Just finished reading an interesting new submission on multitasking. Here is an excerpt and my thoughts on it.
Many researchers point out that what we call multi-tasking is, in fact, tasks switching. For example, in it is pointed out that: “Multitasking refers to a person’s ability to deal with more than one conscious thought or information processes (tasks) at the same time with no loss of speed or accuracy. Multitasking is a myth because in fact what people are doing is task-switching. This involves very rapidly switching from one task to another, pausing and returning to the previous task. We are quickly shifting our focus and attention from one task to another. For things that require our conscious effort and concentration, it is all but impossible to do two things at once. People often assume (or pretend) that they are multi-tasking, but they are task-switching.”
Let us consider what happen in our example, when the person will be switching from one task to other. If this person swims some distance and then starts cycling she/he will lose in swimming. When she/he switches from cycling to running, before finishing the cycling stage, she/he will lose in cycling. Therefore, if a person will be switching tasks, before finishing them, in a triathlon, then this person will lose with 100% of certainty. Therefore, this example dispels myths about improving efficiency, productivity, performance, etc. by multi-tasking (switching tasks).
“Multitasking feels more productive and effective. Multitasking is when you tackle more than one task at the same time. Or at least, that’s what you think it is. In reality, you’re switching between multiple tasks in rapid succession. Research done by Dr. David Meyer and Dr. Joshua Rubinstein showed that even these brief mental blocks that happen as a result of context switching cost as much as 40% of someone’s productive time. Because it takes mental effort to switch between cognitive tasks, multitasking affects your ability to get work done efficiently and effectively.”
Researchers pointed out that: ”Another common misconception is that multitasking improves our performance because it allows us to look at a problem with a ‘fresh eye.’ Evidence also indicates that chronic multitaskers perform worse in many cognitive tasks.”
“As multiple studies have confirmed, true multitasking—doing more than one task at the same time—is a myth. People who think they can split their attention between multiple tasks at once aren’t actually getting more done. In fact, they’re doing less, getting more stressed out, and performing worse than those who single-task.” See [6]Multiple studies and research over the last decade show that “multi-tasking” leads to stress, lack of attention, worsened memory. If doing it for a long time then it may lead to chronic medical conditions, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
You are correct. Multitasking is a diffusion of our energy, a scattering of our focus and a straying from any purpose we might wish to achieve. It’s a misconception, as if your two arms and hands could be doing two different chores at the same time. The human brain is incapable of that. But I will say that in one small department the mind is capable of something akin to multitasking.
That exists in the realm of imagination when one sees and unites corollaries from two different fields, analogies, and realizes how one mirrors the other. An example of this might be when someone long ago, watching the turning of a wagon wheel had an epiphany and invented the first water wheel, the application of one invention into a whole other realm.
Multitasking in the physical sense is humanly impossible. In the mental sense it has the same meaning as being scatterbrained, not a good thing. So I think the word, with its positive innuendo, should be deleted from our language, or redefined into its limited coral. That might save some people from trying such an impossible juggling act, wasting their time and looking foolish.
"Focus’ is my advice for profitable mental activity. I’m sure Rene Descartes would agree with that when he wrote his famous ‘Meditations’.
If you might be stimulated by this to read other things I’ve published on this site, in the science fiction genre, on a lighter note but with the same rigorous logic, here are some links:
https://www.publish0x.com/robert-oreilly/wet-chip-xpzexnd
https://www.publish0x.com/robert-oreilly/roland-house-xnnxllm
