Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

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

• 1: Piotr D. Adamczyk , Brian P. Bailey, If not now, when?: the effects of interruption at different moments within task execution, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.271-278, April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria [doi>10.1145/985692.985727]
• 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: Stuart K. Card , Allen Newell , Thomas P. Moran, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1983
• 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.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Evaluation/methodology

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human information processing

General Terms:
Design, Experimentation, Human Factors

Keywords:
attention, interruption, mental workload, pupil size, task models, user studies