The Myth of Multitasking

[Orphia Nay]

I've never claimed to be a multitasker, and recently it occurred to me that multitasking may be a myth. I decided to Google, and found a number of articles, including this:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-power-prime/201103/technology-myth-multitasking

... there is no such thing as multitasking -- at least not the way you may think of it. The fact is that multitasking, as most people understand it, is a myth that has been promulgated by the "technological-industrial complex" to make overly scheduled and stressed-out people feel productive and efficient.
...
Multitasking involves engaging in two tasks simultaneously. But here's the catch. It's only possible if two conditions are met: 1) at least one of the tasks is so well learned as to be automatic, meaning no focus or thought is necessary to engage in the task (e.g., walking or eating) and 2) they involve different types of brain processing. For example, you can read effectively while listening to classical music because reading comprehension and processing instrumental music engage different parts of the brain. However, your ability to retain information while reading and listening to music with lyrics declines significantly because both tasks activate the language center of the brain.
...
A summary of research examining multitasking on the American Psychological Association's web site describes how so-called multitasking is neither effective nor efficient. These findings have demonstrated that when you shift focus from one task to another, that transition is neither fast nor smooth. Instead, there is a lag time during which your brain must yank itself from the initial task and then glom onto the new task. This shift, though it feels instantaneous, takes time. In fact, up to 40 percent more time than single tasking - especially for complex tasks.
...

Does this confirm your suspicions too? Or does it challenge your self-perception?

Does your workplace encourage multitasking?

Any other thoughts?

 

[nimzov]

I do a lot of task switching, but never could multitask.

 

[Bikewer]

I've listened to a number of NPR segments on this recently, including Science Friday. Many people think they can multi-task quite well, but when tested they do poorly.

Likely the best I've ever seen are the guys who would run small radio stations back 35 or 40 years ago. I sat in with one of these guys, and never saw a busier man in my life.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I challenge any of you to watch a charge nurse on a busy hospital unit and tell me she/he isn't multitasking.

 

[Ketyk]

Doesn't "multi-tasking" depend on the tasks?

I can drive and listen to the radio.
I can drive and eat a Whopper.
But I cannot, and willnot, drive and text to this thread.

>>>>>>>>>>CRASHED........LOL

 

[theprestige]

I challenge any of you to watch a charge nurse on a busy hospital unit and tell me she/he isn't multitasking.

I think the actual claim is that while many jobs involve multitasking, multitasking is not nearly as effective or efficient as some people think.

That charge nurse is most certainly multitasking, but she's also probably working a lot harder, and accomplishing a lot less, than if her work environment wasn't designed around the assumption that multitasking is an acceptable use of her time and effort.

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

I challenge any of you to watch a charge nurse on a busy hospital unit and tell me she/he isn't multitasking.

Having been in that position, I can tell you that I prefer not to think of my approach to it as multitasking. It's more of a sequential process. To me, the idea of multitasking encourages trying to do two or more things simultaneously. When I see people, including myself try to do that, I see a reduction in quality. Some things can't withstand a reduction in quality and most of the things a charge nurse does fall into that category. I encourage people to lose the idea of multitasking and think of it as juggling. When you catch a ball and throw it back up, you have to concentrate on that ball, but then it's in the air for a while and you can concentrate on the next ball that's coming down. Each ball deserves your complete attention at that moment. You can't catch all the balls at once because you only have two hands and you're seldom juggling only two balls. If you TRY to catch all the balls at once, or even try to focus on all the balls at once you're going to drop ALL the balls. The important thing is to remember how many balls you've got in motion, make a mental note (or a paper note. I often have a clipboard covered in post-its.) of when the ones in the air will need attention, and get back to them when they need that attention.

 

[Orphia Nay]

I think the actual claim is that while many jobs involve multitasking, multitasking is not nearly as effective or efficient as some people think.

That charge nurse is most certainly multitasking, but she's also probably working a lot harder, and accomplishing a lot less, than if her work environment wasn't designed around the assumption that multitasking is an acceptable use of her time and effort.

Indeed, although I'd be inclined to argue that she's doing multiple tasks one at a time in quick succession if she's efficient.

 

[quarky]

Not sure if this is on topic, but has anyone felt itch and pain simultaneously? The two sensations apparently compete for neural paths, and i can't recall ever having both at the same time. It might even be possible to trade pain for itchiness.

 

[JJM 777]

Does your workplace encourage multitasking?

I would require it, if I were the boss in computer adminisration. So many processes or operations involve pressing a key and then waiting for 5 minutes. One person can easily handle many operations in a multi-tasking style.

I can drive and listen to the radio.
I can drive and eat a Whopper.
But I cannot, and willnot, drive and text to this thread.

I can, and often will, text while driving. Or talk to the phone. Or read a map, either physical or online via the web browser of my phone. Or find the address or opening hours of a shop on the phone web browser. I am conscious of the increased risk, and being conscious about it is what makes it safe, actually it makes me more alert than normally, more conscious about the necessity of being alert.

 

[Orphia Nay]

I would require it, if I were the boss in computer adminisration. So many processes or operations involve pressing a key and then waiting for 5 minutes. One person can easily handle many operations in a multi-tasking style.

So you recommend serial-tasking, not multitasking.

I can, and often will, text while driving. Or talk to the phone. Or read a map, either physical or online via the web browser of my phone. Or find the address or opening hours of a shop on the phone web browser. I am conscious of the increased risk, and being conscious about it is what makes it safe, actually it makes me more alert than normally, more conscious about the necessity of being alert.

This worries me.

 

[arthwollipot]

I challenge any of you to watch a charge nurse on a busy hospital unit and tell me she/he isn't multitasking.

The problem is in the definition. As per the "normal" definition, which comes from computer science, multitasking refers to doing two or more tasks simultaneously. The nurse isn't adjusting the patient's sheets and changing her drip simultaneously, he's doing them one after the other. His day is taken up by doing many tasks, one after the other very efficiently. Sometimes one task can be put on hold while he attends to another, then returned to, but that's not multitasking, it's task-switching.

The word "multitasking" has come out of the domain of computer science to refer to this kind of rapid task-switching. Almost everyone in this thread has used the word this way, but this change in definition makes the linked article pretty redundant, since it is referring to the former computer-scientific definition. Most people can walk and chew gum simultaneously, because they're autonomic functions and use different areas of the brain. Most people can't adjust sheets and change a drip simultaneously - mostly because each of those tasks requires two hands, and most people don't have four.

 

[whatthebutlersaw]

Anecdote: As a kid (not anymore) I could read a book and listen to an audiobook at the same time and retain both - answer questions about the content, recall characters and what they did etc. (In fact, doing only one or the other made me so restless I could retain nothing. I needed the simultaneous input to be able to focus for that long.) (Kids' brains are amazing. I really miss that ability to retain an entire song lyric after a single listen or a full script after the second read through. Don't know what happened, I guess age+life. )

As a general rule, I don't think multitasking is an efficient usage of time. I do several things "at once" because such is the nature of my job. But what I actually do, is to divide up the tasks and time into priority levels and then do lower priority things in the windows where my focus isn't required on the top priority. I don't see this as multitasking but as sequence tasking. My ability to do even this efficiently fluctuates with form, time of day, when last meal was, how I slept etc. and if the top priority is something that is quality sensitive, I will usually elect to focus on that. That is not a natural ability of mine. It is a hard come-by trained strategy that other people just have for free, the bastards.

When I was first out of uni, I cleaned hotels. And there it became very clear that this split second breaking down of tasks, prioritizing them and ordering them is something some people (good cleaners) have and other people (me) just don't. I had to learn that the hard way and until I did, I was a crap housekeeper. As I learned it, I got better - I even broke the "most rooms (done to proper standard) in a day" record at one point, although my victory was short lived. But having gained that strategy it then followed me to all jobs I had after that. But it always comes at the cost of expelling energy. It isn't hardwired into me like it was in some of my colleagues.

But I'm thinking good cleaners is a good place to start if one wants to get an understanding of multi-tasking. Just film a few for a day and then break down what they do to see if they really are multi tasking or just really ace at split second decisions.

Air traffic controllers is another interesting case.

 

[wobs]

The best multitaskers are generally people like racing drivers or fighter pilots.

I've heard it said that the best rally drivers have about 30 pieces of information being processed by his (or her) brain at any one time (although how much of this is conscious thought is another matter of course).

And when Clarkson did his series on speed (no not the drug!), he featured Micheal Schumaeker (sp?!), and showed that his talent was not fast reactions, but his ability to handle the situation better by multitasking the information. And I'm no fan of either blokes btw.

I recall this myth (of women being better at it) all started a few decades ago when a newspaper reported a study about brain differences in men and women. They found that some women had greater difficulty in focuing on specific tasks, and had many thoughts going through their heads at once. This lack of focus was then twisted by some feminist journalists as women being better multitaskers. (no I can't find the links for these things, it from memory, sorry).

I agree that no one is generally good at it, that what people usually do is switch from different tasks, which is an ineffcient way of working. Much better to do a job, finish it, and then do the next. Especially if it requires particular focus.

Also, as others have said, there is an issue with definition. Multi-doing, and switching bewteen multiple jobs are different things, and processing multiple pieces information at once is another matter.

 

[Brian-M]

Not sure if this is on topic, but has anyone felt itch and pain simultaneously? The two sensations apparently compete for neural paths, and i can't recall ever having both at the same time. It might even be possible to trade pain for itchiness.

While reading your post I was feeling a slight itch on the side of my nose. So I pressed the edge of my thumbnail hard against a finger. The result? Itch and pain at the same time.

Ah, right now as I write this I'm feeling an itch on my left knee. Now to press a semi-sharp object against the same spot... Itch and pain in the same spot at the same time.

They don't seem mutually exclusive to me.

 

[Ethan Thane Athen]

...I recall this myth (of women being better at it) all started a few decades ago when a newspaper reported a study about brain differences in men and women. They found that some women had greater difficulty in focuing on specific tasks, and had many thoughts going through their heads at once. This lack of focus was then twisted by some feminist journalists as women being better multitaskers. (no I can't find the links for these things, it from memory, sorry).

I always respond to the 'Women can multi-task and men can't' meme with 'Of course men can multi-task, we do it all the time. At any given second we're doing whatever it is we're doing and thinking about sex. That's why we can't take on another task, we're already doing two.'

 

[Cayvmann]

I would require it, if I were the boss in computer adminisration. So many processes or operations involve pressing a key and then waiting for 5 minutes. One person can easily handle many operations in a multi-tasking style.


I can, and often will, text while driving. Or talk to the phone. Or read a map, either physical or online via the web browser of my phone. Or find the address or opening hours of a shop on the phone web browser. I am conscious of the increased risk, and being conscious about it is what makes it safe, actually it makes me more alert than normally, more conscious about the necessity of being alert.

Dunning-Kruger

 

[Brian-M]

Dunning-Kruger

Plus people are often unaware of inattentional blindness.

People can falsely believe that they do not experience inattentional blindness. This is due to the fact that they are unaware that they are missing things. Inattentional blindness also has an effect on people’s perception. There have been multiple experiments performed that demonstrate this phenomenon.

Since I'm guessing many people here are already familiar with the invisible gorilla test, I'll use a different example from that page.

Clown on a Unicycle Experiment
One interesting experiment displayed how cell phones contributed to inattentional blindness in basic tasks such as walking. In this experiment a brightly colored clown on a unicycle traveled by. The individuals participating in this experiment were divided into four sections. They were either talking on the phone, listening to an mp3 player, walking by themselves or walking in pairs. The study showed that individuals engaged in cell phone conversations were least likely to notice the clown.

 

[The Don]

I can and do multi-task but it's very limited.

I can, for example, watch TV, read a book and carry on a conversation.

On the other hand I cannot talk and drive at the same time if I actually have to actively drive (as opposed to just cruising down the motorway).

On work related tasks I am truly terrible at multi-tasking and find task switching slow and difficult.

 

[quarky]

While reading your post I was feeling a slight itch on the side of my nose. So I pressed the edge of my thumbnail hard against a finger. The result? Itch and pain at the same time.

Ah, right now as I write this I'm feeling an itch on my left knee. Now to press a semi-sharp object against the same spot... Itch and pain in the same spot at the same time.

They don't seem mutually exclusive to me.

Thanks for running the test.