Does Doodling Effect Performance: Comparison Across Retrieval Strategies

COVID-19 Limitations on Doodling as a Measure of Burnout

Pre-COVID-19, doodling was identified as a measure of burnout in researchers attending a weekly, in-person health narratives research group manifesting team mindfulness. Under the group's supportive conditions, variations in doodling served to measure change in participants reported depression and anxiety-internal states directly associated with burnout, adversely affecting healthcare researchers, their employment, and their research. COVID-19 demanded social distancing during the group's 2020/21 academic meetings. Conducted online, the group's participants who chose to doodle did so alone during the pandemic. Whether the sequestering of group participants during COVID-19 altered the ability of doodling to act as a measure of depression and anxiety was investigated. Participants considered that doodling during the group's online meetings increased their enjoyment and attention level-some expressed that it helped them to relax. However, unlike face-to-face meetings during previous non-COVID-19 years, solitary doodling during online meetings was unable to reflect researchers' depression or anxiety. The COVID-19 limitations that necessitated doodling alone maintained the benefits group members saw in doodling but hampered the ability of doodling to act as a measure of burnout, in contrast to previous in-person doodling. This result is seen to correspond to one aspect of the group's change in team mindfulness resulting from COVID-19 constraints.

Doodling as a Measure of Burnout in Healthcare Researchers

Burnout adversely affects healthcare researchers, their place of employment, and the production of valuable research. It is directly associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Having an easily employed and reliable measure of depression and anxiety in healthcare researchers is important if burnout is to be diminished. Doodling may be one such measure. Doodling became a possible indicator based on unexpected outcomes associated with one diverse and voluntary health narrative research group where doodling was introduced. The result, with respect to casual, self-reported levels of depression and anxiety, ranged from researchers expressing low levels of distress to those revealing clinical diagnoses of depression and anxiety. Changes to doodling execution and content, and their effect on the doodler-metrics previously unmentioned in the literature-hold promise for evaluating depression and anxiety levels of researchers. Maligned in academic settings with increasingly punitive outcomes, doodling should be reassessed as a possible indicator of internal states of distress, dysphoria, depression, and anxiety based on this University of Toronto Health Narratives Research Group result of doodling. Under certain well-defined conditions, variations in doodling may serve as a measure of change in these internal states and, therefore, act as an aid in reducing burnout.

Driving and Multitasking: The Good, the Bad, and the Dangerous

Previous research has shown that multitasking can have a positive or a negative influence on driving performance. The aim of this study was to determine how the interaction between driving circumstances and cognitive requirements of secondary tasks affect a driver's ability to control a car. We created a driving simulator paradigm where participants had to perform one of two scenarios: one with no traffic in the driver's lane, and one with substantial traffic in both lanes, some of which had to be overtaken. Four different secondary task conditions were combined with these driving scenarios. In both driving scenarios, using a tablet resulted in the worst, most dangerous, performance, while passively listening to the radio or answering questions for a radio quiz led to the best driving performance. Interestingly, driving as a single task did not produce better performance than driving in combination with one of the radio tasks, and even tended to be slightly worse. These results suggest that drivers switch to internally focused secondary tasks when nothing else is available during monotonous or repetitive driving environments. This mind wandering potentially has a stronger interference effect with driving than non-visual secondary tasks.