Science, Art, Litt, Science based Art & Science Communication
Image source: iStock
People, even researchers, say true multitasking is not possible.
It has long been thought that using your brain to work simultaneously on multiple things was impossible. That’s because problem-solving, logical planning and abstract thinking are all carried out by a key region of the brain known as the prefrontal cortex, which is notoriously inflexible.
However, my experience is different. Even though it is difficult, I always multi-task, doing several things at a time.
New research by scientists now shows how the brain rewires itself to automate learned tasks. The findings challenge a long-held understanding of how humans master complex skills, suggesting that true multitasking is really possible.
Beyond offering encouragement to busy people that they really can do two things at once, the study also has important implications for the development of artificial intelligence capable of building on prior learning as the brain does.
The encouraging part is that you really can learn to multitask. There is actually a way to remodel your brain architecture and use other parts of your brain.
The new study builds on decades of research on how learning occurs in the brain.
Scientists wanted to understand the mechanisms behind automation, and how the brain shifts from learning a new task into a way of executing that task more unconsciously after extensive experience.
A good example is driving.
When someone first learns to drive, it requires their full concentration. But after driving for many years, most people can talk, listen to music, or consider a problem without having to focus completely on operating the vehicle.
"The question is: how does your brain do that?"
Most previous research on learning has focused on the early stages, but what happens to the brain long-term is harder to study and less understood.
For the new study, researchers trained people to sort morphed images of cars into two categories, learning to spot subtle differences to tell them apart. Participants completed more than 30,000 trials over five to 10 weeks, using an app that allowed them to sort the images as a game on their phone. Researchers used fMRI and EEG to conduct brain scans on the participants before and after they completed the trials.
They found that after people had initially learned to sort the images, the task activated their prefrontal cortex. This area of the brain is responsible for executive function and thinking, but can typically only handle one task at a time.
However, when researchers scanned the brains of participants who had been practicing the sorting task for weeks, they found that the categorization was now happening in the temporal cortex, a part of the brain involved in encoding memory and recognizing complex objects.
Previous studies have shown that parts of the temporal cortex can be activated by particular object categories in experienced observers, birds, cars, even Pokemon, but a limitation of all of those studies is that they only looked after people became experts.
The strength of this study is that it is longitudinal. Researchers measure before and after training, so they can see that extensive training essentially put a category selective area in the temporal lobe that was not there before.
This has implications for critical real world scenarios, like when a radiologist can accurately classify masses on an X-ray as benign or malignant fairly automatically, often without extensive deliberation, thanks to years of training.
Category information from the car-selective area in the temporal cortex bypassed the prefrontal cortex and connected directly to output parts of the brain.
Experience remodels the brain to bypass that frontal bottleneck. The prefrontal cortex then stays free for whatever else you want to do, increasing your capacity.
Indeed, the researchers found that the more the car task was "offloaded" from the prefrontal cortex, the better people were able to do another task in parallel to the car task.
The finding challenges a longstanding theory that humans are not capable of true multitasking. Instead, it was thought that the brain rapidly switched back and forth between two tasks.
What these researchers showed is that the circuitry actually changes so the brain can do two things at once.
"This really is true multitasking."
Hmmm! Now I can tell people I had been always right when I told people I could multitask even though they doubted it. It happens automatically without much effort on your part once you get used to it.
The findings can also have implications for understanding compulsive behaviours because they demonstrate that learned behaviours move into brain circuits that are less accessible to conscious thought or executive function.
"The first step to unlearning something is understanding where it is actually happening in the brain".
This shows why strategies like telling someone to think of something else don't really help, because they don't really have the behaviour under conscious control.
It also helps explain why humans are so good at continuous learning, or building skills upon skills—something that AI still struggles with.
Moving a learned skill into the temporal cortex and freeing space in the prefrontal cortex could allow the brain to use the old information as a building block to learn something new.
Next, researchers want to study the mechanisms or signals involved in moving learning from one part of the brain to another and to figure out what the limits of multitasking are.
Another really interesting question is what kinds of tasks can be learned well enough to do in parallel. We can walk and chew gum at the same time, but looking at our phones to text while driving will never be safe, because we take our eyes away from the road. It comes down to being able to train fully separate neural circuits for two tasks to become compatible.
The researchers also warned that too much reliance on technology to help with multitasking, such as outsourcing our writing or data analysis to generative AI, could backfire on our brains. The brain’s own multitasking capabilities kick in only once a certain amount of expertise has been acquired, the new research showed. In the long term, it may be that overusing AI means our brains become less proficient at complex skills.
You won’t be able to master things if you’re having AI do it all the time. Multitasking comes through developing efficient pattern recognition so you’re able to make decisions faster and integrate something else at the same time.
Now I know why I prefer to do everything myself!
The paper, "Extensive Experience Remodels Neural Task Circuitry to Escape the Frontal Bottleneck and Increase Automaticity of Categorization," is published in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.
Extensive Experience Remodels Neural Task Circuitry to Escape the Frontal Bottleneck and Increase Automaticity of Categorization, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2026).
-----------------XxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxX----------------------
A skill becomes automatic as the brain rewires itself to bypass its own bottleneck, new study suggests
Riding a bike, reading a book or folding laundry while watching TV can feel effortless, almost like your brain does it on autopilot. This ease comes from repetition, built through practicing the same task again and again. The prefrontal cortex (PFC), responsible for flexible thinking and decision-making, plays a role in this process, but it also creates a bottleneck. Although highly flexible, it can generally handle only one decision at a time, making multitasking difficult.
In a recent study, researchers wanted to understand how the brain changes when a person practices a specific task until it reaches cognitive automaticity. In this state, familiar actions can be performed quickly and efficiently with little conscious effort.
After sorting morphed car images more than 30,000 times, participants didn't just get better at the task. Their brains rewired themselves, shifting the work from slow, deliberate thinking to fast, effortless autopilot.
The brain's vision center, the vOTC (ventral occipito-temporal cortex), originally just recognized shapes, but with enough practice, it learned to make the categorization decisions itself. As the vision center could now handle the decision alone, it no longer needed constant guidance from the PFC. The two regions disengaged, and perception took over the job that thinking used to do.
Practice shifts the brain to autopilot
We categorize objects constantly, from recognizing a friend's face to sorting colours. Yet, most brain research on this skill only captures a few hours of practice in a lab, whereas real-world expertise takes months or years to hone the skills we rely on daily.
Earlier studies have shown that, under normal circumstances, the brain follows a two-stage process for categorization. First, the brain's visual areas identify an object's shape. Then the prefrontal cortex steps in to decide which category that shape belongs to.
The prefrontal cortex relies on cognitive control to keep the brain focused on the right task, but it can generally only handle one decision at a time. This creates a frontal bottleneck, so when you try to multitask, the two tasks interfere with each other.
However, once a task becomes automatic through practice, it no longer needs the prefrontal cortex watching over it, so it avoids the traffic jam.
The researchers hypothesized that extensive practice builds a perception-action loop, letting the brain skip the frontal bottleneck altogether. The prefrontal cortex teaches the visual system to recognize categories, then steps aside as the brain links what the eyes see directly to the motor regions of the brain.
Mapping practice in the brain
To test this hypothesis, researchers conducted a long-term study to track how the brain changes as a task moves toward automaticity. Over the course of 5–10 weeks, 11 participants practiced the car-categorization task for more than 30,000 trials, learning to categorize images of morphed cars into two groups with made-up names: SOVOR and ZUPUD.
To see how practice rewired the brain, the researchers tracked both the where and the when of brain activity. fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) revealed which regions were involved, while EEG (electroencephalogram) captured the split-second timing of their signals. They repeated these measurements alongside behavioral tests at different stages of the training.
They found that extensive practice taught the visual areas to handle these category decisions themselves, allowing the brain to offload the work from the prefrontal cortex. The MRI also showed that the visual areas unplugged from the prefrontal cortex and formed new, stronger connections directly to the motor areas.
The most significant result of this rewiring was a dramatic improvement in multitasking. Since the practiced task no longer needed the limited resources of the prefrontal cortex, people could perform it alongside another attention-demanding task without any interference.
In terms of behavior, the participants reached high accuracy quickly, while their reaction times continued to drop with practice. Becoming faster without making more mistakes, alongside physical changes in the brain, showed that the task had become automatic and no longer depended on the brain's usual bottleneck.
These findings could help design training programs for jobs that require fast visual judgment, like radiology, security screening or industrial inspection. The researchers point out that the speed and automation acquired through practice come with a trade-off.
Automatic skills are fast, but they are less flexible than when the prefrontal cortex was in charge of the decision, so they may struggle if the rules suddenly change. Future research needs to clarify whether, and how, the brain can overcome this rigidity.
Patrick H. Cox et al, Extensive Experience Remodels Neural Task Circuitry to Escape the Frontal Bottleneck and Increase Automaticity of Categorization, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2026). DOI: 10.1162/jocn.a.2618
------
I posted other research reports in the comments section below too that show that multi-tasking is truly possible.
Tags:
81
Does multitasking ability really differ by sex? Not in the way you'd think Men and women showed comparable performance across four concurrent visual-manual tasks, but men ignored a concurrent conversational task more than twice as often as women, despite similar response quality and speed when they did answer. Observers rated men as performing worse and being less engaged, suggesting that differing conversational engagement during multitasking may underlie stereotypes that women are better multitaskers. Research simulates real-life multitasking performance to assess potential differences between men and women. When coordinating five different tasks, men ignored the conversational task more than twice as often as women, while showing similar performance to women in all other tasks. Multitasking, defined as the ability to perform multiple tasks simultaneously or switch between them, has become a central feature of modern life, occurring in contexts such as driving, work, household activities and even leisure. Despite the widespread stereotype that women are better at multitasking, research has shown only small and inconsistent sex differences, calling into question the existence of meaningful differences in this domain. In the article "Men Talk Less Than Women During Multitasking", published in the scientific journal Psychological Research, the researchers explain that they developed a complex multitasking paradigm consisting of five tasks designed to simulate real-life scenarios, which more closely reproduce everyday demands than most previous studies. In the first study, 41 men and 37 women performed five different tasks: a recipe-following task in a kitchen setting; a phone number search task; a number-letter matching task; a word-monitoring task in a slideshow; and a conversational task, which consisted of answering a question (e.g., "Would you rather lose all of your money and valuables or all of the pictures you have ever taken, and why?") every 20 seconds. In the second study, to test whether this sex difference was perceptible to others, 160 observers without prior information watched videos of the participants and evaluated their performance. Across the different tasks, men and women showed similar performance, except in the conversational task, in which men ignored the task more than twice as often as women. It is important to emphasize that, when they responded, the quality and speed of men's answers did not differ from those of women. A possible explanation suggested by the authors is that women, on average, may engage more in communicative behavior in social contexts. However, this hypothesis was not directly tested in this study and should be interpreted with caution. These findings are in line with evolutionary theories that propose a greater propensity for conversational behavior among women. When naive observers watched participants' performance, they rated male multitaskers as being less in control of the task, performing worse, using less effort, being less alert, less happy and enjoying the task less than female multitaskers. This study showed that there are no general differences between men and women in multitasking ability, but rather a specific difference: During multitasking, men tend to ignore conversation more frequently. It also showed that this difference influences how people are evaluated by others, potentially leading to the perception of poorer performance. This helps explain why the stereotype that women are better at multitasking than men has emerged and persisted. The data from this work confirm that there are no substantial sex differences in cognitive visual-manual tasks, but that significant sex differences do exist in the ability to hold a conversation while multitasking. This is "an ability highly salient in everyday life and, thus, could explain the development of the widespread public stereotype that women are better at multitasking than men.
André J. Szameitat et al, Men talk less than women during multitasking, Psychological Research (2026). DOI: 10.1007/s00426-026-02279-5
Practice helps the brain separate tasks and improve multitasking ability
Why is it so difficult to perform two tasks at the same time? For decades, scientists have debated whether multitasking is limited by a "central bottleneck" that restricts simultaneous processing or by competition for limited neural resources shared across tasks. But neither view fully explains how the brain manages these competing demands or how practice transforms an interference-prone system into more efficient multitasking.
However, a new study has uncovered how the brain dynamically manages and reorganizes its neural resources when learning to multitask. By tracking the same individual neurons throughout dual-task training in mouse models, the researchers found that multitasking is not governed simply by a fixed processing bottleneck.
Instead, the brain initially combines resource competition with neural coordination, then progressively recruits more task-specific neurons and separates task representations through learning, enabling more efficient parallel processing. They said the biological findings can be applied to training artificial intelligence to multitask. The findings have been published in the leading neuroscience journal Neuron, under the title "Dynamic coordination and segregation mechanisms in higher cortex for parallel task processing."
In mice, dual-task training initially relied on competition among shared neurons and coordinated activity across task-selective neurons. Practice recruited more task-specific neurons and separated task representations, reducing interference. Moderate suppression of secondary motor cortex during training prevented improvement, indicating its causal role in multitasking learning.
To investigate how the brain handles two tasks simultaneously, the researchers developed an original paradigm in which mice had to maintain a continuous lever-movement task while listening to different auditory cues and deciding whether to respond, a sensory decision-making task known as a "Go/No-Go" test. Using longitudinal two-photon calcium imaging, the researchers tracked the activity of the same individual neurons within a large neuronal population in secondary motor cortex (M2) over several weeks of training, allowing them to observe how neural activity was reorganized as the animals learned to multitask.
The study showed that multitasking interference can be traced at the level of individual neurons. Neurons involved in both tasks became hotspots of competition, providing a cellular basis for the brain's limited capacity to process competing demands. But this was only part of the story.
Surprisingly, the researchers found that the competition was not confined to neurons shared by both tasks. Even neurons mainly responsible for one task adjusted their activity when the other task was being processed. This adjustment helped the brain coordinate the two competing demands and achieve early multitasking success.
With continued training, the brain adopted a different strategy. More task-specific neurons were recruited, while the neural representations of the two tasks became progressively separated, allowing the tasks to be performed more independently with less interference. The team further showed that M2 plays a causal role in this learning process. When M2 activity was moderately suppressed during training, the animals failed to improve with practice. Once the suppression was removed, their multitasking performance rapidly improved.
The researchers discovered the neural mechanism of learning to multitask in this study. During early learning, reduced activity in neurons mainly supporting one task actually contributed to processing the competing task and helped both tasks succeed before a more efficient solution had been learned.
Beyond explaining how the brain learns to multitask, the researchers asked whether the strategy might represent a more general computational principle for managing competing demands. Using recurrent neural networks trained on a similar dual-task problem, the team found that simply separating the representations of the two tasks was not the most effective solution. Networks learned faster when early coordination was preserved while task representations became progressively separate, closely mirroring the strategy observed in the biological brain.
These findings suggest that efficient multitasking requires a balance between coordination and specialization. These principles may provide a framework for understanding multitasking deficits in neurological disorders and, importantly, offer a biologically inspired strategy for designing artificial intelligence systems that can learn and manage multiple competing tasks more efficiently.
Shuting Wang et al, Dynamic coordination and segregation mechanisms in higher cortex for parallel task processing, Neuron (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2026.06.001
© 2026 Created by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa.
Powered by