CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 233Personal Information Management and User BehaviorCognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Media multitasking and memory: Differences in working memory and long-term memory

Open access
Uncapher, Melina R., K. Thieu, Monica, Wagner, Anthony D.·2016·Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
DOI 10.3758/s13423-015-0907-3PMC PMC4733435
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Increasing access to media in the 21st century has led to a rapid rise in the prevalence of media multitasking (simultaneous use of multiple media streams). Such behavior is associated with various cognitive differences, such as difficulty filtering distracting information and increased trait impulsivity. Given the rise in media multitasking by children, adolescents, and adults, a full understanding of the cognitive profile of media multitaskers is imperative. Here we investigated the relationship between chronic media multitasking and working memory (WM) and long-term memory (LTM) performance. Four key findings are reported (1) heavy media multitaskers (HMMs) exhibited lower WM performance, regardless of whether external distraction was present or absent; (2) lower performance on multiple WM tasks predicted lower LTM performance; (3) media multitasking-related differences in memory reflected differences in discriminability rather than decision bias; and (4) attentional impulsivity correlated with media multitasking behavior and reduced WM performance. These findings suggest that chronic media multitasking is associated with a wider attentional scope/higher attentional impulsivity, which may allow goal-irrelevant information to compete with goal-relevant information. As a consequence, heavy media multitaskers are able to hold fewer or less precise goal-relevant representations in WM. HMMs' wider attentional scope, combined with their diminished WM performance, propagates forward to yield lower LTM performance. As such, chronic media multitasking is associated with a reduced ability to draw on the past--be it very recent or more remote--to inform present behavior.

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/s13423-015-0907-3

Cites

17 of 17 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?

  • The negative effect of frequent media multitasking on attention focusing was confirmed by multiple studies, whereas the results about attention shifting were inconsistent.

    “the negative effect of frequent media multitasking on attention focusing was confirmed by multiple studies, whereas the results about attention shifting were inconsistent.”

    From Media multitasking, depression, and anxiety of college students: Serial mediating effects of attention control and negative information attentional bias (2022) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Abstract reports that heavy media multitaskers performed poorly on distractor-filtering tasks in multiple studies, while findings on task switching varied. But the Abstract also says the direction of causality is unknown, so it does not establish that frequent media multitasking has a negative effect on attention focusing. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Media multitasking harmed attention focusing.

    “A more consistent finding from previous studies revealed that media multitasking harmed attention focusing.”

    From Media multitasking, depression, and anxiety of college students: Serial mediating effects of attention control and negative information attentional bias (2022) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that heavy media multitaskers had difficulty filtering distractions and ignoring attention-capturing information. It also links greater media multitasking to attentional impulsivity, which includes difficulty focusing on a task. But the Discussion explicitly says the direction of cause and effect remains unknown, so the source does not establish that media multitasking harmed attention focusing. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Heavy media multitaskers tend to use breadth-biased attention allocation, are more likely to be inattentive, and get distracted by internal or external irrelevant stimuli.

    “For example, heavy media multitaskers tend to use breadth-biased attention allocation, are more likely to be inattentive, and get distracted by internal or external irrelevant stimuli (39).”

    From Media multitasking, depression, and anxiety of college students: Serial mediating effects of attention control and negative information attentional bias (2022) · cites this paper as [39]

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

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Uncapher, M. R., K. Thieu, M., & Wagner, A. D.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Uncapher, Melina R.
ORCID
Venue
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-07-30
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
483-490
ISSN
  • 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-5320
DOI
10.3758/s13423-015-0907-3
PMC
PMC4733435
OpenAlex
W965151129
Cited by
232
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5
FWCI
17.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R21MH099812)
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, long-term memory, attentional impulsivity, attentional scope, external distraction, discriminability, decision bias
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Child, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Male, Mass Media, Memory, Short-Term, Young Adult, Executive Function, Memory, Long-Term, Social Media

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