There are a plethora of articles
that support or condemn multitasking.
Some say it takes 23% longer to finish one item when you multitask. Others say the brain is evolving and
could potentially compartmentalize tasks simultaneously, like a computer. While both comments may have merit,
there is an aspect of multitasking that is almost never discussed. That is the
conversational multitasker.
The conversational multitasker is
one who listens to another person as they reference their experience and
knowledge to understand or validate what the speaker is saying. This is multitasking because the
listener is actually listening to two conversations simultaneously. They are listening to what the speaker is saying and they are listening to their interpretation, which is a conversation about what the speaker is saying.
While many may acknowledge this
process, it is difficult to distinguish the amount of conversations happening
in the mind of the listener. For
example, if the speaker talks about the color blue, the listener may have
flashbacks of the midnight blue car their dad drove when they were young. The memory could evoke great feelings
of their dad driving and the fascinating views the listener saw while in the
car.
Furthermore, when the listener is
listening to their experience in their mind about their dad’s blue car, they
are living in the past. As they
relive the past, they are not present to the present – the speaker. This form of multitasking causes the
listener to miss part of what the speaker is saying. As a result, the outcome can often be miscommunication. In the worst case, it can turn into an
argument.
At the same time, the listener may
not be very interested in what the speaker has to say. He or she may only be interested in
what they agree or disagree with.
Therefore, they may not be listening to the words of the speaker. They are simply listening to a
representation of what the speaker is saying. In other words, if the speaker says things that match the
listeners past experience or education, it is likely the listener will agree
with the speaker. The opposite
holds true for disagreement.
In the event the listener has no
point of reference for what is being said to him, he may not know if he can
agree or disagree. He may elect to
ignore it. Or he may go into a
state of confusion. One way to
defend being in a state of confusion is to disagree with the speaker and insist
the speaker is incompetent on the subject. To do this, the listener must run a list of conversations in
his or her mind to determine how to respond to the confusion, all the while not
fully listening to what is being communicated by speaker.
As you can see, the conversational
multitasker can be a messy job. He
can ruin great relationships simply because he tries to understand everything
through that which he already understands. This is problematic because no one knows everything. If he encounters something that is
outside of his experience or knowledge, he may try to make it fit what he
already knows. Or she may
invalidate it.
Some of you may be thinking to
yourself: “that’s just your point of view”. The moment you have that conversation with yourself, you
have engaged in conversational multitasking. Any comment you make is predicated on what you already know,the past.
Perhaps children have an
advantage. They do not have an
extensive past. In some cases,
they have no past to reference. Instead,
children take every experience as an opportunity to learn something new. They don’t compare new information to
the past. They simply understand
what is occurring in front of them for what it is.
As for adults, the power comes when
you can distinguish your conversational multitasking. The moment you do you will have the power of choice. You can continue to choose to listen to
your past. Or you can hear what is
being communicated to you with nothing added.
What do you
think? I would love to hear your feedback. And I’m open to ideas. Or if you
want to write me about a specific topic, let me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment