Christine Rosen, a senior editor of The New Atlantis Journal of Technology and Society, and a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Centre, exposes and analyzes a trend that started gaining serious ground somewhere around the 1990s. Via her published article in The New Atlantis spring issue, The Myth of Multitasking, attempts to bring down everything people knew and believed about multitasking (2008). Until now, being able to perform many tasks at the same time was something that raised self-esteem. However, can people indeed perform two or more activities/tasks simultaneously, or is it a delusional ability of theirs that they tend to believe? And, if they can multitask, how possible is it to actually learn from each task? Rosen projects solid evidence that multitasking draws people back from their tasks if they try to perform them all at once, plus it blocks them from storing information that they can easily retrieve at a later point (107). Judging from personal experience and from the facts presented in the article, one can understand that Rosen has conducted a thorough and in-depth search on the matter discussed –with neurologists, psychologists, economists and many researchers backing up her claim- and brings people into seriously consideration as to whether they do learn effectively and efficiently or work productively when they multitask (108). Indicatively, she ends her article by an impressive comment, that multitasking might make people’s culture gain information, but it weakens them in wisdom (Rosen, 2008 p.110), which is probably true.
When people multitask, they need to do many things at once, which is distinguishing when they are using technology. For example, many surf the net, while they watch TV, read their emails and text from their cell phones, which appeals to them as they believe they save time and are more productive, either when they multitask in a workplace, at home or while on-the-go. At this point, multitasking raises ethical issues that should be noted. How beneficial could driving and taking on the cell-phone be? Rosen manages to bring awareness by exposing the dangers concealed in multitasking (106). She also brought evidence on the table that prove multitasking distracts people on their workplace (106). Indicatively, she mentions that when people are distracted when working in a specific task, they need about 25 minutes to return to their original tasks, which in turns “costs the US economy $650 billion a year in lost productivity” (p. 106). It is definitely food for thought, and triggers businessmen and governments to reconsider working conditions.
Neurologists and psychologists alike claim that the human brain is constructed in a way to function better when single-tasking. It is like when you are a new librarian and you have a dozen of books that you need to put back to the place they belong, based on alphabetical order and genre, while you also want to write a report and answer your emails. If you try to do all the aforementioned tasks simultaneously, as a means to save time, you will probably end up stressed and not remembering where each book section actually is, so next time you need to sort books out, you will not have learnt anything from your previous multi-tasking. This makes a perfect fit with Lord Chesterfield’s advice to his son, that if people single-task there is plenty of time to do so throughout the day, but if they attempt to multitask, there is not enough time in a year (p. 105).
Rosen has tried to stick to the rules of a proper argumentative, by giving the opposite viewpoints from hers. However, she stresses her disregard with comments she makes and her word choice when throwing arguments. While she comes forward with research to solidify her viewpoint, when it comes to opposing views, she quotes reports that she manages to downsize with her comments. That, makes her article biased as it does not provide readers with information from both sides on the coin; therefore people are driven towards the direction Rosen wants. What about the galloping daily responsibilities that dictate people to move fast forward and manage to fit many tasks in one day? For example, when one orders something to eat in a restaurant that is packed with people, would he/she have to wait until the chef cooks each order separately? This could take forever. In other words, multitasking has other applications that Rosen has not touched.
Some people say that the human brain can adjust to multitasking if people train it properly (108). It is like you have just moved in to a noisy neighborhood and can’t concentrate when you study. At some point you include the noise around in your daily routine and stop paying attention to it or allowing it to distract you. This is exactly what is happening to new generations: they have grown up used to the idea that they can watch TV, talk on the phone and listening to music at the same time, without any of the three disputing their learning process. And it doesn’t. Rosen puts decent research and information on her article and forwards people to reconsider how they work and learn on a daily basis. She tries to make them understand that when they focus on one thing at a time, they become better learners and more productive and effective at work. At a great point, she manages that. However, there are aspects of her topic that she has not researched, which makes her article biased.
