ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Task-evoked pupillary response to mental workload in human-computer interaction
Full text PdfPdf (129 KB)
Source Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems archive
CHI '04 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems table of contents
Vienna, Austria
SESSION: Late breaking result papers table of contents
Pages: 1477 - 1480  
Year of Publication: 2004
ISBN:1-58113-703-6
Authors
Shamsi T. Iqbal  University of Illinois, Urbana, IL
Xianjun Sam Zheng  University of Illinois, Urbana, IL
Brian P. Bailey  University of Illinois, Urbana, IL
Sponsors
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 17,   Downloads (12 Months): 126,   Citation Count: 12
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/985921.986094
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Accurate assessment of a user's mental workload will be critical for developing systems that manage user attention (interruptions) in the user interface. Empirical evidence suggests that an interruption is much less disruptive when it occurs during a period of lower mental workload. To provide a measure of mental workload for interactive tasks, we investigated the use of task-evoked pupillary response. Results show that a more difficult task demands longer processing time, induces higher subjective ratings of mental workload, and reliably evokes greater pupillary response at salient subtasks. We discuss the findings and their implications for the design of an attention manager.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
Altmann, E.M. and J.G. Trafton. Memory for Goals: An Activation-Based Model. Cognitive Science, 26, 39--83, 2002.
 
3
Bailey, B.P., J.A. Konstan and J.V. Carlis. The Effects of Interruptions on Task Performance, Annoyance, and Anxiety in the User Interface. Proceedings Interact, 2001, 593--601.
 
4
Beatty, J. Task-Evoked Pupillary Responses, Processing Load, and the Structure of Processing Resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91 (2), 276--292,
 
5
 
6
Cutrell, E., M. Czerwinski and E. Horvitz. Notification, Disruption and Memory: Effects of Messaging Interruptions on Memory and Performance. Proceedings of Interact, Tokyo, Japan, 2001, 263--269.
 
7
Gillie, T. and D. Broadbent. What Makes Interruptions Disruptive? A Study of Length, Similarity, and Complexity. Psychological Research, 50, 243--250, 1989.
 
8
Hicks, T.G. and W.W. Wierwille. Comparison of Five Mental Workload Assessment Procedures in a Moving-Base Driving Simulator. Human Factors, 21 (2), 129--143, 1979.
 
9
Hoecks, B. and W. Levelt. Pupillary Dilation as a Measure of Attention: A Quantitative System Analysis. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 16--26.
 
10
Juris, M. and M. Velden. The Pupillary Response to Mental Overload. Physiological Psychology, 5 (4), 421--424, 1977.
 
11
McFarlane, D.C. Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-Computer Interaction. Proceedings of Interact, 1999, 295--303.
 
12
Miyata, Y. and D.A. Norman. The Control of Multiple Activities. In Norman, D.A. and Draper, S.W. (eds.) User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1986.
 
13
Zijlstra, F.R.H., R.A. Roe, A.B. Leonora and I. Krediet. Temporal Factors in Mental Work: Effects of Interrupted Activities. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 163--185, 1999.

CITED BY  12

Collaborative Colleagues:
Shamsi T. Iqbal: colleagues
Xianjun Sam Zheng: colleagues
Brian P. Bailey: colleagues