Everyday functioning-related cognitive correlates of media multitasking:a mini meta-analysis

A recent meta-analysis has shown that media multitasking behavior, or consuming multiple streams of media simultaneously, might not be associated with less efficient cognitive processing, as measured with objective tests. Nevertheless, a growing number of studies have reported that media multitasking is correlated with cognitive functioning in everyday situations, as measured in self-reports. Here, in a series of mini meta-analyses, we show that the self-reported correlates of media multitasking can be categorized in at least four major themes. Heavy media multitasking was associated with increasing problems with attention regulation (e.g., increased mind-wandering and distractibility), behavior regulation (e.g., emotion regulation and self-monitor), inhibition/impulsiveness (e.g., higher level of impulsiveness and lower level of inhibition), and memory. However, the pooled effect sizes were small (z =.16 to z = .22), indicating that a large proportion of variance of media multitasking behavior is still unaccounted for. Additionally, we witnessed a high level of heterogeneity in the attention regulation theme, which might indicate the presence of the risk of study bias

Low-frequency noise:Experiences from individuals reporting LFN complaints

Until now, Low-frequency noise (LFN) is hardly recognized as an environmental stressor, and its consequences on daily functioning have been rarely investigated. LFN is predominantly produced by human-made sources, and due to the increasing industrialization, these sources and accordingly the number of LFN complaints is steadily rising. Although the majority of the general population does not consciously perceive LFN, an estimated 2% of the Dutch adult population experiences severe annoyance from its exposure. Individuals sensitive to perceiving LFN in their everyday life report various physical complaints and particularly psychological complaints, such as sleeping difficulties, fatigue and stress, and cognitive difficulties such as difficulties in concentration or so-called executive functions. Yet, it is unclear why some people are more sensitive to and suffer more from LFN than others, and a comprehensive (neuro)psychological investigation in this population is still lacking. During an exploratory study, the demographic and personal characteristics of LFN-sensitive individuals, the perceptions of LFN-sensitive individuals and the reported physical, psychological, and social health-related symptoms and restrictions in daily living were investigated