CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 160Personal Information Management and User BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and Testing

Distractor Filtering in Media Multitaskers

Cain, Matthew S, Mitroff, Stephen R·2011·Perception
DOI 10.1068/p7017
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A growing amount of modern media is consumed simultaneously, a phenomenon known as ‘media multitasking’. Individuals who regularly engage in this activity, heavy media multitaskers (HMMs), are more affected by irrelevant information that can intrude into a primary task than are light media multitaskers (LMMs—Ophir et al, 2009 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA106 15583). However, the locus of this deficit is unknown, as previous research is consistent with both memory and attentional explanations. Here, we isolated attentional processes by employing a singleton distractor task with low working-memory demands. In this task, LMMs used top – down information to improve their performance, yet HMMs did not. This difference in performance in an established attentional capture task argues for the presence of attentional differences in HMMs and is consistent with the idea that HMMs maintain a wider attentional scope than LMMs, even when instructed otherwise.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1068/p7017

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Frequent media multitaskers may maintain a wider attentional scope, allowing attention to more visual information compared to infrequent multitaskers who maintain a narrower attentional scope.

    “Cain and Mitroff (2011) argue that the difference in performance on the attentional task affirm attentional differences in heavy media multitaskers; thus, frequent media multitaskers may maintain a wider attentional scope which allows attention to more visual information compared to infrequent multitaskers who maintain a narrower attentional scope.”

    From Efficient, helpful, or distracting? A literature review of media multitasking in relation to academic performance (2018) · cites this paper as Cain & Mitroff, 2011

  • One study found heavy media multitaskers were less able to selectively attend to a target than light media multitaskers, r = −.36.

    “One study found that HMMs appear to be less able to selectively attend to a specific target compared with LMMs, r = À.36 (Cain & Mitroff, 2011).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Cain & Mitroff, 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cain, M. S., & Mitroff, S. R.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Cain, Matthew S
ORCID
Venue
Perception
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2011-01-01
Volume
40
Issue
10
Pages
1183-1192
ISSN
  • 0301-0066 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4233
DOI
10.1068/p7017
OpenAlex
W2014369806
Cited by
160
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Perception (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
media multitasking, distractor filtering, attentional capture, top-down control, attentional scope, working memory, attention deficits
MeSH terms
Aptitude, Attention, Color Perception, Communications Media, Discrimination, Psychological, Female, Field Dependence-Independence, Habits, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Practice, Psychological, Reaction Time

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review