I Stopped Multi-Tasking and This Is What Happened
Personal Perspective: Popular productivity hacks can inhibit productivity.
Updated March 14, 2026 | Reviewed by Monica Vilhauer Ph.D.
Does this describe you? You're responding to emails while on a Zoom call, at the same time you’re checking text messages, and somehow you’re also trying to finish a report due in two hours. For years, I bragged about my ability to juggle multiple tasks simultaneously, like it was some sort of badge of honor. I was Dr. Productivity , the person who could read journal articles while sweating on the StairMaster at the gym, while also ordering my Door Dash dinner, in-between planning tomorrow's meeting agenda with co-workers. I’m not alone, as many believe that this cephalopod approach is effective, except it doesn't work! Research consistently shows that what we call "multi-tasking" is actually rapid task-switching that degrades performance on all tasks involved (Rubinstein et al., 2001). Yet somehow, I still kept believing I was the exception to the rule.
When "getting more done" becomes "getting more done better."
I was a self-proclaimed efficiency expert. For 25 years, I've been collecting productivity hacks like teenagers collect Pokémon cards and Lububu dolls. So, when my consulting business took off, I doubled down on my multi-tasking prowess. But what started as a necessity turned into a bad habit. You see, I'd checked all the productivity boxes using time- management apps, the Pomodoro method (Cirillo, 2018), and even resorted to using three computer monitors to track different client activities simultaneously. But I'd completely missed the point about how counterproductive multi-tasking actually was (especially when it comes to accuracy).
Cognitive psychology research reveals that multitasking is inferior for complex tasks because the brain cannot accurately process multiple demanding activities simultaneously. The only type of information that we can process effortlessly is well rehearsed procedural knowledge, like how to brush your teeth or drive a car (Hoffman, 2017). Most of us don’t need to read the instructions on the toothpaste tube to have clean teeth, and unless you are 16 and learning how to park, everything about driving is automated. The dilemma is that automation doesn’t apply to things like writing, calculations, or goal setting and planning activities, which require deliberate, time-consuming cognitive resources (Kahneman, 2011).
What really happens when we think we are multi-tasking is the rapid switching of attention between tasks. When switching between tasks there is a measurable “ switch cost ,” that results in slower responses that are more error-prone immediately after changing tasks, because the brain must reconfigure rules, goals, and responses for the new task (Rubinstein et al., 2001). As a result, performance typically declines when tasks are attempted simultaneously rather than sequentially. In addition, when multiple tasks are being contemplated, the brain uses a pecking order that can create a bottleneck, which suggests that task execution can only occur one at a time. When two tasks compete for head space, the second must wait until the first is completed, creating delays known as the “ psychological refractory period” (Pashler, 1994). The evidence summarily reveals that the perceived efficiency of multitasking is largely an illusion and the apparent benefits outweigh any potential gains because of the greater probability of making mistakes.
So, what do I do now? Follow the focal factor!
I learned (and it took a while) that my "focus mode" is the real productivity key. When I have multiple priorities, I put away my phone, close all windows on my computer except one, and say to myself, "Just do this one thing for the next 30 minutes and you will reach a goal." This approach works and actually calms me, because I appreciate how much I can accomplish within a defined time period. My work quality improves and I don’t feel rushed. It is a good feeling that most people want! For the first time, I'm scheduling single-task blocks instead of trying to maximize concurrent activities. The focused deep work sessions get more done than I ever imagined and allows for more productivity breaks between tasks.
This approach may not work for everyone, because some of our beliefs are resilient to change despite the evidence (Hoffman et al., 2025). Also, keep in mind there is something called the “ attention management framework ,” that suggests that our attentional strategies evolve through our experiences (Newport, 2016). So, what worked yesterday may not work tomorrow, but deliberate critical thinking may prompt maturation of your style that changes how you approach work and productivity.
My takeaway from this self-reflective productivity rollercoaster? For 15 years, I was oblivious and then resistant to the scientific evidence that consistently finds that our cognitive architecture has limitations, which impact optimized thinking and performance. The reality? Quit fooling yourself! You cannot overcome how your neurological system functions. Regardless of what the “experts” tell you, your thinking, motivation , and decision-making are more reflective of your physiological capabilities than anything else (Hoffman, 2025). While research indicates that personal history and work culture influence work habits and you adjust based on circumstances (Cross et al., 2016), you can’t pedal 100 mph on a tricycle! Acknowledging practical limitations and using personalized control strategies is a better alternative than believing you are superhuman and can defy science.
No more multi-tasking for me, not because I gave up on productivity, but because I gave myself permission to work differently. Maybe you, like me, will discover that monotasking has efficiency benefits that you never imagined. Regardless, acknowledging my past mistakes was not a failure, but instead a plot twist in my ongoing productivity story. Bring on the next chapter!
Cirillo, F. (2018). The Pomodoro technique: The acclaimed time-management system that has transformed how we work . Crown Currency.
Cross, R., Rebele, R., & Grant, A. (2016). Too much teamwork exhausts employees and saps productivity. Here’s how to avoid it. Harvard Business Review , 7 . https://www.robcross.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/HBR-Collaborative-Overload.pdf
Hoffman, B. (2017). Hack Your Motivation: Over 50 Science-Based Strategies to Improve Performance . Attribution Press.
Hoffman, B., Subramaniam, A., & Hartley, K. (2025). It’s time to reconsider: The neuropsychology of belief change. Trends in Neuroscience and Education , 40 , 100261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2025.100261.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow . Macmillan.
Newport, C. (2016). Deep work: Rules for focused success in a distracted world . Hachette UK.
Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin , 116 (2), 220.
Rubinstein, J. S., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27 (4), 763–797. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.4.763
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Bobby Hoffman , Ph.D. , is an associate professor at the University of Central Florida.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.