The Myth of Multitasking

Multivac said:
If you drive on the right, on single carriageways, then you wouldn't last long as you would be driving into the traffic that is driving on the correct side of the road.
Click to expand...

I think that was the point he was making, that you'd notice him because he'd be the one driving on the wrong side of the road.
 
Darat said:
Spot on.



Well I tend to use my chin and shoulder, and a foot or two when I've used up my supply of hands!
Click to expand...

Are you sure the term comes from computer science? This has been a much researched topic in psych for decades...? Google the psychological refractory period for really old examples.
 
MUTLTITASKING MAY HURT YOUR PERFORMANCE, BUT IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER

...“There’s this myth among some people that multitasking makes them more productive,” said Zheng Wang, lead author of the study and assistant professor of communication at Ohio State University.

“But they seem to be misperceiving the positive feelings they get from multitasking. They are not being more productive - they just feel more emotionally satisfied from their work.”

...But one of the key findings of the study is that this multitasking didn’t do a very good job of satisfying their cognitive needs which actually motivate the multitasking in the first place, Wang said. That’s probably because their other media use distracted them from the job of studying. However, the students reported that the multitasking was very good at meeting their emotional needs (fun/entertainment/relaxing) - interestingly, a need they weren’t even seeking to fulfill.
Click to expand...
 
aggle-rithm said:
I've griped before on these forums how fast-food places make their employees sound mentally challenged by forcing them to multitask in the drive-thru...taking orders, assembling orders, and taking money at the same time. The conversation goes like this:

"May I help you?"
"I'll take a hamburger and fries, please."
"OK...um...is that a strawberry or chocolate shake?"
"...what...?"
"Anything else?"
"You got my order wrong. I want..."
"That'll be three-fifty. Drive to the first window please."

The stupid thing is that it would be so easy to farm out the order taking to call centers, so people who are focused entirely on the customer, with no distractions, are the ones doing the communicating.
Click to expand...

Yeah. This is my job these days. Generating a labour model that involves juggling independent tasks.

It does come down to definitions: if the employer is really asking the employee to concentrate attention to two simultaneous activities, then the employer is going to see terrible results.

On the other hand, if the model is to ask the employee to initiate and monitor semi-autonomous tasks and to rotate attention among them, this does bring about efficiencies.

As a personal example, when I started working in food services it was an a bakery franchise ("Mmmarvelus Mmmuffins") where I was both baker and cashier. Once you've tossed a batch into the oven, it does not require constant attention. Just make sure you set the timer. If you have a customer at the till, they'll understand if you interrupt the transaction for nine seconds to take out a fresh tray of cherry chocolate.

The ability to rotate attention is built up with experience in that combination of activities. The new guy will perform badly. The seasoned guy will have enough spare time between attention demanding tasks to chat up the cute girl at the Orange Julius. Not admitting to anything.

Later when I worked on an assembly line, when I worked in a more sophisticated restaurant, and other positions over the years, the question was not whether there were efficiencies in attention-switching, but more about when one has found the limit and started to obtain diminishing returns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom