If not now, when?: the effects of interruption at different moments within task execution

User attention is a scarce resource, and users are susceptible to interruption overload. Systems do not reason about the effects of interrupting a user during a task sequence. In this study, we measure effects of interrupting a user at different moments within task execution in terms of task performance, emotional state, and social attribution. Task models were developed using event perception techniques, and the resulting models were used to identify interruption timings based on a user's predicted cognitive load. Our results show that different interruption moments have different impacts on user emotional state and positive social attribution, and suggest that a system could enable a user to maintain a high level of awareness while mitigating the disruptive effects of interruption. We discuss implications of these results for the design of an attention manager.

[1]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Agents that reduce work and information overload , 1994, CACM.

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

[3]  Sheryl L. Miller.  Window of Opportunity: Using the Interruption Lag to Manage Disruption in Complex Tasks , 2002 .

[4]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Human brain activity time-locked to perceptual event boundaries , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[5]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Instant Messaging: Effects of Relevance and Timing , 2000 .

[6]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Notification, Disruption, and Memory: Effects of Messaging Interruptions on Memory and Performance , 2001, INTERACT.

[7]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing The User Interface , 2013 .

[8]  John L. Sibert,et al.  Heart rate variability: indicator of user state as an aid to human-computer interaction , 1998, CHI.

[9]  J. Cellier,et al.  Interference between switched tasks , 1992 .

[10]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[11]  F. Zijlstra,et al.  Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of interrupted activities , 1999 .

[12]  S. Cohen,et al.  Aftereffects of stress on human performance and social behavior: a review of research and theory. , 1980, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  D. Norman,et al.  Psychological Issues in Support of Multiple Activities , 1986 .

[14]  Liam Bannon,et al.  Evaluation and analysis of users' activity organization , 1983, CHI '83.

[15]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[16]  D. S. McCrickard,et al.  Evaluating Graphical vs . Textual Secondary Displays for Information Notification , 2002 .

[17]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Event structure in perception and conception. , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  Paul P. Maglio,et al.  Tradeoffs in displaying peripheral information , 2000, CHI.

[19]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Perceiving, remembering, and communicating structure in events. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Letizia: An Agent That Assists Web Browsing , 1995, IJCAI.

[21]  J. Gregory Trafton,et al.  Memory for goals: an activation-based model , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[22]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Computers are social actors , 1994, CHI '94.

[23]  Lan Xia,et al.  Effects of Interruptions on Consumer Online Decision Processes , 2002 .

[24]  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.

[25]  G. S. Sanders,et al.  The motivating effects of distraction on task performance. , 1975 .

[26]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Scope: providing awareness of multiple notifications at a glance , 2002, AVI '02.

[27]  Ernesto Arroyo,et al.  Interruptions as multimodal outputs: which are the less disruptive? , 2002, Proceedings. Fourth IEEE International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces.

[28]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[29]  Devina Ramduny-Ellis,et al.  Trigger Analysis - understanding broken tasks , 2003 .

[30]  J. Gregory Trafton,et al.  Preparing to resume an interrupted task: effects of prospective goal encoding and retrospective rehearsal , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[31]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  Measuring the effects of interruptions on task performance in the user interface , 2000, Smc 2000 conference proceedings. 2000 ieee international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. 'cybernetics evolving to systems, humans, organizations, and their complex interactions' (cat. no.0.

[32]  Christopher A. Monk,et al.  The Attentional Costs of Interrupting Task Performance at Various Stages , 2002 .

[33]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  The Effects of Interruptions on Task Performance, Annoyance, and Anxiety in the User Interface , 2001, INTERACT.

[34]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the user interface (videotape) , 1987 .

[35]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  Adjusting Windows: Balancing Information Awareness with Intrusion , 2000 .

[36]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Instant Messaging and Interruption: Influence of Task Type on Performance , 2000 .