Working Memory Dimensions as Differential Predictors of the Speed and Error Aspect of Multitasking Performance

Bühner, Markus; König, Cornelius J.; Pick, Marion; Krumm, Stefan

doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1903_4

Cited by 119 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The pressure to do more in less time, often with frequent interruptions, is greater than ever. As a result, multitasking has become a necessity in both home and work life for many individuals (e.g., Bühner, König, Pick, & Krumm, 2006;Delbridge, 2000). Multitasking has been defined as "performance on multiple tasks, with shifts in attention…over a short time span" where both the nature of the tasks and time span are considered from both subjective and objective perspectives (Oswald, Hambrick, & Jones, 2007, p. 80-81).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of the relative failure of researchers to link non-cognitive predictors with multitasking performance, some researchers (e.g., Bühner, König, Pick, & Krumm, 2006) have suggested that perhaps multitasking researchers should abandon non-cognitive predictors. The present results, however, would suggest that doing so might be premature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neuroticism negatively affects multitasking performance through state anxiety

Poposki¹,

Oswald²,

Chen³

2009

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A -Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.Multitasking is on the rise, both at work and at home. As such, researchers have begun to focus attention on understanding and predicting multitasking performance. Though past research has demonstrated that cognitive predictors correlate positively with multitasking performance, there is reason to believe that non-cognitive factors are likely to predict such performance as well. This study tested for relationships between extraversion, neuroticism, Type A Behavior Pattern, polychronicity, and multitasking performance. Results supported the hypothesis that neuroticism, but not the other personality characteristics measured, significantly predicts performance at multitasking, and that this relationship is mediated by state anxiety experienced during multitasking. Implications for the impact of personality and anxiety on multitasking performance are ForewordThough selection and classification in the U.S. Navy has traditionally been driven by the recruitment interview and scores from the ASVAB, important facets of performance within Navy jobs may be better understood and predicted by a broader range of predictors. Whole Person Assessment (WPA) is an effort on the part of Navy Personnel Research, Studies, and Technology (NPRST/BUPERS-1) to improve the selection and classification of Sailors within the U.S. Navy by developing tools to assess a broader range of characteristics in order to reflect this reality.Within this context, this study discusses a particular facet of Sailor performance that may not be predicted well by traditional selection instruments, yet is on the rise due to the increasing complexity of the work environment: multitasking. Multitasking is characterized by the switching of attention between multiple tasks rather than the completion of a single task at a time. Though past research has established that cognitive ability is related to multitasking, the present study sought to investigate whether non-cognitive (e.g., personality) characteristics were related to performance in a multitasking simulation.This study investigated multitasking performance in a sample of university students who engaged in a computerized multitasking simulation. Results of this study indicated that neuroticism, a personality characteristic associated with the enduring tendency to experience negative emotional states, was negatively associated with performance at multitasking. Further, results indicated that this relationship was mediated by state anxiety experienced during the multitasking simulation. As state anxiety increased, multitasking performance decreased. These findings indicate that neuroticism may be a useful predictor of performance at multitasking because of its relationship with anxiety experienced during multitasking. Though preliminary in nature, these results may also provide some evidence for the utility of non-cognitive predictors of multitasking performance. This study is a product of the overarching SYRUS project, which has generated a series of...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuroticism negatively affects multitasking performance through state anxiety

Poposki¹,

Oswald²,

Chen³

2009

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For everyone juggling multiple team memberships and striving to avoid being spread too thinly, research on MTM holds the promise of forestalling a future in which attention becomes more fragmented (Hudson, Christensen, Kellogg, & Erickson, 2002;Jackson, 2008) and people feel more "slapped about the head and shoulders" by their multiple team commitments. Studied as a behavior with associated cognitive, emotional, and behavioral implications (Baehner, Kaenig, Pick, & Krumm, 2006;Leroy & Sproull, forthcoming) Polychronic time use Studied as a trait or an attitude (Bluedorn, 2002;Kaufman, Lane, & Lindquist, 1991) Multicommunicating Studied with respect to communication (Reinsch, Turner, & Tinsley, 2008) Context switching Shifting attention between sets of stimuli by choice or unwanted interruption, acclimating to the new context Referred to in general terms regarding tasks, people, tools, roles, routines, and locations (Henfridsson & Lindgren, 2005) Task switching…”

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple Team Membership: A Theoretical Model of its Effects on Productivity and Learning for Individuals and Teams.

O’Leary

Mortensen²,

Woolley

2011

Academy of Management Review

186

288

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While organizations strive to manage the time and attention of workers effectively, the practice of asking workers to contribute to multiple teams simultaneously can result in the opposite. We present a model of the effects of multiple team membership (MTM) on learning and productivity via the mediating processes of individual context switching, team temporal misalignment, and intra-organizational connectivity. These effects are curvilinear, with learning and productivity peaking at moderate levels of these mediating processes.Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1474336 do -Manager (Authors, 2007) Over the last century, the primary approach to organizing has shifted from individual work in hierarchical structures, to more team-based work in hierarchical structures, to teambased work in matrix structures, and ultimately to team-based work in multi-team systems (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2006;Hobday, 2000;Malone, 2004;Marks, Dechurch, Mathieu, Panzer, & Alonso, 2005;Scott & Davis, 2006). As these changes have taken place, an increasing amount of responsibility has shifted to individual employees -responsibility for managing their own learning, allocating their own time, and focusing their own attention. This is especially true when employees are members of multiple teams concurrently, with no one manager aware of each employee's full portfolio of work or team commitments. In such situations, individuals may make decisions (about their time, attention, information, etc.) that are completely rational for them, but that do not result in optimal productivity and learning at the team and organizational levels (Schelling, 1978). Conversely, without complete knowledge of individuals' multiple team commitments, teams, managers, and organizations may make reasonable team-and organizationallevel decisions that have very problematic effects for individuals. In this paper, we address this theoretical and practical tension regarding the allocation of time and attention, as well as the flow of information, when people are simultaneously members of multiple teams.Based on our own survey data and surveys by other scholars (Lu, Wynn, Chudoba., & Watson-Manheim, 2003;Martin & Bal, 2006) (Zika-Viktorsson, Sundstrom, & Engwall, 2006). Some surveys place the percent of knowledge workers who are members of more than one team as high as 94.9 percent (Martin & Bal, 2006) and in at least one company (Intel), 28% are on five or more (Lu et al., 2003). In addition, a wide variety of scholars and practitioners have mentioned the commonality of MTM. For example, Gonzalez and Mark's (2005: 143-4) comment is typical: "In fields as diverse as finance, software development, consulting, and academia, we are finding that it is commonplace that information workers are involved in multiple collaborations that occur in parallel. This demands that individuals enact specific efforts to coordinate, manage and track those collaborations." MTM seems especially common (and particularly challenging) in information technology (e.g., Bas...

show abstract

“…For many individuals, multitasking has become an essential requirement of modern home and work life due to general increases in the pace of life, broadening of work roles, and expectations for individual performance and productivity (Bühner, König, Pick, & Krumm, 2006). Multitasking can be generally described as the performance of multiple tasks in a relatively short time period, with shifts in attention among the tasks (Oswald, Hambrick, & Jones, 2007).…”

Section: Individual Difference Variables As Predictors Of Error Durinmentioning

confidence: 99%