Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:10PM EDT
See Comments (599)
I live for multitasking. I would get nothing done without it. I watch TV while I'm writing, read a story in another window, keep a magazine propped to one side, and answer emails/the phone/the doorbell on the side. And according to a new study this is all going to lead to my ruin.
The New York Times reports on a new study that basically says multitasking actually makes you less efficient than if you concentrated on one thing at a time. I'm not entirely sure that's what it says, though. I was talking on the phone while reading the article. (Kidding!)
To some extent, this is common sense. It's long been known that talking on a cell phone while driving a car is exceedingly dangerous. Some studies say it's just as bad as driving drunk.
But the science of the phenomenon is intriguing. I feel more productive when doing multiple things at once, but maybe I'm not. The key, says the researcher, is that you lose time and focus when you switch between tasks. Try it for yourself. Type half of a sentence. Go check your email. Then come back and try to finish your thought. It's tough to get back in the groove of what you were doing.
The expert advice? Check email once an hour. And turn off outside distractions except, maybe, for soft background music.
As for me, I'm going to experiment with checking my email less frequently and see how that works for my concentration. An hour? No, but I am changing my "check for new messages" setting in Outlook from checking once every two minutes to every five.
So, multitaskers: Still think working on more than one thing at a time makes you more productive? Sound off!
LINK: Slow Down, Brave Multitasker, and Don't Read This in Traffic
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
I am in a customer driven environment. The customer always preempts an administrative task. An administrative task, phone call, etc. never preempts a customer conversation.
My wife often asks me why I don't work a short time on something, even if it is just picking up a few things in the garage. I don't like to start something unless I think I have enough time to fini----- . Often, I underestimate the time needed, but I don't even want to start unless I have at least the bare minimum. So, you can see my life ends up being a string of unfinished or just-
multitask works if they are same type of work. I attempt 5-6 projects at one time, moving to the next one when I am stuck or lack of informations to carry on. The writer's multitask is gabbage because they are not related, that's why it is not productive.
Studies often unintentionally, or intentionally, ignore the power of engagement, pressure, and volition. The chances of each of these being higher across a set of tasks is increased with the number of tasks added. The potential is there for productivity to be higher when focused on a single task (naturally), but many studies (and observations) suggest that most will do the minimum required. If given two weeks to perform a task, most will. Given two hours to perform the same task, it will be performed at a fraction that comes closer to 100% for the amount of time taken than the full two week performer. Pressure is powerful. Given two tasks, one I am really excited about and the other that I am not looking forward to... I would rather work on the two, so I am not completely immersed in drudgery. Engagement is key. One light at the end of one tunnel is one thing. But semi-evenly spaced lights in the same tunnel help to create a sense of constant productivity. It's my opinion that the sense of productivity contributes to volition. And volition is really what gets good work done!
I think a lot of the comments are saying the same thing here. It really depends on the tasks at hand. If the task requires a degree of concentration, then it would be less efficient to complete the task while engaged in additional activities. If the task is less stimulating, does not require much concentration, or is something you can start then walk away while waiting on it to finish, it is less of a challenge to multi-task. Here is a good test for anyone who disagrees - call a friend on the phone, start a conversation and then begin reading a news article. See how well you can maintain the conversation while comprehending the article on one pass.
As a mom of two young children (both under five), multitasking is a must. I'm constantly doing laundry and other household chores while watching and entertaining the children. If I didn't multitask, I wouldn't be able to have quality play time with them without worrying about the next "to do" on my list. The trick is you have to learn when to multitask and when not to.
well I can say that I can multitask a lot of thing that don't new to focus a lot because they are very simple, but there are other more complicated that needs to be very focused that multitasking them me you not very effective it is a question of matter
I'm forever multitasking and almost always leave things half completed at the end of the day, only to have to fini----- later, one by one. This piece of reading would probably not stop me from multitasking, it's a bad habit of mine, but I DO get somethings done while multitasking. I've just finshed my lunch (sandwiches), while typing and had a chat on my cellphone. I must admit it took me a bit longer typing this piece than it normally would.
Wow, i never knew that! good thing im lazy, lol! :P im going to tell my friends though, they multitask all the time!
In my long career, I have done a lot of multi-tasking, and I have observed it in others in many venues. It certainly can be annoying and deficient, leading to many errors in judgment and reasoning. Some people are better at it than others, but often the tasks are so disparate that they actually interfere with one another and lead to mistakes that end up costing much more time and effort to repair than it would have cost to do them one at a time. Cell phones catch a lot of the blame for accidents, but I would suggest that any activity other than focusing on the driving is just as dangerous. Thinking about non-driving related things is just as distracting and dangerous. It is where your mind is--not where your body is that counts. There are some tasks that have natural waiting times inherent in them. When doing one of those, one must have some other task that can be done productively during that natural wait time. Utilizing one's time effectively comes from making progress on tasks with every available moment, and not having to go back and rework to fix errors. Errors are extremely wasteful and costly, so it is worth it to do everything right the first time, and that requires focus and continuity of thought related to each task--not quick in and out peeks. Emails can be extremely distracting, and take you off in unexpected directions, sometimes to the complete abandonment of what you were intending to do with that time. You are better off not seeing the email until you really have time to react to it properly without creating problems in your other tasks.
My idea of multi-tasking has always been to balance "no-brainer" activities with stuff that requires more focus. For instance, I'm eating breakfast while I check my e-mail. When I go to work I'll shoot off a few e-mails to get others to start working on things for which I need their input, then I'll focus on my other tasks, one at a time, that I've prioritized. So I may actually have started the ball rolling on multiple things but I'll try to balance how much time I spend on each. Hey - I think they actually call that time management. :o)
The human brain is faster and more complex the computer. It can be exercised and increased in capacity especially when doing meanial tasks, it needs that stimulation. Granted there are limitations of course. But I like the challange for the most part. Consider the standard software Windows that is designed to take advantage of having many programs open at once which allows you to access information much more quickly and become more efficient. It is expected in the business world today in order to be (and remain) competitive.
In todays busy world, very few things get done without multitasking. Wasting away the hours in traffic can be offset by making those needed phone call whle driving at a snail's pace. But multitasking doesn't mean you have to focus on all the tasks you're doing with the same concentration. I don't think watching TV and eating gets the same focus at the same time. Neither is chewing gum and reading. Or knitting while listening to music. As a multitasker, you probably will devote one task with more focus than the other switching back and forth at different times of the multitasking moments.
Like rhondajohnkate, I'm curious about the gender bias here. Although it is tough to determine gender based on just screen names, there seems to be a trend towards men agreeing with the inefficiency of multitasking, and women commenting that it is something they do every day. A male friend of mine once watched a female friend cooking dinner: cutting vegetables for a salad, marinating and broiling meat, boiling pasta - all done going from one action to another with no wasted movement, much like a female line-order cook I once saw. He was astonished, commenting, "I could never do that. I'd have to make one thing, set it aside, make the next, set it aside, then make the last." She answered that it was lucky she was making the dinner, as then they'd be able to eat in less than 20 minutes AND the food would still be hot. I work in biotech, and when you have 3 or 4 different projects which each require a separate test, and each of these tests take from a few hours to a few days to run, multitasking is the norm. While I'm waiting on a half hour incubation for one assay, I'm setting up the reagents for the next step, or starting the assay for the next project, or doing my lab chores. Sitting around frittering away time during an incubation step because you're "focused on one thing" is far from efficient.
I agree with this article 100%. I get more errors while multi-tasking.. and I can't afford errors because I deal with lives.
i don't see the problem, i work in IT and am currently building 2 laptops, answering the helpdesk phone, checking e-mail and writing this! This is a normal day for me.
I am on "both" sides of this issue! I do believe that multi-tasking is the new paradigm, and a true generational split. I was brought up where it was considered "bad" to do more than one thing at a time...now it is an accepted way of life...neither bad nor good, just different. On the other hand, there is no doubt that the time involved re-focussing attention from task to task, makes multi-tasking actually somewhat inefficient.
The real problem is people's definition of Multitasking. This was invdnted as a computer technology and has been co-opted by people who do not understand how it works. People think multitasking means doing several things at once. That is WRONG!!! Multitasking means switching between tasks after the completion of a step is completed. Done this way, it CAN be effective. Not will, but can. It depends on you asd an individual. I multitask, but I work on one item until I finish the piece I am working on, then toggle over and work on the next piece, then back again. For example, in creating a word document, and a multimedia Training module, I have Word, Photoshop, Flash, and an audio editing program open. I toggle to the storyboard, copy the slide text and past it into a textbox in Flash, Pop over to an internet website to enter a search for example images, toggle over the word, swicth to the training manual, write the section that matched the slide content, toggle lover to the audio program, pull in the audio dfor the training, cut out the piece for this slide, save it to a separate file, then toggle over the to image search, find an image I like, purchase it (if not already owned), toggle to Photoshop, open image and edit as necessary, toggle to Flash, pull in the new image, pull in the audio, add animation and user interactions. Then I move to the next slide and start the process over again. This is effective Multitasking. I am performing multiple tasks, switching at the end of each logical activity. This is what Multitasking was meant to be, and I work much fatser this way than my coworkers who only do the word document, then only do the images, then only do the audio, then and only then start on the Flash. Any other type of Multitasking is misusing the term and slowing down the individual, just like the article says.
It's called compartmentalizing!
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
66 Posted by mchristopherp on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:13PM EDT Report Abuse
Absurd! The picture linking up to this article was amusing, because I carry a crackberry and another cell. If not for multitasking I would have work piling up daily. As a matter of fact, I am on the phone while typing this and I am not having any trouble. Perhaps this is something that relates to "brain power"? Give your brain a workout! :)