Question 1 For years, we have become obsessed with the notion of doing multiple tasks at the same time

with the help of technologies as we face increasing demands. This idea of multitasking gained traction as workers packaged themselves as able multitaskers. Digital devices boasted abilities to do many tasks at once, while mainstream media lauded and pedestaled multitasking.

However, doubts have set in. A 2005 research found that multitasking caused IQ losses. A psychiatrist claims that multitasking is impossible, as the need to multitask causes limits attention. An analyst claims that multitasking results in lost productivity. There are calls for a return to doing tasks sequentially.

Many researches show that multitasking is detrimental, leading to undue stress, memory loss, time loss, distraction and decreases in productivity. It affects learning as well, with evidence showing that new information is being stored in the wrong part of the brain as the learning is not focused. A phenomenon, media multitasking, in which teenagers use different media simultaneously, is raising concerns of breeding impatience and an inability to concentrate.

While there are fears that we shall increasingly weaken in the ability to pay attention, leading to a dependence on external stimuli for reminders, it may be that we will adapt and ignore multiple stimuli and learn to focus. Multitasking may lead to an increase in information, but does not guarantee the acquisition of wisdom. Question 2 It is of great importance to begin by exploring the definition of multitasking. To multitask is to work at several different tasks simultaneously

(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/multitask). However, it is humanly impossible to be engaged in several tasks at the same time and be able to focus on all the tasks at the same time. So, even if a person is driving, eating a burger and talking on the phone at once, the person has to prioritise and decide which of the three activities has to take precedence over the other two. In this case, the driver cannot hope to fully see which part of the burger he is biting into and keep his eyes on the road. Likewise, he cannot read road signs and make conversations at the same time. Thus, multitasking itself is an activity that is not humanly possible.

What is possible is the act of task-switching (Ophir, Nass & Wagner, 2009). Taskswitching is the act of moving on from one task to another. What researchers are interested in is the speed at which a person switches from one task to another. So, when multitasking is mentioned in this essay, it refers to the ability to task-switch. In the case of the Singaporean workplace, task-switching takes place at a rather high rate. A typical staff in a workplace handles emails, phone calls, collegial interactions and whatever other main tasks the staff is expected to perform. Add to that the staffs personal mobile phone and music player, the staff is faced with many distractions. While working on a specific task, the staff may receive incoming calls from the companys phone, which legitimizes the need to detract from the task in order to answer the call. Or there may be incoming emails, making it necessary for the staff to reply to the mail. While replying to the mail or answering the phone call, the staff cannot continue to work on the task assigned.

However, there are workers who are able to work on a number of tasks at the same time, being able to task-switch effortlessly. They are called supertaskers by Watson & Strayer (2010). They found that 2.5% of subjects studied were able to multitask effortlessly. Moreover, Carrier et al (2008) showed in their research that

the ability to multitask differs along generational lines, with the younger generations more able to multitask. This is due to the development of media. The younger generations are exposed to more media, thus they are more able to multitask. Media multitasking (Wallis, 2010) has developed in the younger generations the ability to multitask. Likewise, in the Singaporean workplace, younger staffs are more prone to multitasking, while the older staffs tend to work on one task at a time.

While it may seem that there are no adverse effects to productivity, it has been shown that people lose time when switching from one task to another and back again. Every time we switch back to an earlier task, we need time to remember what has transpired and where we stopped before switching to the other task. In Singapore, there have been an increasing number of offices that have blocked social media from the companys computers and frown upon the use of music players and mobile phones as they have become distractions as staff attempt to switch tasks while engaged in their primary job.

Therefore, while there are those who are able to task-switch with ease, majority of the people at the workplace cannot task-switch effortlessly. This has caused a drop in productivity as many require the time to re-calibrate their understanding of the task at hand after having switched to another task. Advances in media may have given the impression that multitasking is raising productivity, yet researches and company policies point to the fact that multitasking has not been effective in raising productivity, not just in Singapore, but globally.

References: 1. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/multitask 2. Ophir, Eyal, Nass, Clifford & Wagner, Anthony D. (2009). Cognitive Control in Media Multitaskers. PNAS Early Submission.

3. Watson, Jason M. & Strayer, David L. (2010). Supertaskers: Profiles in Extraordinary Multitasking Ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2010, 17 (4), 479-485. 4. Carrier, L. Mark, Cheever, Nancy A., Rosen, Larry D., Benitez, Sandra & Chang, Jennifer. (2008). Multitasking across generations: Multitasking choices and difficulty ratings in three generations of Americans. Computers in Human Behavior 25 (2009) 483489. 5. Wallis, Claudia. (2010). The impacts of media multitasking on childrens learning and development: Report from a research seminar, New York, NY: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.