The short version
Cal Newport's Deep Work defines deep work as focusing without distraction on demanding tasks. It is a persuasive book, not a research review, so its ideas are worth checking against the evidence.
Switching tasks has a measurable cost. Even interruptions of a few seconds can double error rates on step-by-step work.
Flow, as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi described it, is absorbed, enjoyable focus that shows up when a challenge matches a person's skills. It is linked to wellbeing.
For clients who feel scattered, small experiments with their own surroundings, such as batching notifications, tend to work better than vows to "focus harder."
What Newport means by deep work
In Deep Work (Newport, 2016), Cal Newport, a computer science professor at Georgetown University (Hachette Book Group, n.d.-a), defines deep work as "the ability to focus without distraction on cognitively demanding tasks" (Hachette Book Group, n.d.-b). He contrasts it with the email, online meetings, and social media that fill so many workdays, and organizes the book around 4 rules: Work Deeply, Embrace Boredom, Quit Social Media, and Drain the Shallows.
The book draws on argument and examples more than on systematic research. The useful question for coaches is whether the research on attention supports the core idea. Much of it does, with some important limits.
What switching and interruptions cost
Switching. In laboratory studies, people respond more slowly and make more errors right after switching from one task to another. Time to prepare reduces this "switch cost" but does not erase it (Monsell, 2003).
Brief interruptions. Altmann, Trafton, and Hambrick (2014) gave people a task that required keeping their place in a sequence of steps. Interruptions averaging 2.8 seconds, about the time it takes to glance at a phone, doubled the rate of sequence errors afterward. Interruptions averaging 4.4 seconds tripled it.
Media multitasking. Uncapher and Wagner (2018) reviewed research on people who often use several media streams at once. On balance, heavier media multitaskers performed worse in some areas, especially those requiring sustained attention, but many studies found no difference, and the direction of cause is unknown. This is a reason for curiosity, not alarm.
Notifications and wellbeing. Fitz and colleagues (2019) randomly assigned 237 people to receive phone notifications as usual, batched 3 times a day, or not at all. The batched group felt more attentive, in a better mood, and more in control of their phones, and reported lower stress. The group with no notifications at all gained few of those benefits and reported more anxiety and fear of missing out. Cutting everything off was not the answer; predictable timing was.
Mind-wandering. Attention also drifts from the inside. In a large phone-sampling study, people's minds wandered nearly half the time, and they were less happy when they did (Killingsworth & Gilbert, 2010).
Flow: focus that feels good
Csikszentmihalyi (1990) described flow as a state of deep enjoyment and total involvement in what you are doing. A scoping review of 252 flow studies summarizes his 9 characteristics, including a balance between challenge and skill, clear goals, clear feedback, full concentration, a sense of control, and a changed sense of time (Peifer et al., 2022). The review defines flow as absorption that shows up when a person faces a challenging activity and believes their abilities are adequate for it, and it describes flow as supporting personal wellbeing and full functioning in daily life.
The review also notes a limit: more experimental and long-term studies are needed to know whether flow causes better wellbeing or simply travels with it.
The link to deep work is practical. Flow needs uninterrupted attention and a task that stretches a person without overwhelming them. Nobody can force flow, but a client can set up the conditions that make it more likely: a clear goal, a protected block of time, and a task adjusted to the right level of difficulty. Too easy tends to feel boring; too hard tends to feel stressful.
Using it with clients
Clients who say they feel "scattered" often blame themselves. The research points to the surroundings and the task as the first places to look.
Find their flow. Ask about a recent time they were fully absorbed. What made it possible? Those conditions are clues the client can build on.
Adjust the challenge. If a task feels draining, explore whether it is too hard (break it into a smaller first step) or too easy (add a goal or a time challenge).
Experiment with surroundings. Share the notification research with permission, then let the client design a test: batching, a single focus block, or a phone in another room. Remind them that going to zero may backfire.
Treat drifting as normal. Noticing a drift and coming back is the skill, not a failure.
Example lines: - "When was the last time you lost track of time because you were so absorbed in something?" - "What tends to pull your attention away when you sit down to do the work that matters most to you?" - "Would it be useful if I shared what one study found about batching phone notifications?" - "What's one small change to your setup you'd be willing to try for the next few days?"
Where coaching stops
Coaches don't diagnose attention disorders or recommend medications. Refer to the client's physician or a mental health professional when trouble focusing is long-standing and shows up across settings, or comes with persistent low mood, anxiety, poor sleep, exhaustion, or substance use. Questions about medications that affect attention go to the prescriber or pharmacist. If a client describes workplace strain that looks like burnout or depression, coaching can continue alongside, not instead of, professional care.
Go deeper
The Sleep, Stress, and Movement package, which covers stress, attention, and recovery, is in development.
References
Altmann, E. M., Trafton, J. G., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2014). Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(1), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030986
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row. (Current edition: Harper Perennial, 2008, ISBN 9780061339202.)
Fitz, N., Kushlev, K., Jagannathan, R., Lewis, T., Paliwal, D., & Ariely, D. (2019). Batching smartphone notifications can improve well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.016
Hachette Book Group. (n.d.-a). Deep work by Cal Newport [Hardcover listing]. Retrieved November 1, 2026, from https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/cal-newport/deep-work/9781455586691/
Hachette Book Group. (n.d.-b). Deep work by Cal Newport [Audiobook listing with book description]. Retrieved November 1, 2026, from https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/cal-newport/deep-work/9781478936596/
Killingsworth, M. A., & Gilbert, D. T. (2010). A wandering mind is an unhappy mind. Science, 330(6006), 932. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1192439
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
Newport, C. (2016). Deep work: Rules for focused success in a distracted world. Grand Central Publishing. ISBN 9781455586691.
Peifer, C., Wolters, G., Harmat, L., Heutte, J., Tan, J., Freire, T., Tavares, D., Fonte, C., Andersen, F. O., van den Hout, J., Šimleša, M., Pola, L., Ceja, L., & Triberti, S. (2022). A scoping review of flow research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 815665. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.815665
Uncapher, M. R., & Wagner, A. D. (2018). Minds and brains of media multitaskers: Current findings and future directions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(40), 9889–9896. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611612115
