Cited by 231Personal Information Management and User BehaviorCognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Working memory, fluid intelligence, and impulsiveness in heavy media multitaskers

Open access
Minear, Meredith, Brasher, Faith, McCurdy, Mark, Lewis, Jack, Younggren, Andrea·2013·Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Abstract

Ophir, Nass, and Wagner (Proceedings of the National Association of Sciences 106:15583-15587, 2009) reported that individuals who routinely engage in multiple forms of media use are actually worse at multitasking, possibly due to difficulties in ignoring irrelevant stimuli, from both external sources and internal representations in memory. Using the media multitasking index (MMI) developed by Ophir et al., we identified heavy media multitaskers (HMMs) and light media multitaskers (LMMs) and tested them on measures of attention, working memory, task switching, and fluid intelligence, as well as self-reported impulsivity and self-control. We found that people who reported engaging in heavy amounts of media multitasking reported being more impulsive and performed more poorly on measures of fluid intelligence than did those who did not frequently engage in media multitasking. However, we could find no evidence to support the contention that HMMs are worse in a multitasking situation such as task switching or that they show any deficits in dealing with irrelevant or distracting information, as compared with LMMs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/s13423-013-0456-6

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Two studies found no significant correlation or difference between heavy and light media multitaskers on task switching.

    “Two studies found no significant correlation and/or difference between HMMs and LMMs (Baumgartner et al., 2014;Minear, Brasher, McCurdy, Lewis, & Younggren, 2013);”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Minear et al., 2013

  • Two studies found no significant correlation or difference between heavy and light media multitaskers in filtering irrelevant information.

    “Two studies, however, indicated that the correlation with and/or the difference between HMMs and LMMs was insignificant (Baumgartner et al., 2014;Minear et al., 2013).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Minear et al., 2013

  • Three studies found no significant correlations or differences between heavy and light media multitaskers in working memory capacity.

    “whereas three other studies indicated that the correlations and/or differences between HMMs and LMMs were not significant (Baumgartner et al., 2014;Minear et al., 2013;Ophir et al., 2009).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Minear et al., 2013

  • The majority of studies found no evidence for a relationship between media multitasking and task switching or working memory capacity.

    “For example, the majority of the studies found no evidence for a relationship between media multitasking and task switching or working memory capacity (e.g., Baumgartner et al., 2014;Minear et al., 2013).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Minear et al., 2013

  • Researchers have used several different cut-off scores to differentiate heavy from light media multitaskers.

    “researchers have used several different cut-off scores to differentiate heavy media multitaskers from light media multitaskers (Minear et al., 2013).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Minear et al., 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Fan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Sommer, T., Raz, A., & Posner, M. I. (2002). Testing the efficacy and independence of attentional net- works. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 340-347.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Minear, M., Brasher, F., McCurdy, M., Lewis, J., & Younggren, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Wyoming (US)
  • College of Idaho (US)
Corresponding author
Minear, Meredith
Venue
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Published
2013-05-31
Volume
20
Issue
6
Pages
1274-1281
ISSN
  • 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-5320
OpenAlex
W2087948978
Cited by
231
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2
FWCI
24.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
media multitasking, working memory, fluid intelligence, impulsivity, self-control, task switching, attention, distraction, cognitive performance
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Communications Media, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Intelligence, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Music, Reaction Time, Video Games, Young Adult

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