Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Intelligent Interruption Management using Electro Dermal Activity based Physiological Sensor for Collaborative Sensemaking

Published: 11 September 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Sensemaking tasks are difficult to accomplish with limited time and attentional resources because analysts are faced with a constant stream of new information. While this information is often important, the timing of the interruptions may detract from analyst's work. In an ideal world, there would be no interruptions. But that is not the case in real world sensemaking tasks. So, in this study, we explore the value of timing interruptions based on an analyst's state of arousal as detected by Electrodermal activity derived form galvanic skin response (EDA). In a laboratory study, we compared performance when interruptions were timed to occur during increasing arousal, decreasing arousal, at random intervals or not at all. Analysts performed significantly better when interruptions occurred during periods of increasing arousal than when they were random. Further, analysts rated process component of team experience significantly higher also during periods of increasing arousal than when they were random. Self-reported workload was not impacted by interruptions timing. We discuss how system designs could leverage inexpensive off-the-shelf wrist sensors to improve interruption timing.

References

[1]
Yomna Abdelrahman, Eduardo Velloso, Tilman Dingler, Albrecht Schmidt, and Frank Vetere. 2017. Cognitive Heat: Exploring the Usage of Thermal Imaging to Unobtrusively Estimate Cognitive Load. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 3 (2017), 33.
[2]
Piotr D Adamczyk and Brian P Bailey. 2004. If not now, when?: the effects of interruption at different moments within task execution. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 271--278.
[3]
Albert F Ax. 1953. The physiological differentiation between fear and anger in humans. Psychosomatic medicine 15, 5 (1953), 433--442.
[4]
Brian P Bailey, Piotr D Adamczyk, Tony Y Chang, and Neil A Chilson. 2006. A framework for specifying and monitoring user tasks. Computers in Human Behavior 22, 4 (2006), 709--732.
[5]
Brian P Bailey and Shamsi T Iqbal. 2008. Understanding changes in mental workload during execution of goal-directed tasks and its application for interruption management. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 14, 4 (2008), 21.
[6]
Brian P Bailey and Joseph A Konstan. 2006. On the need for attention-aware systems: Measuring effects of interruption on task performance, error rate, and affective state. Computers in human behavior 22, 4 (2006), 685--708.
[7]
Aruna D Balakrishnan, Susan R Fussell, and Sara Kiesler. 2008. Do visualizations improve synchronous remote collaboration?. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1227--1236.
[8]
Aruna D Balakrishnan, Susan R Fussell, Sara Kiesler, and Aniket Kittur. 2010. Pitfalls of information access with visualizations in remote collaborative analysis. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. ACM, 411--420.
[9]
Wolfram Boucsein. 2012. Electrodermal activity. Springer Science 8 Business Media.
[10]
AJ Brush, David Bargeron, Jonathan Grudin, and Anoop Gupta. 2002. Notification for shared annotation of digital documents. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 89--96.
[11]
Daniel Chen, Jamie Hart, and Roel Vertegaal. 2007. Towards a physiological model of user interruptability. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 439--451.
[12]
Gregorio Convertino, Helena M Mentis, Mary Beth Rosson, Aleksandra Slavkovic, and John M Carroll. 2009. Supporting content and process common ground in computer-supported teamwork. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2339--2348.
[13]
Mary Czerwinski, Edward Cutrell, and Eric Horvitz. 2000. Instant messaging and interruption: Influence of task type on performance. In OZCHI 2000 conference proceedings, Vol. 356. 361--367.
[14]
Mary Czerwinski, Edward Cutrell, and Eric Horvitz. 2000. Instant messaging: Effects of relevance and timing. In People and computers XIV: Proceedings of HCI, Vol. 2. 71--76.
[15]
RK Dismukes, Grant E Young, Robert L Sumwalt III, and Cynthia H Null. 1998. Cockpit interruptions and distractions: Effective management requires a careful balancing act. (1998).
[16]
Steven A Egger. 2002. The killers among us: An examination of serial murder and its investigation. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
[17]
James Fogarty, Andrew J Ko, Htet Htet Aung, Elspeth Golden, Karen P Tang, and Scott E Hudson. 2005. Examining task engagement in sensor-based statistical models of human interruptibility. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 331--340.
[18]
Darren Gergle, Robert E Kraut, and Susan R Fussell. 2004. Language efficiency and visual technology: Minimizing collaborative effort with visual information. Journal of language and social psychology 23, 4 (2004), 491--517.
[19]
Steven Gottlieb, Sheldon I Arenberg, Raj Singh, et al. 1994. Crime analysis: From first report to final arrest. Alpha Publishing Montclair, CA.
[20]
Nitesh Goyal. 2015. Designing for Collaborative Sensemaking: Using Expert 8 Non-Expert Crowd. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.06053 (2015).
[21]
Nitesh Goyal and Susan R Fussell. 2015. Designing for Collaborative Sensemaking: Leveraging Human Cognition For Complex Tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.05737 (2015).
[22]
Nitesh Goyal and Susan R Fussell. 2016. Effects of Sensemaking Translucence on Distributed Collaborative Analysis. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work 8 Social Computing. ACM, 288--302.
[23]
Nitesh Goyal, Gilly Leshed, Dan Cosley, and Susan R Fussell. 2014. Effects of implicit sharing in collaborative analysis. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 129--138.
[24]
Nitesh Goyal, Gilly Leshed, and Susan R Fussell. 2013. Effects of visualization and note-taking on sensemaking and analysis. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2721--2724.
[25]
Nitesh Goyal, Gilly Leshed, and Susan R Fussell. 2013. Leveraging partner's insights for distributed collaborative sensemaking. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work companion. ACM, 15--18.
[26]
Carl Gutwin and Saul Greenberg. 1998. Design for individuals, design for groups: tradeoffs between power and workspace awareness. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. ACM, 207--216.
[27]
SG Hart and LE Staveland. 1988. Development of a Muli-dimensional Workload Rating Scale: Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. Human Mental Workload. PA Hancock and N. Meshkati. (1988).
[28]
Stephen C Hayne, Lucy J Troup, and Sara A Mccomb. 2011. âĂIJWhereâĂŹs Farah?âĂİ: Knowledge silos and information fusion by distributed collaborating teams. Information Systems Frontiers 13, 1 (2011), 89--100.
[29]
Jeffrey Heer, Fernanda B Viégas, and Martin Wattenberg. 2009. Voyagers and voyeurs: Supporting asynchronous collaborative visualization. Commun. ACM 52, 1 (2009), 87--97.
[30]
Eric Horvitz, Andy Jacobs, and David Hovel. 1999. Attention-sensitive alerting. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth conference on Uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 305--313.
[31]
Shamsi T Iqbal and Brian P Bailey. 2006. Leveraging characteristics of task structure to predict the cost of interruption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems. ACM, 741--750.
[32]
Shamsi T Iqbal and Brian P Bailey. 2008. Effects of intelligent notification management on users and their tasks. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 93--102.
[33]
Thomas Jackson, Ray Dawson, and Darren Wilson. 2001. The cost of email interruption. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 5, 1 (2001), 81--92.
[34]
Ruogu Kang, Aimee Kane, and Sara Kiesler. 2014. Teammate inaccuracy blindness: when information sharing tools hinder collaborative analysis. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work 8 social computing. ACM, 797--806.
[35]
Ruogu Kang and Sara Kiesler. 2012. Do collaborators' annotations help or hurt asynchronous analysis. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work Companion. ACM, 123--126.
[36]
Kara A Latorella. 1998. Effects of modality on interrupted flight deck performance: Implications for data link. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, Vol. 42. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 87--91.
[37]
John D Lee, Joshua D Hoffman, and Elizabeth Hayes. 2004. Collision warning design to mitigate driver distraction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 65--72.
[38]
Santosh Mathan, Stephen Whitlow, Michael Dorneich, Patricia Ververs, and Gene Davis. 2007. Neurophysiological estimation of interruptibility: Demonstrating feasibility in a field context. In In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of the Augmented Cognition Society. 51--58.
[39]
D Scott McCrickard, Richard Catrambone, Christa M Chewar, and John T Stasko. 2003. Establishing tradeoffs that leverage attention for utility: empirically evaluating information display in notification systems. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58, 5 (2003), 547--582.
[40]
C McFarlane Daniel and A Latorella Kara. 2002. The scope and importance of human interruption in HCI design. Human-Computer Interaction 17, 1 (2002), 1--61.
[41]
Helena M Mentis, Paula M Bach, Blaine Hoffman, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M Carroll. 2009. Development of decision rationale in complex group decision making. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1341--1350.
[42]
Yoko Nagai, Laura H Goldstein, Hugo D Critchley, and Peter BC Fenwick. 2004. Influence of sympathetic autonomic arousal on cortical arousal: implications for a therapeutic behavioural intervention in epilepsy. Epilepsy research 58, 2 (2004), 185--193.
[43]
Syavash Nobarany, Mona Haraty, and Brian Fisher. 2012. Facilitating the reuse process in distributed collaboration: a distributed cognition approach. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, 1223--1232.
[44]
Nargess Nourbakhsh, Yang Wang, Fang Chen, and Rafael A Calvo. 2012. Using galvanic skin response for cognitive load measurement in arithmetic and reading tasks. In Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference. ACM, 420--423.
[45]
Tadashi Okoshi, Julian Ramos, Hiroki Nozaki, Jin Nakazawa, Anind K Dey, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2015. Reducing users' perceived mental effort due to interruptive notifications in multi-device mobile environments. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 475--486.
[46]
Veljko Pejovic and Mirco Musolesi. 2014. InterruptMe: designing intelligent prompting mechanisms for pervasive applications. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 897--908.
[47]
Nicholas J Pioch and John O Everett. 2006. POLESTAR: collaborative knowledge management and sensemaking tools for intelligence analysts. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management. ACM, 513--521.
[48]
Peter Pirolli and Stuart Card. 2005. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. In Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis, Vol. 5. 2--4.
[49]
Cheri Speier, Joseph S Valacich, and Iris Vessey. 1999. The influence of task interruption on individual decision making: An information overload perspective. Decision Sciences 30, 2 (1999), 337--360.
[50]
Neville A Stanton. 1994. Human factors in alarm design. CRC Press.
[51]
Jonathan Sykes and Simon Brown. 2003. Affective gaming: measuring emotion through the gamepad. In CHI'03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 732--733.
[52]
Heather L Urry, Carien M van Reekum, Tom Johnstone, and Richard J Davidson. 2009. Individual differences in some (but not all) medial prefrontal regions reflect cognitive demand while regulating unpleasant emotion. Neuroimage 47, 3 (2009), 852--863.
[53]
Wesley Willett, Jeffrey Heer, Joseph Hellerstein, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2011. CommentSpace: structured support for collaborative visual analysis. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3131--3140.
[54]
Paweł Wozniak, Nitesh Goyal, Przemysław Kucharski, Lars Lischke, Sven Mayer, and Morten Fjeld. 2016. RAMPARTS: Supporting Sensemaking with Spatially-Aware Mobile Interactions. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2447--2460.
[55]
Fred RH Zijlstra, Robert A Roe, Anna B Leonora, and Irene Krediet. 1999. Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of interrupted activities. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 72, 2 (1999), 163--185.
[56]
Manuela Züger and Thomas Fritz. 2015. Interruptibility of software developers and its prediction using psycho-physiological sensors. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2981--2990.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)"I Want Lower Tone for Work-Related Notifications": Exploring the Effectiveness of User-Assigned Notification Alerts in Improving User Speculation of and Attendance to Mobile NotificationsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36765128:MHCI(1-25)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Wearable Technology Insights: Unveiling Physiological Responses During Three Different Socially Anxious ActivitiesACM Journal on Computing and Sustainable Societies10.1145/36636712:2(1-23)Online publication date: 9-May-2024
  • (2024)Lateralization Effects in Electrodermal Activity Data Collected Using Wearable DevicesProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36435418:1(1-30)Online publication date: 6-Mar-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 1, Issue 3
September 2017
2023 pages
EISSN:2474-9567
DOI:10.1145/3139486
Issue’s Table of Contents
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. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 September 2017
Accepted: 01 July 2017
Revised: 01 May 2017
Received: 01 November 2016
Published in IMWUT Volume 1, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Analytics
  2. Collaborative Sensemaking
  3. EDA
  4. Galvanic Skin Response
  5. Sensemaking
  6. interface design
  7. interruption
  8. notification

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)134
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)23
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)"I Want Lower Tone for Work-Related Notifications": Exploring the Effectiveness of User-Assigned Notification Alerts in Improving User Speculation of and Attendance to Mobile NotificationsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36765128:MHCI(1-25)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Wearable Technology Insights: Unveiling Physiological Responses During Three Different Socially Anxious ActivitiesACM Journal on Computing and Sustainable Societies10.1145/36636712:2(1-23)Online publication date: 9-May-2024
  • (2024)Lateralization Effects in Electrodermal Activity Data Collected Using Wearable DevicesProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36435418:1(1-30)Online publication date: 6-Mar-2024
  • (2024)Designing for Human-Agent Alignment: Understanding what humans want from their agentsExtended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3650948(1-6)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2024)Sensemaking: What is it today?Extended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3636322(1-5)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2024)Addressing attentional issues in augmented reality with adaptive agentsInternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103324190:COnline publication date: 1-Oct-2024
  • (2023)LAUREATEProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36108927:3(1-41)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
  • (2023)Carry-Forward Effect: Early scaffolding learning processesProceedings of the 2023 Symposium on Learning, Design and Technology10.1145/3594781.3594786(43-52)Online publication date: 23-Jun-2023
  • (2022)Keep Calm and Do Not Carry-Forward: Toward Sensor-Data Driven AI Agent to Enhance Human LearningFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence10.3389/frai.2021.7131764Online publication date: 12-Jan-2022
  • (2022)Because I’m Restricted, 2 – 4 PM Unable to See Messages: Exploring Users’ Perceptions and Likely Practices around Exposing Attention Management Use on IM Online StatusProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517616(1-18)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media