Performance decrements in multitasking have been explained by limitations in cognitive capacity, either modelled as static structural bottlenecks or as the scarcity of overall cognitive resources that prevent humans, or at least restrict them, from processing two tasks at the same time. However, recent research has shown that individual differences, flexible resource allocation, and prioritization of tasks cannot be fully explained by these accounts. We argue that understanding human multitasking as a choice and examining multitasking performance from the perspective of judgment and decision-making (JDM), may complement current dual-task theories. We outline two prominent theories from the area of JDM, namely Simple Heuristics and the Decision Field Theory, and adapt these theories to multitasking research. Here, we explain how computational modelling techniques and decision-making parameters used in JDM may provide a benefit to understanding multitasking costs and argue that these techniques and parameters have the potential to predict multitasking behavior in general, and also individual differences in behavior. Finally, we present the one-reason choice metaphor to explain a flexible use of limited capacity as well as changes in serial and parallel task processing. Based on this newly combined approach, we outline a concrete interdisciplinary future research program that we think will help to further develop multitasking research.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
In this paper, we focussed on the transfer of JDM to multitasking, however, it should be noted that we consider a bi-directional transfer as fruitful (e.g. Kahneman, 2011, for the transfer of attention and effort to JDM theories).
For a similar modelling approach of individual differences in choices using DFT parameters see Raab and Johnson (2004).
Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Conscious and nonconscious information processing: Attention and performance XV (pp. 421–452). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15(9), 610–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00728.x.
Arrington, C. M., & Weaver, S. M. (2015). Rethinking volitional control over task choice in multitask environments: Use of a stimulus set selection strategy in voluntary task switching. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(4), 664–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.961935.
Baron, J. (2000). Thinking and deciding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Blumer, A., Ehrenfeucht, A., Haussler, D., & Warmuth, M. (1987, April 6). Occam’s Razor. Information Processing Letters, 24, 377–380. Retrieved from http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~hungngo/classes/2008/694/papers/occam.pdf. Accessed 16 Aug 2017
Borst, J. P., Buwalda, T. A., van Rijn, H., & Taatgen, N. A. (2013). Avoiding the problem state bottleneck by strategic use of the environment. Acta Psychologica, 144(2), 373–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.07.016.
Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100(3), 432–459.
De Jong, R. (1995). The role of preparation in overlapping-task performance. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A Human Experimental Psychology, 48(1), 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749508401372.
Demanet, J., Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2010). Voluntary task switching under load: Contribution of top-down and bottom-up factors in goal-directed behavior. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17(3), 387–393. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.3.387.
Diederich, A. (1997). Dynamic stochastic models for decision making under time constraints. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 41(3), 260–274. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmps.1997.1167.
Farmer, G. D., Janssen, C. P., Nguyen, A. T., & Brumby, D. P. (2017). Dividing attention between tasks: Testing whether explicit payoff functions elicit optimal dual- task performance. Cognitive Science. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12513.
Fischer, R., & Hommel, B. (2012). Deep thinking increases task-set shielding and reduces shifting flexibility in dual-task performance. Cognition, 123(2), 303–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.11.015.
Fischer, R., & Plessow, F. (2015). Efficient multitasking: Parallel versus serial processing of multiple tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1366. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01366.
Fröber, K., & Dreisbach, G. (2016). How sequential changes in reward magnitude modulate cognitive flexibility: Evidence from voluntary task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(2), 285–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000166.
Fröber, K., & Dreisbach, G. (2017). Keep flexible—keep switching! The influence of forced task switching on voluntary task switching. Cognition, 162, 48–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.01.024.
Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346.
Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669.
Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (2008). Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(5), 1055–1075. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7318.104.22.1685.
Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (2012). Decisions beyond boundaries: when more information is processed faster than less. Acta Psychologica, 139(3), 532–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.01.009.
Glöckner, A., Heinen, T., Johnson, J. G., & Raab, M. (2012). Network approaches for expert decisions in sports. Human Movement Science, 31(2), 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2010.11.002.
Guitart-Masip, M., Duzel, E., Dolan, R., & Dayan, P. (2014). Action versus valence in decision making. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(4), 194–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.01.003.
Hendrich, E. (2014). Determinants of task order in dual-task situations. Retrieved from http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/dissertationen/hendrich-elisabeth-2014-12-02/PDF/hendrich.pdf.
Janssen, C. P., & Brumby, D. P. (2010). Strategic adaptation to performance objectives in a dual-task setting. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1548–1560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01124.x.
Janssen, C. P., & Brumby, D. P. (2015). Strategic adaptation to task characteristics, incentives, and individual differences in dual-tasking. PLoS One, 10(7), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130009.
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 47(3), 263–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2011.00774.x.
Katidioti, I., & Taatgen, N. A. (2014). Choice in multitasking: How delays in the primary task turn a rational into an irrational multitasker. Human Factors, 56(4), 728–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720813504216.
Kessler, Y., Shencar, Y., & Meiran, N. (2009). Choosing to switch: spontaneous task switching despite associated behavioral costs. Acta Psychologica, 131(2), 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.03.005.
Kiesel, A., & Dignath, D. (2017). Effort in multitasking: Local and global assessment of effort. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00111.
Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching—a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 849–874. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019842.
Kool, W., McGuire, J. T., Rosen, Z. B., & Botvinick, M. M. (2010). Decision making and the avoidance of cogntive demand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(4), 665–682. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020198.Decision.
Koop, G. J., & Johnson, J. G. (2013). The response dynamics of preferential choice. Cognitive Psychology, 67(4), 151–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.09.001.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Gigerenzer, G. (2011). Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. Psychological Review, 118(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020762.
Lague-Beauvais, M., Fraser, S. A., Desjardins-Crepeau, L., Castonguay, N., Desjardins, M., Lesage, F., & Bherer, L. (2015). Shedding light on the effect of priority instructions during dual-task performance in younger and older adults: A fNIRS study. Brain and Cognition, 98, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.05.001.
Lehle, C., Steinhauser, M., & Hubner, R. (2009). Serial or parallel processing in dual tasks: what is more effortful? Psychophysiology, 46(3), 502–509.
Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Jones, H. A., Richards, J. B., Strong, D. R., Kahler, C. W., & Read, J. P. (2003). The balloon analogue risk task (BART) differentiates smokers and nonsmokers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11(1), 26–33.
Leonhard, T., Fernandez, S. R., Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (2011). Dual-task processing when task 1 is hard and task 2 is easy: reversed central processing order? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 37(1), 115–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019238.
Liepelt, R., Strobach, T., Frensch, P., & Schubert, T. (2011). Improved intertask coordination after extensive dual-task practice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(7), 1251–1272. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.543284.
Luria, R., & Meiran, N. (2003). Online order control in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(3), 556–574.
Mayr, U., & Bell, T. (2006). On how to be unpredictable: evidence from the voluntary task-switching paradigm. Psychological Science, 17(9), 774–780. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01781.x.
Medeiros-Ward, N., Watson, J. M., & Strayer, D. L. (2015). On supertaskers and the neural basis of efficient multitasking. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22(3), 876–883. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0713-3.
Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part I. Basic Mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104(1), 3–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.1.3.
Meyer, D. E., Kieras, D. E., Allard, T., Chipman, S., Hawkins, H., Vaughan, W., & Jones, C. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms of the ONR for their encouragement and support. Helpful com- ments, suggestions, and constructive criticisms were provided. Psychological Review Gopher and Donchin, 104(1), 3–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.1.3.
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7.
Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological Review, 86(3), 214.
Neth, H., Khemlani, S. S., & Gray, W. D. (2008). Feedback design for the control of a dynamic multitasking system: dissociating outcome feedback from control feedback. Human Factors, 50(4), 643–651. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288583.
Neth, H., Khemlani, S. S., Oppermann, B., & Gray, W. D. (2006). Juggling multiple tasks: A rational analysis of multitasking in a synthetic task environment. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 50(11), 1142–1146. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605001106.
Newell, B. R., Wong, K. Y., Cheung, J. C. H., & Rakow, T. (2009). Think, blink or sleep on it? The impact of modes of thought on complex decision making. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(4), 707–732. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802215202.
Nijboer, M., Taatgen, N. A., Brands, A., Borst, J. P., & Van Rijn, H. (2013). Decision making in concurrent multitasking: Do people adapt to task interference? PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079583.
Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(37), 15583–15587. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903620106.
Pashler, H. E. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: evidence for a central bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(3), 358–377.
Pashler, H. E. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116(2), 220–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.116.2.220.
Pashler, H. E. (2000). Task switching and multitask performance. Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance, XVIII, 277–307.
Plessow, F., Schade, S., Kirschbaum, C., & Fischer, R. (2012). Better not to deal with two tasks at the same time when stressed? Acute psychosocial stress reduces task shielding in dual-task performance. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 12(3), 557–570. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-012-0098-6.
Poljac, E., & Yeung, N. (2014). Dissociable neural correlates of intention and action preparation in voluntary task switching. Cerebral Cortex, 24(2), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs326.
Posner, M. I. (2016). Orienting of attention: Then and now. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(10), 1864–1875. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.937446
Raab, M., & Johnson, J. G. (2004). Individual differences of action orientation for risktaking in sports. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75(3), 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2004.10609164.
Reissland, J., & Manzey, D. (2016). Serial or overlapping processing in multitasking as individual preference: Effects of stimulus preview on task switching and concurrent dual-task performance. Acta Psychologica, 168, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.04.010.
Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictible switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(2), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3422.214.171.124.
Ruthruff, E., Hazeltine, E., & Remington, R. W. (2006). What causes residual dual-task interference after practice? Psychological Research, 70(6), 494–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0012-8.
Scheibehenne, B., Rieskamp, J., & González-Vallejo, C. (2009). Cognitive models of choice: Comparing decision field theory to the proportional difference model. Cognitive Science, 33(5), 911–939. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01034.x.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84(1), 1–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.1.1.
Shakeri, S., & Funk, K. (2007). A comparison of human and near-optimal task management behavior. Human Factors, 49(3), 400–416. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X197026.
Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2006). Dynamics of the central bottleneck: Dual-task and task uncertainty. PLoS Biology, 4(7), 1227–1238. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040220.
Snodgrass, J. G., & Townsend, J. T. (1980). Comparing parallel and serial models: Theory and implementation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6(2), 330–354. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-15126.96.36.1990.
Stelzel, C., Brandt, S. A., & Schubert, T. (2009). Neural mechanisms of concurrent stimulus processing in dual tasks. NeuroImage, 48(1), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.06.064.
Strobach, T., Liepelt, R., Schubert, T., & Kiesel, A. (2012). Task switching: effects of practice on switch and mixing costs. Psychological Research, 76(1), 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-011-0323-x.
Szameitat, A. J., Lepsien, J., Von Cramon, D. Y., Sterr, A., & Schubert, T. (2006). Task-order coordination in dual-task performance and the lateral prefrontal cortex: An event-related fMRI study. Psychological Research, 70(6), 541–552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0015-5.
Tombu, M., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-15188.8.131.52.
Weber, E. U., Blais, A.-R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(4), 263–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.414.
Welford, A. T. (1974). On the sequencing of action. Brain Research, 71(2–3), 381–392.
Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Factors, 50(3), 449–455. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288394.
Wickens, C. D., Gutzwiller, R. S., & Santamaria, A. (2015). Discrete task switching in overload: A meta-analyses and a model. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 79, 79–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.002.
World Health Organization (2015). Global status report on road safety 2015. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Yeung, N. (2010). Bottom-up influences on voluntary task switching: the elusive homunculus escapes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(2), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017894.
Zwosta, K., Hommel, B., Goschke, T., & Fischer, R. (2013). Mood states determine the degree of task shielding in dual-task performance. Cognition and Emotion, 27(6), 1142–1152. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.772047.
We would like to thank the Department of Performance Psychology of the German Sport University Cologne for their helpful comments.
This research was funded by a Grant within the Priority Program, SPP 1772 from the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG), Laura Broeker and Markus Raab were funded by Grant no.: RA 940/17-1, Roman Liepelt was funded by and LI 2115/2-1 Stefan Künzell and Harald Ewolds were funded by Grant no.: KU 1557/3-1, and Edita Poljac was supported by the Grant no.: KI 1388-/7-1.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
About this article
Cite this article
Broeker, L., Liepelt, R., Poljac, E. et al. Multitasking as a choice: a perspective. Psychological Research 82, 12–23 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0938-7