anomaly·mellow

28 June 2026 · 2 min read · On attention

Why multitasking doesn't work (and what to do instead)

There is almost no such thing as multitasking. There is only fast switching, and every switch quietly charges you a tax you never see on the bill.

By the Anomaly Mellow studio. Every claim here is grounded in named, checkable research, listed at the foot of the piece.

Why multitasking doesn't work (and what to do instead)

If you pride yourself on multitasking, here is an uncomfortable, well-evidenced fact: it does not really exist, and the thing you are actually doing is making you slower. Why multitasking doesn’t work comes down to how attention is built. The brain is not a parallel processor for demanding tasks. It is a serial one that switches fast, and switching is not free.

The switching tax

The clearest evidence comes from the study of task switching. In a set of experiments published in 2001, the psychologists Joshua Rubinstein, David Meyer and Jeffrey Evans had people alternate between tasks and measured what it cost.[1] Every time participants switched, they lost time, and the loss grew with how complex and unfamiliar the tasks were. The reason is that switching involves hidden mental steps: disengaging from the rules of one task and loading the rules of the next. You do not notice these steps, but they add up. Doing two things by alternating is reliably slower and more error-prone than doing each in turn.

So when you answer a message mid-task, you do not pay only the seconds of reading it. You pay the cost of leaving your task and the cost of finding your way back into it.

The cost of getting back

That return cost is larger than almost anyone guesses. The attention researcher Gloria Mark, who has tracked people’s focus at work for two decades, found that after an interruption it took on average more than 23 minutes to get back to the original task.[3] Twenty-three minutes. A day sprinkled with “quick” checks is therefore a day in which deep attention barely gets a chance to form before it is broken again.

Does it change you?

There is a further, more debated finding. In a 2009 study, Eyal Ophir, Clifford Nass and Anthony Wagner compared people who habitually media-multitask, juggling several streams at once, with those who do not.[2] The heavy multitaskers performed worse on tests of filtering out irrelevant information and, surprisingly, were worse at task-switching itself. Whether multitasking caused this or simply attracts people already wired that way is still argued. Either way, it punctures the idea that practising multitasking makes you good at it.

What to do instead

The alternative is unglamorous and effective: single-tasking in protected blocks.

  • One task, one block. Choose a single thing and work only on it for a set stretch. Twenty-five minutes is a fine start.
  • Remove the switch triggers. Close the other tabs, silence notifications, and put the phone in another room. You cannot resist a switch you never get prompted to make.
  • Batch the small stuff. Group emails, messages and admin into set windows instead of letting them interrupt all day.
  • Reframe the feeling. Doing one thing at a time feels less busy. That feeling is not lower productivity, it is the absence of the switching tax.

The pull to do everything at once is, underneath, a discomfort with single-pointed attention, the same discomfort that sends us to our phones in every quiet moment. Sitting with one thing is a skill, and like any skill it returns with use. That is the whole premise of How to Be Bored Again.

Questions

Why doesn't multitasking work?+
Because the brain cannot truly do two attention-demanding things at once. What feels like multitasking is rapid switching between tasks, and each switch carries a cost: time to disengage from one task and reload the rules of the next. Studies show this switching makes people slower and more error-prone overall than doing the tasks one at a time, even though it feels productive.
Is multitasking bad for your brain?+
It is bad for your performance in the moment, and there is research suggesting heavy media multitaskers are worse at filtering out distractions and at switching efficiently. Whether that reflects lasting change or pre-existing traits is still debated. What is clear is that habitually multitasking trains a scattered style of attention, the opposite of the sustained focus most worthwhile work needs.
How long does it take to refocus after an interruption?+
Longer than people expect. Research that tracked people at work found it took on average over 23 minutes to return to the original task after an interruption. So a 'quick' glance at a message is rarely quick: it includes the long tail of getting your attention back, which is why a day full of small interruptions leaves so little real work done.
What should I do instead of multitasking?+
Single-task in protected blocks. Pick one task, remove the obvious switch triggers (close other tabs, put the phone in another room, turn off notifications), and stay with it for a set stretch. Batch similar small tasks together rather than scattering them, and accept that doing one thing at a time is not slower, it only feels less busy.

Sources

  1. Rubinstein JS, Meyer DE, Evans JE. Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2001;27(4):763-797.
  2. Ophir E, Nass C, Wagner AD. Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2009;106(37):15583-15587.
  3. Mark G. Attention Span: A Groundbreaking Way to Restore Balance, Happiness and Productivity. New York: Hanover Square Press; 2023.

From the shop

Related reading

Anomaly Mellow is a small UK publishing studio. This piece is opinion and argument grounded in cited research. Nothing here is medical advice. If you have a clinical concern, please speak to a qualified clinician.