute for Research in Biomedicine (and reproduced here with their kind permission) about my course “How to Improve Your Scientific Presentations”. The original interview can be found here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Think about the last presentation you saw. How much can you remember about it? Can you remember any numbers? Any statistics? Any facts?

Most people do not remember much information from your presentations. Actually, it can be surprising what they do remember. They might remember an anecdote you told, or a colorful metaphor, or the way you used your hands to mime an action.

Every day we are bombarded with huge amounts of new material and we cede more and more responsibility to our phones and computers to store the important information (can you recall your best friend's mobile phone number without looking at your phone?). I have an app on my phone that stores all my passwords so I can access them with my fingerprint. If I really need to memorize something, I need to be alone, some place quiet and have plenty of time.

And yet, many presenters believe that by the time they have finished their talk, their audience (who are in a group and in a noisy place for a short length of time) should remember the information they have just presented. Scientists present detailed results of their studies, financiers present complicated financial predictions and teachers present lists and lists of "important" facts they want their students to remember. But if audiences don't remember this information, then what should we be presenting?

The answer is that of course presentations should contain information, but only enough information to convince the audience that your argument is well-founded. Papers, reports and articles are for passing on information (people will save them to their computer and open them when they need that information), while presentations are for presenting arguments and convincing your audience that you have the right answer to their problem.

In printed publications, it's usual for the argument to be presented at the end after all the information has been outlined. In a scientific paper, for example, the first 70-80% of the paper will be information (methods and results) and the final 20% will be argument (discussion and conclusions). I would argue that a presentation, even scientific presentations, should be the opposite - 70% argument and 30% results.

And don't put your conclusions at the end of your presentation, like in a paper. Why not? Think about what you do when you get a new article or report into your hands. Which parts do you read first? Most people say that they read the abstract first and then the conclusions. If they like what they read they go back and read the rest of the paper. Applying this logic to presentations, we should first tell the audience what our argument and conclusions are, and they outline how we have come to them, cherrypicking on the relevant information to convince them that our argument is sound.

So, presentations should contain information, but don't expect your audience to retain it. Instead, aim to convince them that you have the best solution to a problem they have, you have the information (data, results, statistics etc.) to back this up, but you're not going to share it all with them in the presentation and instead you will share it with them in a document (e.g. a handout) , because this is the best way to pass on information.

Find more articles, videos and tools on communication and productivity at www.brianmccarthy.es

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Contain vs. Retain: How much information should you put into a presentation?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Think about the last presentation you saw. How much can you remember about it? Can you remember any numbers? Any statistics? Any facts? Most people do not remember much information from your presentations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This week I've made a 7-minute video explaining 3 structures that are very useful when it comes to answering questions in presentations, interviews or negotiations. Practicing and using these structures will help you answer in a way that is efficient, convincing and confident even when you could be feeling under pressure responding to an unexpected or difficult question.

The three structures are:

PWEP (Position, Why, Example, Positon)

Problem - Solution - Benefit

What? So what? Now what?

Please leave a comment if you know of any other structures that can be useful when answering questions.

For more articles, videos and resources visit my website www.brianmccarthy.es/en

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
3 simple structures to help you answer questions under pressure

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This week I've made a 7-minute video explaining 3 structures that are very useful when it comes to answering questions in presentations, interviews or negotiations. Practicing and using these structures will help you answer in a way that is efficient, convincing and confident even when you could be

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last week I wrote about the physiological effects of fear that many people (at least the people with bodies) experience before a presentation, negotiation or interview. Today I want to have a look at the common psychological consequences of fear.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again - the most important thing to overcome fear and nervousness is to be clear about why you are in this situation. If it's a presentation, see it as an opportunity to help your audience overcome a problem they have (not to share information with them as many presenters think). If you are being interviewed for a job, see it as an opportunity to show your potential employer how and why you would be a great member of their team. And if it's a negotiation, be clear about your non-negotiables, what you're willing to negotiate about, your BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement), and finally but most importantly, all these same factors from the other's point of view.

Now, let' have a look at most common psychological fears and hang-ups (based on my classroom discussions with more than 1500 workshop participants over the last 7 years) related to high-stakes "performance" situations for leaders.
1.Negative self-talk.
Some people, maybe without even realising that they are doing it, are talking themselves into failure. With their inner voice, and maybe even out loud to the audience, they are saying things like "this is going to be terrible", "I hate this, I don't want to be here", "I haven't prepared enough", "they are going to laugh at me the moment I open my mouth" etc. I'm not a psychologist, but I remember when I used to play Gaelic football, there were always guys like this in the dressing room. They would be talking about how bad they felt and their injuries before a match. I think it was a way to make excuses before they had even started the game. If they lost or played badly, then their predictions were right. If they won, they were also right, in fact even better then right, they had played well despite not being in peak form. I think the other reason why people engage in negative self-talk is because it is easier than being positive. Being positive about the future, about your capabilities and about other people, involves risk - you could be mistaken, life always goes at least a little contrary to expectations. However, there is no risk being negative about the future, you are always going to be right to a certain extent; but it can stop you from trying something new and from achieving your potential.

What is the solution to negative self-talk? Well, first of all, you need to catch your voice speaking negatively. You need to take some time to listen to your thoughts in the hours leading up to the event. It can be difficult as this is when we are frantically running around making last minute changes, checking our materials and going over our notes. Take a minute (it only takes a minute) to sit somewhere quiet and turn your attention inwards. What is your inner-voice saying? Repeat to yourself positive phrases (e.g. "This is good", "I'm prepared for this", "The world is going be better after this"). Take a positive posture as this will help you think positively. Visualise (positively!) your opening, your closing, and having good interactions with the audience. It can also help to visualise something you are good at (sport, music, dancing) and let those good feelings influence how you feel right now.

2. Fear of going blank

Many people are afraid of going blank in the middle of their presentation and being unable to continue. To avoid this, they literally put the script of their talk into their powerpoint slide. This is not the solution! Instead, prepare presenter notes on index cards and have them in your pocket or close by. Just preparing these cards will help you remember your speech and key points. And if the worst happens, just take them out and look for what to say next. The audience probably won't even notice and will think that you are pausing to give them a break for a few moments. I've done a full post on how to prepare these cards here.
3. The audience is waiting for me to make a mistake
Ok, maybe if Donald Trump is speaking to the Mexican Parliament, then yes, his audience really is hoping he'll spill water on his suit, forget his lines and his pants are going to rip. However, this is not the case for most presentations. The audience don't want it to be bad, or for the presenter to make an ass of themselves. In fact, it's quite the opposite - they are hoping you're going to do a good job. No one wants to spend half an hour listening to a terrible presentation. Remember, the audience are on your side at the beginning of the talk, or at the very least they are indifferent to you. Show them that you've thought about them in your preparation, that you know what preoccupies them, and they will support you in your talk.

Also, you will make mistakes. Everyone does and you wouldn't be human if you didn't. Interpersonal communication is never perfect. The wonderful and unique aspect of "performance" is that it only happens once, it's live and there is an unreliable audience to deal with (this goes for presentations, interviews and negotiations). Remember that your reaction to your mistake will dictate your audience's reaction - if you spill water on your pants while you are talking and react like it is the end of the world, then your audience will react the same way and feel very awkward about watching you. However, if you react with a joke or a smile and acceptance that "shit happens!", so will they and, furthermore, they will be on your side. In my Improvisational Leadership workshop, we look at the importance of "celebrating our mistakes". We have been brought up to believe that mistakes are bad, and consequently to be afraid of taking risks in case we make mistakes. But taking risks is heroic and people will respond positively even if you fail. See mistakes as learning opportunities and a chance to bond with others - people bond over success, but bond even stronger when they fail together. (I'll be writing here about celebrating mistakes later this month). Perfection does not exist so don't aim for it. Instead, aim for improvement - aim to make this negotiation or interview or presentation better then the last one.
4. Fear of making a start
The hardest part is always the beginning and even nervous presenters will find that once the first few minutes are over they feel much better. We get so afraid of just standing up and walking out in front of the audience, or walking into the room and greeting the negotiator sitting opposite us at the table. For this reason, memorise the first few things you intend to say. Practice how you intend to greet and break the ice with the other negotiator. However, don't memorise everything you intend to say - this will make you sound robotic and you also increase the risk of forgetting what you want to say as if you forget one piece of your speech, all the parts that come afterwards will also be lost to you.
5. Fear of not knowing the answer to a question
The final fear I will speak about is of not knowing how to answer a question. I know people who don't get very nervous when presenting but hate the thought of answering questions in the Q&A session after their talk. This is a shame, as I would argue that the Q&A session is the most important part of your talk, and that your presentation could be seen as merely warming up the audience before you get down to the important interactions. Remember, the unique thing about live leadership performance is the chance to interact with your audience, which is a powerful way for them to trust you, like you, and believe in your arguments.

So, what can we do about this fear of being unable to answer a question? Well, first, let's clarify the different types of questions that can be difficult to answer. First, there is the type of question asking for information that you have, but not with you right now. This is an easy one, all you need to say is that you will find that information and email it to the questioner (or all of the audience). Also, remember to ask if anyone in the audience has the answer. This shows your humility and desire to share and work with them.

The second and more interesting type of question is the one you hadn't thought about before. It might take you by surprise and make you doubt the arguments you have just presented. Of course, in the moment it is natural to get a shock and be defensive when asked this kind of question. But try to see it as an opportunity to test the validity of your argument and above all don't take personal. If you show your audience that the most important thing for you is the truth (and not being right), they will trust you.

I hope these strategies prove useful that next time you are feeling nervous before a big event. Remember that this is a companion piece to my previous article " How to deal with the physiological effects of nervousness before a presentation, interview or negotiation ". Please add some a comment if you have any other ideas about overcoming fear and nervousness, I'd be delighted to get your feedback.

This post originally appeared on Brian McCarthy: Performing Ideas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dealing with the psychological effects of fear before a presentation, interview or negotiation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last week I wrote about the physiological effects of fear that many people (at least the people with bodies) experience before a presentation, negotiation or interview. Today I want to have a look at the common psychological consequences of fear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to deal with the physiological effects of nervousness before a presentation, interview or negotiation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Once again this week I saw someone refer to the “fact” that public speaking is people’s number one fear, even greater then sickness, death and loneliness. The source for this factoid is The Book of Lists by David Wallechinksy et al.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is advice from TED about making presentations any good?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TED curator Chris Anderson has this week released a video called “TED’s Secret to Great Public Speaking”. Is his advice any good and can you apply it to making presentations at work? The video is 8 minutes long and very nicely made with classy graphics, Chris’s resonant voice and some impactful foot

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to rehearse your presentation when alone and also with others

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Everyone gets nervous when they present, even professional speakers. Being nervous reminds you that what you are doing is important.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recording yourself on video is one of the best ways to improve your presentations skills. And yet very few people do it. Why? I think it's because they don't like to see themselves on camera. They sound and look different from the image they have of themselves. But to be a good presenter you need to know how other people see you, and the camera will help you do this. And you don't need any special equipment, the camera on your laptop or phone will do fine. Here are 3 ways that a camera can help you with your presentation.

1. To analyse your body language

Some people think that rehearsing in front of a mirror will help you analyse your body language. This is not true. Most people can't speak and watch themselves at the same time for any great length. And we don't move naturally while looking at ourselves in the mirror. The best thing is to record yourself. Make sure that you are standing up while you give the talk. Try and set the scene to resemble as closely as possible the stage for the day of your presentation. Put your PowerPoint on the computer and change slides with a slide-changer, just as you will on the day of your talk. Use your presenter notes ( see this blog post). Imagine an audience in front of you and don't deliver your talk to the camera. When you finish and watch the video for the first time, watch it with the sound off. This will help you focus on how you move around and your facial expressions. Do you look natural? Enthusiastic? Do you show a range of expressions on your face? Do you smile? Do you gesture with your hands? Do you keep still from your waist down? ( see this blog post). Even better is to watch it with a friend or your partner. Ask them for their opinion. Then watch it again with the sound on but don't look at the screen. How is your voice? Do you speak slowly? Do you module your tone? Do you pause? Watching it this way, first with no sound and then without looking at the picture, will help you immensely in finding out about your voice and body language.

2. To help you remember what you want to say

Another great advantage of recording yourself is that you can use the video to help you remember the sections and transitions in your talk. I don't recommend memorising word-for-word your talk as this will make you sound unnatural. Instead of opening up your powerpoint and silently running through what you are going to say while on the plane or train, just put on some earphones and watch the video. I find this helps me a lot to prepare in the final days before my talk, particularly if I have to travel to get to the venue. Also, because I am a professional speaker and give a number of different talks every year, when I repeat a talk all I have to do is watch the video before the event.

3. To get feedback from friends or colleagues living in another country.

The final way that I use videos of myself is to get feedback from friends and colleagues that live abroad. My brother is a professor of communications in the U.S. and if I have to deliver a new talk I will make a video and send it to him. This is more effective than trying to use Skype as he can watch it whenever he wants and as many times as he wants. A great way to share videos privately is to upload them to Youtube and either make them an unlisted video (so only with people the link can see it) or a privately shared video (where only the people you choose can see it).

So, get over your fear and embarrassment of seeing yourself on camera and record your presentations. It is an essential tool to improve your communications skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Record yourself on camera in order to become a better presenter - but turn the sound off!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recording yourself on video is one of the best ways to improve your presentations skills. And yet very few people do it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There are many books and articles about how to brainstorm with a group. But what about when you are alone? And you need to get some new ideas fast? I have been using a method for the last seven years in my workshops and also for myself, that has proven time and again to be both efficient and highly productive. You only need four simple tools (that you definitely have at your desk), and there are only 12 simple steps to follow. At the very least you will remember some forgotten ideas regarding your project, but at best you will have some new and maybe useful ideas to add to it.

Tools:

1. one pen

2. one block of post-its in one colour and 4-6 post-its of a different colour

3. a sheet of flip-chart paper (or else a large empty table)

4. a countdown timer on your phone or tablet

The Method:

1. Make sure there is nothing on the table (or the sheet of flip-chart paper) except the block of post-its and the pen. If necessary, sit on the floor to do the exercise.

2. Set the countdown timer to 3 minutes and put it somewhere you can see it.

3. With NOTHING IN YOUR HANDS, think of the idea/problem/project you want to brainstorm. Let your mind fill with images, questions, people, ideas, numbers, quotes, etc. related to the project.

4. Wait until you feel anxious to start writing some of these ideas down. You should feel your hand nervously twitching with a desire to pick the pen up and write. When you feel this, grab the pen and start.

5. Start the countdown on the timer and write the first idea on one of the post-its. Each post-it should only contain one idea. An idea can be expressed any way you want - in words, drawings or symbols. Learn how to properly peel off post-its here.

6. The most important thing is to NEVER STOP WRITING ideas on post-its, even if the ideas are nonsense. Even if you have to write "no idea" on several post-its. The point is to keep writing. Don't think, just write. The objective is to try and fill the page with post-its in 3 minutes. This is about quantity of ideas, not quality.

7. When the timer runs out (make sure to set an alarm that sounds when the time is up) you MUST put down the pen. Even if you have more ideas in your head. Even if you are in the middle of writing an idea.

8. Take a couple of minutes to read everything you have written on the post-its. You are not allowed to add anything or move any of the post-its. While you are reading allow the ideas you have written to generate other ideas in your mind.

9. When your mind begins to fill with new ideas based on what you are reading, re-set the timer and start the process again. However, this time, when the timer runs out continue writing down ideas if you have them.

10. When you are finished (you will be tired, even though you have only done 6 minutes work it takes a lot of mental effort to brainstorm like this) read what you have done and group the ideas into themes. You will probably find that all of the ideas fall into 3-4 motifs (our minds usually generate ideas like this).

11. Throw away any ideas that are nonsensical or completely irrelevant.

12. On the different coloured post-its (or with the marker pen) write a title for each group (i.e. each theme that has emerged) and stick the post-it beside each group.

If you are brainstorming a presentation, then each of these groups should be a section of your talk. Remember to take a photo of your work as post-its have a habit of falling off the paper and I remember once a cleaner threw away a workshop's entire work. Finally, if you are a team-leader or teacher, it is easy to run this exercise with a group of people all brainstorming individually.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to brainstorm alone - try this proven method that only takes 10 minutes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are many books and articles about how to brainstorm with a group. But what about when you are alone? And you need to get some new ideas fast?

# data[].attributes.headline
Get your hands out pockets - how to gesture when presenting

# data[].attributes.subject
Get your hands out pockets - how to gesture when presenting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The most important sections of your presentation are the beginning and ending. The beginning is when you will grab the attention of the audience and hopefully persuade them you are worth listening to for the next 20 minutes, and the ending will be where you summarise your main points and key message in such a way that it will be easier for them to remember and take home.

In this post I would like to talk about the five best practices for ending your talk confidently and with impact.

1. Repeat something from the opening.

When you begin your closing section (your summary or conclusions), it's a good idea to repeat or link to an idea from the opening of your talk. One great way to do this is to begin your talk with the first half of a relevant personal story and end your talk with the second half. Or, if you talk about a problem in a specific context at the beginning, refer back to that context at the beginning of your closing. Or, if you open with an impactful picture, show that image again at the end. Doing this will signal to the audience that you are coming to the end of your talk. It completes the circle - you end up back where you started. This is the classic structure of a story that recounts a journey - the hero usually ends up back he started at the end of the movie. Doing this will give a sense of harmony and completeness to your talk.

2. Show how each of your main points support your overall argument.

At the beginning of your talk, it's important to map out the main ideas you will talk about. An audience that doesn't know the stages of the journey you are about to take them on will be less at ease than one that knows what lies ahead. At the end of your talk take them back over what you've spoken about but don't just list the different ideas you developed, show how they are related and how they support your main argument.

3. Don't show a Thank-You slide.

I see so many presenters that show a slide that says "Thank you!" at the end of their talk. Some even include smiley faces or happy photos to make the slide more visual. Others finish with a slide that says "Questions?". Neither of these slides is a good idea and neither helps the audience in any way (every slide you show should help the audience understand what you are saying). "Thank you" should come from your mouth with a smile and with eye contact, putting it on a slide cheapens the sentiment and looks naff. When my wife gives me a birthday present I don't make her a powerpoint to say thank you! The last slide you show, the one that should stay up until every last audience member has left the room, is your summary slide. A summary slide shows all the main points you have made, along with your main argument and your call to action. It should also show your name and contact details. This slide is the only slide you use that can contain a lot of text, you'll probably need to use bullet points to separate the text (this is the only slide you use that should have bullet-points!). Having all this information visible during the questions and answer (Q&A) session will help the audience think of questions to ask you. It will be interesting reading for them while you are answering questions they're not interested in. And many people will take photos of this slide with their phone to take home as a summary of your talk and to have your contact details.

4. I know you're tired, but finish with energy and enthusiasm.

It's only natural that you'll feel tired when you get to the end of your talk. The adrenaline that was racing through your body at the beginning has now worn off, your voice is tired and you'd love to sit down and have a beer. But you're only half way there. Now comes the Q&A session, probably the most important element of a presentation, as it is this part that differentiates your talk from a video of you talking (you can't ask questions to a video). Its crucial that the audience feels that you are enthusiastic and open for questions. What happens if no one has any questions? First of all, some people surely do want to ask you something, but no one wants to be the first to ask a question. You might need to break the ice and get the ball rolling. A good way to do this is for you yourself to ask a question to the audience. Make it an open, non-threatening question. Ask the most confident looking person in the room for their opinion, or get them to discuss the question with the person sitting beside them (this gives them a chance to rehearse their answer before speaking in front of everyone and also gives people a chance to network).

5. Your presentation doesn't end with questions and answers.

When the Q&A session is over, stand up, get their attention and close the presentation. This isn't always possible to do (e.g. At academic conferences where Q&A sometimes happens after every three presentations) but if you can, do it. In your closing give your main argument again, your call to action and deal with any doubts or criticisms that out in the Q&A. So, a closing is more or less a condensed version of your conclusions and an improvised summary of the Q&A. It's important that the audience goes home with an image of you confidently presenting your main argument, and not with a memory of a Q&A that may or may not have gone well or may have been dominated by someone other than you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Delete the "Thank you!" slide - how to end your presentation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The most important sections of your presentation are the beginning and ending.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"False beliefs, it turns out, have little to do with one's stated political affiliations and far more to do with self-identity: What kind of person am I, and what kind of person do I want to be? All ideologies are similarly affected." (New Yorker)

There are two key things to keep in mind when you are making a presentation to a hostile audience. A hostile audience is one that you know is not in agreement with the main argument of your presentation. They may not even agree that the problem you are addressing is, in fact, a problem.

Firstly, research has shown (see New Yorker article) that people's beliefs are weakly related to their political affiliations and more to do with self-identity. Thus, when you are in the important phase of preparing your presentation, which necessarily invokes researching your audience, don't just investigate their stated positions on the topic. These "positions" are like political affiliations. They are what we like to tell ourselves and our friends. However, much more important are the beliefs and needs of the audience.

It is by addressing these beliefs and needs of our hostile audience that we will increase our success of persuading them. However, be aware of the practical limitations you have to work within. If you are addressing a deep-rooted problem, the audience is hostile and you have only been given 15 minutes to speak to them, don't set your hopes high that you will have changed their mind by the time the Q&A session is over. What you can at least aim for is to plant a seed of doubt in their minds. A doubt that will impel them to contact you for more information, or research the matter further for themselves, or soften their hardened rhetoric on the matter.

Secondly, it's important to structure your presentation in such a way that you spend the first half (at least) of your talk outlining the position of your audience before starting to outline your own position. Work hard on this part in your preparation, as it will be the hardest part. It is always difficult for us to put ourselves in the shoes of our opponent. And be careful of making an easy target at which to take aim - of simplifying your opponent's position. Explain their position so precisely, forcefully and succinctly that they themselves wished they had explained their position in those words. And if possible, tell them whose ideas you are referring to, name their heroes and do justice to their ideas. It is only once the hostile audience feels that you fully understand their position that you can go about offering a different point of view.

Here is excellent advice on how to compose a successful critical commentary, outlined by Daniel Dennet in his book "Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking":

1. You should attempt to re-express your target's position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, "Thanks, I wish I'd thought of putting it that way.

2. You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).

3. You should mention anything you have learned from your target.

4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to make a presentation to a hostile audience

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"False beliefs, it turns out, have little to do with one's stated political affiliations and far more to do with self-identity: What kind of person am I, and what kind of person do I want to be? All ideologies are similarly affected."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There are many things that we would be better off not saying when speaking in public, but here are three definite no-no's. And yet I hear them all the time!

Never open your presentation by asking the audience, "How is everyone today?" (or other variations such as "How are you all doing?", "Is everyone having a great time?" etc.)

The reason you shouldn't ask this is that 99% of the time the audience won't answer back. And yet presenters that ask either respond to the ensuing silence by saying "I can't hear you! I said, how is everyone today????", which comes across as aggressive or needy; or they say, "Great, glad to hear it", which is absurd as no one answered them.

The mistake the presenter is making is that they are greeting the audience as they would great a person and they are forgetting that presentations run according to very different dynamics compared to conversations. Of course an individual will respond to this question when someone asks them. However, audiences don't feel obliged in the same way to answer a presenter that asks this question. Another example of the different dynamics in conversations and presentations is that an audience doesn't feel obligated to make eye contact with presenters, while interlocutors in conversations do. So, don't ask this question at the beginning of your presentation. Instead you could ask a more specific question without looking for anyone to answer, or, if you do want the audience to answer, get them to raise their hand to a non-judgmental yes/no either/or question.

Never say, "I'll give a quick/brief/short overview of X".

The problem here is that it doesn't sound like important information and it gives the impression that you are going to give this overview only because it's necessary to understand something that is coming later. Audiences will often stop paying attention to you when they hear this phrase and this is the last thing you want in your presentation. Remember, it is very difficult to recapture the attention of an audience that has drifted away from you.

So, instead say to them "I'm not going to bore you with the details but instead I'm going to quickly give you the 3 (or 5) most important things you need to know about X". Notice how I said 3 or 5 things. Remember that the human brain expects and remembers the triangular numbers 3 and 5 better than the numbers 2 or 4 (be careful about having more than 5 items in your lists or 5 parts to your overall presentation structure as it will seem overly complicated). If you give them a list comprised of 2 or 4 things, audiences will expect a third or fifth element to complete the list.

Never say, "I'm sorry, I haven't had a lot of time to prepare", or "I'm sorry for my bad English".

I can't count the number of times I've heard someone say this at the beginning of their presentation. The immediate and nearly irreversible affect on the audience? It flinches at the thought that they have to spend the next 20 minutes in your company. They switch off their ears and swipe on their twitter feed.

Regarding lack of preparation - no one ever feels like they've had enough time to prepare their presentation. Even if it is true that you really didn't have a lot of time, there is no need to say it. Do the best you can and who knows, some or all of your audience might not even notice. Regarding your poor level of English - if you've accepted the invitation to speak then you should have at least the minimum level required to make yourself understood. Nobody speaks perfectly and there is no such thing as the correct accent for speaking English. If you are very nervous about the language you have to present in, write a script for what you want to say. Generally, I don't advice reading from a prepared script, but in this case it can be a solution. Don't focus on speaking perfectly, instead focus on making the audience understand. Remember, the presentation is not about you; it's about the topic/problem you are talking about.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
3 things you should never say in a presentation (but that people say all the time).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are many things that we would be better off not saying when speaking in public, but here are three definite no-no's. And yet I hear them all the time! Never open your presentation by asking the audience, "How is everyone today?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this 5-min video I answer one of the most common questions about making presentations - how can I be less nervous? Often nerves can come from a fear of going completely blank in the middle of your presentation. However, unlike actors (who cannot take their script on stage with them), presenters can and should take notes with them. In this video, I explain the best method for preparing notes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to remember what you want to say during your presentation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this 5-min video I answer one of the most common questions about making presentations - how can I be less nervous? Often nerves can come from a fear of going completely blank in the middle of your presentation.

# data[].attributes.headline
After the workshop, we will enrol you in the self-taught version of this workshop which covers far more than we were able to in our short time together

# data[].attributes.subject
After the workshop, we will enrol you in the self-taught version of this workshop which covers far more than we were able to in our short time together

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The world rewards people who are best at communicating ideas, not necessarily the people with the best ideas. Using a range of proven techniques from multiple disciplines, you will enhance your capacity to inform, persuade and inspire others. You will learn a step-by-step approach that can be immediately applied to different types of presentations in a variety of situations - to internal and external audiences, technical presentations, sales, online and face-to-face etc. This is not merely a course about designing PowerPoint! - this is about learning how to craft your ideas in order to speak in public with confidence and clarity, thus moving your audience to action.

Managers who aspire to become more effective and assertive communicators.

The question

Do you put a lot of effort into preparing your presentations, but feel like your audience is not engaged and you're not doing justice to your ideas?

The promise

You will learn how to clarify and structure your ideas, sharpen your message and interact confidently with your audience, using a systematic approach and tools to inform, persuade and inspire others.

You reprogrammed my thinking, my presentations will be more successful.

Brian's sessions were really great. I appreciate his enthusiasm and the way he works with people. Brian, thank you for the best session I ever had in my life.

I liked it a lot. It is very well structured and straight to the point, with useful assets and templates to leverage for practical applications.

I am an experienced speaker and have delivered dozens of presentations for large audiences. Still, Brian helped me tremendously: my presentation would not have been a success without his help.

ESRI 2020 Data Scientist of the Year

Brian McCarthy

Expert designer, teacher and facilitator in the areas of Leadership, Innovation and Communication

Brian McCarthy helps people get their greatest work into the world. He helps individuals, teams and organisations turn their big ideas into reality.

From an early age we are taught to study, analyse and discuss the ideas of others. But what about our own big ideas? How can we learn to better concentrate on our own ideas, structure them more clearly, collaborate with others, and then present them persuasively to the world? These are concrete skills we can learn and improve throughout our lives. My work focuses on how to better form and perform ideas using best practices from the fields of philosophy, rhetoric and performance.

Delivered multiple times a year on the number-one MBA and Executive MBA in the world (according to The Economist and FT) at IESE Business School.

More than 8000 participants since 2010.

Taught face-to-face and online to high-level executives and directors at renowned corporate universities such as CapGemini and Telefonica.

Delivered in more than nine countries across four continents.

A Spanish limited company (SL) in the mercantile register of Barcelona: B16873127

Copyright © 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The world rewards people who are best at communicating ideas, not necessarily the people with the best ideas. Using a range of proven techniques from multiple disciplines, you will enhance your capacity to inform, persuade and inspire others.

# data[].attributes.headline
You will be able to access the online course on our website or on our mobile apps - links below

# data[].attributes.subject
You will be able to access the online course on our website or on our mobile apps - links below

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We help top leadership, executives and high-performing teams make their ideas a reality. Now you can access our online self-taught courses for a fraction of the cost.

We train top leadership, executives and high-performing teams at some of the world's most prestigious and successful corporate universities (Cap Gemini and Telefonica), business schools (IESE) and organisations (Médecins Sans Frontières, Allianz, ERSTE). We are delighted to now offer you access to our ground-breaking and sought-after courses in leadership, innovation and communication in an online self-taught format for a fraction of the cost.

Improvements
Introducing biometric authentication: Login becomes fast, easy and secure
Introducing password strength support
Bug fixes
For courses with an expiration date, video downloads will be unavailable after that date.

The developer, Performing Ideas SL, indicated that the app's privacy practices may include handling of data as described below. For more information, see the developer's privacy policy.

Data Used to Track You

The following data may be used to track you across apps and websites owned by other companies:

Data Linked to You

The following data may be collected and linked to your identity:

Data Not Linked to You

The following data may be collected but it is not linked to your identity:

Privacy practices may vary based on, for example, the features you use or your age. Learn More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
‎We train top leadership, executives and high-performing teams at some of the world's most prestigious and successful corporate universities (Cap Gemini and Telefonica), business schools (IESE) and organisations (Médecins Sans Frontières, Allianz, ERSTE). We are delighted to now offer you access to o...

# data[].attributes.headline
Amazon style guidelines for writing a 6-pager

# data[].attributes.subject
Amazon style guidelines for writing a 6-pager

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How did that go, intense, right? I remember the first time I had to read one. It looked like a complete wall of text. I am going to assume you didn't get through the entire thing so I'll include some excerpts as we go. To give you perspective, that took me five days to write, and I did four revisions. Since no one else had to review it, I'd say the process was almost tolerable. I love to write, but even these are a challenge for me. While it may feel completely alien to you, I miss this detail and clarity these types of documents provide now that I no longer work at Amazon. And while 6-pagers are a chore to write, I can no longer sit through a PowerPoint presentation without questioning why it wasn't put into a document for me to read through.

The first thing you probably noticed is that my 6-pager is using 10 point font. These things are dense, and there is a strict rule around it being exactly six pages. The goal is to fill up all six pages without any filler. The other thing you may have noticed is that the document isn't six pages, it's much longer. The perceived length of a 6-pager is a bit of a misconception. I've written 6-pagers that were over 40 pages long. The reason for this is because of the appendix.

The main goal of authoring this kind of document is to craft the entire thing as a narrative. That doesn't mean it needs to be an entertaining story. It merely means there are no bullet-point lists, no graphics, and no fluff in the document's core 6-pages. Since it's difficult to sum up the contextual information like data, graphs, or examples in narrative form, you can add it to the end of the document in an appendix. This allows the reader to choose what to look up for additional information as needed. It also allows you to store bulky, complex data visualizations without breaking up the narrative's flow.

At this point, we are ready to break down the skeleton of the 6-pager. Again, this might change slightly based on the document's goal, but for the most part, it works like this:

Introduction - This needs to set up precisely what the material is going to cover and to inherently state the general direction of where the document plans on going.

Goals - List right up front what the metrics for success are so we can use them as a lens to see the remaining document through.

Tenets - This is a very Amazon thing where every action has some clearly define north star. There are a lot of ways to word these. Generally, they are inspirational pillars that the rest of the plan sits on top of (go with me on this one).

State of the business - This section is another important one. You need to inform the reader of the current state of the business. There needs to be a lot of detail here, which sets up the points to compare against in the next section.

Lessons learned - Amazon is big on data. This section will outline the current state of the business and its influence over creating the goals you need to achieve. It should be a detailed enough snapshot to give the reader all of the data they need to understand the positive and negatives activities in the prior period.

Strategic priorities - This is the meat of the document and lays out the plan, how to execute it, and should match up to achieving the goals stated at the top of the document.

Of course, each of these sections has a specific job in building the narrative of the 6-pager. To pull it all together requires a certain amount of finesse. Luckily, I've made it through meetings needing to make only minor changes, and I've been in meetings where someone's entire document is ripped apart line by line. I don't profess to have the experience to say mine were better than others, but I did have a few good mentors. So here is how I decided to write my sample 6-pager.

I usually try to consolidate my introduction to two paragraphs. Since this 6-pager was probably the first you've ever read on a topic you probably have no background on, I indulged and added the 3rd paragraph to pack in some extra detail.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this section; it should be self-explanatory. I wanted to point out the two references to the appendix right off the bat. There is a lot of data to process upfront, especially if you're not familiar with the subject. So you will want to add as much contextual data as possible in the document itself. You'll notice there are no links in the documents to any websites either. The expectation is that you are reading a printout. So, if you need an offline copy of the entire internet for reference, put it all in the appendix.

Next up are the goals. The goal section is one of the only two areas of the document where bullet points are allowed. I follow a predefined structure for writing these, and I've seen it consistently used across several other groups.

You start with the actual goal, bolded, in as few words as possible. Then you follow with a single sentence that adds context to the goal. Finally, there needs to be a historical data point and a projected data point, followed by an explicit calculation of the change between the two. Not all goals end up with a positive outcome; I made my first one a negative one to show off two different types of results. But you want to have at least three goals which appear to be the magic number considering you will probably have multiple other priorities throughout the year from other groups since these plans do not exist in a vacuum.

I've seen all kinds of ways of writing goals at companies I've worked at, and this is honestly the only format that has ever made sense to me. It feels like OKRs are another popular one but I find it very difficult to adjust to them after spending years at Amazon.

After the goals, you declare the tenets. I've never seen another company so cultish in the way it requires employees to think according to a framework of rules. On the first day of orientation, they walk you through the leadership principles, and this way of thinking helps reinforce the documents you write.

I rarely put much effort into these. While the leadership principles become rules for how you engage with your co-workers, these tenets add nothing to the document. The people that write excellent tenets can link them back to the leadership principles somehow. Since one of the principles I liked the most is "disagree and commit," I kept my opinion to myself and always added tenets to my 6-pagers since the decision to use them happened long before I got there.

Leaders are obligated to respectfully challenge decisions when they disagree, even when doing so is uncomfortable or exhausting. Leaders have conviction and are tenacious. They do not compromise for the sake of social cohesion. Once a decision is determined, they commit wholly.

After the tenets, things get serious fast. The document begins with the state of the business. For this example, 6-pager, I decided to make it a single page. I would hardly call my hobby game engine a "business," but I did my best to take it seriously.

Appendix references litter this section. In a real 6-pager, I would have cut out the first paragraph and jumped right into the numbers. This section is really about distilling all of the current activities and their intended goals. However, this is not a section to talk in the past tense. The state of the business should be a current snapshot of the data. Because of this, I usually keep all of the figures blank until right before the meeting. This way, my document is always as up to date as possible.

I still look at this section through the lens of the Appstore, where I was in charge of tracking the game engines that supported Fire OS, the game submission numbers, and my budget. I had to report weekly on the business's health, so it was natural to have these numbers ready at a moment's notice. Had this been a real 6-pager, I would have included a full snapshot of this data, which could go on for pages, in the appendix. Amazon is big on data; those are real facts. You are building a narrative around those facts so that we are not just skimming an excel spreadsheet.

The last thing I want to call out in this section was how I ended it. It's a subtle detail, but I make sure to complete the section with a little summary of everything that has been done and try to tie it into the goals. Since my goals were core to the way I ran my business, they didn't change much every six months. The only thing that change was the target numbers. This made it easier to keep a consistent theme on how I ran things and made sure my summary of the business reflected that.

After summing up the state of the business, it's time to reflect on what happened in the past. This is a snapshot from the last period until now and has to be even more factual with numbers, percentages of goal completion, and even additional references in the appendix.

This section is similar to the state of the business but with one exception; the tense here is always in the past. There shouldn't be any forward projections or expectations. There is zero room for interpretation. The data will tell the real story. Part of working at Amazon is that you are encouraged to share your failures along with your successes. I've worked in many places where people try to hide what didn't work. You can usually tell because they never have data to back up their claims. At Amazon, the culture understands that you will fail; in fact, there is a leadership principle called "deliver results " to address that reality.

Leaders focus on the key inputs for their business and deliver them with the right quality and in a timely fashion. Despite setbacks, they rise to the occasion and never settle.

Notice the "despite setbacks" part? That is very important because real leaders fail from time to time but learn from their mistakes. Those failures help inform the new set of goals and give you clarity as to why it failed, so you don't repeat your mistake. That's outlined in the "ownership" and "are right, a lot" leadership principles too but you can look those up on your own.

At this point, you should have a real clear picture of what is going on, what has happened leading up to this, and what we hope to achieve moving forward. It's now time for the most detailed section of all, the strategic priorities.

There is a lot to unpack here, mostly because this is usually 50-70% of the 6-pager. This section outlines each activity you plan on doing and how it relates to one of the goals. I don't believe the order makes a difference, you can structure the narrative how you like, but people in the meeting will calculate up each activity to make sure it matches up to the goal's projected data point. This is also the section that is open for interpretation and will be the one you spend the majority of the meeting defending.

Up until this point, everything you have written has been facts, except for the tenets. The only questions you will get on those sections are whether the data adds up or they perceive the goals as not challenging enough. The strategic priorities section is all speculation. And at Amazon, they don't accept anecdotes for an answer. That is why to write this section, you need to pull numbers from the lessons learned and state of the business that help prove your proposed activities will work.

I'll admit, I didn't fully back my assumptions up with data from the previous sections. Honestly, since I don't have to report this to anyone, I don't analyze my game engine data all that much. I just do it for fun. But what I did want you to learn from this section was how to structure these priorities. You'll see they follow a particular pattern.

A strategic priority consists of two parts. The first part is a prediction. Think of this as your thesis on how you will contribute back to a given goal. The second part, however, is where you attempt laying out the actual plan to achieve it. These can get very detailed, and a lot of the plans I've put together use these to summarize the approach and the appendix for tactical execution steps. I've placed entire content plans in the appendix since they didn't contribute to the narrative, but people will want to see the details.

The beauty of the appendix, and probably the most brilliant part of the Amazon 6-pager, is that it gives the reader the choice of how deep they want to go down the rabbit hole. What you read in the 6-pager narrative gives you a high-level overview. If you chose to follow an appendix, that reference goes right into the details. And since the meeting comprises of team leads from other groups, each one will have specific areas of interest to dig into and skim over parts that don't pertain to them. Since everyone at the table needs to understand the entire scope, they chose to follow an appendix reference for more information as needed. Either way, they still walk away with an overall sense of that part of the plan. It's incredibly brilliant, and probably the one structural detail most plans I read at other companies don't do very well.

Congratulations on making it this far. Luckily, we are almost at the end. Let's take a look at the last strategic priority in my 6-pager.

There are two things you should notice. First, I wrote right up to the bottom of page 6 to stick the landing. Second, you'll see there is no summary section or closing remarks. That would be fluff. I've never read a 6-pager that summed everything up. They may exist, but out of the hundreds I've read, I never felt like a summary was missing. I got a clear picture of the past, present, and future activities and what better way to end then on an actionable item.

I always make sure that the last sentence ends on a positive, forward-facing note. One that doesn't sum everything up but at least feels like a natural ending to the document. Also, I didn't add many appendix items to this example strategic priority section. That was on purpose; it would be more work than this example warranted. Regardless, you should now have a clear sense of how this section is supposed to be structured.

I think the last few bits of advice I'll leave you with are how important the leadership principles come into play when reviewing a document and receiving feedback without taking it personally. The leadership principles give you a sort of rules of engagement on how to be direct with a co-worker and walk away civil. While I don't fully drink the kool-aid, it's impossible to survive at Amazon without weaponizing these principles in your meetings. Sometimes it's to attack and others times to defend, but most of all, you want to always "dive deep."

Leaders operate at all levels, stay connected to the details, audit frequently, and are skeptical when metrics and anecdote differ. No task is beneath them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A deep dive into writing detailed planning docs from one of the most successful companies in the world. The most challenging part of working there comes down to being able to write a 6-pager. This will directly impact your status at the table and your ability to move up in the company.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

People spend a sizeable portion of their day-to-day lives mind wandering (i.e., engaged in some form of off-task thought; Killingsworth and Gilbert, 2010). This ubiquitous activity may be largely innocuous, or even beneficial ( Mooneyham and Schooler, 2013; Franklin et al., 2013), but in many circumstances mind wandering can have deleterious consequences for the mind wanderer. One such circumstance that has received some attention recently is the academic lecture ( Lindquist and McLean, 2011; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a; Szpunar et al., 2013a). Lectures, live or video, are one of the primary means of knowledge transmission in post-secondary education (e.g., Bligh, 2000). Unfortunately, students spend much of their time in lectures mind wandering, and mind wandering has been demonstrated to impair memory for lecture material ( Lindquist and McLean, 2011; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a; Szpunar et al., 2013a, b). While this tendency to mind wander is not unique to lectures and appears to be a stable phenomenon across both laboratory experiments and a broad range of everyday activities ( McVay et al., 2009), the costs may be particularly high in a lecture context. For example, lecture's cumulative nature might amplify the cost of momentary attentional lapses by disrupting a student's ability to form and maintain a situation model (see the cascade model of inattention; Smallwood, 2011). Thus, efforts to understand the factors which influence mind wandering, the cues that could indicate that a student is mind wandering, and, ultimately, the strategies that could be used to reduce mind wandering in lectures have the potential to both improve our understanding of attentional function in a naturalistic context and improve educational outcomes. In the present investigation we examine the effect that time on task has on attention to, and memory for, lecture material, in addition to exploring fidgeting as an overt cue of an individual's attentional state.

Time on Task

Listening to a lecture can be considered a kind of sustained attention task ( Young et al., 2009; Risko et al., 2012a). There exists both a broad and deep literature on sustained attention ( Mackworth, 1948; Parasuraman, 1985; Warm et al., 2008a, b; Smilek et al., 2010a; Seli et al., 2012). One of the classic phenomena explored in this literature is the vigilance decrement, which reflects the observation that performance in sustained attention tasks decreases as time on task increases (e.g., Mackworth, 1948). The tasks typically used to investigate the vigilance decrement require the detection of infrequent events over a long period of time (e.g., radar operations). While on the surface listening to lectures might be considered a different type of task, they share the need to sustain attention for an extended period of time and the need to monitor the lecture for relevant events (e.g., important points; Einstein et al., 1985; Risko et al., 2013b). As such, one might expect to find a pattern similar to a vigilance decrement in lectures. Evidence consistent with this notion has been reported recently ( Young et al., 2009; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a). For instance, in Risko et al. (2012a, 2013a), when a lecture was divided into "early" and "late" time periods, reports of mind wandering increased and memory for lecture material decreased from the early to late period. Thus, in this case, the ability to sustain attention in a lecture (as measured via mind wandering frequency) appears to be related to the time spent monitoring the lecture material. A number of potential mechanisms have been put forward to explain attentional variations over time (see Risko et al., 2012a). For example, according to a resource depletion account, sustaining attention draws on a limited resource and over time that resource dissipates until the ability to sustain attention is compromised. Alternatively, mind wandering might increase over time because task-relevant processes become automatized thus freeing up resources to devote to task unrelated thoughts.

Risko et al. (2012a, 2013a) also provided evidence that overall mind wandering frequency was correlated with memory for lecture material, a result consistent with much research demonstrating that mind wandering leads to encoding deficits ( Manly et al., 1999; Smallwood et al., 2007a, 2008; Christoff et al., 2009). While some caution should accompany correlational evidence, the association between time on task, mind wandering frequency, and memory for lecture material provides a strong motivation to better understand variations in attention and memory within the lecture environment. In the present investigation, we extend this work by providing a finer grained evaluation of variations in attention and memory for lecture material over the course of a 40-min lecture. In addition, we explore a potential overt indicator of an individual's internal attentional state, by investigating how fidgeting relates to attention, time on task, and memory for lecture material.

Shades of Attentiveness

Research investigating mind wandering has begun to emphasize the importance of its graded nature. For example, one of the distinctions frequently made in the mind wandering literature relates to the level of awareness associated with mind wandering ( Schooler et al., 2011). Mind wandering without awareness (often referred to as "zoning out" and typically indexed exclusively by "probe caught" reports of mind wandering) has been found to have somewhat different properties than mind wandering with awareness (often referred to as "tuning out" and typically indexed by "self caught" reports of mind wandering). Mind wandering without awareness, for example, has been found to be more strongly associated with response inhibition failures ( Smallwood et al., 2007b). Similarly, "shallow" mind wandering can be contrasted with that of "deep" mind wandering. Smallwood (2011) used such a distinction in a model wherein varying levels of perceptual decoupling were associated with varying consequences for the processing of text. Similarly, Schad et al. (2012) demonstrated that different levels of mindless reading could be identified based on the nature of the errors noticed by the participants. Lastly, and importantly in the present context, there is reason to think that the graded nature of attentiveness will be an important consideration in the context of studying the relation between fidgeting and attention, as Carriere et al. (2013) found that fidgeting (as indexed by self-reports) was predicted by spontaneous mind wandering but not intentional mind wandering. To capture this graded nature of attentiveness, the present work utilized a continuous measure of attention (in the form of a 7-point Likert scale) rather than the more traditional dichotomized measure (i.e., mind wandering? yes/no).

Fidgeting

People often use the overt behaviors of others in order to infer their internal mental state (e.g., Mehrabian, 1969). In a recent series of experiments Chisholm et al. (2013) demonstrated that leaning forward and back are viewed consistently as indicating focused and unfocused attentional states. Another overt cue commonly used to infer another person's attentional state is fidgeting ( Galton, 1885; Mehrabian and Friedman, 1986; Gligoric et al., 2012; Carriere et al., 2013). In particular, there is a widely held notion that fidgeting is associated with faltering attention. For example, Gligoric et al. (2012) surveyed 230 students about their beliefs in what best exemplifies impoverished attention in a lecture setting. The respondents listed fidgeting (along with making noise) as one of the two most common indicators of waning attention in the classroom environment. In addition, Mehrabian and Friedman (1986) found a positive correlation between tendency to fidget (both self-reported and objectively coded) and propensity to daydream. In a more recent series of studies, using various self-report measures of fidgeting and attention, Carriere et al. (2013) also found a strong association between self-reported fidgeting behavior and decreased attention and mind wandering.

The embodied cognition literature emphasizes the central role the body plays in mediating cognition (see Wilson, 2002). In this context one potentially fruitful way to view fidgeting is as an "embodiment" of the act of sustaining attention. For example, Smilek et al. (2010b) found that increased rates of blinking were associated with increased rates of mind wandering (i.e., inattentiveness to the text being read). They interpreted this relationship as reflecting a mechanism by which the flow of sensory information is physically interrupted to facilitate a shift in the relative balance of internally and externally directed processing (i.e., more blinking reflects more internally directed attention). Thus, the physical act supplements the shift of attention. Likewise, fidgeting may represent an overt action that interacts with systems supporting the ability to sustain attention and thus act as a potential route to optimize attention. One possibility is that fidgeting might provide a form of a "mental break." For example, Ariga and Lleras (2011) have demonstrated that task switches, in the context of a sustained attention task, can decrease the vigilance decrement effect (see also Mackworth, 1948). Fidgeting may also help individuals sustain attention by increasing physiological change and arousal. Levine et al. (2000) measured energy expenditure in a variety of non-exercise activities and found that sitting while fidgeting increased energy expenditure by 54% on average relative to sitting at rest. Indeed, the fidgets can be quite small yet still have a pronounced effect. For example, Andrade (2010) had participants doodle during a "boring" task and discovered that it improved performance which was attributed to an increase in overall arousal. Thus, on this account, fidgeting can be taken as providing a physical indicator of attentiveness in so far as its adoption reflects an attempt to combat waning attention. In a similar manner, fidgeting may provide a physical marker of the transition into a state of inattention (an increase in inattention; akin to an individual's averted gaze during a conversation) rather than an attempt to transition from a current state of inattention. Note that in either case fidgeting would reflect the presence of inattention.

This relation between fidgeting and attention makes the straightforward prediction that fidgeting should increase as a function of time spent viewing the lecture (i.e., given attention is known to decrease as a function of time in a lecture). In addition, variations in fidgeting should predict variations in attention (i.e., more fidgeting reflecting reduced attentiveness). The current study puts these predictions to the test.

Present Investigation

In the present investigation we explore the influence of time on task on attention, fidgeting, and memory within a lecture-viewing context. We also assess the relation between these factors. Participants viewed a 40-min lecture. After each 5-min increment individuals reported their attentional state using a continuous 7-point scale. Following the lecture participants completed a retention test composed of 3 questions from each 5-min increment in the lecture. Thus, the measurement of time on task's influence on memory for lecture material consisted of assessing fluctuations in memory for material presented during 5-min periods of the lecture. Lastly, each session was video recorded and from these recordings fidgeting was coded and binned into the corresponding 5-min intervals of the lecture. According to the discussion above, attention to the lecture should decrease as a function of time. In addition, if fidgeting reflects an attempt to stave off decreases in attentiveness, then it should increase as a function of time. Fidgeting should also be negatively correlated with attention, such that fidgeting should increase during blocks associated with reduced attentiveness.

Methods

Participants

Twenty-one undergraduate students (sixteen of which were female) from the University of British Columbia participated in exchange for course credit.

Design

The primary independent variable was block. The lecture was divided into eight 5-min blocks resulting in a one-factor (block) design with eight levels. The dependent variables included attentional self-reports, scores for two types of fidgeting, and retention for lecture material across each block.

Apparatus

Each participant viewed the lecture video individually within a media immersion room, seated approximately 6 feet in front of a big-screen television connected to an external stereo. A single ceiling mounted video camera recorded the full duration of each viewing session. Self-reports of attentional state were recorded on a nearby laptop, which sounded a tone to prompt for a response.

Stimuli

The stimulus was a 40-min video recording of an academic lecture obtained from Open Yale Courses ( http://oyc.yale.edu). This lecture was taken from the Introduction to Psychology course, titled "Evolution, Emotion and Reason: Love" ( Salovery, 2009) and was delivered within a traditional classroom-based context. The content centered around the notion of love and interpersonal relations in general. It was selected to be of general interest to a broad range of participants.

Self-Reports of Attentional State

The self-report of attentional state took the form of a 7-point Likert-type response to the statement "My attention is fully focused on the video." Responses used the following labels: "Strongly Disagree," "Somewhat Disagree," "Slightly Disagree," "Neither Agree nor Disagree," "Slightly Agree," "Somewhat Agree," or "Strongly Agree." Participants were advised that, instead of reporting their attentional state at the discrete point in time when prompted, responses should be based on their average attentional state throughout the preceding 5-min interval. Rather than being explicitly framed as indexing "mind wandering," the scale was presented as reflecting a more generalized level of focus, and in doing so, we sought to capture the notion described in the introduction that there may be a gradation in mind wandering.

Retention Test

The test consisted of 24 questions, evenly distributed across each of the 8 blocks. The questions were recall in nature and answers typically consisted of single word concepts, key terms, or simple main findings. Accuracy for each question was simply scored as either being correct or incorrect. The questions were not cumulative in style in order to minimize the likelihood of earlier lapses in attention affecting future comprehension. The selection criteria for the retention questions largely related to the pace of the lecture in that three questions per 5-min block was approximated to be the maximum number of questions that could be consistently produced without referencing trivial points. The retention test was completed immediately following viewing of the lecture.

Procedure

Participants were told that they would watch a lecture and answer questions about it once completed. In addition, participants were instructed to self-monitor fluctuations in their attentional state and report them using the scale provided when prompted. Following the lecture, participants received the retention test.

Coding Fidgeting

The fidgeting coding consisted of quantifying the total number of movements observed within each 5-min block. Coders worked their way sequentially through each participant one at a time. Each distinct movement was coded as belonging to one of three categories (a) head movements, (b) appendage movements, or (c) body movements. Furthermore, each movement was also coded as belonging to one of two levels of magnitude: macro or micro. The macro movements were operationalized as involving complete spatial displacement relative to a starting position (i.e., moving the arm to a completely new location, not overlapping that of the initial), whereas anything less was considered a micro movement. Values for each coding category were tabulated on a minute-by-minute basis by the coders, which were then converted into totals for each category corresponding to each individual block for every participant. The first author, JF, coded all data. In order to determine inter-rater reliability a second coder coded 25% of the videos and these results were correlated with JF's coding of the same videos. In order to determine intra-rater reliability JF re-coded the same 25% of the videos and these results were also correlated with JF's initial coding of those videos. Intra-rater reliability for micro and macro movements was good, r = 0.92, p < 0.05, and, r = 0.69, p < 0.05, respectively, as was inter-rater reliability for the same, r = 0.61, p < 0.05, and, r = 0.89 p < 0.05. We report analyzes for both micro and macro fidgeting. Collapsing across the micro/macro dimension to produce a singular fidgeting measure resulted in a qualitatively similar pattern of results (not reported). However, there were a few instances when the macro measure was a significant predictor while the micro was not. The opposite pattern did not occur. Additionally, in models for which both measures were predictive, the relationship was always stronger when considering macro fidgets. This suggests the micro/macro distinction is a useful way to parse fidgeting behavior and bolsters its predictive power. The overall correlation between macro and micro fidgets across all subjects was r = 0.45. Note that due to temporary camera misalignment, six participants were recorded with their legs positioned outside of the frame. Of course, given the within subjects design of the experiment, such a systematic underestimation should not change the pattern of results observed with respect to relative changes in frequency of fidgeting. Nevertheless the fidgeting data were re-analyzed with camera placement as a factor and it was confirmed that there was no substantive effect of such. Thus, fidgeting analyzes are reported using models associated with the fidgeting data for all participants.

Results

The data were analyzed using linear mixed effects models (LMM) as implemented in lme4 ( Bates et al., 2012) in the R software environment. Given the ambiguity associated with estimating p-values for fixed effects in linear mixed models, we took as statistically significant those with | t| > 2 for all analyzes using a Gaussian distribution (see Baayen et al., 2008; Kliegl et al., 2010; Masson and Kliegl, 2013). For models using a binomial distribution (i.e., retention), z statistics and p-values are reported. Data are presented in Table 1. We chose to utilize linear mixed effect modeling for our analyzes, but the point should be made that alternative methods, such as structural equation modeling, or Bayesian graphical modeling, may be preferred by other researchers and suitable in future work.

Table 1. Subject means and standard deviations (std.) as a function of block for attention ratings, fidgeting (micro and macro), and performance on the retention test.

Influence of Time on Task (Block)

Separate models were fit to the attention rating, fidgeting, and retention test data, all with block as a fixed effect and subject as a random effect. Furthermore, when analyzing fidgeting data, separate analyzes were conducted for micro and macro measures. The model fit to the retention test data used a logistic link function to capture the categorical (i.e., correct vs. incorrect) nature of the data while the attentional rating and fidgeting data were fit using the default Gaussian distribution.

The fixed effect of block was significant (i.e., | t| > 2) in the attention rating analysis. As block increased attention rating decreased, β = −0.18, SE = 0.03, t = −6.16. In the fidgeting analysis, micro fidgeting was not statistically related to block, β = 0.23, SE = 0.16, t = 1.49, however, macro fidgeting was, β = 0.30, SE = 0.10, t = 3.01, such that macro fidgeting increased as block progressed. The fixed effect of block was not significant in the analysis of retention test performance, β = −0.05, SE = 0.04, z = −1.16, p > 0.05. The latter analysis was conducted again with the data from block 7 removed. Retention test scores in block 7 were on average 30% higher than its neighboring blocks (i.e., block 6 and block 8). In addition, block 7 had the highest mean performance score observed across all blocks, but it was also associated with the lowest standard deviation, indicating uniformly high performance. Both of these descriptive statistics suggest the difficulty and/or nature of the retention test questions may have been different for this block relative to others. For example, two out of three questions drawn from block 7 contained material presented in the context of a humorous personal anecdote told by the instructor. Material can often be made more memorable when presented in the context of a personal story, particularly when humor is involved ( Schmidt, 1994). We believe this may account for the increase in performance for this block relative to others in the second half of the experiment. In the model with block 7's data removed, the fixed effect of block was significant, β = −0.14, SE = 0.05, z = −2.93, p < 0.01, such that as block increased retention decreased. Furthermore, even while retaining block 7, and comparing the first vs. second half of the lecture (see Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a), retention was found to be significantly lower in the second half as compared to the first, β = −0.49, SE = 0.20, z = −2.39, p < 0.05. Note that in all subsequent retention test analyzes block 7 is omitted, however, parallel analyzes were conducted with this block included and where results diverge a note is made.

Exploratory Analysis: Non-Linear Trends

The preceding analysis focused on the theoretically predicted linear effect of time on attention rating, fidgeting, and memory for lecture material. Inspection of the means across block, however, suggests the potential presence of non-linear trends in the data (see Table 1). To explore this possibility three additional models were fit to the attentional rating, fidgeting, and retention data with a set of four orthogonal polynomials as fixed effects (i.e., linear, quadratic, cubic, and quartic) and subject as a random effect. It is important to note that this analysis is exploratory, the intent of which is to provide potential fodder for future research into the influence of time in lectures.

Relation between Attention Rating, Fidgeting and Memory for Lecture Material

In order to assess the relation between attention and fidgeting, two sets of LMMs were fit. In one set, retention test performance was the dependent variable with attention rating and fidgeting as predictors. In the second set attention rating was the dependent variable with fidgeting as the predictor.

In the analysis of attention rating, macro fidgeting was significant, β = −0.05, SE = 0.02, t = −2.18, such that as macro fidgeting increased attention rating decreased. Micro fidgeting did not share the same relation with attention rating, β = −0.001, SE = 0.01, t = −0.04. As above, given block was related to attention rating and macro fidgeting we re-ran the analysis with block included as a predictor. Interestingly, macro fidgeting was no longer significant, β = −0.02, SE = 0.02, t = −1.07, but block was, β = −0.17, SE = 0.03, t = −5.78. Thus, while macro fidgeting was related to attention rating this relation appears to be due to both being related to time on task (i.e., block).

Discussion

The present investigation has provided a number of novel results with respect to attention, fidgeting, and memory for lecture material in a lecture-viewing task. Each of these results will be reviewed and the implications summarized below. In addition, we describe a non-attentional account of fidgeting that can explain the results reported.

Time on Task

The results of the present investigation demonstrated that fidgeting increased, while attention decreased, as a function of time on task. The latter result, that attention declines with time on task in a lecture environment, is consistent with previous research ( Young et al., 2009; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a) but extends it by analyzing a finer grain temporal distribution of attention probes (i.e., across eight blocks of 5-min intervals rather than dichotomizing lecture time into first and second halves) and employing a continuous measure of attentiveness (i.e., 7-point Likert rating rather than a dichotomous yes/no score on attention to the lecture). The former result, that fidgeting increases with time on task, is consistent with our prediction that as attention decreases with time into a lecture, fidgeting, as a potential route to enhance attention should increase, which is exactly what we found. This finding is convergent with previous studies that relied exclusively or partially on self-report measures of fidgeting ( Galton, 1885; Mehrabian and Friedman, 1986; Gligoric et al., 2012; Carriere et al., 2013). Interestingly, this relationship with time was observed for macro but not micro fidgeting, providing tentative evidence for the existence of dissociable "types" of fidgeting. This possibility opens a potentially important line of inquiry for future investigation.

The results with respect to the influence of block on memory for lecture material were more equivocal. Overall there was no effect of block, however, this lack of an effect was found to be due entirely to the surprisingly accurate performance in block 7 (of 8), which appears to reflect the fact that the material covered in this 5-min section of the lecture was particularly memorable. Excluding the data from block 7 yielded an effect of time on task. An analysis comparing the first half of the lecture to the second also confirmed such an effect, even while retaining block 7's data. In both cases, participants remembered more from early in the lecture than later.

Also interesting with respect to time on task were the non-linear trends present in both the relations between fidgeting and time, and memory for lecture material and time. While these findings were derived from an exploratory analysis, it does suggest that a simple linear increase or decrease with fidgeting and retention for lecture material over time might be overly simplistic, and reinforces the use and analysis of our finer grained temporal slices in future research. Rather than speculate on the mechanism underlying these apparent non-linear trends, however, the first order of business for future research is to replicate the patterns reported here and then explore the mechanisms that subserve them.

As the data from block 7 makes very clear, while using naturalistic materials has its benefits in the study of attention ( Kingstone et al., 2008; Risko et al., 2012b), when considering changes over time in actual lectures (whether linear or non-linear), it is important to note that the nature of the material presented also changes as a function of time (see Scerbo et al., 1992 for discussion of this issue). For example, there might be a general increase in the difficulty of the material discussed or random events in the lecture (e.g., a personal story) that might influence variables of interest (e.g., attention, fidgeting, memory for lecture material). Lecture material is often presented in a cumulative fashion in which subsequent material builds on that of previous with greater complexity ( Scerbo et al., 1992), which may be of particular relevance for the general relationship between time and difficulty typically observed in a lecture context. These factors could lead to patterns of change over time that are specific to the lecture rather than some general underlying mechanism of, for example, attention function. Assessing the influence of time on task across many lectures ( Young et al., 2009), or introducing controls in other ways (see Scerbo et al., 1992), is needed in order to derive general principles. That said, across a series of studies investigating mind wandering in lectures ( Lindquist and McLean, 2011; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a; Szpunar et al., 2013a, b), including the present investigation, there now appears to be some consistency with respect to attentional variations with time and the relation between mind wandering and memory for lecture material. The use of naturalistic lecture materials, of course, has the added benefit that the general patterns discovered should be applicable to actual lectures.

Relation between Attention, Fidgeting, and Memory for Lecture Material

In the present investigation we demonstrated that an individual's attention rating in a given block predicted their retention for lecture material during that block (i.e., as attention rating decreased retention decreased) consistent with prior research demonstrating a relation between attention and memory for lecture material ( Lindquist and McLean, 2011; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a; Szpunar et al., 2013a, b). This relation emphasizes the importance of research attempting to understand the factors which modulate attention in educational contexts (i.e., if one can engage a student's attention then one should be able to improve memory for educational material). A second interesting result with respect to the link between attention and memory for lecture material was that the linear effect of block on memory for lecture material (discussed above) was eliminated when an individual's attention rating was included in the analysis. This result suggests that the linear relation found between block and memory for lecture material was likely a function of block's relation to attention and the latter's relation to memory for lecture material. In other words, this analysis suggests that memory for lecture material declined as a function of time because attention was declining as a function of time, and attention modulates memory for lecture material. In addition to attention, fidgeting also predicted retention of lecture material as well, with retention declining as fidgeting increased. Interestingly, the relation between fidgeting and retention was significant even when attention rating was included in the model. This suggests that fidgeting makes a unique contribution to retention of lecture material over and above that contributed by an individual's attention. This result implies that fidgeting might be reflecting variation in some other encoding relevant mechanism. We speculate on this mechanism further below.

The idea that variations in fidgeting might be reflecting variation in some other encoding relevant mechanism draws additional support from the results of the analyzes relating attention to fidgeting. While the prediction that fidgeting would increase with time on task was confirmed, putatively supporting some relation between attention and fidgeting, when the contribution of time on task (i.e., block) to attention was controlled there was no relation between attention and fidgeting. This suggests that fidgeting does not explain any unique variance above and beyond what block explains in attention ratings. This fact will be important to consider in future research investigating the relation between fidgeting and attention (i.e., analyzes need to consider that both are related to time on task).

Distribution of Attention via Self-Reports

One interesting aspect of the attention rating response pattern related to its high mean value (5.6/7) relative to what might be expected based on prior research. Of 168 responses across our 21 subjects, only 9 of those responses indicated a value below a Likert response of 4 (which equated to varying strengths of disagreement with the statement that one's attention was fully focused on the video). While on its face this pattern might seem unusual given that prior mind wandering research typically finds rates of off-task responses between 30 and 40% ( Smallwood et al., 2007b, 2008; McVay et al., 2009; Risko et al., 2012a, 2013a), it is important to note that participants were providing ratings that were meant to reflect a summary of their attentional state over the last 5 min. This needs to be contrasted with the point estimates provided by typical probe based analyzes of mind wandering. Thus, the overall "high" attentiveness is not necessarily inconsistent with prior estimates of the frequency of mind wandering if we suppose that over any given time period participants would be attending to the lecture 60-70% of the time. Alternatively, it remains possible that a regular reporting schedule encouraged more self-monitoring and improved attention to the lecture, which would have obvious practical benefits. If such continuous appraisal of one's attentional state (or some other aspect of the lecture; e.g., importance of material; Risko et al., 2013b) was demonstrated to reliably benefit the commitment of attention to the lecture material, then this could provide an inexpensive means to combat attentional lapses in a variety of contexts. It may be the case that such continuous monitoring could increase meta-awareness of both faltering attention or comprehension, as well as some of the more subtle cues (e.g., an increase in fidgeting) which may proactively indicate the onset of declining attention before a serious lapse actually occurs. While prior work has found no such benefit to self-monitoring in reducing mind wandering rates during a reading task in an experimental setting ( Schooler et al., 2004), the additional intrinsic motivation present in an actual lecture context may interact with the efficacy of self-monitoring. Finding effective classroom interventions is frequently viewed as a priority for attention research, one such successful example being the application of mindfulness training. Such training has been shown to improve measures related to academic performance and appears to be mediated, in part, by reductions in mind wandering ( Mrazek et al., 2013). Yet another promising form of intervention involves interpolating memory tests throughout the course of an online lecture, recently demonstrated to also be of benefit to educational outcomes ( Szpunar et al., 2013a). See Szpunar et al. (2013b) for a review of interventions targeting mind wandering in educational contexts.

Toward a Non-Attentional Account of Fidgeting

Taken together, the collective weight of the data suggests that while fidgeting changes as a function of time on task, and variations in fidgeting are related to memory for lecture material, these two patterns are independent of any strong relation between attention and fidgeting. This is inconsistent with the mechanism described in the introduction in which fidgeting might represent a means to increase attention (i.e., when individuals feel their attention waning they fidget in order to help them sustain attention). Nevertheless, an alternative view of fidgeting in the present context is that it reflects an individual's level of discomfort (see Galinsky et al., 1993). As noted in the introduction, listening to a lecture can be viewed as a sustained attention task. Critically, numerous studies have demonstrated that sustained attention (or vigilance) tasks are stressful ( Temple et al., 2000; Grier et al., 2003; Warm et al., 2008a, b; Young et al., 2009). One line of evidence for increased stress during vigilance tasks comes in the form of elevated levels of catecholamines ( Frankenhaeuser et al., 1971; Lundberg and Frankenhaeuser, 1980) and increases in self-reported distress ( Szalma et al., 2004; Warm et al., 2008a). The primary source of this stress has been interpreted as relating to a common demand for the continual application of cognitive resources over a prolonged period ( Warm et al., 2008a, b) and may therefore be generalizable to other contexts. The vigilance required during a lecture may thus be expected to induce stress for similar reasons. In the lecture context in particular, the increasing difficulty of the material as a lecture progresses (e.g., Scerbo et al., 1992) when combined with the vicissitudes of attention may lead to an increasing likelihood that the individual's situational model breaks down ( Smallwood, 2011) which in turn could induce further stress as time on task increases. In addition to evidence suggesting that time on task is associated with stress in lectures, fidgeting is also known to be related to stress in that individuals tend to fidget more while under stress (e.g., Barash, 1974) and fidgeting appears to actually mediate the experience of perceived stress in some people ( Mohiyeddini and Semple, 2013; Mohiyeddini et al., 2013). Lastly, while the relation between stress and memory is complex, induced stress can have a negative impact on memory (e.g., Kirschbaum et al., 1996; Payne et al., 2002). Taken together, these three observations provide a potential explanation for the patterns of fidgeting reported here in that (1) stress would be expected to increase with time on task, and thus (2) fidgeting should increase with time on task as observed, and (3) increases in fidgeting and thus stress should be negatively correlated with memory for lecture material. This stress account is speculative but it does dovetail with the current data. It also makes a directly testable prediction. Namely, if a "stress" rating was collected with each block rather than an attention rating, one should find that (a) self-reported stress should increase with time on task (b) variations in self-reported stress should be negatively correlated with variations in memory for the lecture material and finally (c) self-reported stress should be positively correlated with fidgeting. These predictions await empirical investigation.

Conclusion

The present investigation has provided further evidence for the important role that attention plays in memory for lecture material. It has also highlighted the key role played by time on task as a modulator of students' attention in lectures. The present work has also provided an initial and objective consideration of fidgeting in the context of lecture viewing, and its relation to attention and memory for lecture material. The relationship we have shown between fidgeting and retention suggest that fidgeting may be an effective indicator of times when interventions (e.g., rest break or a change in lecture pacing) may be of particular benefit to educational outcomes. Additionally, the differential pattern of results across macro and micro levels of fidgeting implies that future research may benefit from examining correlates of different forms of fidgeting. This initial examination also strongly suggests that exploration of non-attentional views of fidgeting, in addition to attentional ones, will be a productive line of inquiry.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

Bligh, D. (2000). What's the use of Lectures? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Galinsky, T. L., Rosa, R. R., Warm, J. S., and Dember, W. N. (1993). Psychophysical determinants of stress in sustained attention. Hum. Factors 35, 603-614.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Gligoric, N., Uzelac, A., and Krco, S. (2012). "Smart classroom: real-time feedback on lecture quality," in International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops, (Lugano).

Levine, J. A., Schleusner, S. J., and Jensen, M. D. (2000). Energy expenditure of nonexercise activity. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 72, 1451-1454.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Parasuraman, R. (1985). "Sustained attention: a multifactorial approach," in Attention and Performance XI, eds M. Posner and O. Marin (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 493-511.

Salovery, P. (2009). Introduction to Psychology: Lecture 9. Yale University: Open Yale Courses. License: Creative Commons BY−NC−SA. Available online at: http://oyc.yale.edu (Accessed September, 2010).

Schooler, J. W., Reichle, E. D., and Halpern, D. V. (2004). "Zoning-out while reading: evidence for dissociations between experience and metaconsciousness," in Thinking and Seeing: Visual Metacognition in Adults and Children, ed D. T. Levin (Cambridge: MIT Press), 203-226.

Warm, J. S., Matthews, G., and Finomore, V. S. (2008a). "Vigilance, workload, and stress," in Performance Under Stress, eds P. A. Hancock and J. L. Szalma (Brookfield, VT: Ashgate), 115-141.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everyday attention and lecture retention: the effects of time, fidgeting, and mind wandering

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We have all had our thoughts wander from the immediate task at hand. The emerging embodied cognition literature emphasizes the role that the body plays in human thought, and raises the possibility that changes in attentional focus may be associated with changes in body behavior.