Neurodiversity, Dopamine & Data: Rethinking Media Norms
At the MFA’s recent annual conference, three industry leaders challenged long-held assumptions about media, marketing, and the minds that shape them. Hearts & Science’s Peita Pacey, Slingshot’s Florence Gleeson-Cook, and OMD’s Rob Frost, who contributed to the discussion, explored the implications of neurodiversity, digital behaviour, and demographic myths on how we work and how we target.
Mi3 hosted a podcast with Peita, Florence, and Rob, which you can listen to here.
Adapting Work for Neurodiverse Talent
Hearts & Science’ Strategy & Behavioural Officer, Peita Pacey, is applying both sides of her job title to enable the kind of rethink mooted by Frost. While statistically around one in ten people are neurodivergent, she thinks “the reality is that in our creative industry, it’s going to be more like 25 to 30 per cent because it is naturally what pulls people in … we gravitate towards each other.”
As such, she says, “we need to embrace the positivity that adds, and we need to recognise that it’s a neurological difference. It isn’t a mistake. It isn’t that someone had paracetamol when they were pregnant that caused this (as the US health secretary believes).
“Trying to fit everyone into one box? It doesn’t work – and in this industry, it’s a terrible idea.”
In fact, she says a Hearts & Science study suggests the opposite is true. We brought together 45 people within the business and set them tasks based on some of the recognised traits of neurodivergence, like ADHD and autism.
“We split them into three groups – we did one group for pattern recognition, one group for curiosity and one group for hyper focus – and we gave each one a brain training exercise, or a kind of behaviour to practice throughout the day, and then we asked them to journal in the night.
“Everyone found that they got better at the tasks they’re meant to do – so the pattern recognition team got better at pattern recognition and so forth – but every single neurotypical person that did [the trial] said that their work output got better over the two weeks of doing it every day.
“We know that it’s not statistically significant. We know that isn’t proving anything at scale, but for me, it’s enough of an indication that us as an industry and us as who we are, we can start to learn from that, and we can start to share some of that thinking, if everyone can be open to doing it.”
Dopamine Dead Ends
Pacey delivered less feel-good news for those chained to our phones. In short, she suggested, they are ageing us faster by feeding us dopamine hits that cause a chemical imbalance.
She told the MFA conference that excessive consumption of social media and short-form video is akin to excessive consumption of alcohol. (While both have negative effects, hard scientific evidence of harm equivalence is at best patchy. Nevertheless, there are plenty of studies that suggest harms, particularly in children and young adults.)
“The misnomer about dopamine is that it’s a ‘feel good’ chemical. It’s not a feel-good chemical. In fact, there’s been quite a lot of research that talks about how it’s a ‘wanting’ chemical, not a ‘liking’ chemical,”– Peita Pacey, Chief Strategy and Behaviour Change Officer, Hearts & Science ANZ
“There’s a bunch of research that’s come out in the last 12 to 18 months around specifically watching short-form videos and what impact that is having on the brain, in terms of dopamine [levels], but then also what happens to that dopamine afterwards, how it retreats very, very quickly and causes what’s called a deficit.”
Dopamine in ‘normal’ life comes naturally – exercise, hanging out with friends, a meal out – but those activities also bring a blend of other neurochemicals, per Pacey, such as oxytocin (the ‘love hormone’) and serotonin (a mood regulator). “Those other hormones help dopamine float in your brain for longer. It keeps it more stable, so you’re not getting that big up and that big down. And unfortunately, that’s what our social media and our smartphones are doing – the big up and the big down, creating the deficit,” she suggests.
Turn On, Tune In, Burn Out
Meanwhile, we’re tethered to our phones for hours a day – around five and a half hours a day of usage for the average Australian, and seven hours-plus for those under 40, she says. “We’re always connected, always on emails, apps, video, maps, socials, Spotify… The problem is that when you’re spending longer than two hours on your smartphone, it’s actually rewiring your brain to overload with dopamine.”
The constant ping of messaging apps and email “are increasing the amount of cortisol as well,” says Pacey. “So you’ve got too much dopamine, too much cortisol. Your heart rate’s gone up, your heart rate variability has gone down, and it’s basically a hot mess that’s aging us significantly – and it’s out of our control, apparently.”
Beyond human collateral damage, she says it’s likely crimping growth, because deep thinking cycles are basically extinct, and because our brains are trained to constantly respond to the latest ping – which at the upper echelons of management may be particularly problematic from a pure growth perspective.
“If your brain is being trained to be reactive, that means that all you’re using is your experience and what you’ve done before. You’re not actually generating new ideas. You’re not being expansive in your thinking – and of course these people, the directors and above, are the ones who are most connected to their phones, because the expectation is that you’re available at all times.”
– Peita Pacey, Chief Strategy and Behaviour Change Officer, Hearts & Science ANZ
Pacey suggests there is a solution.
“Don’t pick up your phone and scroll it for the first 60 minutes of the day … that hour regulates your dopamine system for the next 24 hours.”
The platforms capturing the lion’s share of marketing dollars are unlikely to reprogram algorithms if it negatively impacts earnings, though Pacey thinks Pinterest is the exception.
“They don’t look at time-based measurements or scrolling-based measurements. They look at different measurements that are based on action and engagement on the platform. So it’s not about how fast people are moving, it’s about how deeply they engaged with the content, where did they go afterwards, and what actions did they take? That’s very different to a platform that is designed to just hook you there.”
Noble, perhaps, from a dopamine regulation and mental health perspective. But Meta makes 45X Pinterest in ad revenue, and there lies the rub.
Hear what OMD’s Rob Frost has to say about neurodivergence in the workplace, and see which targeting myths Slingshot’s Florence Gleeson-Cook challenged over at Mi3, here.
