Lecture 4: Multitasking Flashcards
Redelmeier, D. A., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1997). Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions.
¥ The use of mobile phones during driving was associated with a quadrupling of the risk of a collision during the brief time interval involving a call (collision was 4.3 times more likely).
¥ Using hands-free phones was no safer than using hand held phone.
¥ The relative risk was similar for drivers who differed in personal characteristics such as age and driving experience.
Caird, et al. (2008). A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance
¥ Reaction times to events (e.g. onset of brake lights on the car in the front) increased by 250ms when participants used phones.
¥ This increase in RT was observed across different test settings: laboratory, driving simulation and on-road research setting.
¥ The effect was larger when drivers were talking than when they were listening.
¥ If you think ¼ of a second is too short a time period to be significant consider this: at 50mph (80kph) it translates to traveling an extra 18 feet (5.5m) – enough to make a difference.
Caird, et al. (2014). A meta-analysis of the effects of texting on driving.
¥ Typing and reading text messages while driving adversely affected eye movements, stimulus detection, reaction time, collisions, lane positioning, speed and headway.
¥ Typing text messages alone produced similar decrements as typing and reading, whereas reading alone had smaller decrements over fewer dependent variables.
¥ Typing and reading text messages affects drivers’ capability to adequately direct attention to the roadway, respond to important traffic events, control a vehicle within a lane and maintain speed and headway.
Wandtner et al. (2018).
¥ This study investigated response times to critical tasks when driving in highly automated systems an performing non driving related (NDR) tasks
¥ It was found that response times were quickest in control conditions and with an auditory-vocal task
¥ Response times were slower when NDR task was visual-vocal and longer still when visual-manual (this is like reading and writing text messages)
¥ Thus even with highly automated systems there must be careful consideration of what tasks drivers should engage in while ‘driving’
Drews, F. A., Pasupathi, M., & Strayer, D. L. (2008). Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving
That seems to be different and less dangerous because conversation with someone who is present is different than talking on the phone:
¥ the surrounding traffic becomes a topic of the conversation, helping driver and passenger to share situation awareness,
¥ the driving condition has a direct influence on the complexity of the conversation, thereby mitigating the potential negative effects of a conversation on driving-as road conditions get harder the conversation changes, reduces, to limit use of cognitive resources
¥ Although a passenger who is too “supportive” by constantly commenting and directing attention in an “over controlling” fashion has a potentially negative impact on performance
¥ Conversations with children different as they don’t understand the road conditions, they don’t care
Mobile phones and walking
- Walk more slowly, change direction more frequently, less likely to acknowledge other people
- Less likely to notice unusual activity
- =phone usage may cause inattentional blindness even during simple activity that should require a few cognitive resources
Task Switching
ability to shift attention between one task and another
• useful in unpredictable/complex world
• but causes slower performances and decrease in accuracy after the switch
• better sticking to one task finishing that, the moving on to your next task
Some people more prone to multitasking
¥ Approach-oriented or reward-focused.You consider the possible benefits to multitasking and are attracted to the higher potential rewards it represents.-want to look good in front of other people
¥ High-sensation seeker.You need constant stimulation, and enjoy the novelty of switching to new tasks.
¥ Convinced you are good at it.Those who think they’re good at multitasking are more likely to engage in the behavior more often than those who think they’re just average at it. -
¥ Have trouble focusing.If you’re prone to distraction or have trouble blocking out external stimuli, multitasking may be harder for you to shake.
Multimedia multitasking
Ophir, et al. (2009).
¥ Heavy media multitaskers more susceptible to interference from irrelevant environmental stimuli and from irrelevant representations in memory.
¥ Surprising result that heavy media multitaskers performed worse on a test of task-switching ability, something that is often regarded as the “essence of multitasking”. This is likely due to reduced ability to filter out interference from the irrelevant task set.
Can multitasking change our brains?
Loh, K. K., & Kanai, R. (2014)
¥ people who used a higher number of media devices concurrently also had smaller grey matter density in the part of the brain known as the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the region responsible for cognitive and emotional control functions.
¥ The authors point out that their study reveals a link rather than causality and that a long-term study needs to be carried out to understand whether high concurrent media usage leads to changes in the brain structure, or whether those with less-dense grey matter are more attracted to media multitasking.
The iPhone effect
quality of the conversation in the presence of mobile devices was rated to be less fulfilling compared with conversations that took place in the absence of mobile devices.
Supertaskers
¥ may exist but they are rare and most people are not supertaskers.
¥ 2009 study examining multitasking ability found that individuals who report multitasking more frequently, multitask less well than those who are less frequent multitaskers (Ophir et al., 2009).
