Clark Rashid 1

Introduction

It is no secret that there is an imbalance between males and

females in the work force. For instance, only 13 percent of the national

police force consists of women, who also share only 0.5 percent of

careers in First-Line Supervision of Fire Fighting and Prevention.

Additionally, only 1.2 percent of careers in Automotive Service

Technology and Mechanics, 0.3 percent of careers in Mining Machine

Operation, and 6 percent of the careers in piloting are shared by

women (Catalyst). Many people may attribute this great inequality to a

woman's inability to perform these tasks at the same efficiency as a

male. However, scientifically and anatomically, women may very well

be more capable. If this is true, the discrepancy in the workforce may

unfortunately be a result of stereotyping and the social

discouragement of women to pursue these careers.

In order to analyze this idea further, a common aspect or skill

found in each of the aforementioned jobs was determined:

multitasking. Effective multitasking allows for efficiency in the

workplace and is a crucial skill. There is a common theory that women

are better at multitasking than males. This theory is supported by the

corpus callosum, the nerve connections between the left and right

brain hemispheres, which is larger and more developed in females. The

corpus callosum shares and transfers information from one

 Clark Rashid 2

neurological hemisphere to the other. This would indicate an ability in

females to perform these jobs as well as or better than males can.

Therefore, the goal of this research was to determine whether or not

gender does really have an effect on a persons ability to multitask,

and if so, whether or not females are truly more efficient.

An experiment that tested a persons ability to multitask was

then formed in order to determine the truth behind gender differences

in multitasking. First, a task simulator consisting of six puzzles was

made in order to force each participant to use their cognitive skills, and

perform physical tasks. Next, a paragraph that simulated a patrol call

and relayed important information was written and recorded in order to

push each participant to utilize their comprehensive skills. Having each

participant complete as much of the task simulator as possible, while

simultaneously listening to the paragraph, called on each persons

ability to multitask. Finally, the points earned from the task simulator

were added to the number of important details recalled after listening

to the paragraph, and a score out of 20 was then given to each

participant in order to quantify their multitasking ability.

Following the collection of this data, the goal was to statistically

analyze and determine whether or not there were significant

differences between the female and male multitasking scores. If the

hypothesis that females are more efficient multitaskers than males was
 Clark Rashid 3

proved correct, many questions could then be raised. Why do women

hold such a small stock in jobs that require critical thinking and

multitasking? Is this inequality due to gender bias? It would prove that

current society needs to rethink its perception of females and that,

anatomically, they are well equipped to succeed in a wide range of

occupations.

Review of Literature

Multitasking is the ability to engage multiple regions of the brain

in order to accomplish several tasks simultaneously. This has become

more and more prevalent in society and everyday life as technology

and industrialization flood the world. Efficiency and productivity

become vital in the workplace, but also in the careers of first

responders. Firefighters, patrol officers, and emergency medical

paramedics all face similar difficulties when they are called to action.

Often times, as the first responders try to arrive at the location of the

incident as fast as possible, it becomes difficult to drive their vehicle

and comprehend information simultaneously. The messages consist of

a large amount of detailed information delivered rapidly.

Police officer A reflects on an incoming radio message:

'During an

emergency call one receives a lot of information in a short

timeframe [...] Meanwhile, you have to pay attention to the

 Clark Rashid 4

road, so sometimes you do not hear everything.' His colleague

comments on the imposed organizational demands: 'In case of

solo patrol you have to be much sharper [ ...] but you will

commit so many traffic violations (Jansen).

This quotation exemplifies how the ability to multitask can affect

job performance in solo patrol jobs and translates to other similar jobs.

When the brain is working feverishly to both comprehend information

cognitively, and exercise motor skills carefully, both tasks often

become less efficient (Allen). If these tasks could be accomplished on

their own, it becomes much easier to complete them accurately and

quickly. However, in jobs where this is not a possibility, the ability to

multitask suddenly becomes crucial.

Multitasking is an amazing phenomenon, and an impressive trait

that humans possess. Like any other aspect of life, there lies a

scientific explanation for multitasking. The brain consists of two

hemispheres: left and right. The left hemisphere is dominant in

language: processing what you hear and handling most of the duties

of speaking (Melina). It controls logic, exact mathematical situations,

and when you need to retrieve a fact, your left brain pulls it from

your memory (Melina). On the contrary, the right hemisphere is

mainly in charge of spatial abilities, face recognition and processing

music (Melina). Some math is done by the right, but only rough
 Clark Rashid 5

estimations. The right hemisphere also controls the comprehension of

visual imagery and makes sense of what we see

(Melina). Additionally, this hemisphere of the brain plays a role in

language, specifically in interpreting context and tone. Both of these

hemispheres work together to form what is the human brain, and work

to give humans the unique creativity and analytical skills that make

them so outstanding.

Between the right and left hemispheres of the brain, there lie

connections. These connections are otherwise known as the corpus

callosum, Latin for tough body. This is a huge band of myelinated

fibers, with a cross-sectional area of about 700 square millimeters,

which fan out in both hemispheres to join every part of the brain

(Hubel). This system of connections holds implications on an

individuals ability to multitask. When attempting to complete

different tasks simultaneously, one must utilize different regions of

their brain. As the corpus callosum is able to efficiently link motor

skills and comprehension skills, the time and accuracy of tasks can
 Clark Rashid 6

improve (Stoet).

Figure 1. Anatomical Diagram of the Corpus Callosum

As seen above in Figure 1, the corpus callosum lies in the center

of the brain and acts as roads for information to be delivered across

the hemispheres of the brain. Figure 1 provides both a side view and

an above view of the brain. It can be seen how the nerve fibers of the

corpus callosum fan out once they cross over to the adjacent

hemisphere and join each part of the brain.

The corpus callosum is the largest bundle of nerve fibers in the

nervous system. However, until about 1950, the function of the corpus

callosum was not fully known (Hubel). An experiment by Ronald Myers

of the University of Chicago was the first to show its purpose

 Clark Rashid 7

scientifically. Myers used cats to show that information that is

registered in one hemisphere of the brain is delivered to the other

hemisphere. The task was for the cat to place its nose within a circle

when presented with two screens, one with a circle and the other with

a square. One of the cats eyes were covered, so the cat could only

deliver the external visual stimulation to one hemisphere. He did this

by surgically associating each optic nerve with the corresponding

hemisphere of the brain rather than the opposite. The optic nerves are

naturally connected to the opposite hemisphere of the brain, being

that the left optic nerve is connected to the right and vice versa. By

severing this connection and forcing information registered into the

left eye to be delivered to the left hemisphere, he created a system in

which the only connection from the left eye to the right hemisphere

was the corpus callosum. When the right eye of the cats was covered,

the cats were still able to perform just as well due to the connections

of the corpus callosum. However, when tested with a cat that had the

corpus callosum severed as well, the cat failed.

The corpus callosum, while always serving the same purpose, is

not identical between females and males. A recent study at the

University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that mens brains

are set up as straight-as-an-arrow highways within the same

hemisphere (Boesveld), while women have more connectivity

between the left hemisphere, which is more analytical, and the right
 Clark Rashid 8

hemisphere which is more intuitive and can read a social situation

with far more complexity (Boesveld). Additionally, Neurologist

Robert Gorski at the University of California confirmed that the corpus

callosum [...] is 30 percent more highly developed in the female brain

than the male brain (Bowers). These studies support that, while both

males and females have the corpus callosum, the female corpus

callosum is more efficient and developed. These connections between

the diverse hemispheres of the brain allow for more efficient

multitasking. Whereas men have more streamlined connections in a

single hemisphere and may perform a single task more efficiently,

women are believed to be better multitaskers.

While women may be scientifically theorized to be better at

multitasking than men, it does not hold weight unless the

ramifications can be seen. A group of researchers from the University

of Glasgow set out to identify how these theories held up. They

conducted two experiments to analyze the phenomenon of

multitasking. In one, they used computer generated shapes to test

reaction times during multitasking. This one was centered on rapidly

switching the participants attention between two tasks. The other

experiment was designed to resemble real life scenarios of the office

space. This experiment allowed the participants 8 minutes to

complete 3 different tasks by their own schedule. Both experiments

compared the difference between males and females. Their findings

 Clark Rashid 9

were that women performed significantly better than men in certain

aspects of multitasking, but there was not a statistical difference in

other areas (Stoet).

Using previously conducted research such as the aforementioned

experiments, the current researchers found inspiration that proved

vital in the formation of a hypothesis and experimental design. The

largest similarity between these studies is that they parallel each

other in terms of purpose. Both experiments have been conducted

with the aim of proving or disproving theories and stereotypes that

claim women are superior multitaskers. Further, the experimental

designs themselves share some important qualities. Testing people on

their ability to perform multiple tasks simultaneously, and simulating

real life scenarios is an important key to finding accurate and relevant

results. Finally, these results were both statistically analyzed in order

to determine whether there is a significant difference in the

multitasking abilities between men and women.

 Clark Rashid 10

Problem Statement

Problem Statement:
 Clark Rashid 11

To determine if gender has a significant effect on the ability to

multitask.

Hypothesis:

When testing both males and females comparatively on their

ability to multitask, females will yield data that is significantly better

than that of males.

Data Measured:

This research included a total of 96 participants in grades 9 - 12.

There were 48 males and 48 females tested. The participants were

arbitrarily scored on a scale from 0-20 points for their ability to

multitask. This was done by creating a task simulator, which is

comprised of a total of 6 tasks. However, these tasks were weighted in

terms of points awarded for completing certain tasks. The tasks

completed were scored on a scale of 1-10 points. The participant, while

completing the tasks, simultaneously had to listen and comprehend

information from a reading. Once the reading was over, the

participants ceased completing tasks and were asked to recall

everything they could from the reading. If they were able to recall and

vocalize key points from the reading accurately, they were awarded

points. There were a total of 10 key points. The sum of task score and

key points were calculated and recorded as the value for that trial. The
 Clark Rashid 12

data were then analyzed using a 2-sample t-test between males and

females.

Experimental Design

Materials:

Task simulator (Appendix TI NSpire CX

A) Calculator
Written paragraph Voice recorder

Procedure:

1. Randomize a total of 96 trials consisting of 48 males and 48

females of
high school age from South Lake, Center Line, and Butcher high
schools.

2. Isolate participant in a quiet place with the task simulator and

recording
device (Figure 2).

3. Give context and explain the subject of the paragraph and

instruct participant on procedure. Explain what the goal is for the
participant; to complete as many tasks and comprehend the
paragraph.

4. Play the recording device, while the participant completes as

many tasks as possible before the recording stops.

5. Instruct the participant to recall the important information from

the
paragraph that was read to them.
 Clark Rashid 13

6. Record the number of main ideas the participant recalls from the
paragraph.

7. Repeat steps 2-6 until all 96 people have been tested.

Diagram:

Figure 2. Task Simulator Puzzle Diagram

 Clark Rashid 14

Figure 2 above shows the task simulator used to call on each

subjects cognitive ability. Each individual task is labeled and its

corresponding place on the simulator itself is color coded. Labeled in

red are the triangle puzzle pieces that were put together to form a

rectangle within the spot indicated with red, and this was worth three

points. Labeled in blue is the H puzzle, which required the participant

to rotate and flip the piece until it fit into its corresponding slot

indicated with blue, and this was worth two points. Next, the five, four,

and three - point stars, labeled in white, purple, and pink respectively,

were rotated by the participant until they fit into their corresponding

slots labeled in white, purple, and pink. These were worth one point

each, but a bonus point was given if all three were completed. Lastly,

labeled in green is the N track puzzle in which the participants slid the

knob from start to finish, and this was worth one point.

Alert. Incoming call. There is an Asian male, weighing 220

pounds, and he is about 5 foot, 10 inches tall. He is headed eastbound

on 12-mile road in a silver pick-up truck. He is suspect to armed

robbery. There is a possibility of a hostage situation. There are 5

officers already in pursuit. The first plan of action is to shoot out the

tires. Good luck officer, HQ out.

Figure 3. Recorded Paragraph

 Clark Rashid 15

Figure 3 is the paragraph that was recorded and then played for

each participant as they completed the task simulator. Because being

a first responder requires a lot of multitasking, it became an early real-

world application. Therefore, the paragraph put each participant in a

situation that simulated a patrol call detailing a crime in progress.

Important details that an officer would need were included and each

one counted for one point towards the trials total value of 10 possible

points. Each individual point is also labeled with a specific color to

show what was needed to receive a point.

 Clark Rashid 16

Figure 4. Completed Task Simulator

Figure 4 above displays the task simulator once all the tasks

were completed. The majority of participants did not complete all the

tasks as they were asked to immediately stop working on the puzzles

once the paragraph finished playing. At this point the participants were

asked to recall all the information and details they could from the

paragraph. These scores were recorded and summed to acquire a total

score for each trial.

Data and Observations

The dependent variable tested in this experiment was the ability

to multitask. The independent variable was the gender of the

participants. In order to test these variables against each other, the

participants were asked to complete the task simulator as seen in

Figure 2. Simultaneously, a previously recorded paragraph was played

for the participant as seen in Figure 3. When the paragraph ended the

participant was immediately asked to recall all the details from the

reading that they could. The number of points earned from the task

simulator and the number of points recalled from the paragraph were
 Clark Rashid 17

then recorded and added together for final score. Refer to Figures 2-4

for photos.

Table 1
Raw Data for Male Trials
Task Key Total
Trial Gender School Grade Points Points Score
1 Male Butcher 12 6 0 6
3 Male Butcher 12 5 5 10
4 Male Butcher 12 8 4 12
5 Male South Lake 11 6 2 8
6 Male South Lake 9 6 4 10
8 Male South Lake 10 4 3 7
9 Male South Lake 9 6 4 10
10 Male South Lake 12 5 3 8
12 Male Butcher 12 6 4 10
16 Male Center Line 12 10 4 14
17 Male Center Line 12 3 3 6
18 Male Butcher 9 6 4 10
19 Male Butcher 9 2 4 6
20 Male Butcher 9 4 6 10
21 Male Butcher 9 6 2 8
25 Male Center Line 12 7 4 11
27 Male Center Line 11 3 3 6
29 Male Center Line 11 4 3 7
31 Male Center Line 12 4 7 11
37 Male South Lake 12 7 3 10
39 Male South Lake 10 6 3 9
Task Key Total
Trial Gender School Grade Points Points Score
40 Male South Lake 10 6 4 10
41 Male South Lake 10 6 2 8
42 Male Butcher 11 4 6 10
43 Male Butcher 11 10 5 15
46 Male Butcher 11 6 5 11
49 Male Butcher 11 7 3 10
50 Male Butcher 10 7 2 9
51 Male Butcher 10 10 1 11
52 Male Butcher 10 6 6 12
54 Male Butcher 10 4 3 7
58 Male South Lake 9 7 1 8
60 Male South Lake 9 5 2 7
63 Male Center Line 9 6 4 10
64 Male Center Line 10 7 4 11
65 Male Center Line 10 5 2 7
 Clark Rashid 18

68 Male Center Line 10 9 3 12

70 Male Center Line 9 3 2 5
71 Male Center Line 10 5 3 8
72 Male Center Line 9 6 3 9
73 Male Center Line 9 4 4 8
76 Male Center Line 11 6 5 11
82 Male Center Line 11 7 2 9
83 Male South Lake 11 6 5 11
85 Male South Lake 12 6 5 11
86 Male South Lake 11 7 2 9
90 Male South Lake 11 5 4 9
95 Male South Lake 12 4 3 7
Average 5.792 3.458 9.250

Table 1 above lists the results of all 48 male trials, as well as the

final averages. The trial number shown in the table represents the trial

number in relation to all 96 trials, including males and females. These

trials consisted of participants from three different high schools, and

four different grade levels. There were 16 male trials allotted for each

school, and 12 trials for each grade level. Male participants account for

48 out of 96 total trials. The trial numbers within this table are not

consecutive because males and females were randomized and the

above table only includes the male trials.

Table 2
Raw Data for Female Trials
Task Key Total
Trial Gender School Grade Points Points Score
2 Female Butcher 12 6 4 10
7 Female South Lake 9 6 2 8
11 Female South Lake 12 5 2 7
13 Female Butcher 12 7 6 13
14 Female Butcher 12 5 4 9
15 Female Butcher 12 6 5 11
22 Female Butcher 9 7 3 10
23 Female Butcher 9 7 0 7
24 Female Butcher 9 5 1 6
26 Female Center Line 12 6 5 11
 Clark Rashid 19

28 Female Center Line 12 7 3 10

30 Female Center Line 11 10 3 13
32 Female Center Line 11 7 3 10
33 Female Center Line 12 6 4 10
34 Female Center Line 9 7 4 11
35 Female Butcher 9 6 4 10
36 Female South Lake 11 7 4 11
38 Female South Lake 11 6 3 9
44 Female Butcher 11 2 3 5
45 Female Butcher 11 7 5 12
47 Female Butcher 11 8 3 11
48 Female Butcher 11 6 2 8
53 Female Butcher 10 7 5 12
55 Female Butcher 10 4 4 8
56 Female Butcher 10 7 2 9
57 Female Butcher 10 7 5 12
59 Female South Lake 9 4 7 11
61 Female South Lake 9 7 4 11
62 Female South Lake 9 9 6 15
66 Female South Lake 11 3 5 8
67 Female South Lake 12 7 2 9
69 Female South Lake 11 7 6 13
74 Female South Lake 12 7 4 11
75 Female Center Line 10 4 5 9
77 Female Center Line 10 5 3 8
78 Female Center Line 9 7 4 11
79 Female Center Line 10 9 5 14
80 Female South Lake 10 6 5 11
Task Key Total
Trial Gender School Grade Points Points Score
81 Female South Lake 10 7 7 14
84 Female South Lake 10 5 4 9
87 Female South Lake 10 7 4 11
88 Female South Lake 12 7 6 13
89 Female Center Line 11 9 5 14
91 Female Center Line 12 7 4 11
92 Female Center Line 10 6 4 10
93 Female Center Line 9 5 6 11
94 Female Center Line 11 7 6 13
96 Female Center Line 9 7 3 10
Average 6.375 4.042 10.417

Table 2 above displays the results of all 48 female trials, as well

as the averages overall. The trial number shown in the table represents
 Clark Rashid 20

the trial number in relation to all 96 trials, including males and

females. These trials consisted of participants from three different high

schools, and four different grade levels. There were 16 female trials

conducted from participants from each school, and 12 trials for each

grade level. Female participants accounted for 48 out of 96 total trials.

Similar to Table 1, the trial numbers are not in order as the above table

only contains female trials.

Table 3
Significant Observations
Trial Observation

1 Unable to recall any details or partial details.

16 Finished task simulator before conclusion of paragraph.

22 Believed to have heard blue eyes in the paragraph.

33 Jammed 4-Pointed Star piece.

43 Finished task simulator before conclusion of paragraph.

62 Students began making significant noise in background during

trial.
 Clark Rashid 21

76 Partially placed 6-Pointed Star without completing puzzle.

77 Jammed 4-Pointed Star piece.

90 Jammed Triangle Puzzle pieces, did not complete puzzle.

Table 3 above lists the significant observations made while

conducting trials. All those trials not listed were performed routinely

without error or unique circumstances.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Within this experiment, subjects were put in a situation in which

they completed tasks that pushed their cognitive abilities using the

task simulator seen in Figure 2. At the same time, the subjects were

played a recording of the paragraph seen in Figure 3. Afterwards, the

points earned using the task simulator and the number of key ideas

that the subject remembered from the paragraph were recorded. These
 Clark Rashid 22

numbers were added together and that became the value of each trial.

To ensure that this data was valid, precautions were taken. Many pre-

trials were run in order to get an accurate idea of how long it would

take each subject to complete the task simulator. It needed to be a

challenge, yet theoretically possible to get a perfect score. These pre-

trials also ensured that the experimental design, or the way trials were

run, yielded accurate results. Throughout pre-trials, reasonable data

was recorded and each trial went smoothly, indicating the final

experiment was ready. Also, a total of 96 trials were run, with 48 males

and 48 females. This met the Central Limit Theorem which states that

if the number of trials collected is greater than or equal to 30, the data

can be considered normal. Lastly, each trial was randomized using the

TI-NSpire, which eliminated bias. Each participant was randomly

chosen from Center Line, South Lake, and Butcher high schools in

order to get a wide range of people. A participants intelligence or the

intensity of their school may have had an effect on their ability to

perform in a challenging situation such as this research. These

aforementioned precautions ensured a valid experiment.

Once data was collected, it needed to be analyzed within a

statistical test. The test best suited for this experiment was a Two-

Sample t-Test. The purpose of the experiment was to determine

whether or not gender had a significant effect on multitasking ability. In

order to determine the answer to that question, data from both males
 Clark Rashid 23

and females had to be compared. A Two-Sample t-Test fit, as the means

of two sets of data are compared within that statistical test. However,

in order to accurately utilize this test, assumptions needed to be met.

First, the data needed to be collected from a simple random sample. A

sample of both males and females were randomly selected in order to

represent their larger populations. Next, the two samples must be

independent. All trials were conducted such that no trial had any

influence over the result of another trial. Also, the sample populations

needed to be at least 20 times the samples themselves. A sample size

of 48 males and 48 females were tested, a minute portion of their

 Clark Rashid 24

respective populations. Lastly, the data need to be analyzed to ensure

normality.

Figure 5. Histograms of Total Score

Figure 5 above depicts the histograms of total score for both

males and females. The histograms aid in assessing the normality of

the data sets. Both data sets seem to be skewed slightly to the left.

There is a greater amount of data below the mode than above it. In

females the mode was 11 points, while the male trials produced a

mode of 10 points. It should also be noted that the score of 5 in the

female data set is an outlier, adding to the skewness of the female

trials.
 Clark Rashid 25

Figure 6. Normal Probability Plot of Male Data

 Clark Rashid 26

Figure 6 above shows the normal probability plot of the male

data. Only full points were rewarded, so no non-integer values were

reported. This test pits the data collected against a theoretical

distribution that is completely normal. Therefore, the more normal the

collected data is, the closer the distribution is to the line. The data

seems to be concentrated around the line, indicating normality.

Figure 7. Normal Probability Plot of Female Data

Figure 7 above shows the normal probability plot of the female

data. Once again, the data is concentrated fairly closely to the line of

regression, indicating the overall normality of the sample population.

 Clark Rashid 27

With these tests and observations using box plots and normal

probability plots, it was determined that the data collected was

considered normal. With this final assumption met, the data could then

be further analyzed.

Figure 8. One Variable Statistics

Figure 8 above lists the results of the one variable statistics

generated by the TI-NSpire CX calculator. The software displays the

 Clark Rashid 28

mean for each sample population, as well as standard deviation and

the quartiles used in the box plots (Figure 9).

Table 4
Sample Standard Deviations of Total Multitasking Score
Males Females

2.11881 2.25344

Table 4 shows the sample standard deviations of males and

females. The value of standard deviation is a measurement of how

concentrated each sample is around the mean. The female data set

shows a slightly larger variation from the mean, but this is due to the

outlier.

Table 5
Means of Total Multitasking Score
Males Females

9.25
10.3 3

Table 5 shows the mean multitasking score for males and

females. Both males and females were tested using a sample size of

48 people. The mean score of females was 10.33 compared to 9.25 for
 Clark Rashid 29

that of males, indicating that women seemed to be more efficient

multitaskers.

Figure 9. Box Plots of Total Score

Figure 9 above displays the box plots of total scores for both

males and females. The minimum, lower quartile, median, upper

quartile, and maximum values are all labelled as well. The male box

plot is almost exactly normal with the median score exactly 1.5 points

above and below the second and third quartiles. The female box plot is

skewed to the left with a median that is 0.5 points away from the third

quartile, yet 2 points away from the second. This could be alarming,
 Clark Rashid 30

but as stated prior, the data was assumed to be normal due to the

Central Limit Theorem and normal probability plots. There is one outlier

for the female data set, being a score of 5. The medians of the data

sets show a difference. The median for females was 11 points, while

the median for males was a score of 9.5 points. In fact, the median of

the female sample population is equivalent to the upper quartile of the

males sample population. Half of the female trials held values

between 11 and 15 points, while only a quarter of male trials yielded

such results. There is a great deal of overlap between each box plot,

which does not necessarily indicate a significant difference. However,

the large difference between the two medians contradicts that

assumption. This contradiction is why a Two-Sample t-test, detailed in

Appendix B, was then needed to accurately conclude whether or not

there was a significant difference in the ability to multitask between

males and females. To begin, the null and alternative hypotheses were

formed.

males= females
H o :

H a : males females

The null hypothesis was that the mean multitasking score

recorded by females would be equal to the mean score recorded for

males. The alternative hypothesis was that the mean multitasking

 Clark Rashid 31

score recorded by females would not be equal to that of males. Using

these hypothesis, the two sample t-Test was then conducted.

Figure 10. Two-Sample t-test

Figure 10 above shows the results of the Two-Sample t-test as

given by the TI-NSpire software. This test resulted in a p-value which

determines whether or not the null hypothesis is rejected.

 Clark Rashid 32

Figure 11. Graph of P-Value of Total Scores

Figure 11 above illustrates the graph of the p-value produced

when comparing the total scores of males and females using a Two-

Sample t-test. The p-value was small, which corresponds the small

shading of the graph.

t-value: -2.67021

p-value: 0.0089

As seen above, the t-value was -2.67021, which yielded a p-value

of 0.0089. This value is below the alpha level of 0.05, meaning the null

hypothesis was rejected and it can be concluded that there is a

significant difference between the multitasking abilities of males and

 Clark Rashid 33

females. There would only be a 0.89% chance of receiving results as

extreme as this experiment yielded by chance alone, if the null

hypothesis was true.

Lastly, a Two-Sample t-Interval needed to be run on the data in

order to determine how confident the researchers could be in the

conclusions.

1 1
( x malesx females z S p n males + n females

Seen above is the equation used to calculate the Two-Sample t-

Interval. Z* was found using table C, with 80 degrees of freedom as the

sample size was 94 and it must be rounded down. A z* of 1.990 was

chosen in order to have 95% confidence. This test was then run using

the TI- NSpire.

 Clark Rashid 34

Figure 12. Two-Sample t-Interval

Figure 12 above shows the calculations found for a Two-Sample t-

Interval using the collected data. This test was run using 95% and the

final parameters were found to be -1.97298 and -0.206147. It could

then be concluded, with 95% confidence, that the true mean

multitasking values for female and male populations would have a

difference of a value between -1.97298 and -0.206147.

Figure 13. Graph of P-Value of Task Scores

 Clark Rashid 35

Figure 13 above displays the graph of the p-value generated

when comparing the task scores of males and females using a Two-

Sample t-test. The p-value was small, which corresponds the small

shading of the graph.

t-value: -1.7413

p-value: 0.0850

As seen above, the t-value was -1.7413, which yielded a p-value

of 0.0850. However, this value is not below the standard alpha level of

0.05. This means that the null hypothesis failed to be rejected and it

cannot be concluded that there is a significant difference between the

task scores of males and females. There is an 8.5% chance of receiving

results this extreme, if the null hypothesis was true. This probability is

too large to claim there was a significant difference in the task scores

of males and females.

 Clark Rashid 36

Figure 14. Graph of P-Value of Key Point Scores

Figure 14 above shows the graph of the p-value computed when

comparing the key point scores of males and females using a Two-

Sample t-test. The p-value was fairly small, which is shown in the small

shading of the p-value graph.

t-value: -1.9502

p-value: 0.0541

As seen above, the t-value was -1.9502, which yielded a p-value

of 0.0541. However, this value is not below the standard alpha level of

0.05. This means that the null hypothesis failed to be rejected and it

cannot be concluded that there is a significant difference between the

 Clark Rashid 37

task scores of males and females. There is a 5.4% chance of receiving

results this extreme, if the null hypothesis was true. This probability is

slightly too large to claim there was a significant difference in the task

scores of males and females. While the null hypothesis was failed to be

rejected, it should be noted that the P-Value when comparing the

recollection of key points between males and females was only 0.0041

units above the alpha level of 0.05.

To conclude, measures were taken to ensure that the data

collected was valid. All assumptions for the statistical analysis were

met and the data sets were both considered normal. Then, using this

data, a Two-Sample t-test was used to conclude that there was a

significant difference between the mean total multitasking score of

males and that of females. By analyzing the boxplots and comparing

the two means, it was then concluded that the multitasking total

scores of females were significantly larger than that of males. The

average total score for females was 10.33 points, while the average for

males was 9.25 points. These tests were conclusive in that the mean

scores of females were greater than that of males. However, the

means of tasks completed and key points recalled alone do not yield

significant differences between males and females. This was tested to

gauge if there was one area in which females were far superior to

males and analyze patterns that may connect to the anatomy of the

brain. It was concluded that females were significantly better at

 Clark Rashid 38

multitasking overall, but not in any specific area, tasks or key points,

alone.

Conclusion
 Clark Rashid 39

The results of this research inevitably concluded in the

acceptance of the original hypothesis that females are better at

multitasking than males. Multitasking is undoubtedly becoming

increasingly vital in the workplace, wherever that may be. Employees

in law enforcement, business roles, medical positions, and numerous

other diverse fields all share and demand a constant skill: multitasking.

The ability to effectively and efficiently make use of comprehensive

and motor skills have become overwhelmingly decisive in job

performance. In regards to multitasking, there has always been

common theory that women are better at multitasking than men. This

raises many questions about the work place. There is a 0.5% share of

women employees in first-line supervisors of firefighting and fire

prevention workers for example (Catalyst). If gender is truly an

indicator of an individuals ability to multitask, why are many roles that

demand it dominated by males? This research set out to determine

whether or not gender does have a significant effect on a persons

ability to multitask, and whether or not females could be deemed more

efficient at it. It was hypothesized that the data would indeed yield that

gender has a significant effect on the ability to multitask, and that

females would be statistically superior.

In order to test something as complicated as multitasking, the

researchers had to formulate an experiment that would yield pertinent

data. It was observed that in most multitasking situations, a person

 Clark Rashid 40

had to balance physical tasks that call on their cognitive abilities, and

mental tasks that required an understanding of a situation or vocal

instruction (Jarrett). To simulate the former, a task simulator was

created, which consisted of six small puzzles. A weighted point system

was then made, making the simulator worth 10 points. Along with this

simulator, the researchers needed a way to gauge each persons

comprehensive and memorization skills. A paragraph simulating a

police officers crime-in-progress call was written and recorded. This

paragraph contained 10 important details that each participant would

be expected to retain. As the paragraph played, the participant would

listen and complete as much of the task simulator as possible.

Afterwards, the participant was asked to recall as many things as they

could from the paragraph. The number of key points recalled and the

points earned from the task simulator were added and that became the

value for each respective trial. A total of 96 people from 9th through

12th grade, consisting of 48 males and 48 females, were tested for

their ability to multitask.

Following the data collection, and successive analysis, the

hypothesis was accepted. With a p-value of 0.0089, the Two-Sample t-

Test revealed that gender did have a significant effect on a persons

ability to multitask. This p-value constitutes that there is only a 0.89%

chance of receiving results this extreme by chance alone if there was

not a difference in the multitasking abilities of males and females. This,

 Clark Rashid 41

combined with the mean multitasking score of 10.33 for women,

compared to 9.25 for men, helped to conclude that females are

statistically more efficient multitaskers. It can be assumed that the

reasoning behind this, as stated within the Review of Literature, and in

regards to previous research, is the corpus callosum. The corpus

callosum, a bundle of nerves connecting the right and left brain

hemispheres, is more developed in females than it is in males. This

allows for a more efficient transfer of information and superior

cooperation of the two hemispheres relative to males. Further, many

universities have researched the corpus callosum and its effects on

multitasking. Research out of the University of Glasgow by Dr. Stoet,

being the most notable and cited, produced results and conclusions

supportive and in line with this research. Another study out of the

University of Pennsylvania reached like conclusions (Boesveld). These

studies, similar to this research, also aimed to validate or disprove the

claim that women are better at multitasking than men.

As stated, the conclusions within this research were reached due

to differences in the neurological anatomy of males and females, but

the cause of these differences, however, are not as concrete. Since

ancient times and hunter gatherer societies, humans have fit

themselves into roles based largely on their gender. The differences in

the development of the corpus callosum in genders is believed to be

due to this evolutionary distinction (Stoet). Females are tasked with

 Clark Rashid 42

tending to crops, preparing food, taking care of children, cleaning

shelters and various other objectives (Encyclopedia Britannica). Males,

however, are traditionally responsible for hunting. This system has

been in place for all peoples until 11,000 to 12,000 years ago. This

long standing style of living may be an evolutionary contributor to the

differences in corpus callosum development between males and

females (Encyclopedia Britannica).

The aim of this research was not to create gender bias against

males by any means. Rather, the intention lies in encouraging young

women to explore careers in science, technology, engineering, law

enforcement, and any other multitasking fields in which women are a

rarity. Schools and employers have attempted to incentivize girls of all

ages to become involved in these fields, however change has not come

in copious amounts. The application of this study is to inform and

encourage. Females are well suited to succeed in these fields based on

their anatomy and should not shy away due to stereotypes or social

norms. The aptitude and ability to multitask of females can be

demonstrated and does in fact show a significant difference as

previously stated.

As with any research, improvements can always be made. To

begin, only high school students were the participants of this test.

While males and females both have experienced the majority of their

brain development by their teen years, a blocked age group may be

 Clark Rashid 43

more efficient at replicating the abilities of professionals in the fields.

Further, during data collection, the setting of each trial varied. A very

wide range of people were tested: high school students of all grades,

from three different high schools. This may have resulted in an

inconsistency of surroundings and confounding in the data. Some trials

were taken in the library in quiet conditions, while some were taken in

classrooms with other students and varying amounts of noise nearby.

To expand upon this research and approach the problem in

different ways, many details of this experiment could be altered. While

the task simulator called on each participants cognitive and physical

abilities, it was only a simulator. To receive more specific data, the

physical aspect of the multitasking test could be narrowed down to a

specific task such as driving. Additionally, the paragraph simulated a

situation in which each participant was a police officer on duty. This

could be changed in different tests, with participants being forced to

comprehend multiple different subjects depending on the specific job

that is being analyzed. In looking at the results of this research, and

the further research it encourages, a better understanding of the

science behind multitasking can be formed. It was shown that females

are indeed significantly better at multitasking than males. Women

should be encouraged to pursue similar careers and eliminate the

gender gap.
 Clark Rashid 44

Appendix A: Creating the Task Simulator

Materials:

2x1x0.5 Wooden Box Black Handle

Jigsaw Wire holder
Nut and Bolt

Procedure:

1. Draw the outline of all shapes on the top surface of the wooden

box (Figure 15).

 Clark Rashid 45

2. Cut out the abstract shape represented in pink (Figure 15).

3. Cut out the three black shapes (Figure 15).

4. Cut out the green rectangle (Figure 15) at a shallow depth and
then cut the removed rectangle into multiple triangles as seen in
Figure 15.

5. Cut out a pathway as shown by the blue path in Figure 15.

6. Attach the ball joint and rod to the bottom of the box directly
beneath the center of the pathway such that it can rotate freely
enough to move through the entire track.

Diagram:

Figure 15. Design of Task Simulator

Figure 15 illustrates the preliminary design on which the task

simulator was based.

Appendix B: Two-Sample t Test Formula

This is an example of a sample calculation for the Two-Sample T-

Test formula and the p-value derived from the T-value.

x 1x 2
t=

s 21 s 22
+
n1 n 2
 Clark Rashid 46

Figure 16. Two-Sample t-Test Equation

Figure 16 example equation finds the T-value for the test

between two sample populations. The x1 represents the average

multitasking score for males and the x2 in the equation is the same

but for females. The s1 in the equation is the sample standard

deviation of the male trials. The s2 in the equation is the same but

for females. The n1 in the equation is the total number of male trials

and the n2 in the equation is the total number of female trials. The p-

value was found automatically on the TI-NSpire software when the test

was run.

Works Cited
 Clark Rashid 47

Allen, Timothy. Professional Correspondence and Information. 2 Dec.

2016.

Boesveld, Sarah. "Men's and Women's Brains Fundamentally Different, Study

Finds, One Better at Focusing, One Better at Multitasking." National Post

Mens and Womens Brains Fundamentally Different Study Finds One

Better at Focusing One Better At multitasking Comments. n.p., n.d. Web.

20 Sept. 2016

Bowers, Toni. "Are Women Better at Multitasking than Men? - TechRepublic.

"TechRepublic. n.p., 15 ay 2011. Web. 21 Sept. 2016.

Cheshire, William P., Jr. "Multitasking and the neuroethics of distraction." Ethics

& Medicine: An International Journal of Bioethics 31.1 (2015): 19+.

AcademicOneFile. Web. 19 Sept. 2016.

Catalyst. Catalyst Quick Take: Women in Male-Dominated Industries and

Occupations in U.S. and Canada. New York: Catalyst, 2015.

Encyclopedia Britannica. "Hunting and Gathering Culture." Encyclopedia

Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, 4 Aug. 2016. Web. 20 Nov.

2016.

Hubel, David. "The Corpus Callosum and Stereopsis." Eye, Brain, and Vision.

Harvard University, n.d. Web. 21 Sept. 2016.

Jansen, Reinier J., Rene van Egmond, and Huib de Ridder. "Task Prioritization in

Dual-Tasking: Instructions versus Preferences." PLoS ONE 11.7 (2016).

Academic OneFile. Web. 14 Sept. 2016.

 Clark Rashid 48

Jarrett, Christian. "Yes, Men's and Women's Brains Do Function Differently - But

It's a Tiny Difference." Science of Us. N.p., 26 Aug. 2015. Web. 21 Sept.

201

Melina, Remy. "What's the Difference Between the Right Brain and Left Brain?"

Health. LiveScience, 12 Jan. 2011. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

Stoet, Gijsbert, et al. "Are women better than men at multi-tasking?" BMC

Psychology 1.1 (2013). Academic OneFile. Web. 14 Sept. 2016.