Behaviours and Preferences when Coordinating Mediated Interruptions: Social and System influence

There is a growing interest in technologies for supporting individuals to man- age their accessibility for interruptions. The applicability of these technologies is likely to be influenced by social relationships between people. This paper describes an experi- ment that examines interplay between a working relationship of an interruptor and an in- terruptee and two different system approaches to handle interruptions. We tested how system behaviour and the social relationship between the actors influence their interrup- tion behaviours. Our results are consistent with prior research on the importance of rela- tional benefit to understanding interruption. We found that interruptors were far more likely to be considerate of interruptees' activities, when they both shared a common goal. We have extended those findings by showing that interruptees display similar behaviours to those presented by interruptors. The results regarding the systems' influence show a clear trend towards the positive effect of the Automatic system on peoples' interruption behaviours which is based on: (i) visible interruption costs, (ii) social tension and (iii) sys- tem preference. We think that the results of this experiment translated into design impli- cations can prove helpful in informing the design of computer-mediated solutions sup- porting interruption handling.

[1]  Martin Reichenbach,et al.  Individual management of personal reachability in mobile communication , 1997, SEC.

[2]  R. W. Root,et al.  Informal Communication in Organizations: Form, Function, and Technology , 1990 .

[3]  Mikael Wiberg,et al.  Managing availability: Supporting lightweight negotiations to handle interruptions , 2005, TCHI.

[4]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  If not now, when?: the effects of interruption at different moments within task execution , 2004, CHI.

[5]  Mikael Wiberg,et al.  The Interaction Society: Practice, Theories and Supportive Technologies , 2005 .

[6]  Bonnie A. Nardi and Steve Whittaker The Place of Face-to-Face Communication in Distributed Work , 2002 .

[7]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  On the need for attention-aware systems: Measuring effects of interruption on task performance, error rate, and affective state , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[8]  A. Kendon Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters , 1990 .

[9]  E. Goffman Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-To-Face Behavior , 1967 .

[10]  Keith Cheverst,et al.  Exploring bluetooth based mobile phone interaction with the hermes photo display , 2005, Mobile HCI.

[11]  Carsten Sørensen,et al.  Fluid Interaction in Mobile Work Practices , 2004 .

[12]  Laura A. Dabbish,et al.  Administrative assistants as interruption mediators , 2003, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[13]  John C. Tang,et al.  Lilsys: Sensing Unavailability , 2004, CSCW.

[14]  Jeffrey Nichols,et al.  Mediator and medium: doors as interruption gateways and aesthetic displays , 2002, DIS '02.

[15]  Leslie A. Perlow,et al.  Who's helping whom? Layers of culture and workplace behavior , 2002 .

[16]  Sameer Patil,et al.  Who gets to know what when: configuring privacy permissions in an awareness application , 2005, CHI.

[17]  J. Freedman,et al.  Conceptions of Crowding. (Book Reviews: Crowding and Behavior; The Environment and Social Behavior. Privacy, Personal Space. Territory, Crowding) , 1975 .

[18]  Michael J. Muller,et al.  Diverse Strategies for Interruption Management in Complex Office Activities , 2004 .

[19]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Controlling interruptions: awareness displays and social motivation for coordination , 2004, CSCW.

[20]  J. George,et al.  Work Interrupted: A Closer Look at the Role of Interruptions in Organizational Life , 2003 .

[21]  Wendy A. Kellogg,et al.  "I'd be overwhelmed, but it's just one more thing to do": availability and interruption in research management , 2002, CHI.

[22]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action , 2000, CSCW '00.

[23]  Víctor M. González,et al.  Managing Currents of Work: Multi-tasking among Multiple Collaborations , 2005, ECSCW.

[24]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  A diary study of task switching and interruptions , 2004, CHI.

[25]  E. Anderson Hudson et al. , 1977 .

[26]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  The Place of Face-to-Face Communication in Distributed Work , 2002 .

[27]  John C. Tang,et al.  Rhythm modeling, visualizations and applications , 2003, UIST '03.

[28]  Daniel C. McFarlane,et al.  Comparison of Four Primary Methods for Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-Computer Interaction , 2002, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[29]  Kara A. Latorella,et al.  The Scope and Importance of Human Interruption in Human-Computer Interaction Design , 2002, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[30]  Christopher G. Atkeson,et al.  Predicting human interruptibility with sensors , 2005, TCHI.

[31]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[32]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Portholes: supporting awareness in a distributed work group , 1992, CHI.

[33]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Distributed Work , 2002 .