On Tuesday, May 28, maintenance work will be carried out on our website. During this time the following actions cannot be performed: Purchases/orders, redeeming access tokens, new user registrations, updates to user details. If you have any questions or comments, please contact our support team at [email protected]
Skip to main content
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000008

Many people work on more than one task during a typical work hour, but despite its commonness, multitasking behavior has so far been ignored by researchers. This study is the first to explore predictors of the extent of multitasking behavior at work. Questionnaire data from 192 employees were analyzed. The findings showed that polychronicity (the preference to multitask) was the most important predictor, but impulsivity and work demands were also predictors. Surprisingly, neither cognitive interference (the proneness to engage in off-task cognitions) nor family demands predicted the extent of multitasking behavior. The implications of these findings for organizations are discussed.

References

  • Alting, T. , Markham, R. (1993). Text anxiety and distractibility. Journal of Research in Personality, 27, 134–137. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Barratt, E. S. (1994). Impulsiveness and aggression. In J. Monahan, H. Stedman (Eds.), Violence and mental disorders: Developments in risk assessment (pp. 61–80). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Bluedorn, A. C. , Kalliath, T. J. , Strube, M. J. , Martin, G. D. (1999). Polychronicity and the Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV): The development of an instrument to measure a fundamental dimension of organizational culture. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14, 205–231. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Britton, B. K. , Tesser, A. (1991). Effects of time-management practices on college grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 405–410. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bühner, M. , König, C. J. , Pick, M. , Krumm, S. (2006). Working memory dimensions as differential predictors of the speed and error aspect of multitasking performance. Human Performance, 19, 253–275. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Buss, A. H. , Plomin, R. (1975). A temperament theory of personality development. New York: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • D’Abate, C. P. (2005). Working hard or hardly working: A study of individuals engaging in personal business on the job. Human Relations, 58, 1009–1032. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Duell, W. , Frei, F. (1986). Leitfaden für qualifizierende Arbeitsgestaltung. Guideline for qualificatory job design Köln, Germany: Verlag TÜV Rheinland. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hall, E. T. (1983). The dance of life. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • König, C. J. , Bühner, M. , Mürling, G. (2005). Working memory, fluid intelligence, and attention are predictors of multitasking performance, but polychronicity and extraversion are not. Human Performance, 18, 243–266. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • König, C. J. , Waller, M. J. (2010). Time for reflection: A critical examination of polychronicity. Human Performance , 23, 173–190. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Konradt, U. , Ellwart, T. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of work-family-balance: A longitudinal study. Unpublished raw data. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Labianca, G. , Moon, H. , Watt, I. (2005). When is an hour not 60 minutes? Deadlines, temporal schemata, and individual and task group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 677–694. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Leppin, A. , Schwarzer, R. , Sarason, I. G. (1986). Kognitive Interferenz (Trait): TOQ-G [Cognitive interferences (trait): TOQ-G] . In R. Schwarzer (Ed.) Skalen zur Befindlichkeit und Persönlichkeit (Forschungsbericht 5) (pp. 165–171). Berlin: Freie Universität, Institut für Psychologie. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Mark, G. , González, V. M. , Harris, J. (2005). No task left behind? Examining the nature of fragmented work. In SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 321–330). Portland, OR: ACM Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Niesing, A. (2000). Zusammenhang des Persönlichkeitsmerkmals Impulsivität und Internetsucht [Relationship between the personality trait impulsivity and Internet addiction]. Unpublished diploma thesis. Germany: Technische Universität zu Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Podsakoff, P. M. , MacKenzie, S. B. , Lee, J. Y. , Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sarason, I. G. , Sarason, B. R. , Keefe, D. E. , Hayes, B. E. , Shearin, E. N. (1986). Cognitive interference: Situational determinants and traitlike characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 215–226. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221–232. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Waller, M. J. (2007). Preferences, behaviors, and strategies in multiple-task performance. Research in Multi-Level Issues, 6, 239–247. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Willimack, D. , Schuman, H. , Pennell, B. E. , Lepkowski, J. (1995). Effects of a prepaid non-monetary incentive on response rates and response quality in a face-to-face survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 59, 78–92. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar