Read the abstract, see who wrote it and who cites it, and get the citation in APA, MLA, Chicago or Harvard.
About 1,002 papers for “Human multitasking”
Ariel Revel · Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2009
Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians Leaning Objectives: After completion of this article, the reader should be able to explain the concept of the endometrium as a multi-tasking tissue, describe the role in health and potential role in medical care of adult stem cells in the endometrium, and describe the clinical characteristics of endometrial biopsy techniques.
Cited by 23
Andrea Kiesel, L. Johannsen, Iring Koch et al. · 2022
Cited by 23
Encyclopedia of the Mind · 2013
Cited by 1
Edita Poljac, Andrea Kiesel, Iring Koch et al. · Psychological Research · 2018
Cited by 26Open access
Saber Darmoul, Ali Ahmad, Mageed Ghaleb et al. · IFAC-PapersOnLine · 2015
In human multitasking environments, task switching refers to moving from one task to another in a planned manner within an assigned period, whereas task interruption refers to moving from one task to another in an unplanned, usually forced manner. Well-organized task switching and interruption management allow increasing productivity and decreasing error and accident rates, thus contributing to more effective and efficient use of available but limited resources. Although managing task switching and interruptions in human multitasking environments is an important issue, no recent surveys are available to review works and research topics in this area. In this paper, we review how researchers attempt to manage task switching and interruptions in different human multitasking environments and we highlight challenging research directions.
Cited by 14Open access
C. Flachenecker, Rudolf Haller, Marilyn Wolf · Biomedizinische Technik/Biomedical Engineering · 2009
Cited by 0
2008
When people conduct multiple tasks in tandem, they often interleave the various operators of each task. Just how these basic cognitive, perceptual and motor processes are ordered generally affords a range of possible multitasking strategies.
Cited by 0
Do, Nguyen Tien Thong · UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) · 2020
Cited by 0
RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) · 2018
Cited by 0
Edita Poljac, Andrea Kiesel, Iring Koch et al. · 2018
Cited by 0
Marie Mueckstein, Kirsten Hilger, Stephan Heinzel et al. · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Abstract The neural basis of multitasking costs is subject to continuing debate. Cognitive theories assume that overlap of task representations may lead to between-task crosstalk in concurrent task processing and thus requires cognitive control. Recent research suggests that modality-based crosstalk contributes to multitasking costs, involving central overlap of modality-specific representations. Consistently increased costs for specific modality pairings (visual-vocal and auditory-manual vs. visual-manual and auditory-vocal) were demonstrated (modality-compatibility effect), which were recently linked to representational overlap in the auditory cortex. However, it remains unclear whether modality-based crosstalk emerges from overlapping patterns of global brain connectivity and whether resolving it requires additional involvement of cognitive control as reflected in the fronto-parietal control network. This preregistered functional imaging study investigates these questions in 64 healthy, young human adults. Specifically, we focus on the modality-compatibility effect in multitasking by employing functional connectivity (FC) analysis. First, we tested the FC similarity between the single-task networks. Second, we compared the strength of the control network in whole-brain FC between dual tasks. We found no evidence for different FC similarities of single-task networks between modality pairings and no additional involvement of the control network during dual tasks. However, post-hoc connectivity analysis revealed a brain-behavior correlation for the modality-compatibility effect in dual tasks. This effect was locally restricted to FC between lateral frontal and sensory auditory regions, providing evidence for the modality-based crosstalk theory. More generally, the findings suggest that robust behavioral differences in multitasking are not necessarily related to global functional connectivity differences but to local connectivity changes. Significance Our lives are dominated by multitasking. Understanding the neurocognitive mechanisms of multitasking and its associated limitations is relevant for safety-relevant consequences. Here, we investigate functional brain-connectivity patterns associated with modality-based crosstalk in multitasking, describing unintentional exchange of information between two tasks, leading to robust dual-task costs. Our network analyses revealed no significant difference between single or dual tasks with varying degrees of modality overlap on the whole-brain level. However, specific connections between cognitive control-related frontal and sensory-related regions were associated with individual multitasking performance, emphasizing that behavioral differences can arise from specific neural interactions rather than from widespread network reconfigurations. These findings advance our understanding of the underlying mechanisms responsible for modality-based crosstalk, providing practical implications for human-machine interactions.
Cited by 0Open access
Marie Mueckstein, Kirsten Hilger, Stephan Heinzel et al. · Human Brain Mapping · 2025
The neural basis of multitasking costs is subject to continuing debate. Cognitive theories assume that the overlap of task representations may lead to between-task crosstalk in concurrent task processing and thus requires cognitive control. Recent research suggests that modality-based crosstalk contributes to multitasking costs, involving central overlap of modality-specific representations. Consistently increased costs for specific modality pairings (visual-vocal and auditory-manual vs. visual-manual and auditory-vocal) were demonstrated (modality-compatibility effect), which were recently linked to representational overlap in the auditory cortex. However, it remains unclear whether modality-based crosstalk emerges from overlapping patterns of global brain connectivity and whether resolving it requires additional involvement of cognitive control as reflected in the fronto-parietal control network. This preregistered functional imaging study investigates these questions in 64 healthy, young human adults. Specifically, we focus on the modality-compatibility effect in multitasking by employing functional connectivity (FC) analysis. First, we tested the FC similarity FC dissimilarity between the single-task networks. Second, we compared the strength of the control network in whole-brain FC between dual tasks. We found no evidence for differences in FC dissimilarities of single-task networks between modality pairings and no additional involvement of the control network during dual tasks by comparing the global connectivity. However, unregistered post hoc connectivity analysis revealed the first evidence for a correlation of the (behavioral) modality-compatibility effect with local FC. This effect was locally restricted to FC between lateral frontal and sensory auditory regions, consistent with the modality-based crosstalk assumption. More generally, the findings suggest that robust behavioral differences in multitasking are not necessarily related to global functional connectivity differences but might be related to functionally specific local connectivity changes.
Cited by 0Open access
Marie Mueckstein, Kirsten Hilger, Stephan Heinzel et al. · Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) · 2025
The neural basis of multitasking costs is subject to continuing debate. Cognitive theories assume that the overlap of task representations may lead to between‐task crosstalk in concurrent task processing and thus requires cognitive control. Recent research suggests that modality‐based crosstalk contributes to multitasking costs, involving central overlap of modality‐specific representations. Consistently increased costs for specific modality pairings (visual‐vocal and auditory‐manual vs. visual‐manual and auditory‐vocal) were demonstrated (modality‐compatibility effect), which were recently linked to representational overlap in the auditory cortex. However, it remains unclear whether modality‐based crosstalk emerges from overlapping patterns of global brain connectivity and whether resolving it requires additional involvement of cognitive control as reflected in the fronto‐parietal control network. This preregistered functional imaging study investigates these questions in 64 healthy, young human adults. Specifically, we focus on the modality‐compatibility effect in multitasking by employing functional connectivity (FC) analysis. First, we tested the FC similarity FC dissimilarity between the single‐task networks. Second, we compared the strength of the control network in whole‐brain FC between dual tasks. We found no evidence for differences in FC dissimilarities of single‐task networks between modality pairings and no additional involvement of the control network during dual tasks by comparing the global connectivity. However, unregistered post hoc connectivity analysis revealed the first evidence for a correlation of the (behavioral) modality‐compatibility effect with local FC. This effect was locally restricted to FC between lateral frontal and sensory auditory regions, consistent with the modality‐based crosstalk assumption. More generally, the findings suggest that robust behavioral differences in multitasking are not necessarily related to global functional connectivity differences but might be related to functionally specific local connectivity changes.
Cited by 0Open access
Menno Nijboer · Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2016
Multitasking has become an important part of our daily lives. This delicate juggling act between several activities occurs when people drive, when they are working, and even when they should be paying attention in the classroom. While multitasking is typically considered as something to avoid, there are instances where we are perfectly capable at performing multiple activities concurrently. It is therefore important that we understand how multitasking works, so that we can predict when engaging in multitasking is a good or bad idea. In this dissertation we examine how our brains are able to multitask, and how multitasking affects task performance. Through a series of behavioral and neuroimaging experiments we investigate what the cognitive mechanisms of concurrent multitasking are, when multitasking negatively or positively influences performance, and whether people choose to avoid multitasking situations that compromise their task performance.
Cited by 0Open access
Amanda H. Spink, Minsoo Park, Charles Cole · Information science and knowledge management · 2006
Cited by 2
Jessie Y. C. Chen, Stephanie Quinn, Julia L. Wright et al. · 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · 2013
In the current experiment, we simulated a multitasking environment and evaluated the effects of an intelligent agent, RoboLeader, on the performance of human operators who had the responsibility of managing the plans/routes for three vehicles (their own manned ground vehicle, an aerial robotic vehicle, and a ground robotic vehicle) while maintaining proper awareness of their immediate environment (i.e., threat detection). Results showed that RoboLeader's level of autonomy had a significant impact on participants' concurrent target detection task. Participants detected more targets in the Semi-Auto and Full-Auto conditions than in the Manual condition. Participants reported significantly higher workload in the Manual condition than in the two RoboLeader conditions (Semi-Auto and Full-Auto). Operator spatial ability also had a significant impact on target detection and situation awareness performance measures.
Cited by 9Open access
2008
While cognitive models of complex tasks have begun to incorporate increasingly sophisticated models of human multitasking, most models have utilized customized executives (Kieras et al., 2000) that fine-tune specific multitasking mechanisms for particular applications. This paper proposes a general executive for multitasking that facilitates the integration of separate task models and subsequent prediction of the effects of multitasking and task interaction. Developed in the ACT-R cognitive architecture, the general executive is specified as a new goal module that orders goals by urgency and their own requested running times. The paper demonstrates the predictive power of the general executive in the driving domain by integrating separate models of control and monitoring and predicting drivers ’ gaze distributions across various regions of the driving environment.
Cited by 0
Giovanna Broccia, Paolo Milazzo, Peter Csaba Ölveczky · Lecture notes in computer science · 2018
Cited by 6Open access
Raouf Boucekkine, Patricia Crifo · Macroeconomic Dynamics · 2008
This paper provides theoretical foundations to the contemporaneous increase in computer usage, human capital, and multitasking observed in many OECD countries during the 1990s. The links among work organization, technology, and human capital is modelled by establishing the conditions under which firms allocate the workers' time among several productive tasks. Organizational change is then analyzed in a dynamic perspective as the transition from specialization toward multitasking emphasizing its technological and educational determinants. We show that large enough “organizational shocks” can trigger a transition from specialization to multitasking, and this transition obviously should be accompanied by gradual increases in human capital.
Cited by 10Open access
Gloria Mark · The Journal of Intelligence Conflict and Warfare · 2025
On November 18, 2024, Dr. Gloria Mark presented Multitasking, Distraction, and Vulnerability: Human Security in a Digital Age for this year’s West Coast Security Conference. The presentation was followed by a question-and-answer period with questions from the audience and CASIS Vancouver executives. The key points discussed were the correlation between technology use and attention spans, human interventions with AI, and regaining control over our attention spans in the digital world. Received: 12-26-2024 Revised: 01-29-2025
Cited by 1Open access