Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Multitasking Makes You Stupid and Slow

Posted by kdawson on from the knew-it-all-along dept.

Reverse Gear recommends a long and interesting article over at The Atlantic in which Walter Kirn talks about the scientific results that support his claim and his own experiences with multitasking: that it destroys our ability to focus. "Multitasking messes with the brain in several ways. At the most basic level, the mental balancing acts that it requires — the constant switching and pivoting — energize regions of the brain that specialize in visual processing and physical coordination and simultaneously appear to shortchange some of the higher areas related to memory and learning. We concentrate on the act of concentration at the expense of whatever it is that we're supposed to be concentrating on... studies find that multitasking boosts the level of stress-related hormones such as cortisol and adrenaline and wears down our systems through biochemical friction, prematurely aging us. In the short term, the confusion, fatigue, and chaos merely hamper our ability to focus and analyze, but in the long term, they may cause it to atrophy."

35 of 551 comments (clear)

  1. I'd half agree by n2rjt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I always thought multitasking made me slow, but more able to see alternative solutions. Sometimes a solution for task A comes from task B.

  2. I knew it all the time. But explain that to the .. by iknownuttin · · Score: 5, Interesting
    hiring manager or HR person.

    Just about every freekin job add I see requires the ability to multi task. I used to say that I can't do it. Now, I just say that I'm as good at it as any other human. Most of the gung ho corporate types insist that they can multi task wonderfully and trying to reason with them is pointless.

    --
    I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
  3. Re:Funny... by bladesjester · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think it depends on what you're doing and how you define "every so often".

    Doing something different every couple of hours for a little while provides a mental break from the task at hand. Having to constantly switch between things, on the other hand, causes you more stress and makes you less effective as a general rule.

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  4. Re:True... for everyone but you of course by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I think you've hit the mark.

    People have not evolved to effectively multitask. In the last hundred thousand years society has structured itself so that a person works on a task, completes, then moves to the next. Multitasking really is a concept which, while it may have been primitively present in busy offices, wasn't really quantified to the level that it is now until computer processing introduced it. Most people, in general, still don't multitask well. They're still in the Windows 3.1 era of multitasking where they need to wait for definite breakpoints in their tasks to switch. Probably the earliest form of effective multitasking was a wife who was good in the kitchen. Can she cook a Thanksgiving Day meal for 20 relatives in one day without burning or spillng anything? If so then she's multitasking well. Most people would get stuck on the biscuits and forget to start the cranberry sauce until 15 minutes before turkey is done... and then what do you do? Because you can't let the turkey get cold just because you forgot to prep the cranberry sauce, and now that the biscuits are started the turkey will get cold if you don't baste it, or it'll burn if you ignore it. Better learn your job, woman!

    Besides, it's not like HR actually has a measure of multitasking prowess. If you have six degrees and twelve letters of recommendation from people earning $millions, then you're a good multitasker. If you claim to be a good multitasker but you don't have the social connections to sing your praises on paper, then you're obviously a liar and a suspect for administrative discipline.

    Screw the subjective hoops and hurdles. Do you have an opportunity for me or not?

    --
    the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
  5. Re:True... for everyone but you of course by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First, I have yet to meet a human that does not massively multitask all of the time. Even while sleeping, your body and brain are doing lots of different tasks at the same time.

    Second, There is a reason that people would call other people dumb by saying "He can't walk and chew gum at the same time." long before 'Multitask' became a common word.

    While a task that takes all of your though to accomplish might take a hit if your doing two of them, the majority of tasks that people preform in a day do not take even a small fraction of our mental capabilities. Such as... walking and chewing gum. By saying that multi-tasking makes you worse at what you are doing, you are also saying at the very least, you cannot walk as well if you are chewing gum.

    I don't know about you, but I really can walk and chew gum at the same time.

  6. The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by MOBE2001 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I agree with the author (Walter Kirn) of the article. Multitasking is so time consuming that the brain relies on the cerebellum (little brain) to handle a lot of routine tasks (maintaining posture, walking, standing, blinking, etc...) while the conscious cognitive areas of the cerebral cortex focus on an important task (e.g., talking, thinking, reasoning, planning, etc...). People with cerebellar lesions are known to speak in a halting stacatto-like manner. The reason is that Broca's area (the part of the brain that produces speech) is constantly being interrupted because the brain's motor cortex has to momentarily stop what it's focusing on in order to attend to the routine tasks that a healthy cerebellum would handle automatically. So multitasking is such a big problem that the cerebellum contains more neurons than all the other areas of the brain combined but it cannot do everything because it's a direct sensori-motor automaton. That is to say, it cannot plan or predict phenomena, so it is limited. Only the most primitive animals lack a cerebellum.

    1. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by Qbertino · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is also said - by esotherics and mysticists - that the cerebellum is the part of the brain that prophets and seers have learned to use 100% on command. The Bodi-Tree under which Budda sits is supposed to be a symbol of the cerebellum and have a simular structue with its branches and leaves, and thus represents enlightenment. If you read about the prime goals in Zen Buddisim ('thoughtless thinking', 'reasonless acting' etc.) you get the impression that it does involve a superior flexibility in activating and de-activating cognitive functions of the brain.
      I practice Aikido, and the most difficult part of it is not to have your cognitive brain interfere when you're exectuing a technique against an opponent (or two or three ...). It's what you practice in such Arts. Thus all the meditating and all that. It's really nothing religious - it's simply training your mind in the very same methodic and well-planned manner you train your body.

      --
      We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    2. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by ehrichweiss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I haven't RTFA yet but there was a study I think a couple years ago where they determined that women multitask magnitudes better than men. If Kim's study was mostly of men then he might be onto something, otherwise I think someone needs to check their data a bit better.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    3. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by onescomplement · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Here's an interesting data point for you. I type about 15-25% faster if I wear earplugs. When I tune out the noise it shuts off some fundamental and unwanted feedback loop, which was probably useful when I learned how to type but now not so.

      Also, some stutterers benefit by _not_ listening to themselves speak.

    4. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by rohan972 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From the summary: In the short term, the confusion, fatigue, and chaos merely hamper our ability to focus and analyze

      There is much anecdotal evidence that women seem to have a hampered ability to focus and analyze. The article is not about how proficient people are at multitasking, but that multitasking is detrimental to focus and analytical function.

      From TFA: Multitasking messes with the brain in several ways. At the most basic level, the mental balancing acts that it requires--the constant switching and pivoting--energize regions of the brain that specialize in visual processing and physical coordination and simultaneously appear to shortchange some of the higher areas related to memory and learning. We concentrate on the act of concentration at the expense of whatever it is that we're supposed to be concentrating on.

      So women could indeed be better at multitasking but still have equivalent detrimental effects. Or perhaps women are better at multitasking through practice rather than innate ability. If they are better at multitasking, can they safely drive while using a mobile for example? I suspect not. It would be interesting to know if women who have demonstrated the ability to focus and analyse (perhaps some are reading this?) are also multitaskers or if they have the focus and analytical ability as a result of not multitasking.

      --
      http://marriedmansexlife.com/
    5. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by Smordnys+s'regrepsA · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or, for the nerdier version: Piano!

      I can play amazingly complex songs, at terrific speeds... but only from memory, and only at full speed. The moment I've learned the song, I burn the sheet music. If I try to use it, I spend so much time thinking about where my hands/fingers should go, they stop performing correctly. If I try to slow the song down enough to teach others, I find I can not remember which note comes next in the sequence.

      When I stop thinking and just let my hands do their own thing, they move people to tears.

      --
      Just -1, Troll talking to another.
    6. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by rts008 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think both you and ehrichweiss (706417) are beating around the same bush here.

      I think that it may have a lot to do with the type of multitasking involved.

      From observation/experience, I seem to have noticed that if it is primarily mental multitasking, then women have a big advantage. Women have a MUCH larger connection between the brain hemispheres than men do.

      With mostly physically oriented tasks, my experience has been observations favoring the men.

      This is all VERY generalized, and there are many exceptions to the above, (My Great Aunt Molly was amazing in her kitchen!) and strictly anecdote...so take with more than one grain of salt.

      I would also be interested in checking out some legitimate studies if they exist.

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    7. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by hazem · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd add to that with my own anecdote. I've noticed that when I'm driving and traffic suddenly gets more complicated that I automatically reach down and turn off the radio.

      Yet, when I'm driving in "boring" conditions, I can hardly go more than a minute or two without finding that I've reached down to turn on the radio. If I consciously try to resist turning on the radio (after stopping my hand in midway to the radio a few times), and I'm successful, I find that I eventually start singing or talking to myself.

    8. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by Mex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How does age work into it?

      I remember being able to study and read books in high school while blasting Metallica through my headphones. Now, at 27, I can't seem to concentrate on anything without total silence.

    9. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by MOBE2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

      Funny. Look in the mirror when you say this out loud.

      If "the most primitive animals" were to lack part of the brain, it would much more likely be a cerebrum, or at least a large one. One of the things that's different about humans is the massively increased size of the cerebrum -- supposedly giving us the ability to reason and whatnot.

      Wow. Posting anonymously to make a derogatory, know-it-all and yet, ill-informed comment, eh? The fact remains that invertebrates and some lower vertebrates (e.g., salamanders) have no cerebellum (look it up on Google, it's not that hard). Besides, a cerebellum makes no sense without a cerebrum. It is precisely because the cerebellum appeared in more advanced animals that they are more advanced. In other words, the cerebellum gives them the ability to spend more time to focus on important things in their environment and that ability increases their chance of survival.

      As for the reason why people with cerebellar lesions may sometimes speak in a halting manner, it's not because of anything wrong with Broca's area (in the inferior frontal lobe of the cerebrum)

      But who said otherwise? Fighting with your own strawman, eh? I can't believe someone actually modded you up.

    10. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by CannonballHead · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's interesting that you say what you say. I play the piano, also, but have always been taught that if you can't play the song slowly from memory, you don't truly remember it... and if your muscle memory fails, for some reason, you are in trouble.

      That's not to say muscle memory doesn't take place, but simply to argue the point that not all pianists would agree with your method. For me, I know when I really know a song well when I can almost tell you exactly what note is where... that's as far as me actually knowing it - actually doing the physical activity of playing it is, in my mind, different from knowing the music. (for the record, I've played piano for 17 years and am a composer).

    11. Re:The Brain Uses the Cerebellum to Multitask by rhakka · · Score: 2, Interesting

      absolutely; however, that doesn't mean anything pre-scientific is simply imagination. Science moves very slowly. its surety is nice, but being able to function in a sphere outside of certainty... maintaining curiousity as well as skepticism... is useful.

      to go back to acupuncture; you can poo-poo meridians, and I personally think it's wrong. But science still hasn't come up with anything better to explain its functionality yet. So the choice is, use something that works to some degree or don't use it at all because you're not "sure"... even though that same unsurety exists with many modern drugs... with much shorter track records.

      the whole point is not to ignore the pre-scientific. Use it as a guide for future scientific exploration.

  7. I CALL B.S. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It all boils down to what you call "multitasking". In the card sorting experiment, for instance, they were asked to perform a cognitive task that takes concentration, while simultaneously being alert to instantly jump at an interruption that they (correctly) expected could happen at any second. Few people I know do that kind of "multitasking" on a regular basis.

    For most people I know, "multitasking" consists of talking on the phone while waiting for their code to compile, or answering the office phone when it rings, even if you were in the middle of writing a paper. But that is NOT the same as sitting there, wire-tense, waiting to jump on it the instant it rings. That would drive anybody crazy. No wonder their cortisol and epiniphrine levels were elevated.

    (BTW: "adrenaline" is a brand name for one particular company's epinephrine. It is not a chemical name. Calling ephinephrine "adrenaline" is like calling all automobiles "toyotas".)

    1. Re:I CALL B.S. by misleb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For most people I know, "multitasking" consists of talking on the phone while waiting for their code to compile, or answering the office phone when it rings, even if you were in the middle of writing a paper. But that is NOT the same as sitting there, wire-tense, waiting to jump on it the instant it rings. That would drive anybody crazy. No wonder their cortisol and epiniphrine levels were elevated.


      I don't know about you, but there are times when the phone ringing while I'm working can make me jump or at least flinch. The thing is that people DON'T call me when I'm just sitting there waiting for something to compile. They invariably call when I'm focused on something (or so it seems). And then there's email. Being a slave to your inbox and compulsively reading ever new message that comes in will definitly cut down on productivity and cause stress. I don't know about elevated levels of cortisol or epinephrin, but I think there is something to the idea that multitasking is stressful. I know I'd feel a lot more relaxed and focused if I could just turn off my phone and email for hours at a time without worry.

      The study may have been a little extreme. But I think it still might have some truth to it.

      -matthew
      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
  8. Shoot the Articles author by killmofasta · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The ability to effectively multitask ( oh look! A bird ) is based upon the ability to both prioritize and concentrate. Switching gears is no more a matter of re-prioritising the task at hand. I used to talk on the phone while driving, then I saw others do it, and the tiny loss of concentration at a critical moment, can get you killed. Now, I pull over when I want to talk, and don't talk while driving, but I can listen to the radio, and learn to play songs.

    Somethings I can do well with multitasking, like playing Bach/Brahms or Joplin, but there are some songs, I will never be able to play. I can play second hands of the concerto for 4 hands. I could do it easily, but when I play first hands, I am distracted by the second hands. I think is just all a matter of practice, in playing instruments, but driving is a completely different story, you have to constantly adapt to the changing road conditions.

    But, in typing this reply, I can watch my torrents, and process monitor, and not be distracted by them. Walk and chew gum? The chewing does not take our attention, and is not a distraction. If it was, we would walk into objects.

    Singing while playing piano, or playing along with someone. both multi-tasking activities. While driving, you have a lot of tasks to do, keeping on the road, keeping aware of other drivers, keeping your directions, and managing not to run out of ( look, there is that bird again! ) gas, one that has been a recent problem for me. And if your a felon, with a gun under the seat, and drugs on the seat, while speeding... you have to watch for police too!

    The author was clearly distracted from driving, and stresed out about his cell phone. He priortized it above his driving, and switched his attention at a critical moment, and he says he cannot multi-task well? He can drive cant he? That is a lot of multi-tasking to take on. I am teaching a teenager to drive. ( but of course, I will never tell him, I can drive with my foot...or show him how! ).

    Mod me troll-bait, but this is NOT NEWS or otherwise... this is a bitspam/bucket news item.

  9. Re:Really by ezratrumpet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    An IQ of 159 means that out of a random sample of 100,000 people, you have 8 people who share your intelligence, and maybe 4 or 5 who exceed you.

    I've taught about 20 students with similar IQ levels. To you, and them, this article probably doesn't apply. Your minds are making unbelievably fast connections with little effort - so what to you is really just fast processing and quick changes is a neurobiological impossibility to others.

    I always ask my students, "What will you do with the abilities and opportunities you are given?"

  10. Multitasking is the antithesis of "flow" by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As defined by psychologist Mihály Csíkszentmihályi, flow is the mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing, characterized by a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity... what Csíkszentmihályi calls "optimum performance."

    In my own view (and experience), it is closely related to "happiness."

    Charles Kingsley wrote "We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us really happy is something to be enthusiastic about." Enthusiasm is obviously related to flow.

    And multitasking is compatible with neither.

    --

    "How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!

  11. I have to concur with these findings... by DrStoooopid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...I've been a multitasker for many years (better part of 20 years.)...

    I wouldn't necessarily say that I'm "dumber" as the article suggests, but I will say that there are many instances where I have to stop and think about something that I normally wouldn't have to. It takes me a little longer than it did to remember facts. I have difficulty remembering numbers especially. (I can still remember my childhood phone number, but I can't remember my parent's cell phone numbers. I never remember where I put my keys anymore, so I have to put them on a hook...if I can remember. I always lose the phone/remote/cellphone. It's easy to forget appointments, bill due dates, anything that's static in nature. ...are they sure this just isn't a product of aging?

    --
    There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
  12. Re:Funny... by springbox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, it can really help sometimes. I only focus on one thing at a time because I get distracted easily. Switching tasks after trying to solve a problem for several hours can help as you might accidentally think of a different approach while taking a break to do something else.

  13. Re:Really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm making a rare AC post because I hate braggarts, but I have to agree with the caveat that IQ is only a measure of certain types of cognitive ability. My own is in the 160's and I can handle many tasks at once without getting overly stressed.

    It's a pity that high IQ doesn't always correlate to having any common sense though. I'm lucky enough to have some, but many 'smart' people do not.

  14. Re:I knew it all the time. But explain that to the by hattig · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's time-slicing tasks, and it isn't what the article is talking about. Time slicing would mean you'd drive the car, notice the phone went off, pull over, then handle the phone call, then drive off again.

    Multitasking in terms of the article is having two resource intensive tasks happening at the same time. Think about running two tasks that would each require 60% of the CPU on a computer at the same time to react in real-time - instead the tasks run slower, reaction time drops or quality of response is lowered (e.g. skipped frames in a video), and so on.

    Listening and understanding and forming responses is a resource intensive task for the brain (if it's not all, like, yeah, yeah, really she did that did she?) as is driving, or walking across a tightrope, and so on. Ever noticed how talk radio presenters speak smoothly, slowly and with clear enunciation so that the listeners in cars aren't distracted - you notice it more as a passenger, and I suspect that drivers listen to talk radio a lot because subconsciously it is a lower load on the brain. As you do a task more (like learning to juggle) the more you can handle at the same time (conversations, or more balls) - it's like the repetition JIT-compiles the actions into a more efficient format for the brain to handle.

  15. Reminds me of "time management" managers by Morgaine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >> Perhaps it's more a combination of multitasking and immediate gratification.

    Or perhaps some peoples' gratification comes in small doses? I always found the "time management" kind of managers very annoying, regularly distracting me from concentrating on my work just because they had a deep belief in making everything subservient to the clock, their organizers, and their arbitrary day schedules.

    >> When you get everything you want quickly, there's no need to ever learn patience or persistence.

    Well they were past masters at persistence, but only a couple learned that patience was a virtue, and that it got them better results. You really can't be distracted in the middle of a core dump analysis say, not without starting from scratch anyway. And there are many similar kinds of task in the general field of computing, where human multitasking doesn't pay.

    OTOH, machines don't have that frailty, and as long as they complete their concurrent tasks without intrusively interrupting us, we're peachy.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  16. What about programmers? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As I'm sure some of you know well, the mark of a skilled programmer is a peculiar kind of multitasking -- the ability to maintain several 'stacks' of instruction and code in your head, representing the internal state of what you're working on at any given time. This can often encompass multiple path of execution. On the other hand, these are all facets of the same task; and perhaps not truly different/qualifying as multitasking.

  17. Multi-Tasking Addiction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One thing that isn't pointed out is that after a few years of this multi-tasking crap you get addicted to it.
    I am so used to doing multiple things at once (mostly because my high paying job is so skull fuckingly boring [FN1]) that I am almost unable to give things my undivided attention.

    I'll try to watch TV or talk to someone and I need that constant over-stimulus.
    I used to not be that way. But at 35 it feels like I have developed something akin to ADD.
    I am so used to giving simultaneous partial attention to multiple things (Bill Gates' phrase for it) that slowing down is a real problem.

    [FN1]
    One guy at work has a TV running 24-7 just to keep him less bored.

  18. Re:Price and overhead by Odineye · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The idea that modern life does not allow for periods of extended concentration is really matter of perception and approach. We become very accustomed to being busy on multiple things and begin to assume that we must continue in this fashion. When it all boils down, however, it is a matter of learning to draw good boundaries.

    You really don't *have* to respond to each e-mail as it comes in, and you really don't have to have your phone on or your instant messaging client open
    all of the time. You can set blocks of time during the day during which you minimize distractions like those and focus directly on single projects. Of course, you also set times specifically for responding to communications as well. After a short while those who communicate with you regularly will become accustomed to the fact that you respond at specific times of day. What's more, they will probably come to appreciate the increased focus you are putting into your communiques, since you are no longer distracted by other things while making them.

    There may be a couple of folks who try to insist on your immediate availability at all times. Drop them. They are almost certainly more trouble than they are worth.

  19. Re:Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What's surprising to me is that people seem to have forgotten that specialization and the division of labor has historically led to greater efficiency. Adam Smith's definitive 200 year old work "wealth of nations" even touches on this.

    yet, modern businesses seem to try to saddle down each person with as much work as they can. I believe the reason is the switch from long term big picture focus, to quarterly profit focus.

    I personally have turned down every job I've been offered in the last 5 years where the interviewer asked about my ability to multi-task and how I feel about multi-tasking. I can multi-task, but in my experience, the places that ask that during an interview end up having burned out old timers(not age either, just in terms of how long they've been there) who are in need of very long vacations doing little, while all the newcomers have everything dumped on them. The newcomers will be burned out "old timers" within a couple of years and the cycle repeats.

  20. Re:True... for everyone but you of course by Kirkoff · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IMO The biggest challenge/danger regarding e-mailing when driving is limited visual capacity. Your macula (the part of the retina that does detailed vision) can only be pointed towards one place at once. As a result, when you are looking at your computer, you are not looking at the road. The other problem is that most of us either hunt and peck or type with two hands. If you type with two hands, you are going to need to look at the keyboard to type so you can keep the other hand on the road. If you hunt and peck, you still need to look to see what key you are about to hit.

    Most of us have the ability to explain a complex concept while driving. If the visual constraints were out of the way, I would imagine that this would easily translate to writing. The worst it would probably do to you is make you more likely to miss an exit on a highway* or make your writing a bit less concise. I might not write a formal e-mail to my boss, but I probably wouldn't mind e-mailing a friend or something like that.

    I have missed an exit before on a relatively short trip (~20min) down a highway when thinking about my day or listening to something interesting even though I am still fully focused on and can react quickly to the road ahead. I am not the only one to have ever done so. I think that the previous poster who said that much of driving should be automatic was right on - your "muscle memory" takes care of a lot of the basic tasks that control the vehicle and even watching for visual problems. Higher thought comes in when planning a route or when changing lanes.

    --
    There are exactly 42,935,718 letter sized sheets in a square mile.
  21. Re:Really by misanthrope101 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I know plenty of people smarter than me who happen to be dumber than me. That made me feel good, till I realized all the people I also knew who were dumber yet smarter than me. By these statements I mean that I know people who are analytically smarter, mathematically smarter, yet not well-read at all, and I also know people who are, at least on paper, better-educated, but don't seem to know much outside their career field. I've worked with people with Master's degrees who didn't know who Freud or Stalin were.

    I actually don't even want to know my IQ. I'm only as smart as I am, and finding out that I'm 102 vs 135 wouldn't help me. It would only create an inferiority complex, either way. Either I'll view myself as dumb (if the score is low), or wonder why I'm so mediocre despite a high score. Can't win. I already have the problem of being overestimated. I'm fairly articulate and I read, which gives the illusion of higher intelligence.

  22. "Apparent" IQ and multitasking by cavebison · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In my personal experience of meeting various interesting people, I feel that learned behaviours have a lot to do with how one's mental skills are shaped, and hence how the person is perceived by others.

    One friend of mine had a very bad childhood. She learned to escape inwardly, by concentrating on books, study, escaping physically to a library any time she had the chance. Now, she is a doctor. She also has a photographic memory and can "re-read" pages she has scanned. People might perceive her as "high IQ". However she has trouble reading people, and cannot pick up more than the basics of computers, as she gets frustrated and bored easily. You could say she's a bad multitasker.

    If an IQ test was based on mechanical cognition, she wouldn't rate very high. If it was memory-based, she would excel. If it was dependent on multi-tasking, she would also struggle.

    Briefly, I'm the opposite. Multi-task all the time, rarely bored, but my visual memory sucks. I'm good at judging people's moods, but terrible with faces and names. I grew up slightly hypervigilant, and for some reason need to swap tasks to keep my brain ticking over, like those old watches you had to shake to wind up. I'm good at remembering practical and mechanical skills, of which I class programming as one. Which is funny, others I've spoken to class programming as technical, or mathematical. To me, it's mechanical, like a watch.

    If I sat an IQ test which required visual memory, I'd fail. If it relied on drawing meaning from literature, or reading body language I'd do well. If it required multi-tasking (like the classic male-secretary-in-busy-office experiment) I'd breeze.

    My point is, learned behaviours can sometimes be extreme, leading to some amazing skillsets while impairing other skillsets. So what does a measure of multi-tasking ability or IQ really mean, in terms of gauging "intelligence"? Nothing, in my opinion.

    To me, intelligence, simply means we function well in our environment. As modern humans, we tend to pick our environments so that our learned skills are most applicable. That's "comfort zone". Sometimes dysfunctional, but always dependent on the skills you have learned therefore, ideally, the place where you are most "intelligent".

  23. That's why I cheat by QuestorTapes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Delegate your multitasking to the fast idiot. Write scripts to automate everything you can, and schedule them to run them in the background while you concentrate on one thing at a time.

    Every now and them one of my coworkers razzes me about not graduating from the command line, but when they want something -done-, they call me.