COML 509 B2
Gonzaga University
Professor Alexander Kuskis
November 20, 2010
A few weeks ago, I visited the library at our local community college. After parking my car I walked across a large common area bustling with students headed in all directions. Many were in groups of two or three and many were alone. Nearly all, however, were performing multiple activities simultaneously. Among those activities was walking, talking, texting, reading, checking e-mail and listening to music. While I’m certain none were attempting all of them simultaneously, not a single person was performing only one task.
The digital ecology of our world has become more dynamic than ever before; there is an almost universal sense of urgency in our daily lives. We embrace the power of technological devices to deliver incredible amounts of entertainment, information and social interaction. Multitasking has become a way of life for many of us and an obsession for some. It is mythic in the sense that we have accepted it as a part of our culture as if it is the natural way things have always been. Job seekers list multitasking on their resumes as a skill and employers filter job applicants based on that skill (Indiana School of Medicine, 2010). Scientists conduct research to find ways to train our brains to multitask faster (Vanderbilt University, 2009).
Is the mania of multitasking good for us? What are the consequences of life in a fast lane that continues to accelerate? These and other questions are the concerns of many researchers, scholars and scientists who are just beginning to discover the impact of multitasking on human performance, learning, cognition and memory. Multitasking, as a word, is actually a misnomer. One of the few things that researchers agree on in this field of study is that the cognitive processing part of the brain is not capable of actually focusing attention on two or more tasks simultaneously. Multitasking is actually the phenomenon of “task switching”; focusing first on one task, then switching to another. Scientists are using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to learn the physical effects of multitasking, how to speed up the switching process, and which parts of the brain are engaged (Harmon, 2010). Other researchers are studying the cognitive aspects such as memory, intelligence and learning. They have learned that constant task-switching is like catching fish with a net rather than a fishing pole dangling a hook. When a fisherman casts a net, he is attempting to capture everything within a broad area, but at a shallow depth. A fisherman dropping a hook, in contrast, is attempting to lure a single fish at a much greater depth in a narrowly focused area of the water. Multitasking, “involves skimming the surface of incoming data, picking out the relevant details, and moving on to the next stream. You’re paying attention, but only partially (Lin, 2009).” You are casting a wider net, but you might not get that really big one cruising along the bottom.
How this activity truly impacts the ability of students to learn, office workers to effectively perform their jobs and the rest of us to go about our daily lives is anything but clear. Many of the published findings reflect negative outcomes ranging from low productivity among multitasking office workers to the spawning of a new type of attention deficit resulting from information overload, to looming health problems caused by constant release of stress hormones and prolonged production of adrenalin (Rosen, 2008). More recent research, however, is beginning to suggest that the changes that are occurring in our brains may actually produce positive outcomes not recognized by earlier studies. Professor Clifford Nass of Stanford University suggests that research methodology has targeted the negative impact that multitasking has on focused information processing, rather than the potential benefits that might be achieved through the broad but shallow cognitive filtering. The experimental results might be a difference in orientation; an innovative approach to processing that isn’t yet fully understood (Lin, 2009).
If, as Marshal McLuhan contends, each new medium is an additive extension to our senses and becomes integrally linked to our lives, then scholars might discover not simply “amputations” of current cognitive capabilities, but valuable new ones. Researchers may need to develop new methods, and measures from deep within the context of media multitasking rather than attempting to fit new phenomenon into an old framework. Though not everyone may be able to effectively and safely drive an automobile while texting or talking on a cell phone, we may find that we can learn to exploit the avenues provided by technological devices and learn to grasp deeper meanings, more complex understanding and an ability to be two places at once when we are not anywhere at all.
References
Harmon, K. (2010). Motivated multitasking: How the brain keeps tabs on two tasks at once: Scientific american. Retrieved 11/20/2010, 2010, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=multitasking-two-tasks
Indiana School of Medicine. (2010). Measuring preference for multitasking. Retrieved November 15, 2010, 2010, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2010/09/100914095934.htm
Lin, L. (2009). Breadth-biased versus focused cognitive control in media multitasking behaviors Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(37), 15521-15522. doi:10.1073/pnas.0908642106
Rosen, C. (2008). The new atlantis » the myth of multitasking. Retrieved 11/13/2010, 2010, from http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-myth-of-multitasking
Vanderbilt University. (2009). Multitasking ability can be improved through training. Retrieved 11/19/2010, 2010, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090716113401.htm
