# Linking Phubbing Behavior to Self-Reported Attentional Failures and Media Multitasking
## 4 Discussion
One potential explanation for the difference between the current findings and past findings on gender and phubbing could be due to an unequal gender ratio. Future studies should take this consideration into account if they wish to better clarify the relationship between gender and phubbing. We also compared correlations between scores on the GSP with scores on psychosocial and personality measures, which included the BIS-11, SSRQ, and SCS. Individuals that would describe themselves as more impulsive, lacking in self-regulation, and feeling less connected to and belongingness with others also reported more experiences of phubbing behavior. Past research has found phubbing to be negatively associated with social connectedness [7], and while a myriad of psychosocial and personality variables has been investigated alongside phubbing behavior, it has not yet been explored how this behavior relates to impulsivity and self-regulation. Impulsivity is a strong predictor of problematic smartphone use [55] and problematic smartphone use is a strong predictor of phubbing behavior [6]. Moreover, self-control has been found to be negatively associated with phubbing behavior [7], and while self-control and self-regulation can be used interchangeably, they can also be perceived as distinct processes [56]. Future work should use these same measures to test how robust these findings are. We created an initial regression model to determine which measure of everyday attentional failures best predicted phubbing behavior. Perceptions of attention-related cognitive errors, or how frequently individuals make minor mistakes as a result of absent-mindedness, was the strongest predictor of phubbing behavior. When considering the research on media multitasking and everyday attentional abilities, there are a few possible explanations to infer why phubbing is best predicted by attention-related cognitive errors. [PERSON] and colleagues [35] explored the deficit-producing hypothesis to determine the extent to which media multitasking predicts poor attentional control. Using causal modeling, media multitasking predicted attention-related cognitive errors, and this effect was mediated by attentional lapses and spontaneous mind wandering. Though we treated attention-related cognitive errors as a predictor variable rather than an outcome variable, [PERSON] and colleagues' [35] work supports a strong link between this particular attention variable and technology multitasking behaviors such as phubbing, albeit in a different manner and with a different behavior. In our initial regression model, difficulty with attentional switching and spontaneous mind wandering were the next biggest predictors of phubbing behavior. When examining these three predictors alongside one another, it appears that individuals who phub may not be entirely aware of that they are engaging in this behavior, and it may be unintentional that they are not focusing all of their attention on the social interaction. Once a \"phubber's\" attention is captured by a distractor such as their phone, it could be difficult for them to redirect their attention back to the social setting and particularly their conversational partner. Research that integrates an attentional capture paradigm while also measuring phubbing behavior can perhaps further test this inference. Further evaluating [PERSON] and colleagues' findings [35] brings up the question whether engagement in phubbing behavior can predict attentional failures. We did not explore this possibility because we wanted to remain consistent with most [8; 13; 28; 29; 33; 46; 55; 57], though certainly not all [19; 30; 35; 36; 58], of past research, which has treated technology use and multitasking behaviors as outcomes and individual differences variables as predictors. Another finding worth noting is the negative, rather than positive, coefficient for AC-D scores predicting GSP scores in the initial regression model.