Study shows why some types of multitasking are more dangerous than others

by Jeff Grabmeier

In a new study that has implications for distracted drivers, researchers found that people are better at juggling some types of multitasking than they are at others.

Trying to do two at once hurt performance in both tasks significantly more than combining a visual and an audio task, the research found.

Alarmingly, though, people who tried to do two visual tasks at the same time rated their performance as better than did those who combined a visual and an audio task - even though their actual performance was worse.

"Many people have this in how well they can multitask, and our study shows that this particularly is the case when they combine two visual tasks," said Zheng Wang, lead author of the study and assistant professor of communication at Ohio State University.

"People's about how well they're doing doesn't match up with how they actually perform."

Eye- used in the study showed that people's moved around much more when they had two visual tasks compared to a visual and an audio task, and they spent much less time fixated on any one task. That suggests distracted visual attention, Wang said.

People in the study who had two visual tasks had to complete a pattern-matching puzzle on a while giving walking directions to another person using (IM) software.

Those who combined a visual and an audio task tried to complete the same pattern-matching task on the screen while giving voice directions using audio chat.

The two multitasking scenarios used in this study can be compared to those drivers may face, Wang said.

People who try to text while they are driving are combining two mostly visual tasks, she said. People who talk on a phone while driving are combining a visual and an audio task.

"They're both dangerous, but as both our behavioral performance data and eyetracking data suggest, texting is more dangerous to do while driving than talking on a phone, which is not a surprise," Wang said.

"But what is surprising is that our results also suggest that people may perceive that texting is not more dangerous - they may think they can do a good job at two visual tasks at one time."

The study appears in a recent issue of the journal Computers in Human Behavior.

The study involved 32 college students who sat at computer screens. All of the students completed a matching task in which they saw two grids on the screen, each with nine cells containing random letters or numbers. They had to determine, as quickly as possible, whether the two grids were a "match" or "mismatch" by clicking a button on the screen. They were told to complete as many trials as possible within two minutes.

After testing the participants on the matching task with no distractions, the researchers had the students repeat the matching task while giving walking directions to a fellow college student, "Jennifer," who they were told needed to get to an important job interview. Participants had to help "Jennifer" get to her interview within six minutes. In fact, "Jennifer" was a trained confederate experimenter. She has been trained to interact with participants in a realistic but scripted way to ensure the direction task was kept as similar as possible across all participants.

Half of the participants used instant messaging software (Google Chat)to type directions while the other half used voice chat (Google Talk with headphones and an attached microphone)to help "Jennifer" reach her destination.

Results showed that multitasking, of any kind, seriously hurt performance.

Participants who gave audio directions showed a 30 percent drop in visual pattern-matching performance. But those who used instant messaging did even worse - they had a 50 percent drop in pattern-matching performance.

In addition, those who gave audio directions completed more steps in the directions task than did those who used IM.

But when participants were asked to rate how well they did on their tasks, those who used IM gave themselves higher ratings than did those who used audio chat.

"It may be that those using IM felt more in control because they could respond when they wanted without being hurried by a voice in their ears," Wang said.

"Also, processing several streams of information in the visual channel may give people the illusion of efficiency. They may perceive visual tasks as relatively effortless, which may explain the tendency to combine tasks like driving and texting."

Eye-tracking results from the study showed that people paid much less attention to the matching task when they were multitasking, Wang said. As expected, the results were worse for those who used IM than for those who used voice chat.

Overall, the percentage of eye fixations on the matching-task grids declined from 76 percent when that was the participants' only task to 33 percent during multitasking.

Fixations on the grid task decreased by 53 percent for those using IM and a comparatively better 35 percent for those who used voice chat.

"When people are using IM, their is split much more than when they use voice chat," she said.

These results suggest we need to teach media and multitasking literacy to young people before they start driving, Wang said.

"Our results suggest many people may believe they can effectively text and drive at the same time, and we need to make sure young people know that is not true."

In addition, the findings show that technology companies need to be aware of how people respond to when they are designing products.

For example, these results suggest GPS voice guidance should be preferred over image guidance because people are more effective when they combine visual with aural tasks compared to two visual tasks.

"We need to design media environments that emphasize processing efficiency and activity safety. We can take advantage of the fact that we do better when we can use visual and audio components rather than two visual components," Wang said.

Related Stories

Multitasking -- not so bad for you after all?

Apr 12, 2012

Our obsession with multiple forms of media is not necessarily all bad news, according to a new study by Kelvin Lui and Alan Wong from The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Their work shows that those who frequently use different ...

Videogamers no better at talking while driving

Jun 13, 2012

No matter how much time you've spent training your brain to multitask by playing "Call of Duty," you're probably no better at talking on the phone while driving than anybody else.

Virtual 'forest' used to measure navigation skills

Apr 27, 2006

A new study recently published in Journal of Vision, an online, free access publication of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO), shows that an individual’s navigation skills can be measured by ...

Recommended for you

Watching for signs of language delay in your child

2 minutes ago

One of the wonderful and thrilling parts of being a parent comes in witnessing a child's firsts: their first smile, their first laugh, their first step, their first word. These firsts can be delightful, exciting and memorable.

Even depressed people believe that life gets better

5 hours ago

Adults typically believe that life gets better—today is better than yesterday was and tomorrow will be even better than today. A new study shows that even depressed individuals believe in a brighter future, but this optimistic ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gwrede
not rated yet Jul 23, 2012
Oh. And I would have thought that having to alternate your gaze between the puzzle (or driving) and texting was the reason for worse results. But what do I know.
PussyCat_Eyes
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 23, 2012
I can think of other equally dangerous activities....like standing naked over a hot stove cooking dinner while having vertical sex and the boiling tea kettle starts to whistle and you have to reach behind it to turn the burner off and your lover is slamming you into the stove.
Totally dangerous multi-tasking, that.
;)
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (16) Jul 23, 2012
I can think of other equally dangerous activities....like standing naked over a hot stove cooking dinner while having vertical sex and the boiling tea kettle starts to whistle and you have to reach behind it to turn the burner off and your lover is slamming you into the stove.
Totally dangerous multi-tasking, that.
;)
Jesus doesnt approve of smutty lying dimwits you know.
PussyCat_Eyes
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 24, 2012
I can think of other equally dangerous activities....like standing naked over a hot stove cooking dinner while having vertical sex and the boiling tea kettle starts to whistle and you have to reach behind it to turn the burner off and your lover is slamming you into the stove.
Totally dangerous multi-tasking, that.
;)
Jesus doesnt approve of smutty lying dimwits you know.
- GhostofBlotto

So you're saying that Jesus didn't approve of sex between a man and a woman? It seems that it is YOU who is the smutty lying dimwit since you read something into my comment that is only in your sick mind. Remember what you kept saying about "sucking sounds/sucksuck"? You need to go to a gay porn website, Blotto. That should give you a ton of pleasure because it's obvious that Phys.org doesn't give you any. You faggot.

TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (16) Jul 24, 2012
You mean like one of the ones you posted here on physorg, a site which is frequented by children? One of those sites maybe?
http://phys.org/n...rth.html
PussyCat_Eyes
2 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2012
LOL...since when have you started being so concerned about children, blotto? You probably bullied children every chance you could get.

My first comment above was consistent with the topic.

"Jesus doesnt approve of smutty lying dimwits you know." says the atheist queer dummy.
alfie_null
not rated yet Jul 25, 2012
The college students used in these tests may have been multitasking for years. It would be interesting to see how people who are inexperienced at multitasking perform.