Comparison of Four Primary Methods for Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-Computer Interaction
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15216158 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel C McFarlane (0000-0002-0561-2634, Lockheed Martin (United States), corresponding author) |
| Year | 2002 |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 63-139 |
| Publication date | 2002-03-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Human-Computer Interaction (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0737-0024 • E-ISSN: 1532-7051 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1207/s15327051hci1701_2 |
| OpenAlex | W2055104609 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 12 |
| References cited | 45 |
Interruptions can cause people to make mistakes or errors during human-computer interaction (HCI). Interruptions occur as an unavoidable side-effect of some important kinds of human computer-based activities, for example, (a) constantly monitor for unscheduled changes in information environments, (b) supervise background autonomous services, and (c) intermittently collaborate and communicate with other people. Fortunately, people have powerful innate cognitive abilities that they can potentially leverage to manage multiple concurrent activities if they have specific kinds of control and interaction support. There is great opportunity, therefore, for user-interface design to increase people's ability to successfully handle interruptions, and prevent expensive errors. The literature contains very little concrete design wisdom about how to solve the interruption problems in user interfaces (UIs). Coordination support, however, is identified as a most important design topic. This article presents the results of an empirical investigation to compare basic design solutions for coordinating human interruption in computer-based multitasks. A theory-based taxonomy of human interruption is used to identify the four primary methods for coordinating human interruption. An experiment with 36 participants compares these four different design solutions within an abstracted common user multitasking context. The results show important design tradeoffs for coordinating the interruption of people in HCI and support some UI design guidelines. Negotiation support is the best overall solution except where small differences in the timeliness of handling interruptions is critical and then immediate is best
Context (archaeology · Human multitasking · Human–computer interaction · Leverage (statistics · Negotiation · Computer Science · Human-Automation Interaction and Safety · Personal Information Management and User Behavior · Psychology · Usability and User Interface Design · Artificial Intelligence
Perceptions of Digital Device Use and Accompanying Digital Interruptions in Blended Learning
Imagining future digital assistants at work
Understanding the social media interactivity paradox
An organizational digital footprint for interruption management
Intrusive media and knowledge work
Effects of interruption on work performance and the moderating effects of mental fatigue
Examining Factors Influencing the Disruptiveness of Notifications in a Mobile Museum Context
Change Blindness and Its Implications for Complex Monitoring and Control Systems Design and Operator Training
Using Task-Induced Pupil Diameter and Blink Rate to Infer Cognitive Load
The Scope and Importance of Human Interruption in Human-Computer Interaction Design
The Meaning of Interactivity—Some Proposals for Definitions and Measures
Grounding Privacy in Mediated Communication
Design and analysis
Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences
Using Language
Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears
Note on the construction of digram-balanced Latin squares
The SonicFinder
The Scope and Importance of Human Interruption in Human-Computer Interaction Design
Aftereffects of stress on human performance and social behavior
Aftereffects of stress on human performance and social behavior
Need achievement and the resumption of incompleted tasks
Why Can't a Woman be More Like a Man
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2002 - 2023 (22) |
| Highly cited | No |