1. Jenna Takushi
Skyler Farr
The Effects of Pressure and
Handedness on Multitasking

2. Research Question
 How does pressure effect a person’s ability to
multitask efficiently?
 H0: Participants who receive pressure before taking
the test will perform as equally as the control group
not being pressured.
 H1: Participants who receive pressure before taking
the test will perform better than the control group.
 H2: Participants who receive pressure before the
the test will perform worse than the control group.

3. Research Question
 How does a person’s handedness disposition
effect their ability to multitask efficiently?
 H0: Left Handers, Right Handers, and Ambidextrous
participants will have equal multitasking scores.
 H1: Ambidextrous participants will have higher
scores than Left and Right handed participants.
 H2: Right handed participants will have lower
scores than left handers and ambidextrous
participants.

4. Previous Research
 (Semenza, Delazer et al.)Processing Math is
facilitated in the left hemisphere of the brain
which is where language is processed. This was
supported by examining patients with right
hemisphere aphasia and their mathematical
abilities compared to patients with left
hemisphere lesions.
 (Benton, Hannay, and Varney)Visual perception
of line direction is located in the right hemisphere.
This was found in examining patients with
unilateral brain disease.

5. Previous Research
 (Knecht, Dräger, et al.) Likelihood of right-
hemisphere language dominance (%)=15%-
handedness (%)/10.
 Left Handed (entirely)= -100
 Right Handed (entirely)= 100
 Ambidextrous (entirely)= 0
 Left Handed People are 75% likely to have right-
hemisphere language dominance
 Right Handed People are 95% likely to have left-
hemisphere language dominance
 Ambidextrous People are 85% likely to have left-
hemisphere language dominance

6. Previous Research
 (Ferrari) Chronic procrastinators regulate
ineffectively their performance speed and
accuracy when working under pressure that can
be defined as high cognitive load, objective self-
awareness, and imposed time limitations.
 (Poposki, Oswald, and Chen) Neuroticism, a non-
cognitive factor, and multitasking performance
have a negative correlation.

7. Subjects
 Sample Size: n=36
 Gender: 18 Males and 18 Females
 Age: 18-32, average age: 23.17
 Pressure Group: 8 Males, 12 Females; Average
Age: 23.20
 Control Group: 10 Males, 6 Females; Average
Age: 23.13

8. Methods
 The control group was given directions on how the
game is supposed to be played and how to submit
their results and survey.
 The pressure group received the same directions,
however they were informed with this caption before
the link to the game: “Most people, so far have
received an average score of 2000. Good luck!”
 Surveys were taken soon after to obtain:
 Demographic information (age and gender, etc.)
 Handedness (left, right, ambidextrous)
 Practice trials

9. Methods
 The actual scores were taken from participants’
screen captures.
 Screen captures of results were observed and the
number of how many programs and windows
opened were analyzed.

10. Game Configuration
KaRmA. Multi Tasking Test JTP (KaRmA)
[Software]. Available from
http://karma.celardore.net/multi/

11. Example of Scores

12. Survey
 Writing hand(s)
 Brushing teeth hand(s)
 Number of tasks participant can do with both
hands equally
 Hand dominance

13. Results
 The pressure condition participants had an
average total score 643.25.
 The control condition participants had an average
total score 500.31.
 A non-repeated measures analysis of variance F-
test was conducted to determine mean
differences in total score.
 Overall the pressure group performed significantly
better than the control group, F (1,31)= 6.45, p <
.05 r2 = .473. Power=.689
 The null hypothesis and H2 were rejected. H1 was
retained.

14. Results
 The Left Handed participants had an average total
score of 745.
 The Right Handed participants had an average total
score of 511.72.
 The Ambidextrous participants had an average total
score of 1250.
 A non-repeated measures analysis of variance F-test
was conducted to determine mean differences in total
score.
 Overall the ambidextrous participants performed
better than the non-ambidextrous participants, F
(2,31)= 13.73, p < .001*** r2 = .473. Power=.996
 The null hypothesis was rejected. H2 was rejected.

15. Results
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Control Pressure
Average Total Score
Average Total Multitask Score as a Function of Pressure
Pressure Groups

16. Results
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Left Right Ambidextrous
Total Score
Handedness
Multitask Total Score as a Function of Handedness and
Pressure
Pressure
Control
Pressure
Groups

17. Results

18. Results

19. Discussion: Interpretation of Results
 Results found indicate that pressure forces individuals
to perform better when multitasking. Mainly in right
handers, no effect on others.
 Ambidextrous people multitask better than right
handers, possibly left handers.
 Media multitaskers do not do better or worse than
non-media multitaskers.
 “Practice doesn’t always make perfect”.
 Correlation of games practiced and total score

20. Discussion: Limitations
 The limitations we found within our study:
 Small sample size (left handers and ambidextrous)
 Insufficient reading of the instructions given
 Distractions
 In person/Online
 Inconsistent number of games played

21. Discussion: Practical Implications
 Ambidexterity would be a more sought out ability
among certain professions that have high
demand for multitasking.
 Knowledge that multitasking performance
improves under pressure can be applied to many
fields, such as the military and any other
profession that might require multitasking.
 Multitasking does not seem to improve much with
practice, but it does seem to improve while
developing co-dominant handedness.
Ambidexterity training could be done to improve
multitasking.

22. Discussion: Future Directions
 Run a study that scans the brain in order to verify that
each task in the multitask game pertains to the
hemisphere they are thought to belong to.
 Develop and use a similar test that is more
reliable/proportional in scoring its different
dimensions.
 Measure the effect of a different pressure or perhaps
a non-cognitive factor that can possibly effect
multitasking performance.
 More research should be done on determining what
each hemisphere dominantly specializes in.
Subsequent multitask and handedness experiments
could be based off these specializations.

23. References
 BENTON, A., HANNAY, H. J., VARNEY, N. R. (1975). Visual perception of line
direction in patients with unilateral brain disease. American Academy of
Neurology, 25(10), 907. doi: 10.1212/WNL.25.10.907
 Ferrari, J. R. (2001). Procrastination as self-regulation failure of performance:
effects of cognitive load, self-awareness, and time limits on ‘working best under
pressure.’ European Journal of Personality, 15, 391-406.
 KaRmA. Multi Tasking Test JTP (KaRmA) [Software]. Available from
http://karma.celardore.net/multi/
 Knecht, S., Dräger, B., Deppe, M., Bobe, L., Lohmann, H., Flöel, A.,
Ringelstein, E.-B., Henningsen , H., (2000). Handedness and hemispheric
language dominance in healthy humans. Brain, 123(12), 2512-2518. doi:
10.1093/brain/123.12.2512
 Poposki, E. M., Oswald, F. L., Chen, H. T. (2009). Neuroticism Negatively Affects
Multitasking Performance through State Anxiety. NAVY PERSONNEL
RESEARCH STUDIES AND TECHNOLOGY, 29. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-
bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA494159
 Semenza C., Delazer M., Bertella L., Grana A., Mori I., Conti F. M., Pignatti R.,
Bartha L., Domahs F., Benke T., Mauro A. (2006). Is math lateralised on the
same side as language? Right hemisphere aphasia and mathematical abilities.
Neuroscience letters, 406(3), 285-288. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2006.07.063