China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
The balanced communications diet for business
Published in Cary L. Cooper, Psychological Insights for Understanding COVID-19 and Work, 2020
Multitasking (attempting to perform two or more tasks simultaneously), or task switching (when you are interrupted mid-task) are effectively the mental equivalent of juggling. If you have ever closed your laptop down at the end of the day and found a multitude of half-finished email replies, chat sessions and half-completed documents, you have probably been doing one or the other. Academics have long known that task-switching has a detrimental effect on productivity, even for simple tasks (e.g. Rogers & Monsell, 1995). The results are even worse for complex tasks (e.g. Rubinstein et al., 2001). Although switch costs may be small, sometimes just a few tenths of a second per switch, they can add up to large amounts of time wasted when people switch repeatedly back and forth between tasks. Task switching can also impede memory and knowledge retention, particularly for interruptions mid-task. Interruptions reduce our ability to pay attention (Ophir et al., 2009), complete tasks, reduce task accuracy (Montag & Walla, 2016), and increases the time we take to complete tasks (Cellier & Eyrolle, 1992).
Imaging Cognition in the Aging Human Brain
Published in David R. Riddle, Brain Aging, 2007
Task switching, sometimes known as shifting, refers to the ability to fluidly and accurately alternate between multiple rule sets that govern task responding [80]. Switching has been associated with a prefrontal-parietal network similar to that involved in working memory, although it appears to rely somewhat more heavily on activation in parietal regions of this network [8, 81]. Numerous studies have investigated the behavioral effects of aging on task switching, generally finding that older adults exhibit disproportionately large dual-task or switch costs relative to younger adults, although these age differences tend to be most pronounced for between-block switch costs rather than for within-block switch costs [82–84]. Despite the natural translation of task switching paradigms into blocked and event-related functional imaging methods, imaging studies of age differences on task switching are remarkably scarce.
Akili: A Novel Approach to Clinical Intervention with Digital Therapeutics
Published in Oleksandr Sverdlov, Joris van Dam, Digital Therapeutics, 2023
Attention is a fundamental cognitive function and can be thought of as a sub-process of cognition that modulates information processing in a goal-consistent manner via attentional control. Attentional control is the capacity to apply necessary attention to appropriate time and place while monitoring the environment for new sources of information to ensure the most favorable processing of task-relevant information (Bavelier and Green, 2019). This enables optimal deployment of resources across three attentional functions: focus, multitasking, and interference processing. Focus: The ability to deploy attention to task-relevant sources of information. It can be further divided into two processes, selective attention (the ability to selectively process task-relevant information) (McDowd, 2007; Bavelier and Green, 2019) and sustained attention (the skill needed to maintain such attention to tasks over long time periods) (McDowd, 2007).Multitasking (also known as task switching): The ability to adequately deploy focused attention to simultaneous tasks. Multitasking requires cognitive flexibility to allocate optimum attention to simultaneous tasks, also known as divided attention (McDowd, 2007).Interference processing: The ability to optimally prioritize attention in the presence of competing/non-task relevant information. This can be further divided into two processes, inhibition and conflict resolution. Inhibition enables the suppression of distractions, impulses, or biases (externally and internally driven) (Diamond, 2013), and conflict resolution continuously monitors for information that is incompatible with the desired goal (Botvinick et al., 2001).
An Examination of the Contextual Interference Effect and the Errorless Learning Model during Motor Learning
Published in Journal of Motor Behavior, 2022
Hesam Ramezanzade, Esmaeel Saemi, David P. Broadbent, Jared M. Porter
While the current findings are in line with the challenge point framework (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004), and somewhat in line with the error-processing hypothesis for the CI effect (Broadbent et al., 2017), the findings do contradict the implicit learning hypothesis for the CI effect proposed by Rendell et al. (2011). This study proposed that high levels of cognitive effort emerging from task switching during random practice, may promote an implicit style of learning as the individuals working memory is overwhelmed and they cannot consciously focus on the task being practiced (see also, Rendell et al., 2009). With this in mind, in the current study, it would have been predicted that the condition with the highest demand on working memory, the Random-Errorful group, would promote the most implicit learning condition and therefore the greatest performance in the retention and transfer tests, but this was not the case. As discussed in the previous paragraphs, the Random-Errorful group performed the worst in the retention test out of all the groups. Similarly, in the transfer test, in which a secondary task was used to examine the level of automation (as a consequence of implicit learning), the Random-Errorful group was again one of the worst performing groups on the primary task, with only the Constant group performing worse. This suggests that high levels of cognitive effort during practice due to task switching and error process will overwhelm working memory, but will not result in learning the skill implicitly.
Implementation of a triage nurse role and the effect on hospitalist workload
Published in Hospital Practice, 2021
Gopi J. Astik, Nita Kulkarni, Rachel M. Cyrus, Chen Yeh, Kevin J. O’Leary
Workload was improved in our study by offloading activities, not directly related to patient care, from the hospitalist to the Triage Nurse. This change in responsibilities reduced the number of paging interruptions experienced by the hospitalist. Prior studies have found that hospitalists experience frequent interruptions and that these interruption often result in task switching (e.g., switching from taking a history on one patient, to returning a page about another) [8,20]. Research has shown that task switching can be problematic in cognitive work because some of an individual’s attention remains stuck with the original activity, a phenomenon called ‘attention residue.’ [21] Furthermore, task switching can reduce the efficiency of hospitalists’ work. Previous studies have shown a large number of pages were non-urgent and/or sent to the wrong physician [22–24]. In our study, the Triage Nurse was provided with algorithms to prioritize and direct messages to the appropriate team member.
Acute stressor effects on cognitive flexibility: mediating role of stressor appraisals and cortisol
Published in Stress, 2019
Robert L. Gabrys, Jesse W. Howell, Sarah F. Cebulski, Hymie Anisman, Kimberly Matheson
There are several limitations attributed to the present study that should be considered when interpreting the results. Most notably, given that the present study was limited by sample size, we were unable to sufficiently test potential moderating effects, such as sex and age, and thus, the generalizability in this regard should be considered. This notwithstanding, the current data might provide important insight into the processes, including stressor appraisals and cortisol, through which an acute stressor might affect set-shifting ability. It is unclear, however, whether similar effects might be apparent across different types of stressors and other aspects of cognitive flexibility, such as task switching. The present investigation also highlights the value of focusing on potential mediators in determining whether and how cognitive functioning might be affected following a stressor, which frequently are not considered in linking stressful events to cognitive performance.