Standford study: Habitual Multitaskers Do It Badly

[Nyalria]

Did a quick search for slashdot / habitual / multitasking and didn't see this, apologize if it was posted somewhere.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/08/25/1245221/Habitual-Multitaskers-Do-It-Badly

I am a habitual dual-boxer, and for the most part bad at it, bad at WoW anyways. Abysmal at pvp, void zones, fire, and if I play with default health bars on my priest she sometimes dies because her health bar is a different size and causes me to phase out my own bar. I'm bad at multi-tasking most RL things in general. So when my friend sent me this link, I basically replied "DURRRR, that's what I've been saying all along!"

But, the title is quite misleading. The study doesn't seem to test multitasking; it tests multi-taskers doing what essentially are single tasks, and failing at it, in attempt to study what makes multi-taskers able to multi-task. I can totally imagine why multitaskers didn't do well at the three tests. Boredom, distraction, what-if-they're-actually-gonna-ask-about-the-other-squares-and-I-really-do-need-to-know-about-those-too. I feel that part of why I multitask is simply I just like extra stimulus and options. I don't care that I'm bad at it, I just like having the extra options/challenge/whatever. Or maybe I need to lower or raise my ADD medication! Could be one way or the other. Maybe two-boxing is my version of embracing my inability to focus on single tasks.

Yet, I can do things I wouldn't be able to do single boxing, and enjoy it immensely. Well maybe I could do it anyways with my godly prot paladin, but would just take longer. Actually that happens all the time when I mess up; the priest dies, and the paladin just keeps trucking. My priest's resurrections stats are hilarious. Resed by priests, druids, shaman: like 20 each; resed by paladins: 90. Also my falling, drowning, and fatigue deaths are numerous. How many times have YOU had to spirit rez in the Barrens?

Anyways, thought was interesting, and thought of you all.

[Meshuggenah]

Two things.

First. Anyone that exclusively multiboxes any game is going to be bad at that game. I can't play a shaman or a paladin nearly as well as someone in a high rated team, or a high end raiding guild. Because I don't play a shaman or a paladin. I multibox. I take the abilities of several classes and combine them into a single unit. In a way, boxing is its own class. Ask the best mage in the world to login and play a class he's never played before and you'll see the same result.

Second. I don't think that multiboxing and multitasking are synonymous. In fact, you could say that multiboxing successfully is an attempt to do as little multitasking as possible.

[Bigfish]

I read it. Basically, it sounds like a load of hogwash.

1. The study targeted people who use multiple media forms at the same time. That's not multitasking, that's inundating yourself with infomation.

2. The study focused on a single task at hand. Multitaskers aren't valued because they do tasks at 100% efficiency, they are valuable because they can do 4-5 tasks at 80% efficiency.

3. The tests relied on users recieving information, not acting independantly.

4. It doesn't consider the concept of process building. Doing a task once isn't difficult. Doing it repetitively leads people to develop faster and more efficient ways of performing said task. If you habitually look for the best way to do something the first time you do it, it will naturally take longer that first time, but your efficiency improves in the long run.

5. The sample was a bunch of college students.

The thing that pisses me off most though is that every stupid internet news feed that ripped off that story from somewhere else is perpetuating this idea that multi-taskers are scatterbrained nincompoops. The people who wrote that paper really should have hunted down some real multitaskers.

[F9thRet]

I think Individual skill comes into play here also.

I have been one of two main tanks in my guild for close to a year now, and Multiboxing for almost 6 months.

Many is time, I have ran a few guildies in through an instance when they couldn't get a full group, or Boosted my own toons through instances.

Every night, I'm a solo player, Taking on Ulduar and Heroic ToC right now (solo meaning only one toon being played in the group).

As far as battlegrounds, and Arena's Haven't done much of them due to my connection. But I figure, If I had a cable connection, I would be ok at that also.

Most of my life I played semi-Pro Jazz trumpet, so as with any musical ability, there is some multi-tasking going on there.

now I am far from the best player in solo or MB, but I do well enough.

Stephen

[Khatovar]

Anyone that exclusively multiboxes any game is going to be bad at that game.

I really disagree with that. Would I suck at arena on any of my guys? Sure, I can't stand PvP. But PvE, I'd probably do a lot better. As a multiboxer, I spend more time learning classes than I did solo. When I soloed, I wasn't interested in Elitist Jerks, I didn't read up on the most efficient use of various skills, I didn't spend time researching anything, everything was always trial by fire and I always did exceedingly well that way. Hell, I barely used hotkeys or macros.

But now I spend a lot of time researching everything. Spell efficiency, rotations, specs, gear, stats, I chew through everything I can find and try to decide how this information will fit into what I'm trying to do. In my previous life as a solo healer I never had to learn encounters, I just watch health bars and make sure they don't get empty. Now I have to know how to tank and DPS, too. I have to know what's going to happen so I have all the right spells in the right order and all the right "responses" ready for my team.

After a few months of 4-boxing {healer+dps} I hit some instances with guildies as a solo player. After 5 minutes, all I could think is "Holy fuck, this is easy." After 20 minutes, it became "Holy fuck, I'm bored." and I started wishing someone's pet would pull something 2 rooms away so I'd get something to do. After 5-boxing the last month or two, I'd be pretty comfortable filling any spot in a group, though I'd probably be a slave-driver of a tank because real people dick around far more than my slaves do :p

I know I wouldn't be the most omgwtfhax uberest player in the game, I have no desire to turn WoW into brain surgery with a side of rocket science like some of these people do so they can be the god of all {insert class here}. But bad at the game? I point you to this post (http://www.dual-boxing.com/showpost.php?p=209363&postcount=8) and say no, I don't think it's possible for me to be truly bad at this game.

[heyaz]

2. The study focused on a single task at hand. Multitaskers aren't valued because they do tasks at 100% efficiency, they are valuable because they can do 4-5 tasks at 80% efficiency.

.

e, more like 30% efficiency and none of those 4-5 tasks can involve anything that takes concentration


also, multiboxing is not synonymous with multitasking

[Nepida]

I know after I multibox for a while I feel very clumsy doing only a single task. But to be honest since I have been both multiboxing and singleboxing for a long time the reacclimation period is pretty quick.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

I read it. Basically, it sounds like a load of hogwash.

1. The study targeted people who use multiple media forms at the same time. That's not multitasking, that's inundating yourself with infomation.

2. The study focused on a single task at hand. Multitaskers aren't valued because they do tasks at 100% efficiency, they are valuable because they can do 4-5 tasks at 80% efficiency.

3. The tests relied on users recieving information, not acting independantly.

4. It doesn't consider the concept of process building. Doing a task once isn't difficult. Doing it repetitively leads people to develop faster and more efficient ways of performing said task. If you habitually look for the best way to do something the first time you do it, it will naturally take longer that first time, but your efficiency improves in the long run.

5. The sample was a bunch of college students.

The thing that pisses me off most though is that every stupid internet news feed that ripped off that story from somewhere else is perpetuating this idea that multi-taskers are scatterbrained nincompoops. The people who wrote that paper really should have hunted down some real multitaskers.
This is one of the reasons I like these forums. So refreshing to see someone rationally analyze the latest internet "YOU PEOPLE ALL SUCK" FUD fad. :D Points in bold being my favorite, and apparently supremely difficult to get through the thick skulls of the typical idiot.

[Pyro-San]

It is a load of Hogwash, most creatures (actually can’t think of any that don’t) Multitask... there definition of multitasking is loaded...

Just being alive is multitasking, I can breathe, chew gum, type on the computer, listen to music, notice the air-con kicking in, etc, etc, etc ,etc all at the same time.
Just because I can't write an essay with pen and paper and read a totally unrelated news article on the computer screen does not mean I "don't pay attention"

[Iceorbz]

Second. I don't think that multiboxing and multitasking are synonymous. In fact, you could say that multiboxing successfully is an attempt to do as little multitasking as possible.


Go 5 box grobbulus or KT lol, and you will understand the pain of multi tasking =p.

[heyaz]

The whole idea of "multitasking" as a skill is getting tired. It's the kind of thing they want in administrative assistants, customer service reps, and junior level IT. If you want to specialize and move up any higher than that, you have to master single tasking. C-levels, principal level consultants and other specializsts didn't get into their positions because they did a bunch of easy tasks at 30% efficiency at the same time, they got there because they could do the important tasks at 100% efficiency.