For generations, the stereotype has persisted of women being far better at multi-tasking than men, but no-one has been able to put their finger on why. Until now.
A new study by a husband and wife team at Brunel University of London has found that in fact both sexes are capable of navigating complex tasks simultaneously, but women can do something in addition – hold a conversation at the same time.
In an experiment which saw 41 men and 37 women juggle four tasks designed to simulate real-life, there was no difference between their ability to complete physical demands under increasing pressure.
However, when the cohort was given the additional task of responding to spoken questions, men failed to answer more than a quarter of the questions, while for women it was just one in ten.
“There has always been this suspicion that sex differences do exist when it comes to multi-tasking,” said Dr Andre J. Szameitat, Deputy Director of the Centre for Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience at Brunel University of London. “But until now, they had not been identified.”
Dr Szmeitat, who carried out the research with his wife, Dr Diana Szameitat, an honorary lecturer at Brunel’s Department of Psychology, added: “Through our work, we wanted to shed light on why a potential stereotype might have developed.
“This reduced talkativeness amongst men could explain why males are likely to be rated as being worse at multi-tasking than women.”
While previous studies have been computer-based or using simple pencil and paper tasks performed on a single table, the Szameitats were inspired by their own lives raising two children to set up a complex multi-tasking experiment that more closely replicated the demands of everyday multitasking than any previous research.
Participants had to work on four non-computerised tasks spread out across three different tables. These included a simulated cooking task, two paper and pencil tasks carried out when a kitchen timer sounded, as well as monitoring a slideshow presenting words on different coloured backgrounds and writing them down. And, for the first time in an experiment of this kind, participants had to verbally respond to complex pre-recorded questions played through speakers.
Dr Szameitat said: “We were thinking of our own lives with two kids and working out where the real challenges of multi-tasking lie for people.”
In the second part of the research, short films of the participants carrying out the tasks were judged by a group of 80 neutral observers. They were unaware of the motives of the research. Once participants were required to respond to questions, the observers judged male multi-taskers to be less in control of what they were doing, performing worse, using less effort, and liking the task less, as compared to the female multi-taskers. Sex differences were even more pronounced when time pressure built up during the course of the experiment.
Now the Szameitats believe their research might have important workplace implications, especially in roles that depend on effective verbal interaction. Reduced speech may be problematic in novel or critical situations in other jobs.
“Reduced talkativeness in the workplace may be perceived as impolite or even rude,” says Dr Szameitat. “Future research should examine whether training might help maintain verbal abilities under pressure.”