In fast-paced environments, multitasking is often treated as a badge of honor. Those who appear to juggle several responsibilities at once are praised for their efficiency, while those who struggle with switching between tasks may be seen as disorganized, slow, or unfocused. It’s not uncommon for individuals who claim to excel at multitasking to be critical of those who don’t—but this confidence may not be rooted in reality.
Research suggests that the people who are most vocal about their multitasking abilities are not always the most effective at it. In fact, they may be some of the least aware of their own limitations.
The Illusion of Competence
Multitasking, by definition, involves handling more than one cognitive task at a time. However, countless studies in cognitive psychology have shown that the brain doesn’t truly perform multiple complex tasks simultaneously. Instead, it rapidly switches attention from one task to another, which leads to decreased performance, more mistakes, and slower completion times.
People who believe they are strong multitaskers often fall into what researchers call a metacognitive blind spot—an inability to accurately assess their own mental processes. This creates an illusion of competence. They think they’re managing multiple streams of information efficiently, but in reality, they may be doing each task less effectively than if they had focused on one at a time.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect in Action
This phenomenon aligns closely with the Dunning-Kruger Effect, a well-documented cognitive bias where individuals with lower ability in a particular area tend to overestimate their skill. When applied to multitasking, this means that some people who are quick to criticize others may genuinely believe they are superior multitaskers, when in fact, their performance is average—or worse.
Their confidence is not matched by competence, yet they assume that others’ struggles reflect poor time management or a lack of intelligence, rather than the cognitive reality that multitasking is inherently taxing for most people.
Why the Judgment Hurts More Than It Helps
When someone is hard on others for not being able to multitask, they often dismiss real limitations. Everyone’s cognitive bandwidth is different. Factors such as attention span, working memory, and processing speed all influence how well a person can manage multiple inputs. Stress, fatigue, and even past trauma can reduce a person’s ability to shift between tasks efficiently.
Criticizing others for these struggles not only shows a lack of empathy—it also fails to acknowledge the scientific consensus: that human brains are wired for focused attention, not constant task-switching.
Multitasking and Workplace Culture
In many work environments, the pressure to multitask is woven into daily expectations. But promoting multitasking as a core skill can backfire. It encourages surface-level engagement, burns out employees, and leads to more frequent errors. Ironically, those who claim to multitask well may be spreading inefficiency by overextending themselves and setting unrealistic expectations for others.
A culture that values deep work and supports task prioritization is far more productive in the long run. Recognizing that multitasking is not a measure of worth, but rather a challenge to be managed thoughtfully, can improve both individual and team performance.
Conclusion
Those who are hardest on others for not being able to multitask may not be as skilled at it as they believe. The overconfidence in their own abilities and lack of understanding about the limits of human cognition can lead to unfair criticism and unrealistic standards. Instead of glorifying multitasking, we would be better served by encouraging focus, patience, and the ability to do one thing well at a time.
True productivity is not about doing more at once—it’s about doing what matters, with intention and clarity.
