So if the trough is the poison and restorative breaks are the antidote, what should those breaks look like? There’s no single answer, but science offers five guiding principles.
1. Something beats nothing.
One problem with afternoons is that if we stick with a task too long, we lose sight of the goal we’re trying to achieve, a process known as “habituation.” Short breaks from a task can prevent habituation, help us maintain focus, and reactivate our commitment to a goal.17 And frequent short breaks are more effective than occasional ones.18 DeskTime, a company that makes productivity-tracking software, says that “what the most productive 10% of our users have in common is their ability to take effective breaks.” Specifically, after analyzing its own data, DeskTime claims to have discovered a golden ratio of work and rest. High performers, its research concludes, work for fifty-two minutes and then break for seventeen minutes. DeskTime never published the data in a peer-reviewed journal, so your mileage may vary. But the evidence is overwhelming that short breaks are effective—and deliver considerable bang for their limited buck. Even “micro-breaks” can be helpful.19
2. Moving beats stationary
Sitting, we’ve been told, is the new smoking—a clear and present danger to our health. But it also leaves us more susceptible to the dangers of the trough, which is why simply standing up and walking around for five minutes every hour during the workday can be potent. One study showed that hourly five-minute walking breaks boosted energy levels, sharpened focus, and “improved mood throughout the day and reduced feelings of fatigue in the late afternoon.” These “microbursts of activity,” as the researchers call them, were also more effective than a single thirty-minute walking break—so much so that the researchers suggest that organizations “introduce physically active breaks during the workday routine.”20 Regular short walking breaks in the workplace also increase motivation and concentration and enhance creativity.21
3. Social beats solo
Time alone can be replenishing, especially for us introverts. But much of the research on restorative breaks points toward the greater power of being with others, particularly when we’re free to choose with whom we spend the time. In high-stress occupations like nursing, social and collective rest breaks not only minimize physical strain and cut down on medical errors, they also reduce turnover; nurses who take these sorts of breaks are more likely to stay at their jobs.22 Likewise, research in South Korean workplaces shows that social breaks—talking with coworkers about something other than work—are more effective at reducing stress and improving mood than either cognitive breaks (answering e-mail) or nutrition breaks (getting a snack).23
4. Outside beats inside
Nature breaks may replenish us the most.24 Being close to trees, plants, rivers, and streams is a powerful mental restorative, one whose potency most of us don’t appreciate.25 For example, people who take short walks outdoors return with better moods and greater replenishment than people who walk indoors. What’s more, while people predicted they’d be happier being outside, they underestimated how much happier.26 Taking a few minutes to be in nature is better than spending those minutes in a building. Looking out a window into nature is a better micro-break than looking at a wall or your cubicle. Even taking a break indoors amid plants is better than doing so in a green-free zone.
5. Fully detached beats semidetached
By now, it’s well known that 99 percent of us cannot multitask. Yet, when we take a break, we often try to combine it with another cognitively demanding activity—perhaps checking our text messages or talking to a colleague about a work issue. That’s a mistake. In the same South Korean study mentioned earlier, relaxation breaks (stretching or daydreaming) eased stress and boosted mood in a way that multitasking breaks did not.27 Tech-free breaks also “increase vigor and reduce emotional exhaustion.”28 Or, as other researchers put it, “Psychological detachment from work, in addition to physical detachment, is crucial, as continuing to think about job demands during breaks may result in strain.”29
So if you’re looking for the Platonic ideal of a restorative break, the perfect combination of scarf, hat, and gloves to insulate yourself from the cold breath of the afternoon, consider a short walk outside with a friend during which you discuss something other than work.
Vigilance breaks and restorative breaks offer us a chance to recharge and replenish, whether we’re performing surgery or proofreading advertising copy. But two other respites are also worth considering. Both were once sturdy features of professional and personal life only to be dismissed more recently as soft, frivolous, and antithetical to the head-down, laptop-up, inbox-zero ethos of the twenty-first century. Now both are poised for a comeback.
THE MOST IMPORTANT MEAL OF THE DAY
After you woke up this morning, some time before you began a day of filing reports, making deliveries, or chasing children, you probably ate breakfast. You might not have settled in for a full, proper meal, but I’ll bet you broke the nighttime fast with something—a piece of toast maybe or a little yogurt, perhaps washed down with coffee or tea. Breakfast fortifies our bodies and fuels our brains. It’s also a guardrail for our metabolism; eating breakfast restrains us from gorging the rest of the day, which keeps our weight down and our cholesterol in check. These truths are so self-evident, these benefits so manifest, that the principle has become a nutritional catechism. Say it with me: Breakfast is the most important meal of the day.
As a devout breakfast eater, I endorse this principle. But as someone paid to muck around in scientific journals, I’ve grown skeptical. Most of the research showing the salvation of a morning meal and the sin of missing it are observational studies rather than randomized controlled experiments. Researchers follow people around, watching what they do, but they don’t compare them to a control group.30 That means their findings show correlation (people who eat breakfast might well be healthy) but not necessarily causation (maybe people who are already healthy are just more likely to eat breakfast). When scholars have applied more rigorous scientific methods, breakfast’s benefits have been much more difficult to detect.
“A recommendation to eat or skip breakfast . . . contrary to widely espoused views . . . had no discernable effect on weight loss,” says one.31 “The belief (in breakfast) . . . exceeds the strength of scientific evidence,” says another.32 Layer in the fact that several studies showing the virtues of breakfast were funded by industry groups and the skepticism deepens.
Should we all eat breakfast? The conventional view is a flaky and delicious yes. But as a leading British nutritionist and statistician says, “[T]he current state of scientific evidence means that, unfortunately, the simple answer is: I don’t know.”33
So eat breakfast if you’d like. Or skip it if you’d prefer. But if you’re concerned about the perils of the afternoon, start taking more seriously the often-maligned and easily dismissed meal called lunch. (“Lunch is for wimps,” 1980s cinematic supervillain Gordon Gekko famously declared.) By one estimation, 62 percent of American office workers wolf down lunch in the same spot where they work all day. These dismal scenes—smartphone in one hand, soggy sandwich in the other, despair wafting from the cubicle—even have a name: the sad desk lunch. And that name has given rise to a small online movement in which people post photographs of their oh-so-pathetic midday meals.34 But it’s time we paid more attention to lunch, because social scientists are discovering that it’s far more important to our performance than we realize.