The Misnomer of Multitasking

Multitasking, so often considered a mark of mastery in the modern age, is not quite what we think it is.

When people attempt to attend to several different tasks, they’re not actually working on all of them at once. “Multitasking,” as it’s used in common parlance, is somewhat of a misnomer: rather than performing multiple tasks simultaneously, the brain actually switches rapidly between tasks. And task-switching is an expensive habit for the untrained brain—the cognitive control required to flip back and forth gobbles up the brain’s limited processing power. The result: plenty of extra time and effort expended, usually rendering any attempt to “multitask” less efficient than simply concentrating on one task at a time.

What does this mean for those of us who are constantly plugged in, forever fiddling with a dozen things to see and do? The popularity of multitasking in modern culture has left its true detriments largely ignored. But it’s time to put down your phone—and your tablet, and your iPod, and your remote. Concentrate instead on the scientific evidence against multitasking:

In a 2009 study out of Stanford University, frequent multitasking was shown to hurt cognitive performance. People labeled as heavy media multitaskers (consuming several forms of media at once, like texting while listening to music, playing games while surfing the web, etc), did worse on tests of attention and filtering ability. They also floundered on challenging working memory tests (3-Back, similar to our Memory Match Overload), and garnered lower scores on a task-switching assessment (similar to Brain Shift). The researchers postulated that frequent exposure to irrelevant stimuli had made the heavy media multitaskers less adept at filtering interference even when it mattered. Ouch.

“Multitasking” attempts don’t always perform badly, however. Sometimes, they just perform differently. In a 2006 study from the University of Los Angeles, participants who learned a new task—classification problems—while exposed to a demanding secondary task were just as accurate as single-task learners on later classification tests. The difference was that dual-task learners were less flexible when it came to accessing explicit knowledge and describing the rules of classification—they relied more heavily on habit. In fact, when researchers took fMRI scans of participants’ brains, they found that items learned under single-task conditions activated different areas of the brain than items learned under dual-task conditions. The conclusion: “multitasking” may sometimes work, at least when the tasks in question become automatic and habitual enough (like an expert musician who’s mastered singing and playing an instrument at the same time).

And finally, if you’re in the lucky 2.5% of the population labeled as “Supertaskers,” you really are a multitasking master! A 2010 study by Watson and Strayer showed that Supertaskers experienced no drop in performance even when faced with a challenging multitasking driving simulation.

Here’s the takeaway: while multitasking is largely a misnomer, the cognitive abilities it stands for—namely task switching and working memory—are inarguably real. There are plenty of scenarios that rely on those abilities, no matter what name they go by. Luckily, you can train these two critical cognitive functions through Lumosity exercises such as Brain Shift and Memory Match Overload, indirectly improving the skills that we commonly refer to as “multitasking.” Try out a training exercise today—just remember to do it without any distractions around!