The figure of 23 minutes to regain concentration after an interruption is a myth with no scientific basis; the true cost of repeated interruptions is primarily emotional and cognitive (stress, frustration, increased mental load) rather than purely temporal.

noli's read

The creator's analysis is rigorously aligned with the work of Gloria Mark, particularly the benchmark study 'The Cost of Interrupted Work' (Mark et al., 2008). This observational study effectively shows that while interruptions push individuals to work faster to compensate, it comes at the cost of a significant increase in stress, frustration, and mental load, rather than a fixed 23-minute recovery time. The '23 minutes' figure is widely considered in the scientific community to be a media distortion or an unverified extrapolation of more complex data. The creator's assertion is therefore factually sound: the brain switches to a compensatory survival mode, reducing the depth of work. There is no exaggeration here, but rather a necessary correction of an erroneous popular belief. The distinction between temporal cost and cognitive cost is an important nuance supported by literature in occupational psychology.

the sources

No named source held this one up — that absence is part of the verdict.