“The Myth of Multitasking” by Rosen: Rhetorical Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Target audience
Article structure
Logos
Pathos
Ethos
All appeals through one quote
Other rhetoric moves
Conclusion
Work Cited

Life in the modern age is changing at an incredible pace, leaving people who cannot adapt to these changes behind. Digital devices have become a part of every human’s daily routine making people helpless without them. Traditional media sources have also shifted from print to digital, and the amount of information they provide has increased for hundred times. Therefore, people in recent decades have found a method of processing all data they consume daily – multitasking. In the article The myth of multitasking, Christine Rosen discusses this skill, comparing its advantages and disadvantages. By the end of the article, Rosen persuades the reader that the benefits of multitasking are overrated and that human brains are wired to focus on one single task. The following analysis of Christine Rosen’s article will present an evaluation of the target audience, article structure, rhetoric appeals, and other rhetorical moves used in the paper.

Target audience

The article’s target audience are people aged from around 18 to 40. This is probably related to the fact that people of this age are a working class who are the main users of digital devices. Often active smartphone users are those who practice multitasking therefore the target audience of this article might find it challenging to read an article written in partly academic and scientific language. Another important note is that readers of Rosen’s article can be young parents who allow their children multitask. After reading the text they might consider a different approach in their upbringing. The target audience of the article might not be easy to convince because there can appear readers from science or related fields, and thus doubt Rosen’s arguments.

Article structure

The article’s structure is coherent to the reader because it flows from introducing the benefits and disadvantages of multitasking. The author starts the piece with a quote from Lord Chesterfield, who said that humans are meant to focus on one task at once to waste no time. The language she operates throughout the first paragraphs is emotional and powerful. She gives examples of multitasking from everyday life to which almost everyone can relate. She continues by mentioning excerpts from articles about multitasking and its involvement in our lives. The reader might get confused because the paper’s title and the text’s first paragraphs convey opposing ideas. However, Rosen later gave pro-multitasking arguments for the objective judgment of the phenomenon in her article because the following pages focus on the cons of multitasking. She begins anti-multitasking argumentation with alarming statistics on phone use while driving. The author continues by presenting a correlation between IQ and multitasking, where a person’s cognitive function worsens in the long term if the person multitasks. The following paragraphs show the author’s contempt for convincing readers of multitasking’s harm and inefficiency.

Logos

A rhetorical appeal used mainly in the text is logos – a persuasive technique using logic and reason. Rosen gives the first evidence of multitasking’s psychological damage by mentioning the works of Dr. Edward Hallowell – a Massachusetts-based psychiatrist specializing in the treatment of hyperactivity. As a scientific writer, Christine Rosen significantly used scientific facts to prove her argument. For instance, she states that multitasking “costs the U.S. economy $650 billion a year in lost productivity” (Rosen 3). The author explains that multitasking is harmful to an individual’s mental health and a country’s economy and insists that multitasking is a national issue. Rosen also quotes experts like Jordan Grafman, William James, Russel Poldrack, and others to support her argument. This method of citing experts and science journals is an example of the author using logos.

Pathos

Christine Rosen also uses pathos in her article to convince readers of her argument. This persuasion technique through feelings and emotions can be seen throughout the text. For instance, the quote, “Numerous studies have shown the sometimes-fatal danger of using cell phones and other electronic devices while driving,” causes feelings such as fear, anger, and shock. The emotions caused by this fact might even provoke readers who drive to stop using smartphones and multitask when driving. The latter author talks about the impact of multitasking on how a person learns. She gives supporting evidence by quoting Psychology Professor at the University of California – Russel Poldrack. Furthermore, she asks, “What might this mean for today’s children and teens, raised with an excess of new entertainment and educational technology, and avidly multitasking at young age?” (Rosen 4). This question endorses parents reading the article to analyze their children’s media consumption and begin to avoid multitasking.

Ethos

As a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, the author uses ethos in her writing to analyze multitasking. The ethos technique persuades readers by provoking an ethical view on the issue. The use of ethos in the article appears in lines “‘ Attention Deficit Trait,’ which he claims is rampant in the business world” (Rosen 2). The “Attention Deficit Trait” is a psychological disorder that appears in the text, but more importantly, the author writes that the disease is uncontrollably spread in business. Further in the text, the author insists that multitasking should be limited, which means that the author used widespread “Attention Deficit Trait” with a negative connotation. Moreover, the attention shortage implies that people might become more ego-centric, which is not a moral virtue. Observing the work of International Organizations and volunteers, people know that they have to serve society because it is morally right. However, the widespread attention deficit might lead to the moral decay of society, which in turn will lead to lower standards of ethics and justice.

All appeals through one quote

In the final part of her article, “Paying attention,” Rosen uses ethos, logos, and pathos through one quote. She cites Isaac Newton by writing “owing more to patient attention than to any other talent” and makes this line serve as a logical, ethical, and emotional persuasion instrument (Rosen 5). Isaac Newton was a scientist who discovered Earth’s gravitational force and thus stands as a scientific source of information; hence the quote is logical. Newton is also an image of success, therefore causing a feeling of authority and trust. Readers might unconsciously believe the words Rosen used because Newton appears as a credible source. The quote itself is propaganda of patience which ethically and biblically is a moral virtue; therefore, presents ethos.

Other rhetoric moves

The article is not limited to rhetoric moves since the author uses devices like hyperbole, climax, and idioms. In the line in the first paragraphs, where the emotionality of language is more robust than in other sections author uses hyperbole by writing “marshalling the power of as many technologies as possible” (Rosen 1). These lines presumably mean that author finds people’s desire to multitask as a show of power over technologies and other individuals. Instead of saying “marshalling the power,” the author could write “use,” but this intentional hyperbole makes the text more expressive. Another rhetorical tool Rosen used is a climax at the end of her article “but it will surely weaken the wisdom” (Rosen 6). She uses this device to emphasize the point she has been emphasizing throughout the article – multitasking damages the mind. She also uses simple linguistic tools like idioms; for instance, in the line “Multitasking might also be taking a toll on the economy,” she stresses the negative impact of multitasking on the economy (Rosen 2).

Conclusion

The rhetorical analysis of Christine Rosen’s The myth of multitasking included a discussion of the article’s target audience and structure, with an evaluation of her rhetorical appeals and devices’ use. The article’s target audience has been defined as young people in their late teenage years to adults over forty. The target audience of such range was possibly challenging because it requires precise argumentation with facts and emotions simultaneously. The article’s structure enables readers to understand both the positive and negative sides of multitasking, focusing on the disadvantages of the phenomenon. It has been found that the author used logos the most, but she also focused on pathos at the beginning of the article. Ethos persists over the text and plays a significant role in delivering the author’s central idea. The author not only focuses on rhetoric appeals but also uses devices like hyperbole, climax, and linguistic tools such as idioms. It can be concluded that the author achieved her goal for this article and provided a well-written piece for everyone in her target audience. Nonetheless, the report might require a more profound analysis of all rhetoric tools.

Work Cited

Rosen, Christine. “The Myth of Multitasking”. The New Atlantis, 2008, Web.

Click Here To Order Now!