Kids Don't Multitask As Well As They'd Like You To Think
from the ooh,-look,-something-shiny... dept
Over the past few years, there have been plenty of stories about the rise of multitasking, especially among the younger generation. The general consensus is that having grown up with multitasking, they're just better at it. However, in a NY Times article that suggests people really don't handle multitasking very well, the author points to research suggesting that while kids may multitask more often, it doesn't mean they're very good at it. If anything, it just tends to show that they're not very good at ignoring distractions. Of course, as with many of these discussions the definition of multitasking can be quite tricky. We were just talking about the evolutionary benefits of continuous partial attention, that allowed a brain to work on more challenging problems while it was overtly working on less interesting issues. But is that really multitasking? At the same time, some people blame multitasking for not being able to keep the attention of people who they want to listen to them -- but again, that's a different issue. Perhaps part of the problem is that multitasking has multiple definitions to multiple people, and that makes it that much more difficult to recognize when it's a problem and when it's beneficial.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Back in the 80s
Back in the early 1930s, bestseller books described a monstrous new generation of youth raised by the flapper generation of the 1920s, who were lackadaisical, anemic, lacking manliness, and incapable of defending a country for war.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Back in the 80s
Whatever happened to the good old days?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kids these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ahh dorpus
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ahh dorpus
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ahh dorpus
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tolerance and humility are all good qualities, but still we should be able to distinguish between what's *practical* and what's impractical. After all, those kids do have their own values that may be different from our own, their own goals we fail to understand, but -- like us -- they want to be happy, able to realize their goals and to succeed at what they deem is important.
Is multitasking helping them? Is it making them more effective at what they want to do? Are they more able to rest among changing circumstances of the more and more complex world today *or* are they becoming more and more confused? They have their goals - they want to succeed - they need focus and patience. Focus and patience it's not something that just comes with age; my experience at least is that it's something that has to be learned. (Perhaps I'm stupid or something :)
After having learned that, one can stay focused among chaos and confusion and perhaps chaos and confusion *are* the ways to learn it. But it's also possible that you have to learn to crawl before you walk and walk before you run.
Just a few chaotic thoughts... ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Multitasking can also get you killed...
Driving a car, hammering a nail, answering your boss can be very hazardous to you health and well being if you do not focus on that single event.
Reward goes to those who can focus to exclusion of everything else, the NASCAR driver, the homerun king, the spelling bee champion, the perfect SAT score were all done with intense purpose, no distractions, no switching tasks.
Running for your life from a beast in the wild whether it is a lion or "da Lions of 143rd street", you do not want to stop and say coo-man a new X-box.
Being able to Multitasking is another word for being easily distracted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Multi-what?
I consider myself to still be fairly young (24) but I work in the IT business and its quiet chaotic; there are always a dozen things that require attention ASAP.
I grew up playing RTS (Real-Time Strategy) where multitasking is a requirement and I firmly believe that this directly aided in my ability to keep pace with the dynamic work environment I’m in today.
I have noticed that there are many people that appear to be better at handling multiple issues simultaneously and, at the risk of generalizing; I have also noticed that most people that devote a large portion of their time to RTS games tend to be among the best of them. This may be more an effect then a cause (maybe people that are good at multitasking are drawn to RTS more then those who are not) but there is definitely a link there.
I am certain I would not have the resource allocation and controlled sense of urgency skills I have today were it not for all those hours playing StarCraft and Command & Conquer growing up.
I don’t think this an age-related skill though. I know many older adults that are just as good, or better, at RTS and multitasking then I am. I think it’s just more prevalent to find gamers among young people.
In response to Ajax – that is ridiculous! Yes, being able to focus is very important, but how often do you need to run for your life in today’s world? Talk to the boss, sure. But I demonstrate to my boss everyday that I can be talking to him (and communicate effectively with comprehension) while helping a user on Instant Messenger and editing open tickets in our tracker software. THESE are the things I need to do everyday to ensure my wellbeing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Multi-what?
Correlation is not causality.
In addition, I would distinguish between multiple sub-tasks within an over all task (competing in a NASCAR race is an overall task, steering, brakes, pit communications, etc. are all related sub-tasks) and unrelated tasks -- 1) meeting with yur boss about objectives and 2) thumbing IM on your Blackberry under the table.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Multi-what?
Does it matter? We doferentiate tasks as "unrelated" or "sub-tasks" but in the end you're still talking about a single brain working on multiple trains of thought (or 'threads'). A processor in a computer can differentiate between a new process and a thread, but can your brain?
If I'm driving a car, and operating the brakes, that's two tasks. Is that any different (to my brain) as operating my brakes and smoking a cigarette?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Multi-what?
This is very true...which is why I stated;
"This may be more an effect then a cause (maybe people that are good at multitasking are drawn to RTS more then those who are not) but there is definitely a link there."
...in my original post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Multi-what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
um...so you mean to tell me that the Nascar driver isn't doing multiple things at once? I think they might disagree. They need to watch where their going, controll the vehichles speed and direction and keep track of every car in their immediate vicinity. I think you just Proved multitasking is vital to Nascar drivers.
:-P
Silly Ajax.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Multitasking can be good, and it can also be bad, just like everything else in this world. It just all depends on how it is used.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The human CPU
That sounds like multi-threading to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The human CPU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The human CPU
As analog computers, our brain can process many thoughts at once, and its actually the random interference and noise from those other thoughts that gives us creativity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can it be?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The difference between texting under teh table and racing in F1, NASCAR, V8Supercar, rallying, whatever, is that in the former you are not really paying attention to yor boss, since the thought processes involved in composing an intelligent message are connected to the same parts of the brain used to compose sentences to say, which is why your texting speed slows down when you talk. Richard Feynamnn did an experiment where he found tat no-one coudl count out one minute while reading aloud. Some people could count out a minute while speaking, others could count out a minute while reading, but none could do boht, because some people counted by seeing numbers incrementing, while others did it by speaking silently to themselves, which tied up the vision or speech centres of the brain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]