Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34047893›Full record

ArticleCognitive processing2021

Decision-making, cognitive functions, impulsivity, and media multitasking expectancies in high versus low media multitaskers.

Silke M Müller, Johannes Schiebener, Matthias Brand, Magnus Liebherr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive processing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Silke M MüllerDepartment of General Psychology: Cognition and Center for Behavioral Addiction Research (CeBAR), University of Duisburg-Essen, Forsthausweg 2, 47057, Duisburg, Germany.
Johannes SchiebenerDepartment of General Psychology: Cognition and Center for Behavioral Addiction Research (CeBAR), University of Duisburg-Essen, Forsthausweg 2, 47057, Duisburg, Germany.
Matthias BrandDepartment of General Psychology: Cognition and Center for Behavioral Addiction Research (CeBAR), University of Duisburg-Essen, Forsthausweg 2, 47057, Duisburg, Germany.
Magnus LiebherrDepartment of General Psychology: Cognition and Center for Behavioral Addiction Research (CeBAR), University of Duisburg-Essen, Forsthausweg 2, 47057, Duisburg, Germany. magnus.liebherr@uni-due.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In several studies, individuals who reported to frequently multitask with different media displayed reduced cognitive performance, for example in fluid intelligence and executive functioning. These cognitive functions are relevant for making advantageous decisions under both objective risk (requiring reflection and strategical planning) and ambiguous risk (requiring learning from feedback). Thus, compared to low media multitaskers (LMMs), high media multitaskers (HMMs) may perform worse in both types of decision situations. The current study investigated HMMs and LMMs in a laboratory setting with the Game of Dice Task (GDT; objective risk), the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT; ambiguous risk), various tests quantifying cognitive functions (logical reasoning, working memory, information processing, general executive functions), and self-report measures of impulsivity, media multitasking expectancies, and problematic Internet use. From 182 participants, 25 HMMs and 19 LMMs were identified using the Media Multitasking Index. Results show that HMMs compared to LMMs performed weaker on the IGT but not on the GDT. Furthermore, HMMs had slightly decreased performance in tests of logical reasoning and working memory capacity. HMMs tended to increased information processing speed but this difference was not significant. Furthermore, HMMs have more positive expectancies regarding media multitasking and reported higher tendencies toward problematic Internet use. HMMs and LMMs did not differ significantly with respect to impulsivity and executive functions. The results give a first hint that HMMs may have difficulties in decision-making under ambiguous but not under objective risk. HMMs may be more prone to errors in tasks that require feedback processing. However, HMMs appear not to be impaired in aspects of long-term strategic decision-making.

Indexed as

CognitionImpulsive BehaviorDecision MakingExecutive FunctionHumansIntelligenceMemory, Short-TermNeuropsychological TestsRisk-TakingDecision-makingExpectanciesGame of Dice TaskImpulsivityInternet addictionIowa Gambling TaskMedia multitasking

Identifiers

PMID34047893
PMCPMC8547206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.