Multitasking and task performance: Roles of task hierarchy, sensory interference, and behavioral response

Abstract This research examined how different types of multitasking affect task performance due to (a) task hierarchy, (b) sensory interference, and (c) behavioral response. This research used a 2 task hierarchy (primary vs. secondary multitasking) × 2 sensory interference (low vs. high) × 2 behavioral response (absent vs. present) between group experimental design. The results of two experiments showed that task performance was lower (a) when the given task was a secondary task, (b) when sensory interference was high, and (c) when behavioral response was present. In addition, there was an interaction between task hierarchy and sensory interference, such that the effect of task hierarchy was stronger when sensory interference was high (than low). Theoretical, practical, and methodological implications for future multitasking research are further discussed.

[1]  Alan D. Baddeley,et al.  Short-term memory and the limited capacity hypothesis. , 1969 .

[2]  Annie Lang,et al.  The limited capacity model of mediated message processing , 2000 .

[3]  Se-Hoon Jeong,et al.  Predictors of Multitasking with Media: Media Factors and Audience Factors , 2007 .

[4]  Tom H. A. van der Voort,et al.  The Impact of Background Radio and Television on High School Students' Homework Performance , 2003 .

[5]  Annie Lang,et al.  Media Multitasking: Good, Bad, or Ugly? , 2015 .

[6]  Niels Taatgen,et al.  The Multitasking Mind , 2010, Oxford series on cognitive models and architectures.

[7]  Gabi Schaap,et al.  "TV no longer commands our full attention": Effects of second-screen viewing and task relevance on cognitive load and learning from news , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[8]  Michael S. Gendron,et al.  Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[9]  William P. Eveland.  A “Mix of Attributes” Approach to the Study of Media Effects and New Communication Technologies , 2003 .

[10]  Yoori Hwang,et al.  Multitasking and Persuasion: The Role of Structural Interference , 2015 .

[11]  Rhiannon M. Fante,et al.  The Effects of Instant Messaging and Task Difficulty on Reading Comprehension , 2013 .

[12]  Tip Robertson,et al.  The impact of media multitasking on learning , 2012 .

[13]  D. Lawson,et al.  The effects of text messaging on memory recall in college students , 2013 .

[14]  James J. Cummings,et al.  Multitasking on a Single Device: Arousal and the Frequency, Anticipation, and Prediction of Switching Between Media Content on a Computer , 2014 .

[15]  Jatin Srivastava,et al.  Media multitasking performance: Role of message relevance and formatting cues in online environments , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[16]  Timothy C. Brock,et al.  Acceptance of persuasion and the inhibition of counterargumentation under various distraction tasks , 1974 .

[17]  Zheng Wang,et al.  Multidimensions of Media Multitasking and Adaptive Media Selection , 2015 .

[18]  Yoori Hwang,et al.  Does Multitasking Increase or Decrease Persuasion? Effects of Multitasking on Comprehension and Counterarguing , 2012 .

[19]  Matthew J. Grawitch,et al.  In Search of the Relationship Between Polychronicity and Multitasking Performance: The Importance of Trait Self-Control , 2013 .

[20]  Jennifer M. Glass,et al.  Virtually Perfect Time Sharing in Dual-Task Performance: Uncorking the Central Cognitive Bottleneck , 2001, Psychological science.

[21]  H. Pashler.  Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[22]  Yoori Hwang,et al.  Media Multitasking Effects on Cognitive vs. Attitudinal Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis , 2016 .

[23]  Tip Robertson,et al.  Reading Performances Between Novices and Experts in Different Media Multitasking Environments , 2009 .

[24]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .