INTRODUCTION

With the advent of computer era, the world witnessed a revolution different from any other in the history of mankind. Media has become an inherent part of human beings daily run of life and turning the entire world into a digital village. With the growth in technology, human behavior also changed, as the people depend more and more on digital platforms to get information, to communicate and to connect with the world. The prevalence of mobile phones, computers, and wireless internet has produced a hyperconnected reality in which diverse sources of media are consumed simultaneously. Individuals nowadays process enormous flow of news from news organizations, blogs, sites, and social networks, enlarging their vision and understanding of social realities as well as taxing their capacity to deal with attention, cognitive burden, and emotional management.

The word multitasking, is based on the Latin prefix multi meaning "many" and the English term task, was first used in 1965 to characterize the IBM System/360 computer's ability to execute several actions at the same time. The term has since been coined to characterize the human activity of performing two or more tasks simultaneously. Media multitasking, in particular, is the synchronous consumption of various forms of media, both conventional (e.g., TV, radio) and digital media (e.g., smartphone, social media, online video). According to Bardhi et al. (2010), media multitasking encompasses any behavior entailing simultaneous use of more than one source of media, frequently mixed with entertainment, communication, and productivity.

For socio-humanist scholars, media multitasking has become an interesting area of study for two main reasons. First, it is a characteristic behavior of modern society, particularly among young adults and students who are socialized in a world filled with digital technology. Second, its cognitive, psychological, and social consequences are complex and not well understood yet. Ophir (2009) discovered that frequent multitaskers are likely to have poor cognitive control, indicating that ongoing media use might decrease attention, memory and the capacity to screen out irrelevant information.

Turkle (2011) mounts trenchant critiques of the possibly corrosive effect of digital technology on human interactions and identity construction. It is her argument that as digital tools become part of the self, they redefine the way people feel intimacy, solitude, and emotional validation. With this digital age, individuals find themselves going beyond mere communication and data gathering in cyber spaces to seeking affirmation and community affiliation. But this relies on mediated interaction raises questions regarding authenticity, emotional disconnection, and the breakdown of face-to-face communication.

The university setting offers a specific useful context for studying digital multitasking. University students, described as "digital natives," use technology not only in an academic context, but also socially and for recreation. This pervasive connectivity, while it expands access to information, can result in fractured attention, heightened stress, and academic underachievement (Junco 2012). In addition, it also intersects with fundamental psychological constructs including self-efficacy and self-perception, influencing the way students perceive themselves and their abilities in both academic and non-academic areas.

Self-perception involves people's judgments of their capability, behavior and overall self. It is an essential component of how they deal with social and academic contexts. Self-efficacy, on the other hand, is the belief in one's ability to perform actions necessary to achieve specific goals (Bandura 1977; Rushby et al. 2025). While students may view their ability to multitask as a sign of efficiency or technological adeptness, studies suggest this may create distorted self-perceptions. For example, heavy media multitaskers have been known to overestimate both their proficiency and productivity even when they have no resultant performance outcomes that correlate with such beliefs (Sanbonmatsu et al. 2013).

In addition, studies suggest that multitasking behaviors may impact students' overall general self-efficacy in subtle ways. At first glance, juggling several digital tasks may enhance mastery and control feelings. However, in practice multitasking usually results in mental overload, decreased task satisfaction, and an illusion of productivity (Misra & Stokols, 2012). This mismatch between perceived and actual ability can erode students' faith in their overall ability to cope with challenges, which leads to undermining resilience, initiative and academic motivation. Compounding this complexity is the existence of gender variations in digital behavior. Previous research has posited that men and women can be different in terms of how they go about multitasking, as well as the effects it has on self-reporting and academic performance. An understanding of these gender-based variations presents a fuller picture of the psychological impact of digital media habits.

In a study, Wang and Tchernev (2012) examined the motivations for digital multitasking and found that the participants would engage in multitasking because of internal psychological needs such as social connectivity, search for information, and habituated behavior. It was then determined that even though multitasking satisfies these psychological needs, it comes at the cost of cognitive performance. The participants indicated decreased accuracy and focus on tasks, suggesting that multitasking could lead to cognitive overload and reduced efficiency in processing.

Boahene et al. (2019) drawing on social cognitive theory, discussed how multitasking behaviors influence self-perception and performance among students. They concluded that students with high self-efficacy demonstrated higher levels of strategic use of media and better performance. Disjointed student multitasking behaviors, however, are likely to have lower confidence and competence and demonstrate how multitasking can impact and mislead self-perception and cognitive assessment.

Luo et al. (2020) research examined the longitudinal relationships between media multitasking, academic performance, and self-esteem of Chinese adolescents. The researchers discovered that media multitasking negatively affected academic performance but did not affect self-esteem directly. However, academic performance mediated the relationship between media multitasking and self-esteem, implying that the negative impacts of multitasking on academic performance could indirectly influence students' perception of themselves.

Alghamdi et al. (2020) addressed the psychological incompatibility between perceived and actual multitasking ability. They established that individuals who thought they were good multitaskers tended to overestimate their skill level. The overestimation of their skill level led to lower academic performance because such students underestimated the detrimental cognitive consequences of task-switching. The research identified a metacognitive gap that maintains ineffective multitasking habits.

Kolo et al. (2017) examined the general theme of self-efficacy in the context of digital behavior. Their research identified that more self-efficacious students used media positively and had greater psychological resilience. Nevertheless, individuals with excessive or poorly managed digital use tended to report lower follow-through with tasks and efficacy, implying that digital habits can be a help or a hindrance to one's self-efficacy depending on management.

Lin et al. (2017) conducted a study of multitasking self-efficacy and how it correlated with academic achievement. The research identified that students who held exaggerated impressions of their ability to multitask tended to experience attention control problems as well as task completion difficulties. This incongruity between perception and action resulted in decreased academic achievement scores and heightened stress levels, showing that multitasking self-efficacy may prove to be maladaptive if not based on a realistic level of capability.

Brooks (2015) examined connection between computer multitasking self-efficacy and academic success by having participants complete an educational video by simultaneously using multiple social media sites. Results showed that, even with high self-reported efficacy at multitasking, students who multitasked performed significantly lower on a quiz about the content of the post-video. This finding illustrated that high self-efficacy was not shielded from cognitive negative effects of divided attention.

Mohammed et al. (2021) set out to investigate the correlation between social media use, multitasking, and academic self-efficacy among Malaysian university students. The research established that both social media use and multitasking were positively related to students' self-efficacy, which in turn significantly affected their academic performance. The research also established self-efficacy as a mediator of social media multitasking and academic achievement, implying that the promotion of self-efficacy would counteract possible adverse effects of multitasking.

Pérez-Juárez et al. (2023) research examined digital distractions among university students in an engineering institution where technology is central to learning practices. Students rated themselves as being able to improve in performance, and the importance of strategies to make awareness of digital distractions and build self-control abilities and to make sustainable use of technology in education was noted. Literature reviewed indicates that multitasking has a significant impact on people's self-perception and overall self-efficacy, particularly for university students. Although there are studies to indicate that there are instances where multitasking may increase engagement if properly maintained or applicable to the situation, there is overwhelming evidence to indicate that habitual or uncontrollable multitasking tends to distort people's self-perceptions either in overestimation or loss of esteem and eroding one's confidence in his or her effectiveness in handling multiple tasks. This intricate relationship highlights how digital multitasking can influence not just cognitive results but also psychological measures integral to academic and personal achievement. Delving into these dynamics is crucial for crafting approaches that enable students to retain realistic self-evaluations and enhance their overall general self-efficacy in more digital classrooms.

In doing so, the present study attempts to examine the effects of digital multitasking on students' self-perception and self-efficacy at the university level, as well as gender differences in these associations. Through an examination of both behavioral and psychological aspects of media multitasking. This study further aims to identify patterns that can help tailor interventions to increase students' digital literacy, mental health, and academic achievement. The hypotheses of the study are:

H1: There will exist relationship between digital multitasking, self-perception, and self-efficacy.

H2: Digital Multitasking and self-perception will be positively correlated.

H3: Digital multitasking and self-efficacy will be negatively correlated.

H4: Gender differences will exist in digital multitasking behaviors, self-perception, and self-efficacy.

METHODOLOGY

Participants

The sample consisted of 105 participants drawn from seven faculties of Govt. College University Faisalabad. These faculties included Arts and Social Sciences, Engineering, Medical Sciences, Pharmacy, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, and Business. Fifteen participants were taken from each department including both males and females to ensure gender diversity. Seventy (70) females and thirty-five (35) males are covered in the sample. A mixture of quota sampling (A non-random strategy in which participants are included in the sample on the basis of pre-existing categories (e.g., gender, faculties) until the quotas are reached) and convenience sampling (a non-random strategy in which participants are selected due to easy access and availability) methods was applied. Quota sampling was utilized to cover each faculty proportionally, whereas convenience sampling enabled easy access to participants through university networks and face-to-face.

Inclusion criteria: The inclusion criteria existed of participants who are enrolled as full-time university students in any of the previously mentioned faculties. The age limit was 18-26 years. Only students who reported regular use of digital media devices were eligible, as this was central to the study of digital multitasking behaviors.

Exclusion criteria: Participants reporting any diagnosed cognitive or psychological disorder or were on academic leave were excluded to maintain the validity of the results.

Measures

Three validated psychological scales were used in the survey:

Media Multitasking-Revised (MMT-R) Scale: Ralph et al. (2015) developed the MMT-R scale that measures how often and how extensively people use digital media simultaneously in everyday life. The 18 items of the scale are usually rated on a Likert scale of 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). The first scale item is reverse scored. Higher scores reflect higher frequency of media multitasking.

General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE): Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1995) gave this scale to measure a person's general confidence in coping with difficult situations and goal accomplishment. The scale contains 10 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (Not at all true) to 4 (Exactly true). The total score is 10 to 40, and higher scores represent higher self-efficacy.

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES): Morris Rosenberg (1965) devised the RSES, which assesses overall self-perception through the measurement of positive and negative self-judgments. The 10-item scale has responses scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 4 (Strongly agree). Scores range from 10 to 40, with higher scores reflecting greater self-esteem or self-concept.

Operational definitions

Media Multitasking Frequency (MMF): It describes the degree to which people engage in multiple activities of digital media use at the same time during routine activities. In this research, it was assessed with the Revised Media Multitasking Scale (MMT-R), which asks participants about how often they multitasked using different types of media at the same time (e.g., texting while viewing videos). Greater scores represent more often multitasking.

Self-perception: Self-perception is a general perception of one's value, qualities, and skills, especially by himself in social and academic situations. In this research, it was measured through the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), with the higher score indicating stronger self-perception. Items were reversed scored where appropriate to ensure consistency of direction.

Self-efficacy: Self-efficacy is a concept describing one's perception of his or her capability to effectively execute and cope with tasks under a range of situations. This was assessed via the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE), which captures the participant's self-perceived ability to handle everyday problems. Stronger self-efficacy is indicated by higher scores.

Procedure

The questionnaire was administered online via faculty announcement groups and gathered university-wide in person. Informed consent was given before conducting the survey, and confidentiality was guaranteed to facilitate frank responses. Data collection took place over a four-week period to provide sufficient participation across faculties.

Data analysis

Responses were collated and analyzed through statistical software SPSS. Descriptive statistics provided participant demographics and scale scores summary. Correlational analyses investigated the interplay among digital multitasking behavior, self-efficacy, and self-perception and helped to identify how multitasking affects self-perception among university students.

Data handling

All data gathered were stored securely on password-protected devices, and only the research team had access. The data were anonymized before analysis, and identifying details were deleted to ensure confidentiality and to prevent identification of individual participants. Data were treated in accordance with data protection law, and the findings are reported in summary form to avoid identification of individual participants. Upon finalization of the research, the raw data will be kept safely for a duration stipulated by institutional guidelines and eventually destroyed in a proper manner.

Ethical considerations

This research was carried out in accordance with ethical guidelines for human-subject research. Before taking part, all participants were given clear information regarding the purpose of the study, methods, and their rights as a participant. Informed consent was gathered electronically via an embedded consent form at the start of the survey. Participants were made aware that taking part was voluntary, they could withdraw at any time without a penalty, and that their answers would be kept confidential and anonymous. No individually identifiable information was gathered to ensure privacy.

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics and reliability analysis

Three significant psychological constructs were measured: media multitasking, self-perception and self-efficacy. Descriptive statistics revealed that the Media Multitasking Scale (MMF) scores ranged from 43 to 79 (M = 56.22, SD = 7.67), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE) scores, which reflect self-perception, varied from 9 to 32 (M = 14.68, SD = 3.54), and General Self-Efficacy Scale scores varied between 13 and 40 (M = 28.27, SD = 5.68). Reliability testing revealed acceptable to high internal consistency for the MMF (α = .78) and GSE (α = .83), whereas the RSE indicated lower reliability (α = .63). These findings give an indication of the core variables and justify the usage of the MMF and GSE scales when measuring their respective dimensions in this population (Table 1).

Table 2: Pearsons correlations between media multitasking, self-perception and self-efficacy

Variable

1

2

3

MMF-total

—

RSE-total

0.224*

—

GSE-total

–0.122

–0.439**

—

*P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01

Table 3: Simple linear regression predicting self-perception from media multitasking (N = 105)

Predictor

B

SE

β

t

p

(Constant)

17.42

2.31

—

7.54

< 0.001

MMF-total

0.095

0.041

.224

2.33

0.022

Note. MMF-total = Media multitasking total score. B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard error; β = standardized coefficient.

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Coefficients for Study Variables (n = 105)

Variable

No. of Items

Min

Max

Mean

SD

Cronbach’s alpha

Media Multitasking (MMF-total)

18

43.00

79.00

56.22

7.67

0.78

Self-Perception (RSE-total)

10

9.00

32.00

14.68

3.54

0.63

Self-Efficacy (GSE-total)

10

13.00

40.00

28.27

5.68

0.83

Note. Cronbach's alpha values represent internal consistency reliability for each scale.

Correlational analyses

Pearson product–moment correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the relationships among media multitasking, self-perception, and self-efficacy. Results are displayed in Table 2. There was a strong positive correlation between media multitasking and self-perception (r = 0.224, P = 0.022), suggesting that students who perform more frequent media multitasking report higher self-perception. Conversely, self-perception and self-efficacy were strongly negatively correlated (r = –.439, P < 0.001). Nonetheless, no significant relationship existed between media multitasking and self-efficacy (r = –.122, P = 0.216).

Regression analysis

To test whether media multitasking was a predictor of self-perception, a basic linear regression analysis was carried out with MMF-total as the predictor and RSE-total as the dependent variable (Table 3). The model was statistically significant [F (1, 103) = 5.45, P = 0.022], accounting for ~5% of the variance in self-perception scores (R² = 0.05).

Gender-based analyses

Independent samples t-tests were conducted to examine gender differences in media multitasking, self-perception, and self-efficacy. The results are presented in Table 4. A significant difference was observed in self-perception scores between male and female participants, with males reporting significantly higher self-perception than females (t(103) = –2.54, p = .012). However, no significant gender differences were found for media multitasking or self-efficacy scores.

DISCUSSION

The current research explored the correlation between digital multitasking, self-perception, and self-efficacy among university students, with a further emphasis on gender differences. The findings indicated a positive significant correlation between digital multitasking and self-perception but not between digital multitasking and self-efficacy. Furthermore, gender comparisons revealed large differences in self-perception with the males' higher scores but no significant differences in frequency of multitasking or in self-efficacy.

The descriptive statistics reveal that sampled students had high and moderate media multitasking (M = 56.22, SD = 7.67). Except for this widespread participation, the self-perception scores were discovered to be relatively low (M = 14.68, SD = 3.54), which suggests the majority of the students would think less positively about themselves. In contrast, self-efficacy ratings were average (M = 28.27, SD = 5.68), demonstrating a good amount of confidence that they could handle tasks. This trend shows students as active digital multitaskers who are self-assured in general but might be having trouble with the way they see themselves, which is an area of potential discrepancy between perceived competence and self-concept.

The positive correlation between multitasking online and self-conception runs counter to earlier findings of negative consequences from multitasking. It is reported that online multitasking will fulfill inner psychological needs such as social belonging or searching for information but ultimately diminishes task accuracy due to cognitive overload (Wang and Tchernev, 2012; Öksüz et al. 2026). In the same vein, Alghamdi et al. (2020) noted that students who overestimated their ability at multitasking performed worse, implying metacognitive mismatch.

Table 4: Gender Differences in media multitasking, self-perception, and self-efficacy (n = 105)

Variable

Gender

Mean

SD

t

df

p

95% CI of mean difference

MMF-total

Male

54.71

8.28

–1.43

103

0.156

[–5.39, 0.88]

Female

56.97

7.29

RSE-total

Male

15.53

3.56

–2.54

103

0.012*

[–2.97, –0.37]

Female

13.86

3.36

GSE-total

Male

27.37

7.13

–1.01

49.88

0.319

[–4.02, 1.34]

Female

28.71

4.80

*P < 0.05

On the other hand, these findings are more consistent with Mohammed et al. (2021), wherein there was a positive relationship between multitasking and academic self-efficacy, which was mediated through higher confidence. This suggests that students might perceive their multitasking as a sign of competence or adaptability and consequently develop a positive self-concept despite lowered performance. Such a mismatch between perceived and actual multitasking ability might be a reflection of cultural or situational norms that excessively value productivity and multitasking.

In contrast to predictions and Hypothesis 3, computer multitasking was not significantly correlated with self-efficacy in this study. Past research including Boahene et al. (2019) and Kolo et al. (2017) highlighted that students with greater self-efficacy are found to have better constructive media behaviors and perform more favorable academic results. Wu et al. (2017) identified that exaggerated multitasking ability perceptions might be associated with lower task completion and higher stress. These contradictory results indicate that although students might be confident in their capability for multitasking, this might not carry over to a general sense of efficacy if it is not accompanied by subsequent success within academic settings.

The absence of a significant correlation in our results can also suggest that general self-efficacy, as operationalized in this research, is not affected by multitasking routines per se. Alternatively, perhaps it mirrors students' compartmentalized perceptions of competence—confident in navigation of the digital world but not necessarily in general academic or life tasks.

Gender comparisons showed that male students reported significantly greater levels of self-perception than female students, although no significant differences between genders were identified in multitasking frequency or self-efficacy. This conforms with previous research (Boahene et al. 2019), where it is inferred that male students may indicate greater confidence within digital contexts due to differing socialization experiences or confidence norms.

The absence of gender differences in self-efficacy does not necessarily imply that male and female students both perceive themselves as competent in general regardless of multitasking behaviors. The greater self-perceived scores among males may imply that digital multitasking contributes more positively to their self-perception, or that males conceptualize multitasking success differently than women. This research builds on work by Luo et al. (2020), who showed that academic performance mediated the link between media multitasking and self-esteem. Although our research did not measure academic performance, the link between multitasking and self-perceived competence can be attributed to students correlating multitasking skill with academic ability. Similarly, Pérez-Juárez et al. (2023) emphasized the importance of self-regulatory strategies to cope with digital distractions. The current findings confirm the potential for students to overestimate their ability at multitasking, advocating for metacognitive awareness and instructional intervention. Brooks (2015) also showed that high levels of multitasking self-efficacy failed to insulate students against the cognitive penalty of divided attention. The present results are consistent with this conclusion, in that high levels of multitasking frequency were not associated with greater self-efficacy, suggesting a potential disconnection between perceived and actual ability.

CONCLUSION

The present study explored the inter-relationship between digital multitasking, self-perception, and self-efficacy among university students. The results showed a significant positive correlation between digital multitasking and self-perception. However, no significant relation resulted between digital multitasking and self-efficacy, indicating that multitasking behavior may not manifest in increased belief in one’s own ability. Moreover, gender-based comparisons revealed significant differences in self-perception scores, with males showing significantly higher scores than females. No such differences were found in digital multitasking and self-efficacy variables. Overall, the study adds to a rich picture of how digital habits create psychological traits in educational contexts.

Implications

These results have several practical and theoretical implications:

Educational interventions: The significant correlation between digital multitasking and self-perception reveals that students overestimate their capabilities in dealing with general and academic tasks. This false confidence can affect how they approach learning material. Training in digital literacy and time management are crucial educational interventions that can enable students to critically evaluate their multitasking tendencies.

Gender-sensitive programming: Since gender variation had been discovered in the self-perception aspect, university support services would be well advised to involve gendered strategies to address self-image and academic confidence, especially among female students who may underreport or experience lower rates of self-perception.

Curriculum design: Academic professionals and administrators can use these findings to foster environments that discourage deleterious multitasking i.e., excessive use of digital devices during lectures.

Limitations

Following are some of the limitations of this study:

Cross-sectional design: The researchers used a cross-sectional research design which restricts it from making causal inferences. Longitudinal studies are required to make certain inferences if multitasking would cause changes in self-perception and self-efficacy over time.

Self-report measures: All the information were collected through self-report questionnaires that are prone to social desirability bias or inauthentic self-evaluation, particularly when working with multitasking activities.

Sample demographics: The sample only included university students from a specific area, which limits its generalizability to other populations or age groups.

Measurement tools: One of the scales had a reliability score less than optimal thresholds that could potentially impact the validity of results. In any future research, consideration needs to be given to revising or replacing less reliable measures.

Cultural context: Cultural factors specific to Pakistani university population can shape multitasking behaviors, self-perception and self-efficacy beliefs. Future studies should include cross-cultural comparisons to increase generalizability.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Authors thank the Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan for logistic support.

AUTHOR CONTRIBIUTIONS

Both authors contributed equally to this work.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no competing interest.

DATA AVAILABILITY

The data will be made available on a fair request to the corresponding author.

ETHICS APPROVAL

Not applicable to this study.

FUNDING SOURCE

No special funding was acquired for this study.

REFERENCES

Alghamdi A, Karpinski AC, Lepp A, Barkley J (2020) Online and face-to-face classroom multitasking and academic performance: moderated mediation with self-efficacy for self-regulated learning and gender. Computers in Human Behavior 102: 214–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.018.

Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change opens in new window. Psychological Review 84(2): 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4.

Bardhi F, Rohm AJ, Sultan F (2010) Tuning in and tuning out: media multitasking among young consumers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 9(4): 316–332. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.320.

Boahene KO, Fang J, Sampong F (2019) Social media usage and tertiary students’ academic performance: examining the influences of academic self-efficacy and innovation characteristics. Sustainability 11(8): 2431. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082431.

Brooks D (2015) The impact of digital multitasking on academic performance: evidence from classroom experiments. Journal of Educational Computing Research 52(4): 589–607. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115571302.

Junco R (2012) The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers and Education 58: 162–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004

Kolo C, Jaunzeme J, Döring N (2017) Digital media use and self-efficacy among university students: patterns and predictors. Computers in Human Behavior 76: 605–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.029.

Luo J, Yeung PS, Li H (2020) The relationship among media multitasking, academic performance and self-esteem in Chinese adolescents: the cross-lagged panel and mediation analyses. Children and Youth Services Review 117: 105308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105308.

Misra S, Stokols D (2012) Psychological and health outcomes of perceived information overload. Environment and Behavior 44(6): 737–759. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916511404408.

Mohammed MTS, Ibrahim F, Yunus N (2021) Exploring the relationship of social media usage and multitasking of social media on self-efficacy and academic performance. Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication 37(1): 227–243. https://doi.org/10.17576/JKMJC-2021-3701-13.

Öksüz YE, Avcı İ, Çukutli VŞ (2026) The Impact of constant online presence and multitasking behavior on cognitive fatigue among generation Z university students. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi 13(1): 21–43. https://doi.org/10.17680/erciyesiletisim.176000.

Ophir E, Nass C, Wagner AD (2009) Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(37): 15583–15587. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903620106.

Pérez-Juárez MÁ, González-Ortega D, Aguiar-Pérez JM (2023) Digital distractions from the point of view of higher education students. Sustainability 15(7): 6044.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076044.

Ralph BC, Thomson DR, Seli P, Carriere JS, Smilek D (2015) Media multitasking and behavioral measures of sustained attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 77(2): 390-401. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0771-7.

Rosenberg M (1965) Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Measures Package 61(52): 18.

Rushby JV, Klassen RM, Durksen TL, Pfaffel A, Bardach L (2025) Longitudinal effects of a scenario-based learning intervention on preservice teacher self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education 154: 104859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104859.

Sanbonmatsu DM, Strayer DL, Medeiros-Ward N, Watson JM (2013) Who multi-tasks and why? Multi-tasking ability, perceived multi-tasking ability, impulsivity, and sensation seeking. PLoS One 8(1): e54402. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054402.

Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M (1995) Generalized self-efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M (eds.) Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs. Windsor: Nfer-Nelson, 35–37.

Turkle S (2011) Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Wang Z, Tchernev JM (2012) The “myth” of media multitasking: reciprocal dynamics of media multitasking, personal needs, and gratifications. Journal of Communication 62: 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460‐2466.2012.01641.x.

Wu JY (2017) The indirect relationship of media multitasking self-efficacy on learning performance within the personal learning environment: implications from the mechanism of perceived attention problems and self-regulation strategies. Computers & Education 106: 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.010.