Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] multitasking

It has already been pointed out that the multi-tasking referred to in this thread might more correctly be called time-sharing.

What most contributors to this thread seem to be blind to is that there are tasks that take less than full attention, yet are beyond our power to speed up. The options then are to rehash the incoming information while waiting for more, or think about something else.

In my example quoted below (moving files, typing, conversing) which so amused M Horton, moving files to an mp3 player may require 100% of my attention for the initial second of deciding what to grab and the actual "drag & drop" operation, but thereafter I'm left twiddling my metaphorical thumbs. Much better to shift my attention to another task, only occasionally checking to see whether further action on my part is required for the successful accomplishment of the task. Similarly, but requiring more practice, is typing a message while keeping a finger on the pulse of a conversation I'm occasionally contributing to. I freely admit that here frequent adjustments of attention are needed. I pause my typing when I need to pay more attention to the conversation. I know I am incapable of simultaneously doing two highly cognitive tasks, but the point is that most tasks aren't! Even a conversation doesn't require 100% of our attention, since halfway through my sentence you have a pretty good idea of what I'm saying. Obviously if you switch attention too often, comprehension falls off, so practice is needed to find a good balance.

I suspect that people who think they "never multitask", actually do reduce the amount of their attention focused on the task at hand just as much as I do, but _less_intentionally_. Call it day-dreaming: "What was that you said? My attention wandered...." For such unintentional multi-taskers (or time-sharers, if you will), there is no practiced "return from subroutine" signal, so their attention may not come back on task when needed. Those of us who intentionally multi-tasking have practiced the habit of switching focus, so important tasks will again receive attention when it is important that they have it. It is also important to _adjust_ the amount of attention devoted to various tasks as needed, possibly frequently. (As I said earlier, but the day-dreamers weren't listening!)

What I didn't say earlier, but might amuse the multi-taskers, and probably confuse the day-dreamers, is: I have anecdotal experience indicating that I have less difficulty switching between unrelated tasks, perhaps because it's easier to find my place again. I can read a physics book and listen to a lecture on some other topic more easily than a lecture on physics. In university I got most done if I did unrelated homework while taking notes in class: two pages in front of me at all times. So I did my physics homework in German class, and my German homework in physics class -- slowing down or even halting the extra activity as needed to follow what the professor was saying. To this day it's easier for me to read in one language while listening to another, again, perhaps because the two activities are easier to distinguish.

But I do not see how (according to reports) President James Garfield was able to simultaneously write ambidextrously, one hand in Greek and the other in Latin! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multilingual_Presidents_of_the_United_States That just seems amazing to me.

Thanks, M. Horton, for the Harvard and MIT research quotes. Very interesting! I'm sure that _too_ much attempted multi-tasking has the results highlighted. Moral: keep the multi-tasking/time-sharing within reasonable limits -- and recognize that "reasonable" may well vary from person to person. I tell my students that if they keep an A in my class, I'm happy to see them using their time efficiently. Otherwise, they need to recalibrate. (That wouldn't apply to a class based on discussion or group activities, where extra time should be spent in specified ways.)

KC

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@mail.phys-l.org [mailto:phys-l-bounces@mail.phys-l.org] On Behalf Of M. Horton
Sent: Friday, 15 June 2012 1:38 AM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] multitasking

Haha, imagine where you'd be if you didn't think you were so good at it:

"Clifford Nass, a communication professor at Stanford and author of The Man Who Lied to His Laptop, conducted research in 2009 on media multitaskers.
The results of his study found that "the people who think they're good at multitasking are actually the worst at it, and the people who think they are bad at it are ironically better at it." And though it may seem counter-intuitive, he found that the more frequently people multitask, the worse they get at it -- and the less likely they are to even realize the mistakes they're making."

You are not chatting, typing, and moving files at the same time. You're switching between the three and being less efficient and accurate than if you did them separately. And if one of them was a learning task, you would learn less in the process.

;-)

Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Caviness" <caviness@southern.edu>
To: <Phys-L@Phys-L.org>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 6:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] multitasking


Thanks, JD, for an insightful and informative post. As a life-long
multi-tasker, I automatically adjust the amount of attention I pay to each
task whenever I risk falling below the needed level appropriate for the
task. I'm responding to this message, chatting with the family moving
language learning audio files to an mp3player preparatory to running
errand -- can't waste that time on the road!

Didn't respond earlier because it seemed a waste of time to argue with
non-multitaskers about something I've done since high school, fine-tuned
in college -- and because of which I survived grad school. If it works
for you, do it. If it doesn't, don't!

KC

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@mail.phys-l.org
[mailto:phys-l-bounces@mail.phys-l.org] On Behalf Of John Denker
Sent: Thursday, 07 June 2012 10:55 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] multitasking

As Harry Emerson Fosdick was fond of saying:

The person saying it can't be done
is liable to be interrupted
by the person doing it.

Multitasking -- aka division of attention -- can be done. I get paid to
do it. I get paid to teach other people how to do it.

Here's a /simplified/ description of one scenario: You are flying the
"downwind" leg of the airport traffic pattern.
http://www.cfidarren.com/r-approachland2.jpg
You are looking out the window so as to see and avoid other traffic.
Note that nearby traffic is plentiful, hard to see, and rapidly moving.
You are also looking out the window so as to perceive pitch attitude, bank
attitude, heading, position, crosswind correction angle, and other
variables. You are also looking at the instruments so as to quantify the
airspeed, altitude, engine power settings, et cetera.
You are manipulating the primary flight controls. You are also changing
the configuration of the landing gear, flaps, elevator trim, mixture, and
possibly other things. You are talking on the radio. Also, you are
listening attentively to the radio, interpreting what you hear so as to
form a three or four dimensional model of what other people are doing. Et
cetera.

If you tell me you can do all that automatically, with little or no
cognitive workload, then congratulations, you must be the world's best
pilot. Either that or you have no idea what you're talking about.

As for the difference between talking and texting: In sufficiently fancy
aircraft, text messages can be sent to and from the cockpit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS
The feature has been around since circa 1980 ... long before personal
phones that could send SMS were widely available.

Even more to the point, in non-fancy aircraft, there is a lot of paperwork
in the cockpit, including navigation charts, flight plans (which also
serve as progress logs), checklists, et cetera. Using a GPS reduces the
amount of paper but /increases/ the cognitive workload, because the GPS
user interface is several sandwiches short of a picnic.

This is relevant because updating the flight plan (on paper or in the
GPS) involves the eyes and the hands and nontrivial cognitive workload.
It's like texting, only more complicated. You have to do this while
flying the airplane. Division of attention is required. It's not like
driving a car, where you can pull to the side of the road for a few
minutes if you want to look at maps or do some texting.

This is the relevant difference between piloting and driving:
-- In the airplane, you have no choice. Division of attention on a
grand scale is necessary, so you simply must learn to do it properly.
-- In the car, you have a choice. Simply not allowing drivers to
make phone calls is an option, and I suppose it is simpler than
teaching them how to do it properly.

That's the relevant difference. Please don't tell me you think it's OK
for pilots to talk on the radio mainly because the cognitive effort is so
much lower (allegedly, compared to phoning while driving).

The idea that the cognitive content of the conversation is the dominant
risk factor is a non-starter for another reason also, as should be obvious
from the fact that even in jurisdictions that forbid talking on the phone
while driving, they allow talking to a passenger in the car ... which
involves the same cognitive content.

===========

With division of attention, as with anything else, there is a right way
and a wrong way to do it.

Learning to properly _allocate_ your attention is part of the training.

Suppose you taking the final practical test to become a private pilot.
I pretty much guarantee that during the checkride, in some inopportune
high-workload situation, the examiner will drop his pencil to the floor
and ask you to fish it up for him ... in which case the only appropriate
response is "Stand by." That's pilot-speak for "Let's worry about that
later."
Let's be clear: You are not supposed to look for the pencil, let
alone reach for it. That would be improper division of attention,
and it would be grounds for flunking the checkride.

That's a contrived situation, but analogous non-contrived situations come
up all the time. Suppose you are on short final, trying to land the plane
in a gusty crosswind. On the radio, you hear the tower controller asking
you a question. The only correct reaction is to ignore the question.
Common courtesy says you should answer the guy, but safety is more
important.
Get the thing landed and stopped, then chat with the controller. You
won't even get the chance to apologize for not answering earlier, because
by that point the controller will have figured out what just happened, and
will be apologizing to you, apologizing for the distraction.

========================================

Last but not least, there is an important connection between multitasking
and ordinary terrestrial grade-school teaching and learning.

I know at least a dozen people who hold research jobs, with very high pay
and very high responsibility, who during childhood were diagnosed as being
"mentally deficient" ... presumably because they would not pay attention
in class.

It's not like they couldn't pay attention ... it was just that they
wouldn't pay attention, and there's no good reason why they should have
paid attention, because they were bored to tears.

A generation ago, the school would have just skipped such a kid ahead a
grade or two, but that has cons as well as pros ... and in any case, it
seems to be strongly out of fashion now, at least in the public schools.
(And people wonder why there is a such a rush to charter schools.....)

I tell such kids: Plan A should be to escape from that situation. School
is not supposed to be like going to jail for six hours a day. It's
supposed to be interesting. Failing that, Plan B is to learn to "fit in"
by learning to multi-task. That is, learn to devote 1% of your attention
to the class while devoting the other 99% to something else. For example:
Sit in the back of the class and read a library book, or draw something,
or calculate something, or compose something ... but keep one ear open
enough so that if you get called on you don't need to ask for the question
to be repeated.
Unless the teachers are exceptionally clueless they will know what you're
doing, but if you play the game properly you can get away with it. As
long as you pay a little bit of attention they don't care what you do with
the other 99% of your brain. Plan B is not so bad. You sit in school for
a few years and read a few hundred books. Eventually an owl brings you a
letter and you get to go someplace where they actually do interesting
things.

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@mail.phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@mail.phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 7222 (20120614) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com





__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7222 (20120614) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@mail.phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l