Podcasts > Stuff You Should Know > Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

By iHeartPodcasts

Step into the world of cognitive clarity with Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant in an episode of "Stuff You Should Know" that debunks the multitasking myth. While many wear the ability to juggle tasks as a badge of honor, our hosts reveal the hidden truth – that what is often mistaken for multitasking is actually rapid task switching which significantly hampers efficiency. Embark on a journey of understanding how striving to do too much at once can lead to a staggering 40% loss in productivity, particularly in the modern workplace where social media and emails incessantly divide our attention, resulting in more errors and lower quality work.

In this enlightening discussion, listen as Clark and Bryant explore the brain’s limitations, introducing the concept of 'processing bottleneck'—a testament to our cerebral constraints when it comes to handling multiple tasks. They confront the dangers of distracted driving, amplified by mundane activities that dramatically increase accident risks, and delve into practical solutions to enhance focus, like the Pomodoro Technique. Whether you're aiming to boost your work efficiency or simply curious about the brain's capabilities, this episode will guide you toward mastering the art of concentrated effort in an age of constant distractions.

Listen to the original

Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Mar 6, 2024 episode of the Stuff You Should Know

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.

Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

1-Page Summary

Multitasking is impossible for humans and makes tasks take longer and have more errors

Multitasking is debunked as a myth by Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant, pointing out that attempts at multitasking lead to inefficient work and higher error rates. Instead of performing multiple tasks simultaneously, humans engage in rapid task switching, which incurs a "switching cost" in terms of time and productivity. No progress is made during the brain's transition period between tasks, leading to a significant loss in productivity. This inefficiency is particularly magnified in individuals with ADHD, who face even longer switching costs. Task switching can cause up to a 40% loss in productivity, especially in workplace situations where employees divide their attention between tasks like checking social media or email, ultimately resulting in decreased work quality and an increase in mistakes.

Trying to multitask overloads the brain's limited processing ability

Josh Clark introduces the concept of a 'processing bottleneck' conveying the brain's restricted capacity to handle tasks concurrently. The brain can manage, to some extent, two tasks at once before performance drops. Any further, and performance suffers greatly due to what is known as the "response selection bottleneck," this occurs when the brain must prioritize tasks, emphasizing the inefficiency of multitasking. Although there is some evidence to suggest that women may be slightly better at multitasking than men, Clark and Bryant stress the research is inconsistent and inconclusive. Contrasting brain connection patterns in men and women may point to different cognitive strengths, but not necessarily to enhanced multitasking abilities.

Driving while performing another task is very dangerous

Discussing the dangers of distracted driving, Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant underscore how activities like eating or drinking while driving increase the risk of accidents. For example, eating while driving, particularly complicated foods, increases the risk of an accident by 80%, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Smartphones have contributed to an increase in distracted driving crashes; however, despite being a serious issue, there is insufficient data to suggest that smartphone use is more dangerous than other distractions, such as eating or drinking while driving.

Notifications and distractions should be limited to help focus

The need to minimize notifications and distractions to maintain focus is highlighted by Clark and Bryant. They promote techniques, like the Pomodoro method, which encourage sustained concentration by limiting interruptions. By turning off notifications and managing outside communications, individuals can better concentrate on tasks at hand. The Pomodoro Technique, which consists of 25 minutes of focused work followed by a short break, is presented as an effective strategy to enhance attention and productivity in a world rife with potential diversions.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Switching cost in terms of time and productivity refers to the negative impact on efficiency when transitioning between tasks. It represents the time and productivity lost during the mental shift from one task to another, leading to a decrease in overall performance. This phenomenon is particularly evident when individuals attempt to multitask, as the brain needs to readjust its focus, resulting in a delay in completing tasks effectively. The switching cost highlights the inefficiency of task switching and emphasizes the importance of focusing on one task at a time to maintain productivity.
  • The processing bottleneck in the brain is a concept that describes the brain's limited capacity to handle multiple tasks simultaneously. When the brain tries to process too many tasks at once, it can lead to a drop in performance due to the brain's need to prioritize tasks, causing inefficiencies in multitasking. This bottleneck occurs when the brain reaches its limit in managing tasks concurrently, resulting in decreased efficiency and potential errors.
  • The response selection bottleneck is a term used to describe the brain's limitation in prioritizing tasks when attempting to multitask. It signifies the point at which the brain struggles to choose which task to focus on, leading to decreased performance and efficiency. This bottleneck occurs when the brain is overloaded with multiple tasks, causing delays in decision-making and task execution. Essentially, it highlights the cognitive challenge faced when trying to juggle multiple tasks simultaneously.
  • The Pomodoro Technique is a time management method that breaks work into intervals, typically 25 minutes long, separated by short breaks. Each interval is called a pomodoro, and after completing four pomodoros, a longer break is taken. This technique aims to improve focus and productivity by structuring work into manageable time blocks with regular breaks. It was developed by Francesco Cirillo in the late 1980s and has gained popularity for its simplicity and effectiveness in enhancing concentration.

Counterarguments

  • While multitasking may lead to inefficiencies, some argue that certain types of multitasking, such as combining physical tasks with cognitive ones, can be performed effectively.
  • Some research suggests that practice and training can improve an individual's ability to multitask, potentially reducing the "switching cost."
  • The concept of "continuous partial attention" suggests that some people may choose to stay partially engaged with multiple tasks to keep up with a fast-paced environment, which can be beneficial in certain contexts.
  • The 40% loss in productivity due to task switching may not apply to all types of tasks or all individuals, as some people might have developed strategies to minimize this loss.
  • The idea that the brain can only handle two tasks at once is a simplification, as task complexity and familiarity can influence how many tasks one can juggle.
  • The "response selection bottleneck" may be less pronounced in tasks that are highly practiced or automated, suggesting that multitasking can be more efficient in certain scenarios.
  • The claim that women may be slightly better at multitasking than men is contentious, and some argue that observed differences in multitasking ability are not significant enough to be generalized.
  • While eating while driving is dangerous, some might argue that the risk can be mitigated by choosing less distracting foods or by eating in a controlled manner.
  • The assertion that smartphones have contributed to an increase in distracted driving crashes could be countered by pointing out that other factors, such as vehicle design or road conditions, also play a significant role.
  • The effectiveness of the Pomodoro Technique may vary among individuals, and some may find other time management strategies more suitable for their work style or attention span.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

Multitasking is impossible for humans and makes tasks take longer and have more errors

Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant dissect the notion of multitasking, revealing that it is, in fact, a myth and that human attempts to multitask lead to less efficient work with more errors.

Switching between tasks involves a "switching cost" of lost time and productivity

The hosts delve into the mechanics of what multitasking really entails and why it's a flawed practice.

The brain requires time to switch between tasks, during which no progress is made

Josh Clark explains that what is often considered multitasking is actually just rapid task switching, similar to how single CPU computers operate by quickly jumping back and forth between tasks. This requires a pause as the brain stops one task and starts another, with no progress being made on either task during this refractory period.

Frequent task switching leads to significant reductions in productivity

Chuck Bryant mentions the "switching cost" when you leave a task to do something else, like sending an email, and then return to the original task. Although it may seem seamless, there's a cost in the time it takes for your brain to refocus on the original task. Clark and Bryant emphasize that, when switching from one task to another, especially when attempting two tasks at once, there is a loss of productivity known as switching cost.

The psychological refractory period effect describes how the response to a second task is delayed because the brain is still processing the first task. Chuck Bryant explains that while it seems like you’re multitasking, you're actually doubling the time it takes to complete tasks due to this switching cost. The hosts agree that during the time the brain is switching tasks, there's no progress made on either task.

This inefficiency is exacerbated for ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Multitasking is impossible for humans and makes tasks take longer and have more errors

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The psychological refractory period effect (PRP) is a phenomenon where the brain delays responding to a second task while still processing the first task. This delay occurs when individuals are required to divide their attention between two tasks, leading to a slowdown in response time. The PRP is often studied in contexts that involve divided attention, such as driving and talking on the phone, to understand how cognitive processes are affected by multitasking. Researchers use the PRP paradigm to investigate how the timing between stimuli impacts reaction times and cognitive performance.
  • The performative aspect of multitasking refers to the appearance or impression of being productive by juggling multiple tasks simultaneously. It suggests that individua ...

Counterarguments

  • Some research suggests that certain types of multitasking may be possible when the tasks involved are very different from each other and use different types of cognitive resources.
  • There is evidence that some individuals, often referred to as "supertaskers," may be capable of multitasking effectively without the typical costs associated with task switching.
  • The concept of "continuous partial attention" suggests that people can maintain a level of attention across multiple streams of information without necessarily incurring the same costs as task switching.
  • Training and practice in certain contexts, such as playing musical instruments or video games, may improve an individual's ability to switch tasks more efficiently, potentially reducing the switching cost.
  • The negative impact of multitasking might be mitigated by strategic planning, such as grouping similar tasks together or scheduling dedicated times for specific types of work.
  • Some argue that the ability to quickly switch between tasks is a skill that can be beneficial in dynamic environments where adaptability is crucial, even if it comes with some loss of efficiency.
  • The 40% loss in productiv ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

Trying to multitask overloads the brain's limited processing ability

Clark introduces the concept of a 'processing bottleneck', indicating that the brain has a finite capacity to handle multiple tasks at once. This capacity is pushed to its limit when we attempt to multitask.

The brain can only handle 2 tasks at once before performance suffers

The conversation revolves around the brain's limitations when it comes to multitasking. Clark and Bryant explore how multitasking can overload the brain's core functions such as attention and working memory, which is particularly apparent in individuals with ADHD. Bryant suggests that while managing one task is ideal, two tasks can be handled to some extent, but trying to accomplish three tasks concurrently is ill-advised.

A study from Vanderbilt University points to a phenomenon known as the "response selection bottleneck," where the brain must choose which task is more critical when faced with several actions. During task-switching moments, Clark explains, the brain doesn't make progress on any task, illustrating the inefficiency of multitasking.

It's also mentioned that the brain may favor tasks based on the pleasure they provide or their potential to accomplish a sub-goal. Clark emphasizes that such multitasking, especially involving various media screens, is associated with lower density of gray matter in certain brain regions, but the implications of this are not fully understood.

Women may have slightly better multi-tasking abilities than men, but research is inconclusive

Bryant dives into research regarding gender differences in multitasking abilities, noting the inconsistent and sometimes questionable quality of many studies. Clark acknowledges that definitive conclusions are elusive, and the research isn't clear on whether women may possess slightly ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Trying to multitask overloads the brain's limited processing ability

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • A processing bottleneck in the brain is a concept that suggests the brain has a limited capacity to handle multiple tasks simultaneously. When faced with multiple tasks, the brain can only effectively process a limited number of them at a time before performance starts to decline. This bottleneck occurs because the brain must prioritize which tasks to focus on, leading to inefficiencies and reduced effectiveness in multitasking situations.
  • The response selection bottleneck is a cognitive phenomenon where the brain struggles to choose which task to prioritize when faced with multiple tasks simultaneously. This bottleneck occurs during task-switching moments, leading to inefficiencies as the brain cannot make progress on any task effectively. It highlights the challenge the brain faces in managing competing demands for attention and decision-making. This concept underscores the limitations of multitasking and sheds light on how the brain copes with processing multiple tasks at once.
  • Lower density of gray matter in certain brain regions can indicate reduced neural cell bodies and synapses in those areas. Gray matter is crucial for processing information in the brain. A decrease in gray matter density in specific regions may suggest potential impacts on cognitive functions related to those areas. ...

Counterarguments

  • Multitasking does not necessarily overload the brain; some argue that it depends on the type of tasks being performed and that the brain can adapt to multitasking with practice.
  • The assertion that the brain can only handle two tasks at once is overly simplistic; some research suggests that task complexity and familiarity play significant roles in multitasking performance.
  • While multitasking can affect attention and working memory, some studies suggest that strategic task management and improved cognitive control can mitigate these effects.
  • The impact of multitasking on individuals with ADHD might vary, with some individuals finding strategies to effectively manage multiple tasks.
  • The concept of a "response selection bottleneck" may not apply to all forms of multitasking, particularly when tasks are highly practiced and automated.
  • The link between multitasking with media screens and lower gray matter density does not necessarily imply causation; it could be correlational or influenced by other factors.
  • The idea that women may have slightly better multitasking abilities than men is contentious, and some argue that observed differences may be due to social and cultural factors rather than inherent cognitive differences.
  • The claim that women have quicker response times and perform better on creative multitasking tasks could b ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

Driving while performing another task is very dangerous

Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant discuss the hazards of distracted driving, expressing particular concern about common but dangerous behaviors like eating or drinking while in control of a vehicle.

Eating or drinking while driving dramatically increases accident risk

Bryant cites alarming statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), noting that 65% of near-miss accidents are caused by drivers who are eating or drinking. He also mentions that doing so increases the risk of being involved in an accident by 80%. Coffee is singled out as an especially perilous beverage to consume while driving.

Eating while driving presents a particular danger because it often involves foods that can divert the driver's attention, such as jelly-filled donuts, which can drip, or fried chicken, due to the necessity of licking fingers or its typically two-handed consumption. Consuming fried chicken with bones requires even more attention and hands, which further compounds the risk.

Smartphones have led to some increase in distracted driving crashes, but other behaviors are more dangerous

Despite these dangers, Clark points out the lack of comprehensive data regarding crashes caused specifically by smart ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Driving while performing another task is very dangerous

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The lack of comprehensive data regarding crashes caused specifically by smartphone use indicates a gap in detailed information on the direct impact of smartphone usage on driving incidents. This means that there is limited specific data available to quantify the exact number of accidents solely attributed to smartphone distractions. The existing research may not provide a complete picture of the extent to which smartphone use contributes to road accidents. This lack of detailed data hinders a thorough understanding of the role smartphones play in causing crashes.
  • The statement about a 2.7 percent increase in crashes due to smartphone use is based on limited research findings. This data suggests that since smartphones became widespread, there has been a relatively small rise in the number of crashes attributed to smartphone-related distractions. However, it's important to note that this figure may not capture the full extent of the impact of smartphone use on road safety. The research indicates that while smartphones contribute to distracted driving incidents, other behaviors like eating or drinking while driving may pose even greater risks.
  • Eating or drinking while driving poses significant risks, with statistics showing a high likelihood of accidents resulting from these behaviors. Smartphone use, although also a concern for distracted driving, has been linked to a smaller increase in crashes compared to eating or drinking while driving. The hosts emphasize that while smartphones are a recognized distraction, the dangers of eating o ...

Counterarguments

  • While eating or drinking can increase the risk of an accident, not all foods or beverages require the same level of attention, and some can be consumed with minimal distraction.
  • The statistics cited may not account for underreporting or misreporting of the causes of near-miss accidents, which could affect the accuracy of the 65% figure.
  • The 80% increased risk of accident while eating or drinking may not be uniformly applicable across all driving conditions and driver skill levels.
  • The specific mention of coffee as perilous could be challenged by arguing that many drivers are accustomed to drinking beverages like coffee without incident, suggesting that the risk might be more associated with driver behavior than the beverage itself.
  • The increase in crashes attributed to smartphone use might be underreported due to difficulties in proving smartphone use post-accident, suggesting that the 2.7 percent increase could be higher.
  • The comparison between the dangers of eating or drinking and smartphone use while driving could be more complex, with some studies potentially showing that smartphone use is more distracting due to cognitive load.
  • The assertion that other behaviors can be equally ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Mulititasking: Working slower with worse results | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

Notifications and distractions should be limited to help focus

Podcast hosts Chuck Bryant and Josh Clark discuss how limiting notifications and distractions is crucial for maintaining focus and productivity, proposing techniques to aid in this process.

Techniques like the Pomodoro method work by limiting distractions during focused work periods

The hosts touch upon the loss of productivity due to distractions, which can severely impact activities that require concentration, such as schoolwork. This discussion points to a broader understanding that effectively managing interruptions and outside communication is vital to sustaining attention on a given task.

Chuck Bryant specifically recommends turning off notifications on one’s phone, arguing against the need to be notified of every social media interaction, such as comments on posts. Meanwhile, Josh Clark agrees and suggests that turning off ringtones and other notifications can be fundamental steps toward enhancing one’s ability ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Notifications and distractions should be limited to help focus

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The Pomodoro Technique is a time management method that breaks work into intervals, typically 25 minutes long, separated by short breaks. Each interval is called a pomodoro, and the technique aims to improve focus and productivity by limiting distractions during work periods. The method involves setting a timer, working on a task for a set time, taking short breaks, and repeating the process to enhance task attention.
  • Chuck Bryant and Josh Clark are well-known podcast hosts who have discussions on various topics, including productivity and focus techniques. They often share insights and tips on how to improve concentration and limit distractions during work or study sessions. Their discussions can provide valuable advice on managing interruptions and enhancing productivity in daily tasks. Chuck Bryant and Josh Clark may reference specific methods like the Pomodoro Technique to help listeners implement practical strategies for better focus and efficiency.
  • Short, focused work periods involve dedicating a specific amount of time to work on a task without any distractions. This technique aims to enhance productivity by encouraging intense concentration during these brief intervals. By limiting interruptions and focusing solely on the task at hand for a short period, individuals can achieve higher levels of efficiency and effectiveness. The Pomodoro Tec ...

Counterarguments

  • While limiting notifications can help many people focus, some individuals may find that certain types of notifications actually help them stay on track or quickly address urgent matters without worrying about missing something important.
  • Techniques like the Pomodoro method are not one-size-fits-all; some people may find that the frequent breaks disrupt their flow state or that the 25-minute work periods are too short for tasks that require deep, prolonged concentration.
  • In some professions, being responsive to notifications and communications is essential, and limiting them could negatively impact performance or the ability to provide timely responses.
  • For some, the act of turning off notifications might increase anxiety or the fear of missing out (FOMO), which could counterintuitively reduce focus and productivity.
  • The effectiveness of the Pomodoro Technique or similar methods may vary depending on the nature of the work, the individual's personal work style, and the work environment.
  • There is a possibility that the structure imposed by the Pomodoro Technique could lead to a rigid work style that doesn't allow for the flexibility often required in dynamic or creative t ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free

Create Summaries for anything on the web

Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser

Shortform Extension CTA