Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A combined multitasking performance measure involving sequential and parallel task executions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research on human multitasking suggests several measures to evaluate performance. However, the suggested measures evaluate performance either when tasks are performed sequentially, or when tasks are performed in a parallel manner. There is a lack of models with performance measures that consider concurrently sequential and parallel task execution. This paper aims to develop a measure of human performance that considers both sequential and parallel execution of tasks in multitasking conditions. First, the literature is reviewed to select a taxonomy to model the features and execution of tasks during multitasking. Task features include a list of tasks, task demands (in terms of physical, psychological, and emotional loads), and coordination between tasks (in terms of priorities, similarities, dependence, and time constraints). Task execution is represented as a network of sequential and overlapping tasks. Second, a set of measures are identified to evaluate human performance in multitasking conditions. The analysis of literature suggests a task switching cost model for sequential task execution and a task interference ratio when tasks are executed in parallel. To enable combining switching cost (i.e., sequential execution) and interference ratio (i.e., parallel execution) in multitasking conditions, a classification scheme based on tasks’ modalities is utilized. Finally, the developed model is applied to different scenarios.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

adapted from (Wickens 1980; Wickens et al. 2000)]

Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Reproduced with permission from (Wickens 2002)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler RF, Benbunan-Fich R (2015) The effects of task difficulty and multitasking on performance. Interact Comput 27:430–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altmann EM (2004a) Advance preparation in task switching what work is being done? Psychol Sci 15:616–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altmann EM (2004b) The preparation effect in task switching: carryover of soa. Mem Cogn 32:153–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AD, Hitch GJ (1974) Working memory. Psychol Learn Motiv 8:47–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Shakhar G, Sheffer L (2001) The relationship between the ability to divide attention and standard measures of general cognitive abilities. Intelligence 29:293–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojko A, Kramer AF, Peterson MS (2004) Age equivalence in switch costs for prosaccade and antisaccade tasks. Psychol Aging 19:226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braverman A, Meiran N (2010) Task conflict effect in task switching. Psychol Res 74:568–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess PW, Veitch E, de Lacy Costello A, Shallice T (2000) The cognitive and neuroanatomical correlates of multitasking. Neuropsychologia 38:848–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong R (2000) 15 An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In: Control of cognitive processes, p 357

  • Delbridge KA (2002) Individual differences in multi-tasking ability: exploring a nomological network. Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University

  • Derakshan N, Smyth S, Eysenck MW (2009) Effects of state anxiety on performance using a task-switching paradigm: an investigation of attentional control theory. Psychon Bull Rev 16:1112–1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drews FA, Yazdani H, Godfrey CN, Cooper JM, Strayer DL (2009) Text messaging during simulated driving. Hum Factors 51:762–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzubak CM (2008) Multitasking: the good, the bad, and the unknown. J Assoc Tutor Prof 1:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR (1995) Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Fact 37:65–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR (2017) Direct measurement of situation awareness: validity and use of SAGAT. In: Situational awareness. Routledge, pp 129–156

  • Fleishman EA, Quaintance MK, Broedling LA (1984) Taxonomies of human performance: the description of human tasks. Academic Press

  • Garavan H (1998) Serial attention within working memory. Mem Cogn 26:263–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn S, Andersen GJ, Kramer AF (2003) Multidimensional set switching. Psychon Bull Rev 10:503–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick DZ, Oswald FL, Darowski ES, Rench TA, Brou R (2010) Predictors of multitasking performance in a synthetic work paradigm. Appl Cogn Psych 24:1149–1167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart SG (1978) Subjective time estimation as an index of workload. Proceedings of the airline pilots association symposium on man-system interface: advances in workload study. Washington, DC, USA, pp 115–131

  • Hart SG (2006) NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, vol 50, No. 9. Sage publications, Sage, CA: Los Angeles, CA, pp 904–908

  • Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv Psych 52:139–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huizinga M, van der Molen MW (2011) Task switching and shifting between stopping and going: developmental change in between-trial control adjustments. J Exp Child Psychol 108:484–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junco R, Cotten SR (2012) The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Comput Educ 59:505–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D (1973) Attention and effort, vol 1063. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinman S (ed) (2009) The culture of efficiency: technology in everyday life, vol 55. Peter Lang

  • Kleinsorge T, Gajewski PD (2004) Preparation for a forthcoming task is sufficient to produce subsequent shift costs. Psychon Bull Rev 11:302–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch I (2003) The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching. Psychon Bull Rev 10:488–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch I (2005) Sequential task predictability in task switching. Psychon Bull Rev 12:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolski C (2013) Human-computer interactions in transport. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Konig CJ, Buhner M, Murling G (2005) Working memory, fluid intelligence, and attention are predictors of multitasking performance, but polychronicity and extraversion are not. Human Perform 18:243–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kray J, Lindenberger U (2000) Adult age differences in task switching. Psychol Aging 15:126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law AS, Logie RH, Pearson DG (2006) The impact of secondary tasks on multitasking in a virtual environment. Acta Physiol 122:27–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee FJ, Taatgen NA (2002) Multitasking as skill acquisition. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the cognitive science society, vol 24, No. 24

  • Mansi G, Levy Y (2013) Do instant messaging interruptions help or hinder knowledge workers’ task performance? Int J Inf Manage 33(3):591–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr U (2002) Inhibition of action rules. Psychon Bull Rev 9:93–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr U, Keele SW (2000) Changing internal constraints on action: the role of backward inhibition. J Exp Psychol Gen 129:4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran N (1996) Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 22:1423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran N (2000) Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychol Res 63:234–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran N, Chorev Z (2005) Phasic alertness and the residual task-switching cost. Exper Psych 52:109–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran N, Chorev Z, Sapir A (2000) Component processes in task switching. Cogn Psychol 41:211–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merlau M (2010) Does dual task interference affect concurrent duration production?. Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. https://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1337&context=theses

  • Meyer DE, Kieras DE (1997) A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: part i. Basic mechanisms. Psychol Rev 104:3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monsell S, Sumner P, Waters H (2003) Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches. Mem Cogn 31:327–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (1998) Modeling human and organizational behavior: application to military simulations. National Academies Press

  • Navon D, Gopher D (1979) On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychol Rev 86:214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieuwenhuis S, Monsell S (2002) Residual costs in task switching: testing the failure-to-engage hypothesis. Psychon Bull Rev 9:86–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswald FL, Hambrick DZ, Jones LA (2017) Keeping all the plates spinning: understanding and predicting multitasking performance. In: Learning to solve complex scientific problems. Routledge, pp 77–96

  • Otto SC, Wahl KR, Lefort CC, Frei WH (2012) Exploring the impact of multitasking in the workplace. J Bus 3:154–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Ou CX, Davison RM (2011) Interactive or interruptive? Instant messaging at work. Decis Support Syst 52:61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pester-DeWan J, Oonk H (2006) Human performance benefits of standard measures and metrics for network-centric warfare. In: Proceedings of human factors issues in network-centric warfare symposium

  • Putze F, Jarvis J-P, Schultz T (2010) Multimodal recognition of cognitive workload for multitasking in the car. In 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) IEEE, pp 3748–3751

  • Rangra S, Sallak M, Schön W, Vanderhaegen F (2017) A graphical model based on performance shaping factors for assessing human reliability. IEEE Trans Reliab 66(4):1120–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid GB, Nygren TE (1988) The subjective workload assessment technique: a scaling procedure for measuring mental workload. Adv Psych 52:185–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers RD, Monsell S (1995) Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen 124:207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin O, Meiran N (2005) On the origins of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 31:1477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein JS, Meyer DE, Evans JE (2001) Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubio S, Díaz E, Martín J, Puente JM (2004) Evaluation of subjective mental workload: a comparison of swat, nasa-tlx, and workload profile methods. Appl Psychol 53:61–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvucci DD (2005) A multitasking general executive for compound continuous tasks. Cogn Sci 29:457–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvucci DD (2006) Modeling driver behavior in a cognitive architecture. Hum Factors 48:362–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanbonmatsu DM, Strayer DL, Medeiros-Ward N, Watson JM (2013) Who multi-tasks and why? Multitasking ability, perceived multitasking ability, impulsivity, and sensation seeking. PLoS One 8:e54402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sathyanarayana A, Boyraz P, Hansen JH (2014) Effects of multitasking on drivability through can-bus analysis. In: Smart mobile in- vehicle systems. Springer, New York, NY, pp 169–182

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schuch S, Koch I (2003) The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 29:92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiers HJ, Maguire EA (2006) Thoughts, behaviour, and brain dynamics during navigation in the real world. Neuroimage 31:1826–1840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spink A, Cole C, Waller M (2008) Multitasking behavior. Ann Rev Inf Sci Technol 42:93–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinhauser M, Hübner R (2005) Mixing costs in task shifting reflect sequential processing stages in a multicomponent task. Mem Cogn 33:1484–1494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan DN, Koch I (2011) The role of input–output modality compatibility in task switching. Psychol Res 75:491–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes ER (2011) Interruptions in the workplace: a case study to reduce their effects. Int J Inf Manage 31:385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor RM (2017) Situational awareness rating technique (SART): the development of a tool for aircrew systems design. In: Situational awareness. Routledge, pp 111–128

  • Tornay FJ, Milán EG (2001) A more complete task-set reconfiguration in random than in predictable task switch. Q J Exper Psych 54:785–803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umebayashi K, Okita T (2013) A carry-over task rule in task switching: an erp investigation using a go/nogo paradigm. Biol Psychol 92:295–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderhaegen F (1999) Toward a model of unreliability to study error prevention supports. Interact Comput 11(5):575–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderhaegen F (2010) Human-error-based design of barriers and analysis of their uses. Cogn Technol Work 12(2):133–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderhaegen F (2016) A rule-based support system for dissonance discovery and control applied to car driving. Expert Syst Appl 15(65):361–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderhaegen F, Wolff M, Mollard R (2019) Synchronization of stimuli with heart rate: a new challenge to control attentional dissonances. Autom Chall Socio-technical Syst 15:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD (1980) The structure of attentional resources. In: Nickerson R (ed) Attention and performance VIII. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 239–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD (1981) Processing resources in attention, dual task performance, and workload assessment (no. Epl-81-3/onr-81-3). Illinois University at Urbana Engineering-Psychology Research Lab

  • Wickens CD (2002) Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor Issues Ergonom Sci 3:159–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD (2007) Attention to attention and its applications: a concluding view. In: Attention: from theory to practice, pp 239–249

  • Wickens CD (2008) Multiple resources and mental workload. Hum Fact 50:449–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD, Hollands JG (2000) Attention, time-sharing, and workload. Eng Psychol Hum Perform 3:439–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD, Santamaria A, Sebok A (2013) A computational model of task overload management and task switching. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, SAGE Publications, San Diego, CA, USA, pp 763–767

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung N, Monsell S (2003) Switching between tasks of unequal familiarity: the role of stimulus-attribute and response-set selection. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 29:455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zakay D, Block RA (1997) Temporal cognition. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 6(1):12–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zakay D, Shub J (1998) Concurrent duration production as a workload measure. Ergonomics 41:1115–1128

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NSTIP strategic program number (12-INF2574-02) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The authors would like to thank all personnel involved in this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Louisiana Community and Technical College System-Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

    Ali Ahmad

  2. Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11421, Saudi Arabia

    Mageed Ghaleb, Saber Darmoul & Mohammed Alkahtani

  3. Global Assessment Inc, Orlando, FL, USA

    Shatha Samman

Authors
  1. Ali Ahmad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mageed Ghaleb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saber Darmoul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammed Alkahtani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shatha Samman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Ahmad.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ahmad, A., Ghaleb, M., Darmoul, S. et al. A combined multitasking performance measure involving sequential and parallel task executions. Cogn Tech Work 23, 131–142 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00615-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00615-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation