In this day of accessible information, multitasking is becoming a vital daily skill, particularly for

college students who must multitask by juggling many projects at once and constantly moving

between displays. It sparks a fresh surge of curiosity in how multitasking impacts key cognitive

functions, including why it's so terrible for productivity and why it's so awful. Multitasking

refers to performing many tasks simultaneously which strongly is associated with increasing

efficiency and production. Multitasking has become second nature in today's lively digital world,

particularly for college students who frequently use many digital devices at once to multitask on

different projects. This growing phenomenon has spurred an unprecedented spate of research

into the consequences of multitasking on cognitive performance of late. Whereas multitasking is

often hailed as a practice that may enhance efficiency, there is a growing body of findings

arguing that it negatively affects several cognitive processes involved in understanding and

retention. For a compelling communication to be effective, the recipient must be completely

engaged and understand its substance. However, multitasking might cause attention to be

divided, which could impair understanding and lessen the message's persuasive power. In light of

this, it is imperative that educators and marketers understand the impact of media multitasking

on persuasion and communication in a world where it is only becoming more prevalent. Indeed,

past studies have conventionally investigated the effect of multitasking on task performance and

have clearly shown that the simultaneous performance of several activities reduces cognitive

efficiency. Drawing from the existing literature, my study will therefore examine how

multitasking influences the effectiveness of persuasive messages and hypothesize that

multitasking negatively affects comprehension, positively affects counterarguing, and negatively

affects persuasion. Therefore, in investigating these relationships, my current research aspires to

offer insight into how the use of multitasking behaviors influences persuasive communication

and to make recommendations for the improvement of message effectiveness in multitasking

environments. Thus, the purpose of my paper will be to investigate how multitasking may

impact awareness and the development of arguments in persuasive communications.

Source 1

Does Multitasking Increase or Decrease Persuasion? Effects of Multitasking on Comprehension and

Counterarguing Se-Hoon Jeong1 & Yoori Hwang2 1 School of Media and Communication, Korea

University, Seoul, Korea 2 Department of Digital Media, Myongji University, Seoul,Korea This study

examined the effects of multitasking on persuasion, including comprehension and counterarguing of

persuasive messages, which were presented in three different contexts: (a) nonmultitasking with full

attention paid to the message, (b) multitasking with primary attention paid to the message, and (c)

multitasking with secondary attention paid to the message. Consistent with predictions, the results

suggested that multitasking reduced the actual and perceived levels of comprehension and also reduced

counterarguing. The implications for research on persuasion are further discussed.

Source tow

Biological stress responses to

multitasking and work interruptions:
A randomized controlled trial
Author links open overlay panelLinda Becker a, Helena
C. Kaltenegger b, Dennis Nowak b, Matthias Weigl b c, Nicolas Rohleder a
Show more
Add to Mendeley
Share
Cite
[Link] rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license
open access

Abstract
In the course of digitalization, new stressors are emerging. In modern
working and living environments, two ubiquitous, technology-mediated
stressors are multitasking demands and work interruptions.
However, biological stress response patterns to multitasking and work
interruptions have been sparsely investigated so far. We thus aimed to
comprehensively assess biological stress response patterns to both
stressors and, additionally, test whether responses differ between digital
and partially non-digital settings. A controlled experimental set-up was
established and humans’ biological markers of the Sympathetic Nervous
System (SNS), the hypothalamic-pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis, and the
immune system were assessed. N = 186 healthy participants (mean age:
23.2 ± 4.3 years, 74.7% female, body mass-index: 22.3 ± 3.1 kg/m2) took
part in this pre-registered study. Each participant was randomly assigned to
one of 6 experimental conditions (1 digital single-task, 3 dual-tasks [2
parallel tasks and 1 interruption], 1 multitasking, and 1 passive, control
condition). Each one of the dual-tasking as well as the multitasking
conditions included a non-digital sub-task, i.e., performing a task in
presence of an examiner. All other conditions involved digital tasks only.
Salivary alpha-amylase (sAA) levels as a marker for SNS reactivity
significantly changed in work interruptions, parallel dual-tasking, and
multitasking conditions. No changes were found for control conditions.
Furthermore, no significant changes over time and no differences between
the conditions were identified for three biological markers: cortisol as
marker for HPA axis activity as well as for two immune system markers
(secretory Immunoglobulin-A, C-reactive protein). A time course similar to
sAA was found for perceived stress: with increases during task execution
and decreases afterwards in multitasking and parallel dual-tasking. Yet, it
did not change for the work interruption, passive control, and single-tasking
condition. Overall, our findings show that dual- and multitasking are
perceived as stressful and are associated with an activation of the SNS, but
not with responses of HPA axis or immune system. This was consistent for
digital as well as partially digital task demands. Our findings will also
inform future research into the differential stress effects of digital and non-
digital tasks to advance our understanding of biological stress response-
patterns to multitasking and work interruptions. Therefore, our findings are
highly relevant for understanding the long-term biological health effects of
stress in modern (digitalized) environments.

three source

Mental Juggling: When Does Multitasking Impair Reading Comprehension? Kit W. Cho, Jeanette

Altarriba & Maximilian Popiel To cite this article: Kit W. Cho, Jeanette Altarriba & Maximilian Popiel

(2015) Mental Juggling: When Does Multitasking Impair Reading Comprehension?, The Journal of

General Psychology, 142:2, 90-105, DOI: 10.1080/00221309.2014.1003029 To link to this article:

[Link] Published online: 02 Apr 2015. Submit your article to

this journal Article views: 1038 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 5 View citing

articles The Journal of General Psychology, 2015, 142(2), 90–105 Copyright C 2015 Taylor & Francis

Group, LLC Mental Juggling: When Does Multitasking Impair Reading Comprehension? KIT W. CHO

JEANETTE ALTARRIBA MAXIMILIAN POPIEL University at Albany, SUNY ABSTRACT. The present study

investigated the conditions under which multitasking impairs reading comprehension. Participants read

prose passages (the primary task), some of which required them to perform a secondary task. In

Experiment 1, we compared two different types of secondary tasks (answering trivia questions and

solving math problems). Reading comprehension was assessed using a multiple-choice test that

measured both factual and conceptual knowledge. The results showed no observable detrimental

effects associated with multitasking. In Experiment 2, the secondary task was a cognitive load task that

required participants to remember a string of numbers while reading the passages. Performance on the

reading comprehension test was lower in the cognitive load conditions relative to the no-load condition.

The present study delineates the conditions under which multitasking can impair or have no effect on

reading comprehension. These results further our understanding of our capacity to multitask and have

practical implications in our technologically advanced society in which multitasking has become
commonplace. Keywords: cognitive load, dual-task, multitasking, reading comprehension, task switch

TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENTS have now made it commonplace for people to engage in multiple

tasks simultaneously. The practice of multitasking manifests itself in a number of situations in our

everyday lives. For example, people speak on cell phones while driving, listen to music via their

smartphones while cooking, and frequent social media Web sites while reading an assignment. Hence, it

is not surprising that in a survey of 1,649 college undergraduates enrolled at a 4-year public institution in

the United States, 51% of respondents reported that they send text messages, and 33% reported using

Facebook, while doing schoolwork (Junco & Cotton, 2012). Although the notion of multitasking might

lead students to believe that they are being more productive, research in cognitive

Source 4

Why do college students engage

in in-class media multitasking
behaviours? A social learning
perspective
Chunxiao Yin, Lirui Li, Liang Yu

First published: 15 December 2023

[Link]

Read the full text

PDF

TOOLS

SHARE
Abstract

People in modern society are media multitaskers due to portable devices and
omnipresent wireless networks, and college students are no exception. Previous studies
have indicated that students' media multitasking behaviours in class harm their
academic performances, and understanding the reasons for college students'
engagement in such behaviour is meaningful. However, the literature takes media
multitasking behaviour as an audience behaviour, which ignores the interaction
between students and their surroundings. This study fills this gap by emphasizing the
role of the social learning process. A survey was conducted in a public and
comprehensive university in western China, and a total of 457 valid respondents were
obtained. The results from PLS-SEM revealed that college students' in-class media
multitasking behaviours were influenced by both observational learning (ie, imitating
others) and reinforcement learning (ie, in-class interventions), and this learning process
was shaped by students' media multitasking self-efficacy and self-management of
learning. These findings contribute to the current literature by providing a relatively new
perspective for understanding college students' in-class media multitasking behaviours,
and suggestions about how to deal with such behaviours are also provided.

Practitioner notes