Gloria Mark
Mary Czerwinski
ABSTRACT
In HCI research, attention has focused on understanding external influences on workplace multitasking. We explore instead how multitasking might be influenced by individual factors: personality, stress, and sleep. Forty information workers' online activity was tracked over two work weeks. The median duration of online screen focus was 40 seconds. The personality trait of Neuroticism was associated with shorter online focus duration and Impulsivity-Urgency was associated with longer online focus duration. Stress and sleep duration showed trends to be inversely associated with online focus. Shorter focus duration was associated with lower assessed productivity at day's end. Factor analysis revealed a factor of lack of control which significantly predicts multitasking. Our results suggest that there could be a trait for distractibility where some individuals are susceptible to online attention shifting in the workplace. Our results have implications for information systems (e.g. educational systems, game design) where attention focus is key.
- John A. Bargh. 1992. The ecology of automaticity: Toward establishing the conditions needed to produce automatic processing effects. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 181--199.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Eran Chajut and Daniel Algom. 2003. Selective attention improves under stress: implications for theories of social cognition. Journal of personality and social psychology 85.2: 231.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sheldon Cohen, Tom Kamarck, and Robin Mermelstein. 1983. A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of health and social behavior 1983: 385--396.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Allessandro Couyoumdjian, Stefano Sdoia, Daniela Tempesta, Giuseppe Curcio, Elisabetta Rastellini, Luigi De Gennaro, and Michele Ferrara. 2010. The effects of sleep and sleep deprivation on task-switching performance. Journal of Sleep Research, 19, 64--70.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mary Czerwinski, Eric Horvitz and Susan Wilhite. 2004. A diary study of task switching and interruptions. in Proceedings CHI'04, 175--182. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laura Dabbish, and Robert E. Kraut. 2004. Controlling interruptions: awareness displays and social motivation for coordination. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 182--191. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lloyd J. Edwards, Keith E. Muller, Russell D. Wolfinger, Bahjat F. Qaqish, and Oliver Schabenberger. 2008. An R2 statistic for Fixed Effects in the Linear Mixed Model. Stat Med. 2008 (27(29)). 6137.Google Scholar
- John L. Evenden. 1999. Varieties of impulsivity. Psychopharmacology, 146(4), 348--361.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hans J. Eysenck, Hans J. and Michael W. Eysenck. 1987. Personality and individual differences. Plenum.Google Scholar
- Kerry Fairbrother and James Warn. 2003. Workplace dimensions, stress and job satisfaction. Journal of managerial psychology 18.1: 8--21.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sophie Forster and Nilli Lavie. 2015. Establishing the attention-distractibility trait. Psychological science. Dec. 14. 0956797615617761.Google Scholar
- Michael R. Frone, Marcia Russell, and M. Lyme Cooper. 1994. Relationship between job and family satisfaction: Causal or noncausal covariation? Journal of Management. 20:565--579.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard Gendreau. 2007. The new techno culture in the workplace and at home. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 11(2), 191--196.Google Scholar
- Namni Goel, Hengyi Rao, Jeffrey S. Durmer, and David F. Dinges. 2009. Neurocognitive consequences of sleep deprivation. Seminars in Neurology, 29, 320--339.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Victor M. Gonzalez and Gloria Mark. 2004. "Constant, Constant, Multi-tasking Craziness?: Managing Multiple Working Spheres. Proceedings CHI'04, 113120. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sture Holm. 1979. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian journal of statistics, 6, 65--70.Google Scholar
- Briana N Horwitz, Gloria Luong, and Susan T. Charles. 2008. Neuroticism and extraversion share genetic and environmental effects with negative and positive mood spillover in a nationally representative sample. Personality and individual differences, 45(7), 636--642.Google Scholar
- Pascal Huguet, Marie P. Galvaing, Jean M. Monteil, and Florence Dumas. 1999. Social presence effects in the Stroop task: Further evidence for an attentional view of social facilitation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1011--1025.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shamsi T. Iqbal and Eric Horvitz. 2007. Disruption and Recovery of Computing Tasks: Field Study, Analysis and Directions. in Proceedings of CHI'07, 677--686. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Steven W.Keele, and Harold L. Hawkins. 1982. Explorations of Individual Differences Relevant to High Level Skill. Journal of Motor Behavior, 14(1), 323.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Derrick N. Lawley, and Albert E. Maxwell. 1971. Factor Analysis as a Statistical Method. New York: American Elsevier Pub. Co.Google Scholar
- Archana Laxmisan, Forogh Hakimzada, Osman R. Sayan, Robert A. Green, Jiajie Zhang, and Vimla L. Patel. 2007. The multitasking clinician: decisionmaking and cognitive demand during and after team handoffs in emergency care. International journal of medical informatics, 76(11), 801--811.Google Scholar
- Richard S.Lazarus, Psychological stress in the workplace. 1995. Occupational stress: A handbook 1: 3--14.Google Scholar
- Julian Lim and David F. Dinges. 2008. Sleep deprivation and vigilant attention. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1129, 305--322.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gloria Mark, Shamsi T. Iqbal, Mary Czerwinski, and Paul Johns. 2014. Bored Tuesdays and focused afternoons: The rhythm of attention and online activity in the workplace. Proceedings of CHI'14, ACM Press, 3025--3034. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robert R. McCrae and Paul T. Costa. 1999. The five factor theory of personality. in Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, L.A. Pervin, O.P. Johns, NY: Guilford, 139--153.Google Scholar
- Eyal Ophir, Clifford Nass, and Anthony D. Wagner. 2009. Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106.37: 15583--15587.Google Scholar
- Rita Orji, Julita Vassileva, and Regan L. Mandryk. 2014. Modeling the efficacy of persuasive strategies for different gamer types in serious games for health." User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 24, no. 5: 453--498. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joshua S. Rubinstein, David E. Meyer, and Jeffrey E. Evans. 2001. Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27.4: 763.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Blazej Szymura, and Edward Necka. 2005. Three superfactors of personality and three aspects of attention." Advances in personality psychology: 75--90.Google Scholar
- Hans PA Van Dongen, Greg Maislin, Janet M. Mullington, and David F. Dinges. 2003. The cumulative cost of additional wakefulness: Doseresponse effects on neurobehavioral functions and sleep physiology from chronic sleep restriction and total sleep deprivation. Sleep, 26, 117--126.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kavita Vedhara, J. Hyde, Iain Gilchrist, Michelle Tytherleigh, and Sue Plummer. 2000. Acute stress, memory, attention and cortisol. Psychoneuroendocrinology 25, 6: 535--549.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard M.Wenzlaff, and Daniel M. Wegner. 2000. Thought suppression. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 59--91.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stephen P. Whiteside and Donald R. Lynam. 2001. The five factor model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and individual differences, 30(4), 669--689.Google Scholar
- Christopher D.Wickens. 1980. The structure of attentional resources. Attention and performance VIII, 8.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Neurotics Can't Focus: An in situ Study of Online Multitasking in the Workplace
Recommendations
Focused, Aroused, but so Distractible: Temporal Perspectives on Multitasking and Communications
CSCW '15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social ComputingA common assumption in studies of interruptions is that one is focused in an activity and then distracted by other stimuli. We take the reverse perspective and examine whether one might first be in an attentional state that makes one susceptible to ...
Effects of Individual Differences in Blocking Workplace Distractions
CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsInformation workers are experiencing ever-increasing online distractions in the workplace, and software to block distractions is becoming more popular. We conducted an exploratory field study with 32 information workers in their workplace using software ...
Email Duration, Batching and Self-interruption: Patterns of Email Use on Productivity and Stress
CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWhile email provides numerous benefits in the workplace, it is unclear how patterns of email use might affect key workplace indicators of productivity and stress. We investigate how three email use patterns: duration, interruption habit, and batching, ...
Comments