Good and bad multitasking when reading

Some of our students point to Eyal Ophir’s work to demonstrate that multitasking is bad. While we do not argue with dangers of bad multitasking, we provide several concepts and training exercises that reduce the damage caused my multitasking.

There is a big difference between true multitasking (e.g. dealing with several issues at the same time) and chaining several small tasks (e.g. multitasking via performing short tasks at very quick succession). This is why we teach to generate markers during stops between paragraphs and add details during saccade masking in prepare-read-analyze cycles. There is no place where this difference is as evident as working memory.

The working memory is the pinnacle of our attention and focus. We can work with 7+-2 objects at the same time, and the more objects we hold in the working memory the slower it becomes. If you are summing up numbers with two digits, you pretty much use your whole working memory (load numbers, sum ones, sum tens, add together, do not forget the carry number). If you would try to add two series of two-digits numbers at the same time, your calculation would probably fail: not enough working memory to execute two such sequences. Instead we are trained to add and subtract 3 or 4 such series. To do that we replace the whole content of the working memory. E.g. load set A – process set A – store set A -load set B – process set B – store set B and repeat. There is some overhead for this context switching, but it still enables efficient computational multitasking.

We can apply the same process to reading complex texts. First we need to read, then we need to remember what we just read, but immediately afterwards we need to switch context. We need to decide how the paragraph we read makes or does not make sense and what logic it adds to our knowledge base. Then we switch context to reading another paragraph as so on. If we try to switch context every word reading would take forever, and if we try to read too much before switching context we could loose a huge chunk of content.

Context switching is harder for people with ADHD. There is no guarantee that each context switch will not result in our brain “locking on” the context and developing stuff that was not even in the text. Partially we can fight the temptation by using some rithmic work, like counting 1-2-3 when we read subvocalization. Additional help comes from self-discipline asking each time: was this extra detail really necessary? And finally we can go with the natural inclination turning each context switch into marker creation opportunity.

To function properly we need multitasking. Usually good multitasking involves doing short tasks one after another. It has overhead, yet it is better than the alternatives. Do rest and replenish your energies after multitasking, since it may be using more resources than you are aware of.