Measuring relational wellbeing: construct validity in pre-COVID-Era UK; generalizability across COVID-lockdown-Era India, Greece, and UK.

Aim: In the present studies, we examine the construct validity and criterion-related validity of a previously unpublished, eight-item measure of relational wellbeing. Methods: First, in two pre-COVID-Era pilot studies within the UK (n's = 207 and 146, respectively), results of exploratory factor analyses revealed that-with the possible exception of one item regarding close relationships-the items assessed individual differences along a single dimension (i.e., relational wellbeing), rather than two distinct dimensions (i.e., social connections and close relationships). Second, in an initial pre-COVID-Era main study within the UK (n = 192), results of confirmatory factor analyses provided support for the hypothesized one-dimensional factor pattern, although the same problematic item from the pilot studies continued to under-perform relative to the other seven items. Findings: In a subsequent COVID-Lockdown-Era main study across India (n = 205), Greece (n = 354), and the UK (n = 390), results of confirmatory factor analyses established that-after omitting the same problematic item that had surfaced in the preceding studies-a one-dimensional factor pattern provided equally satisfactory fit for the three samples. Original value: Although we had not set out to test a priori hypotheses regarding mean similarities or differences in relational wellbeing among our COVID-Lockdown-Era studies, results of an analysis of variance revealed that persons within the UK scored significantly lower in relational wellbeing than did persons in India or Greece. Limitations: As noted above, one particular item repeatedly performed poorly in factor analyses; this item ideally should be dropped from the relational wellbeing scale in future research.

The working memory costs of a central attentional bottleneck in multitasking.

When two (or more) tasks, each requiring a rapid response, are performed at the same time then serial processing may occur at certain processing stages, such as the response selection. There is accumulating evidence that such serial processing involves additional control processes, such as inhibition, switching, and scheduling (termed the active scheduling account). The present study tested whether the existence of serial processing in multitasking leads to a requirement for processes that coordinate processing in this way (active scheduling account) and, furthermore, whether such control processes are linked to the executive functions (EF) of working memory (WM). To test this question, we merged the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm with a WM task, creating a complex WM span task. Participants were presented with a sequence of letters to remember, followed by a processing block in which they had to perform either a single task or a dual task, and finally were asked to recall the letters. Results showed that WM performance, i.e. the amount of letters recalled in the correct order, decreased when performing a dual task as compared to performing a single task during the retention interval. Two further experiments supported this finding using manipulations of the dual task difficulty. We conclude that the existence of serial processing in multitasking demands additional control processes (active scheduling) and that these processes are strongly linked to the executive functions of working memory.

"Women Are Better Than Men"-Public Beliefs on Gender Differences and Other Aspects in Multitasking.

Reports in public media suggest the existence of a stereotype that women are better at multitasking than men. The present online survey aimed at supporting this incidental observation by empirical data. For this, 488 participants from various ethnic backgrounds (US, UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Turkey, and others) filled out a self-developed online-questionnaire. Results showed that overall more than 50% of the participants believed in gender differences in multitasking abilities. Of those who believed in gender differences, a majority of 80% believed that women were better at multitasking. The main reasons for this were believed to be an evolutionary advantage and more multitasking practice in women, mainly due to managing children and household and/or family and job. Findings were consistent across the different countries, thus supporting the existence of a widespread gender stereotype that women are better at multitasking than men. Further questionnaire results provided information about the participants' self-rated own multitasking abilities, and how they conceived multitasking activities such as childcare, phoning while driving, and office work.