I can have a conversation with someone while driving a car. Is that not multitasking?

To anticipate an objection, I would agree that the competence of both tasks diminishes somewhat. However the overall competence of both is sufficient.

My brain also seems capable of detecting when more attention is required, and automatically stopping the lower priority task. For example, if I had to quickly merge across many lanes on a busy freeway, then I would likely cease conversation during that maneuver. I don’t have to think too much about this consciously. The brain understands that driving is paramount and it will automatically preempt anything lower priority when more cognitive attention is required.

I would be interested to know what the research says about phenomena like that. There must be research like this supporting aviation, space flight, and nautical activities.

It seems easiest to multitask across different modes, e.g., I can work with my hands or drive a car while listening to an audiobook. I can have a social conversation with friends over voice chat while playing a video game.

Maybe the degree to which you can multitask depends upon the type of task and to what extent your brain can perform it automatically. The rote tasks involved in driving for example require very little attention to perform safely and correctly.

Yes, I had a lot of similar questions. Maybe 'task' is a misnomer? Maybe it's context switching that is the issue. Like talking and driving and having music playing in the background all exist in the same context of operating a vehicle. Just like using a calculator, reading a textbook and writing in a notebook are all different tasks you switch between to study, but are all in the same context of studying.

Side note, Wikipedia claims you can multitask between tasks you are already highly proficient at.

I think the idea is that the neocortex doesn't multitask. So you can talk and drive a car but not talk and learn abstract algebra.

>Some Evidence

Obviously the studies aren't definitive, but if they were and multitasking caused me to be less intelligent and less able to focus due to "permanent physiological changes in the brain", I would consider my brain to be damaged regardless of whether it meets the literal medical definition of brain damage.

If one is free to ignore or alter the definition of anything, then one could consider anything to be anything one wants.

But I get what you mean. We can only hope that permanent means permanent if you don't do anything to reverse it like being overweight.

There's a phrase for that. "not permanent."

There's a word for that!

Impermanent.