Cited by 205Personal Information Management and User BehaviorImpact of Technology on AdolescentsChild Development and Digital Technology

Media multitasking in adolescence

Open access
Cain, Matthew S., Leonard, Julia A., Gabrieli, John D. E., Finn, Amy S.·2016·Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Abstract

Media use has been on the rise in adolescents overall, and in particular, the amount of media multitasking-multiple media consumed simultaneously, such as having a text message conversation while watching TV-has been increasing. In adults, heavy media multitasking has been linked with poorer performance on a number of laboratory measures of cognition, but no relationship has yet been established between media-multitasking behavior and real-world outcomes. Examining individual differences across a group of adolescents, we found that more frequent media multitasking in daily life was associated with poorer performance on statewide standardized achievement tests of math and English in the classroom, poorer performance on behavioral measures of executive function (working memory capacity) in the laboratory, and traits of greater impulsivity and lesser growth mindset. Greater media multitasking had a relatively circumscribed set of associations, and was not related to behavioral measures of cognitive processing speed, implicit learning, or manual dexterity, or to traits of grit and conscientiousness. Thus, individual differences in adolescent media multitasking were related to specific differences in executive function and in performance on real-world academic achievement measures: More media multitasking was associated with poorer executive function ability, worse academic achievement, and a reduced growth mindset.

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/s13423-016-1036-3

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Research shows diminished performance on selective attention tasks among individuals with high levels of social media use.

    “Research shows diminished performance on selective attention tasks among individuals with high levels of social media use (Cain, Leonard, Gabrieli, & Finn, 2016; Chen, Li, Guo, & Wang, 2023), though these studies operationalized use merely as time spent online.”

    From Problematic social media use and cognitive performance in young adults: Associations with selective attention and inhibitory control (2026) · cites this paper as Cain, Leonard, Gabrieli, & Finn, 2016

    The Executive functions section reports poorer performance on working-memory tasks among adolescents who reported more media multitasking. It does not report a selective-attention task result for high social-media users. The Media-multitasking index section also shows that use was measured by simultaneous consumption of multiple media, not merely time spent online. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • PSMU is associated with difficulties in filtering task-relevant information in the presence of competing stimuli.

    “which aligns with prior work suggesting that PSMU is associated with difficulties in filtering task-relevant information in the presence of competing stimuli (Cain et al., 2016; Farchakh et al., 2022; Wegmann et al., 2020).”

    From Problematic social media use and cognitive performance in young adults: Associations with selective attention and inhibitory control (2026) · cites this paper as Cain et al., 2016

    The Abstract (page unavailable) reports prior findings linking media multitasking in adults to poorer filtering of distracting information. But the paper studies media multitasking, not problematic social media use (PSMU), and its own Executive functions results (page unavailable) found no significant association between media multitasking and filtering performance in adolescents. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • More media multitasking was linked to significantly worse standardized test scores in math and English.

    “and a U.S. study similarly found greater media multitasking was linked to statistically significant poorer performance on standardized test scores measuring academic performance in math and English (Cain, Leonard, Gabrieli, & Finn, 2016).”
  • Increased media multitasking is associated with poorer working memory performance and lower academic outcomes.

    “Cain et al. (2016) reported an association between increased media multitasking and poorer working memory performance and lower academic outcomes.”
  • Frequent media multitasking was associated with poorer performance on behavioral measures of working memory capacity.

    “For example, Cain, Leonard, Gabrieli, and Finn (2016) found that frequent media multitasking was associated with poorer performance on behavioral measures of working memory capacity.”

    From Efficient, helpful, or distracting? A literature review of media multitasking in relation to academic performance (2018) · cites this paper as Cain, Leonard, Gabrieli, and Finn (2016)

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. [12]12. De Riddere, G. (2013). Media multitasking and advertising: Friends or foes? The impact of media multitasking and (in)congruency on memory and attitude toward the ad (Masters thesis). University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium. Retrieved from http://lib.ugent.be/fulltxt/ RUG01/002/064/025/RUG01-002064025_2013_0001_AC.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cain, M. S., Leonard, J. A., Gabrieli, J. D. E., & Finn, A. S.
Affiliations
  • Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Cain, Matthew S.
Venue
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Published
2016-05-17
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
1932-1941
ISSN
  • 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-5320
OpenAlex
W2402992121
Cited by
205
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 2
FWCI
32.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Springer US
Funders
  • the National Institutes of Health
  • the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
Keywords
media multitasking, adolescents, executive function, working memory capacity, academic performance, standardized achievement tests, impulsivity, growth mindset, individual differences, cognitive performance
MeSH terms
Achievement, Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Child, Communications Media, Female, Humans, Individuality, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Adolescent Development, Executive Function

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