ArticlePDF Available

Interrupting or not: Exploring the effect of social context on interrupters' decision making

Authors:

Abstract

In recent decades technology-induced interruptions emerged as a key object of study in HCI and CSCW research, but until recently the social dimension of interruptions has been relatively neglected. The focus of existing research on interruptions has been mostly on their direct effects on the persons whose activities are interrupted. Arguably, however, it is also necessary to take into account the "ripple effect" of interruptions, that is, indirect consequences of interruptions within the social context of an activity, to properly understand interrupting behavior and provide advanced technological support for handling interruptions. This paper reports an empirical study, in which we examine a set of facets of the social context of interruptions, which we identified in a previous conceptual analysis. The results suggest that people do take into account various facets of the social context when making decisions about whether or not it is appropriate to interrupt another person.
Interrupting or not: Exploring the effect of social context
on interrupters’ decision making
Rikard Harr
Department of Informatics
University of Umeå
Sweden
rikard.harr@informatik.umu.se
Victor Kaptelinin
Department of Information Science
and Media Studies
University of Bergen
Norway
victor.kaptelinin@infomedia.uib.no
ABSTRACT
In recent decades technology-induced interruptions
emerged as a key object of study in HCI and CSCW
research, but until recently the social dimension of
interruptions has been relatively neglected. The focus of
existing research on interruptions has been mostly on their
direct effects on the persons whose activities are
interrupted. Arguably, however, it is also necessary to
take into account the “ripple effect” of interruptions, that
is, indirect consequences of interruptions within the social
context of an activity, to properly understand interrupting
behavior and provide advanced technological support for
handling interruptions. This paper reports an empirical
study, in which we examine a set of facets of the social
context of interruptions, which we identified in a previous
conceptual analysis. The results suggest that people do
take into account various facets of the social context when
making decisions about whether or not it is appropriate to
interrupt another person.
Author Keywords
Interruptions; social context; collaboration; interpersonal
relation; physical proximity; communication.
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.m. Information interfaces and presentation (e.g.,
HCI): Miscellaneous.
General Terms
Human Factors; Design; Measurement.
INTRODUCTION
With interactive technologies becoming increasingly
pervasive the interruptions caused by the technologies are
becoming pervasive, as well. Understanding how
interruptions happen, their effect on people and their
activities, as well as possible ways to designing
technological support for handling interruptions are key
research questions in HCI and CSCW [4, 9, 11].
Studies of interruptions have been dealing with a range of
issues, in particular: (a) the occurrence of different types
of interruptions in various everyday contexts (e.g., [2, 5]),
(b) effects of interruptions on interrupted activities, which
effects were typically (but not always, see e.g. [15]) found
negative [3, 6, 10], and (c) technological solutions, which
can help prevent unwanted interruptions from taking
place, as well as help users recover from interruptions if
they do take place (e.g., [1, 7, 12]).
While conceptual analyses and design explorations of
interruptions have undoubtedly produced a number of
significant results, they are, arguably limited in the sense
that they have mostly focused on the direct effects of
interruptions on the persons whose activities are
interrupted (that is, interruptees). Less attention has been
paid to understanding how people decide whether or not
to interrupt (that is, understanding interrupters). For
instance, studies of availability clues, intended to
minimize interruptions, are mostly concerned with how to
help people provide such clues to others rather than how
to utilize availability clues, that others provide.
With some exceptions (e.g. [12, 13, 14]) the social
dimension of interruptions has been neglected. As we
argue in a previous paper [8], the “ripple effect” of
interruptions, that is, indirect consequences of
interruptions within the social context of an activity, is
underrepresented in existing research. We argue that it is
critical to take these into account to properly understand
interrupting behavior and to be able to develop advanced
technological support for handling interruptions.
In our previous analysis [8] we described a variety of
“ripple effects”: from “collateral disruption” (the effect an
interruption directed at one person may have on other
people present, such as a mobile phone ringing during a
concert) to “dropping the ball” (a distraction experienced
by one person causes delays in activities of other
participants in a collaborative activity). We also identified
four relevant facets of the social context:
interpersonal relation (whether or not there exist
a personal relation between interrupter and
interruptee),
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies
bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise,
or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior
specific permission and/or a fee.
NordiCHI’12, October 14-17, 2012 Copenhagen, Denmark
Copyright © 2012 ACM 978-1-4503-1482-4/12/10… $15.00”
707
location (whether or not the interuptee is located
in a context where others could be indirectly
disrupted by an interruption),
communication (whether or not the interruptee is
involved in communication with others), and
collaboration (whether or not the interruptee is
involved in collaboration with others).
We argued that these facets of context are likely to have
an effect on how (or if) interruptions are taking place. The
aim of the present paper is to address some of the
limitations of existing HCI and CSCW research into
interruptions by providing empirical evidence about
how/if people take social context into account when
making decisions about whether to interrupt another
person or not. The study seeks to find empirical evidence
regarding the following questions:
Do people take into account social context when
making a decision about whether to interrupt?
What is the relative importance of individual
facets of social context when making such
decisions?
GENERAL METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Conducting an empirical study of how people make
decisions about interrupting others presents a serious
challenge from a research methodology point of view,
especially if the aim of a study is to investigate a set of
specific facets of social context. Direct observations in
natural settings have the advantage of high external
validity but are problematic because of practical and
ethical constraints. Since the researcher does not have
control over the social context, the specific facets of
interest may never be observed within the timeframe of
the study. In addition, such observations can be difficult
to interpret, since the reasons why people make a decision
may not be obvious for an external observer. Finally,
direct observations in real life contexts can undermine
participants’ privacy and integrity.
Direct observations in artificial settings allow researchers
to model situations, in which phenomena of interest are
likely to occur. However, this method is associated with
low external validity. Knowing that the situation at hand
is not “real” may significantly change the decision-
making process in the participants.
Therefore, an approach to studying how people make
decisions regarding interruptions, especially suitable for
an initial exploratory study, appears to be employing
interviews and questionnaires to capture participants’
opinions about, and real-life experience with, making
such decisions. However, a straightforward approach, that
is, simply asking the participants about their opinions and
preferences may make it hard for the participants to relate
their experience to issues in question.
After considering the concerns mentioned above, we have
adopted scenario-assessment as a method for
investigating the effect of different facets of social context
on making decisions regarding interrupting other people.
The facets used were the ones that were identified in our
previous analysis. We did however decide to change the
terminology for one of them from “location” to “physical
proximity” as this better captures what is actually meant.
We constructed a set of concrete scenarios, each
describing a context in which a participant had to decide
whether or not to interrupt a certain person. The contexts
that we used for this purpose were tax office, bus stop,
library, police station, school and accountant’s office.
Then we produced several variations of each scenario by
systematically emphasizing or de-emphasizing certain
facets of social context. The participants were asked to
assess the probability of trying to establish interaction in
the contexts described by each of the variations.
METHOD
Participants
Twenty-five undergraduate students at a Swedish
university, 16 males and 9 females, between 21 and 46
years old (average age of 26), fluent English speakers,
took part in the study.
Materials
The materials used in the study comprised sets of
assessment scenarios, each scenario shown on a separate
sheet of paper. In every scenario an imaginary context
was first described, in which one person was supposed to
interrupt another. Then four different additional
conditions were listed. The conditions represented four
possible combinations of two context facets, each of
which could be expressed at two different levels, High vs.
Low. For instance, the person to be interrupted could be a
personal acquaintance (high level of personal
relationship) or stranger (low level of personal
relationship), and he or she could be engaged in a
collaborative activity with other people (high level of
collaboration) or apparently working alone (low level of
collaboration). The participants were asked to assess each
of the four conditions by assigning a percentage
describing the estimated probability, with which they
would interrupt the person described in the scenario.
By systematically combining six different conditions (all
possible combinations of 4 context facets) and 6 types of
context we produced a pool of 36 assessment scenarios.
During the study each participant was presented with a set
of 6 assessment scenarios. These sets were constructed so
that all 36 scenarios were assessed during the study as a
whole. The order of 6 combinations of context facets was
balanced by using a 6x6 Latin Square design.
708
Procedure
Copies of assessment scenario sets were printed, sorted,
and stapled, to ensure the correct presentation order. Sets
were given to students, who were manually filling in the
printed copies when sitting in a classroom. One of the
authors was present throughout the procedure.
Analysis
The procedure of analyzing the data included the
following steps. A table of the 36 scenarios was created,
each respondent’s estimation of the probability of
interrupting under the four conditions filled in and the
average values for all respondents calculated. As a final
step various calculations were made to look for relative
importance of the four facets. An important part of this
last step was to rank the weight of difference facets. As all
four facets were compared against each other in different
scenarios by the creation of different conditions (high vs.
low, low vs. high etc.) they could easily be ranked
through a grading process. If the average value of making
an interruption under the condition that physical
proximity is high and interpersonal relation is low
exceeds the average value for the opposite, then physical
proximity has more weight than interpersonal relation. As
all facets were tested against each other, their weights
were measured by giving them a value for every time they
were considered superior and when summarizing all
values the relative weight of all facets were established.
RESULTS
The results show that respondents do take the social
context into consideration when deciding whether or not
to interrupt another person. In all 36 scenarios it is shown
that respondents estimate the probability of making an
interruptions as lower if there exist no previous relation,
the interruptee is located in a context where others could
be disturbed by an interruption, or is involved in
communication or collaboration with others. The
difference, for all scenarios, between the condition where
the facets are assumed to speak in favor of an interruption
(i.e. when an interpersonal relation exists, there are few or
no bystanders that could be disturbed and the interruptee
is not involved in any communication or collaboration)
and the opposite, ranges from 47% to 63%.
The degree of influence that the social context has on a
decision about whether or not to interrupt does however
differ between scenarios and combinations of facets. A
scenario that takes place in an accountant’s office where
the facets interpersonal relation and physical proximity
(of other people) are combined in four different
conditions shows the largest difference between estimated
probabilities of interruption for different conditions
(89%). More specifically, according to estimations of the
probability of making an interruption, it is 89% more
likely that an interruption would occur under the
condition that there exist a previous relation and there are
no other people on the scene, than if it were the other way
around. The scenario that showed the lowest difference in
estimated probability of making an interruption between
different conditions is the one that takes place in a tax
office and the facets of communication and physical
proximity are combined. In that case there was a
difference, but as low as 13%. When comparing the
estimated probability of making an interruption under the
same conditions but in different scenarios it becomes
evident that although the estimations are consistent, the
range in percentage varies. When, for example, a
combination of interpersonal relation and involvement in
communication is assessed in the “bus stop” scenario and
the “library” one, the difference is as high as 47,8%.
The design of the study ensured that all facets were
combined and tested in all conditions, which allows us to
make inferences about facets that have more weight than
the others. The results show that physical proximity is the
facet with most weight (i.e. if there are other people
nearby that could be disturbed by the interruption), an
interruptee’s involvement in communication the second,
interpersonal relation the third and interruptees’
involvement in collaboration the least dominant. Worth
mentioning is however that the difference between
physical proximity and communication is only 13%.
Other interesting results are that in some scenarios the
strength relationships between different facets differ from
the overall pattern presented above. For example in the
tax office scenario the interruptee’s involvement in
collaboration with others, even if with a small margin,
outweigh an existing previous relation (with 1,7%), or in
the scenario that takes place at a school where
involvement in communication outweigh physical
proximity (with 6%).
DISCUSSION
This paper continues our previous work on social
dimensions of interruptions (see [8]) by presenting
empirical evidence of their existence and importance. It
complements work on interruptions by showing how
people take social contexts into consideration before
interrupting others and also by comparing the level of
influence of different facets of these dimensions.
Exploring interruptions from the perspective of the
interrupter, and not only the interruptee, is, in our opinion,
a necessary step towards an improved understanding of
the phenomena and developing more advanced
technological support for interruption handling.
One of the main challenges for HCI and CSCW research
into interruptions is finding novel technological solutions
that would simultaneously address different, potentially
conflicting concerns. On the one hand, the more
information about interruptee’s current social context is
provided to the interrupter, the easier it is for the latter to
decide whether or not to interrupt. On the other hand,
709
providing such information may undermine interruptee’s
privacy. Understanding how exactly people make
interruption decisions can help identify ways to balance
these concerns, that is, provide enough information to
make a decision without revealing too much. The findings
of the study reported in this paper allow us to make to
some tentative conclusions about the facets of social
context taken into account when making decisions about
interruptions.
Even though the study only included a limited number of
respondents, the results suggest, in each and every
scenario, that people are more likely to make an
interruption if there is a previous personal relationship,
there is little risk for disturbing other people except the
interruptee, and that the interruptee is not involved in
communication or collaboration with others. Although
there are some exceptions in some scenarios, the overall
picture shows how some facets are considered as more
important to take into consideration before making an
interruption than others. As mentioned above, whether or
not there are other people around that might be disturbed
by an interruption is experienced as more important than
the other investigated facets. Worth mentioning however
is that the facet that was shown to be least influential,
involvement in collaboration, still had a significant impact
on the estimated probability of initiating an interruption
by the respondents.
Another important observation is that different contexts
(e.g. a police station, library or tax office) have a clear
effect on the estimated probability of making
interruptions under similar conditions. This could be
caused by how the scenarios were described, but it is also
likely that respondents co-created the scenarios by adding
their own experiences, norms and understandings to these
descriptions. This could at least partly explain individual
differences found in the empirical data, differences that
are partly hidden as a result of our analysis.
Even though it is tempting to consider immediate
implications of the findings presented in this paper for
design and evaluation of interactive technologies, much
more work is needed. It should be established whether the
findings could be generalized to a wider population, as
well as to technology-mediated communication and
collaboration. We are preparing to conduct another set of
scenario-assessments to include additional scenarios and a
far higher number of respondents with more diverse
characteristics in terms of occupation and age. This will
further improve the validity of our claims regarding social
contexts and interruptions.
REFERENCES
1. Altmann E. M., and Trafton J. G. Task interruption:
Resumption lag and the role of cues. In Proc. CogSci
2004, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2004), 43-48.
2. Ammons S. K., and Markham W. T. Working at
home: Experiences of skilled white collar workers,
Sociological Spectrum, 24, 2 (2004), 191-238.
3. Bailey, B. P., Konstan, J. A., and Carlis, J. V. The
effects of interruptions on task performance,
annoyance, and anxiety in the user interface. In Proc.
INTERACT 2001, IOS Press (2001), 593-601.
4. Burmistrov, I. and Leonova, A. Do interrupted users
work faster or slower? The micro-analysis of
computerized text editing task. In Proc. of HCI
International 2003, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
(2003), 621-625.
5. Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., and Wilhite, S. A diary
study of task switching and interruptions. In Proc.
CHI 2004, ACM Press (2004), 175-182.
6. Dodhia, R. M., and Dismukes, R. K. Interruptions
create prospective memory tasks. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 23, 1 (2009), 73-89.
7. Hameed, S., Ferris, T., Jayaraman, S., and Sarter, N.
Using informative peripheral visual and tactile cues to
support task and interruption management. Human
Factors, 51, 2 (2009), 126-135.
8. Harr, R., and Kaptelinin, V. Unpacking the Social
Dimension of External Interruptions. In Proc. GROUP
2007, ACM Press (2007), 399-408.
9. Iqbal, S. T. and Bailey, B. P. Oasis: A framework for
linking notification delivery to the perceptual structure
of goal-directed tasks. ACM Transactions on
Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 17, 4 (2010),
1-28.
10. Mark, G., Gudith, D., and Klocke, U. The cost of
interrupted work: More speed and stress. In Proc. CHI
2008, ACM Press (2008), 107-110.
11. Perlow, L. The time famine: Toward a sociology of
work time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1
(1999), 57-81.
12. Petersen, S. A., Cassens, J., Kofod-Petersen, A., and
Divitini, M. To be or not to be aware: Reducing
interruptions in pervasive awareness systems. In Proc.
UBICOMM 2008, IEEE Computer Society (2008),
327-332.
13. Ritterskamp, C. The Collaborative Nature of
Interruption Handling. In Proc. HICSS 2011, IEEE
Computer Society (2011), 1-10.
14. Tolmie, P., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., and Benford, S.
“Are You Watching This Film or What?” Interruption
and the Juggling of Cohorts. In Proc. CSCW 2008,
ACM Press (2008), 257-266.
15. Zijlstra, F. R. H., Roe, R. A., Leonova, A. B., and
Krediet, I. Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of
interrupted activities. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 72, 2 (1999), 163-185.
710
... Among the notable exceptions we find the seminal work by Perlow (1999) that shows how organizational norms regarding time use influence the organizational members interrupting behaviors, and the work by Dabbish et al. (2011) that shows how the organizational environment influences selfinterruptions. The works in this line of research (see also Harr and Kaptelinin, 2007;Harr and Kaptelinin, 2012) started to uncover the role of organizational environments, but largely overlooked the importance that the individuals' perceptions of the organizational context have in conditioning the way they work. ...
... More generally, Fayard and Weeks (2011) observe that different dimensions associated to the physical space, i.e. proximity, privacy, and permission, affect how people interact with and interrupt others at work. For example, Harr and Kaptelinin (2012) propose that individuals take the physical characteristics of the location where they are based into account when deciding if and when interrupting others and Whittaker et al. (1994) find that people tend to have impromptu conversations in public spaces more than in private ones. ...
... Consequences Formal and emergent interactions with coworkers Requests and need for attention (e.g., Gonzalez and Mark, 2004;Harr and Kaptelinin, 2007) Physical office layout and location Open office vs traditional office layouts and interruptions (Dabbish et al., 2011;Fayard and Weeks, 2012) Location characteristics and interruptions (Harr and Kaptelinin, 2012;Whittaker et al., 1994) Work allocation and organizational design Multiple team membership (O'Leary et al., 2011) Flat organizational structures (Appelbaum et al., 2008) Intense use of collaborative technology Use of instant messaging and other collaborative technology (e.g., Bertolotti et al, 2012;Li et al., 2011) Organizational norms Organizational norms regarding time use (Perlow, 1999) Individual perceptions and attitudes about the organization ? -our focus ...
Article
This paper investigates how individual perceptions and attitudes about an organization influence multitasking behaviors in the workplace. While we know that individuals are significantly influenced in their behaviors by the characteristics of their organizations (e.g. ICTs, organizational structure, physical layout), we still do not know much about how the way individuals interpret their organization influences their multitasking behaviors. Thus, we specifically hypothesize that the individual perception of the organizational preferences for multitasking (i.e. organizational polychronicity) engenders the actual multitasking behaviors that an individual enacts in the workplace. We also hypothesize that the attachment to the organization (i.e. organizational identification) moderates the above relationship. We conducted a mixed method study in two knowledge intensive organizations (an R&D unit and a university department) and collected data through a survey, diaries, and semi-structured interviews. Our findings support the first hypothesis but not the moderating role of organizational identification. However, this latter is directly related to how much a person is willing to work on multiple activities on a single day. Further, our study suggests that not only the organizational context should be investigated in the study of multitasking behaviors, but also the larger work context, including the individuals’ professional communities. We conclude with a discussion of theoretical and practical implications as well as methodological reflections on mixing methods in the study of multitasking in organizations.
... However, the definition of social context as "the interruptee' physical environment as understood in a social sense" -relating to the place the user is in, the people around him/her and the nature of the task [16] -is closer to "social expectation". Hence, the activity engagement variable considers only the social engagement of the user in his/her current task [17,19]. The activity engagement variable is related to what has been previously considered as interruption threshold [11,13], which also relates to the current activity type [29]. ...
... The influence of the broad social context includes culture and social norms [5,7,34], the presence and opinions of others [5] and social interactions [26]. This has been studied in regard to the effect on user behavior, decisions and expectations towards privacy, including how much control over data sharing may be desired [23], as well as its effects on the user's interruptibility [9,19,25,28] and the decision to interrupt somebody else [17]. ...
Conference Paper
This paper presents an organized set of variables that can aid intelligent privacy agents in predicting the best and necessary moments to interrupt users in order to give them control and awareness over their privacy, avoiding information overload or over choice.
... EMA: Social Interaction (6 features): Research on interruption has revealed that situations involving social engagement are considered less interruptible [6,15,18]. To model availability, we used participants' responses for the social interaction related EMA queries that includes "In social interaction?", ...
... An inward looking camera in smart eyeglasses could potentially detect some of these in near future as well. Second, we observe that stress features (16)(17)(18)(19)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26) figure quite prominently in this list, indicating a significant role of stress in predicting availability. Finally, we observe that driving is not included in the list of selected features, though intuitively it appears relevant. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Wearable wireless sensors for health monitoring are enabling the design and delivery of just-in-time interventions (JITI). Critical to the success of JITI is to time its delivery so that the user is available to be engaged. We take a first step in modeling users' availability by analyzing 2,064 hours of physiological sensor data and 2,717 self-reports collected from 30 participants in a week-long field study. We use delay in responding to a prompt to objectively measure availability. We compute 99 features and identify 30 as most discriminating to train a machine learning model for predicting availability. We find that location, affect, activity type, stress, time, and day of the week, play significant roles in predicting availability. We find that users are least available at work and during driving, and most available when walking outside. Our model finally achieves an accuracy of 74.7% in 10-fold cross-validation and 77.9% with leave-one-subject-out.
... The what task asks about the task content. We asked participants for whom they would be willing to do the task for because interpersonal relationships could affect how interruptions are perceived [29,54]. We wanted to cover common activities that people do during their daily lives and used the American Time Use Survey [58] to find activities where and how people spend time. ...
Conference Paper
Smartphones frequently notify users about newly available messages or other notifications. It can be very disruptive when these notifications interrupt users while they are busy. Our work here is based on the observation that people usually exhibit different levels of busyness at different contexts. This means that classifying users' interruptibility as a binary status, interruptible or not interruptible, is not sufficient to accurately measure their availability towards smartphone interruptions. In this paper, we propose, implement and evaluate a two-stage hierarchical model to predict people's interruptibility intensity. Our work is the first to introduce personality traits into interruptibility prediction model, and we found that personality data improves the prediction significantly. Our model bootstraps the prediction with similar people's data, and provides a good initial prediction for users whose individual models have not been trained on their own data yet. Overall prediction accuracy of our model can reach 66.1%.
... The what task asks about the task content. We asked participants for whom they would be willing to do the task for because interpersonal relationships could affect how interruptions are perceived [29,54]. We wanted to cover common activities that people do during their daily lives and used the American Time Use Survey [58] to find activities where and how people spend time. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Digital currencies represent a new method for exchange -- a payment method with no physical form, made real by the Internet. This new type of currency was created to ease online transactions and to provide greater convenience in making payments. However, a critical component of a monetary system is the people who use it. Acknowledging this, we present results of our interview study (N=20) with two groups of participants (users and non-users) about how they perceive the most popular digital currency, Bitcoin. Our results reveal: non-users mistakenly believe they are incapable of using Bitcoin, users are not well-versed in how the protocol functions, they have misconceptions about the privacy of transactions, and that Bitcoin satisfies properties of ideal payment systems as defined by our participants. Our results illustrate Bitcoin's tradeoffs, its uses, and barriers to entry.
... Experiment environments have ranged from all moments of daily life (e.g., through a personal smartphone [43,57]) through to a more specific focus, such as those with high social costs (e.g., [17]) or where task disruption is likely to occur, such as in offices (e.g., [12,41]). More generally, the environments are either controlled or in-the-wild, as classified in Table 3. Controlled environments have traditionally involved a laboratory setting, providing close observation of behaviour and a restricted decision space within which activities are undertaken (e.g., [26,29,1]). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
When should a machine attempt to communicate with a user? This is a historical problem that has been studied since the rise of personal computing. More recently, the emergence of pervasive technologies such as the smartphone have extended the problem to be ever-present in our daily lives, opening up new opportunities for context awareness through data collection and reasoning. Complementary to this there has been increasing interest in techniques to intelligently synchronise interruptions with human behaviour and cognition. However, it is increasingly challenging to categorise new developments, which are often scenario specific or scope a problem with particular unique features. In this paper we present a meta-analysis of this area, decomposing and comparing historical and recent works that seek to understand and predict how users will perceive and respond to interruptions. In doing so we identify research gaps, questions and opportunities that characterise this important emerging field for pervasive technology.
Article
Programming is a creative process that requires the ability to concentrate and juggle multiple concepts simultaneously in one's mind. Existing research shows there is a tangible cost when a programmer is interrupted as the programmer must recover the context of his work and refocus on the task at hand. However, CS students are rarely taught about interruptions and how to manage them. Instead, teaching tends to focus only on technical concepts. In addition, there is little research on interruptions with respect to CS students. Therefore, our research examines what happens when CS students are taught about interruptions and how to cope with them. The objective of this paper is to determine if CS students are affected by interruptions, what knowledge CS students possess regarding memory cues and resumption strategies, and what their opinion is of this material. We conducted a study with approximately two-hundred undergraduate CS students to answer these questions. Our study was comprised of an initial questionnaire, a seminar on memory cues and resumption strategies, and a follow-up questionnaire. Our results demonstrate that CS students are affected by interruptions, but 73% of students report not knowing methods to mitigate them. After learning about memory cues and resumption strategies, students report that the material was useful and that they want to study it. Their most significant feedback is that they have a strong desire to include these techniques in CS curriculums, reporting a mean score of 7.78 out of 10, where 0 signifies strong disagreement and 10 signifies strong agreement.
Article
The abundance of communication technology, such as the omnipresence of cell phones, has not only increased our ability to reach people anytime anywhere, but also the likelihood of being interrupted. As a result, there is value in understanding how to design technology so that gains are realized from desired interruptions, while the losses from unwanted interruptions are minimized. This paper presents the findings of two complementary field studies, one quantitative and the other qualitative, exploring how the provision of additional incoming cell phone call information impacts people's interruption decision making. These studies were enabled by, Telling Calls, a research application built to enable users to provide and receive information such as what the call is about and the caller's circumstances. The qualitative study showed how the additional call information helps people make informed call handling decisions and acts as an aid to effective conversation. The quantitative study elucidated these findings and showed that reducing the uncertainty about the nature of an incoming call improves people's ability to predict the value of an interruption. By combining these diverse research approaches: 1) theory instantiation through tool building; 2) context-aware surveys; and 3) semi-structured interviews, we were able to gain unique insights into the nature of interruption management in the wild, and related design implications.
Article
Full-text available
Previous research on the effects of interruptions on the speed of performing the computerized tasks gave rather non-homogeneous results: many authors insist that interrupted users always complete tasks slower than when performing the same tasks without interruption, but others showed that interrupting a user during some categories of tasks caused that user to complete the tasks faster. The micro-analysis of concrete text editing operations conducted in our experimental study revealed the difference between the effects of interruptions on cognitively simple and cognitively complex tasks. While the performance of simple tasks was not influenced by interruptions, interruptions slowered complex task performance. The task re-orientation after the interruption was found to be responsible for performance degradation.
Article
Full-text available
Based on a comprehensive literature review and detailed semistructured interviews with skilled workers who work at home, this article explores six research areas: reasons for working at home, the creation and maintenance of home/work boundaries, problems of isolation, distractions and temptations facing at-home workers, workaholism, and gender differences. The results indicate that white collar workers usually choose to work at home to reduce work/family conflicts or because of factors in the external labor market. Problems of creating and maintaining home/work boundaries, isolation, distractions and temptations at home, and workaholism do exist, but there was evidence that they may have been exaggerated in previous writing about at-home work. A combination of gender and life course stage better predicts differences in the experiences of the interviewees than does gender alone.
Article
Full-text available
In this paper we look at awareness systems that use mo-bile and ambient devices for collecting or presenting aware-ness information and operate within an Ambient Intelli-gence Environment. Our focus is on Pervasive Awareness Systems (PAS) that mediate awareness with the aim to im-prove the feeling of being connected. In particular, we con-centrate on the challenges that are connected to participa-tion in multiple communities, requiring a continuous bal-ancing between the need to "keep in touch" and to reduce interruptions. In the paper, we discuss software agents as a possible solution and identify the different roles that agents can play in reducing interruptions.
Article
Full-text available
When the theory of prospective memory is brought to bear on the ubiquitous experience of failing to resume interrupted tasks, the cognitive reasons for these failures may be understood and addressed. We examine three features of interruptions that may account for these failures: (1) Interruptions often abruptly divert attention, which may prevent adequate encoding of an intention to resume and forming an implementation plan, (2) New task demands after an interruption's end reduce opportunity to interpret resumption cues, (3) The transition after an interruption to new ongoing task demands is not distinctive because it is defined conceptually, rather than by a single perceptual cue. Hypotheses based on these three features receive support from two experiments that respectively manipulate encoding and retrieval conditions. The data support our contention that interrupted tasks are a special case of prospective memory, and allow us to suggest practical ways of reducing vulnerability to resumption failure. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
We performed an empirical study to investigate whether the context of interruptions makes a difference. We found that context does not make a difference but surprisingly, people completed interrupted tasks in less time with no difference in quality. Our data suggests that people compensate for interruptions by working faster, but this comes at a price: experiencing more stress, higher frustration, time pressure and effort. Individual differences exist in the management of interruptions: personality measures of openness to experience and need for personal structure predict disruption costs of interruptions. We discuss implications for how system design can support interrupted work. Author Keywords Multi-tasking, interruptions, experiment, context
Conference Paper
Full-text available
A proliferation of mobile devices in everyday life has increased the likelihood of technologically mediated interruptions. We examine ethnographic data from an SMS- based pervasive game in order to explicate the situated character of interruption. Ethnomethodological analysis of gameplay in the context of participants' everyday lives shows that interruption handling is shaped by its accountability to the various people or 'cohorts' whose concerns participants need to juggle simultaneously. Findings inform existing approaches to design where certain presuppositions regarding the nature of interruption prevail. Accordingly, we propose an approach to interruption handling that respects the ways in which people orient to and reason about interruptions locally in the conduct of situated action. Author Keywords
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The paper systematically explores the social dimension of external interruptions of human activities. Interruptions and interruption handling are key issues in human-computer interaction (HCI) and computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) research. However, existing research has almost exclusively dealt with effects of interruptions on individual tasks. In this paper we call for expanding the scope of analysis by including the effect of interruptions on the social context. We identify four facets of the social 'ripple effect' of interruptions: location, communication, collaboration, and interpersonal relation. We discuss the advantages of extending the notion of interruptions and its implications for future research.
Article
When an automating application needs a user's input or has feedback or other information for that user, it typically engages the user immediately, interrupting the user's current task. To empirically validate why unnecessarily interrupting a user's task should be avoided, we designed an experiment measuring the effects of an interruption on a user's task performance, annoyance, and anxiety. Fifty subjects participated in the experiment. The results demonstrate that an interruption has a disruptive effect on both a user's task performance and emotional state, and that the degree of disruption depends on the user's mental load at the point of interruption. We discuss the implications of these results in terms of building a system to better coordinate interactions between the user and applications competing for that user's attention.
Article
Corporate lawyers, investment bankers, computer programmers, and many other types of workers routinely work seventy-or eighty-hour weeks, putting in extra effort during particularly hectic times (Kidder, 1981; Schor, 1991). These men and women, married and single, are stressed, exhausted, and even dying as a result of frantic schedules (Harris, 1987). They have insufficient time to meet all of the demands on them from work and their lives outside of work. The purpose of this paper is to explore what I refer to as their time famine -their feeling of having too much to do and not enough time to do it -and to question whether this famine must exist. I chose to study a group of software engineers in a high-tech corporation. Over the past three decades, a number of studies have described the nature of engineers' work (e.g., Perrucci and Gerstl, 1969; Ritti, 1971; Brooks, 1982; Zussman, 1985; Whalley, 1986); however, I chose this group not because of the type of work they do but, rather, because of the immense pressure they are under to get their product to market and the time famine they experience as a result. Several recent books have described with awe the fast-paced, high-pressure, crisis-filled environment in which software engineers work (Kidder, 1981; Moody, 1990; Zachary, 1994). These authors portray the engineers as heroes for their willingness to work extremely long hours and celebrate the engineers' intensity and total devotion to work. I, in contrast, explore the engineers' actual use of time at work and the impact their use of time has on other individuals and the groups to which the individuals belong, which reveals the problematic nature of the current way of using time. Ultimately, I therefore challenge the assumption that the current way of using time, which is so destructive to individuals' lives outside of work, is in the corporation's best interest (Perlow, 1995, 1997).
Conference Paper
Interruptions have become an indispensible and ubiquitous part of multi-project knowledge work. While most existing studies analyze the effects of interruptions from the perspective of the interrupted individual, in this paper I propose to interpret task interruptions as events that are embedded in a rich social context. Handling interruptions therefore becomes a collective activity that depends on the interplay of a variety of actors. Interruption planning and task resumption are portrayed as collaborative processes: the paper presents six corresponding design guidelines for organizational and technological support. By the example of three prototypes, different possibilities to support knowledge workers in handling interruptions are discussed and put to the test.