MULTITASKING IS A POSITIVE PRACTICE

In the middle of a Zoom call, you’re trying to listen to the conversation while at the same time you scan your inbox. You spot your son nearby and yell at him to not drink the milk right out of the bottle. Then you realize you were not on mute! The attendees in the Zoom call go all quiet and,?embarrassed, you meekly utter a lame excuse,?“Sorry, I am obviously not good at multitasking!”

Many have experienced similar frustrations, resulting in the term “multitasking” taking on a negative connotation. “Boomers can’t multitask,” you hear people say. But let me assure you that we can all multitask.

What we humans cannot do well is “multiprocessing”.

Multiprocessing is about doing two or more tasks at the same time, and it is easily done by computers containing more than one CPU (Central Processing Unit). Each CPU can then carry a specific task simultaneously.

On the other hand, Multitasking is the segmentation of tasks to take advantage of those periods of time when an active task becomes idle or is suspended to make room for another task.

Computer scientist developed multitasking when older “time-share” ?single-CPU computers, had to halt a running task to wait for input from the user. Rather than having the expensive CPU wait idly by for a user’s input, it made sense to save the state of the current task and switch to work on tasks required by other users. From time to time, the system would check if the expected data from the first had been entered. ?This way of serially switching between multiple tasks is what’s known as multitasking. ?

A real-world analogy would be you preparing coffee in the morning and then setting it to brewing. Rather than standing in front of the coffee machine patiently waiting for the coffee to be ready, you could choose to pull your smartphone out to check your friends’ status without impacting the brewing cycle. Once the coffee maker pinged with the coffee is ready, you would then suspend your social media scanning to pour the java on your coffee mug. ?Yeah, multitasking!

Now, consider this: you are grinding the coffee beans, pressing the grinder’s button with your left hand while simultaneously scrolling the smartphone with your right one. This is not multitasking!?What you are doing is a flimsy attempt at multiprocessing. And we humans are just not capable of multiprocessing. Fact is that, while our brains have two hemispheres and ?contain hundreds of millions of neurons, the reality is that when it comes to cognition, we come equipped with the equivalent of a single CPU (let’s refer to it as “Cognitive Processing Unit”).

What trick us into thinking we are capable of multiprocessing are two things: our ability to process sensory information in the background, and our ability to perform automated tasks.

Imagine if evolution had endowed us only with a single cognitive processing unit and nothing else. Mr. Cro-Magnon, fully focused on rubbing two sticks together to produce fire, might easily ignore the roaring of the Sabretooth Tiger behind him. Not a good recipe for procreation. Luckily, everyone of our senses can autonomously scan our surroundings and quickly trigger an alert. Hearing the tiger’s roar would inform Mr. Cro-Magnon he’d better switch from the “Make Fire” task to the “Better Run Now” task.

What this means is that?even though we have a single CPU, our senses provide us with sub-processing units act as sensors “subconsciously’ detecting changing environmental conditions. These sensors ?let us know we should quickly switch our cognitive focus, if necessary. Still, these sensory sub-processors are not capable of cognition.

Since these days Sabretooth Tigers are not much of a problem, we can now comfortably answer emails (our modern-day equivalent to making fire), whilst listening to music in the background.

But don’t be fooled. This does not mean we are multiprocessing or even multitasking. While our attention is focused on the emails, the music remains in the background—nothing more than a pleasant mood filler. Now, should you come across a song you particularly like, you might instinctively switch tasks and start paying attention to the lyrics instead of focusing on?the emails.?

We can also perform tasks via automatic processing. Some examples are driving, playing a musical instrument, riding a bicycle and so on. This is the result of training our bodies to automatically (subconsciously) perform repetitive scripted actions. Emphasis here is on the word “subconsciously”. When operating in automatic mode, we are not cognitively aware of what we are doing, but rather rely on our sensory abilities to alert us to the need to quickly “focus” on the automated task at hand, should it be required.

So, now we know,?multiprocessing is not something we are able to do. Multitasking is, on the other hand, a valid work mode.

However, to be effective multitasking requires disciplined techniques, practice, and common sense.

In computer science, due consideration is given to task switching times. If moving from one task to another is too expensive in terms of time or effort, then task switching is avoided.?Same with us. If multitasking causes us a great deal of effort to ready the environment for the new task, such as removing the items from a table if we want to switch from, say, doing homework to setting the table for dinner, and then back again to desk mode, doing it might not be smart.??A second computer science consideration is to properly prioritize tasks. Switching from an important task to one that’s not as critical, may not be advisable.?Additionally, we must always ensure that we remember to ?resume (and complete) suspended tasks. It is often the case when engaged in furious multitasking that we completely forget to finish something we had previously started. Time to turn off that bathtub faucet!

In summary, smart multitasking can be a great tool in making us more effective and in optimizing the use of our time.?Don’t heed those saying you shouldn’t multitask. Just let’s not confuse multiprocessing with multitasking.?

But also, let’s remember that, in the end, there is something we humans can do that computers cannot: the willful ability to NOT multitask. Unlike computers, we can choose when not to multitask for the sole purpose of fully enjoying the moment at hand. It might not be productive in a work sense, but those moments of quiet relaxation that many activities provide, such as fishing or hiking through the forest or playing with your children, can provide a more valuable experience than simply trying to fill those “idle gaps” with other tasks the way mindless computers do. Let's call those the non-preemptable “enjoying life” tasks!