The importance of "who" and "what" in interruption management: Empirical evidence from a cell phone use study
TL;DRAbstract
Interruption management in technology mediated communication is a key concern in collaborative work and social environments. Previous empirical and theoretical work in predicting interruptibility predominantly focuses on interrupteeâs local context namely identifying cognitively and socially intruding contexts such as mental work load levels, activity, place of activity. They largely ignore the relational context namely âwhoâ the interruption is from or âwhatâ it is about. This paper addresses this issue by systematically investigating the use of the various contextual factors in interruption management practices of everyday cell phone use. Analysis of 1201 incoming calls from our experience sampling method study of cell phone use, shows that âwhoâ is calling is used most of the time (87.4%) by individuals to make deliberate call handling decisions (N=834), in contrast to the interrupteeâs current local social (34.9%) or cognitive (43%) contexts. We present implications
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Interruption management in technology mediated communication is a key concern in collaborative work and social environments. Previous empirical and theoretical work in predicting interruptibility predominantly focuses on interrupteeâs local context namely identifying cognitively and socially intruding contexts such as mental work load levels, activity, place of activity. They largely ignore the relational context namely âwhoâ the interruption is from or âwhatâ it is about. This paper addresses this issue by systematically investigating the use of the various contextual factors in interruption management practices of everyday cell phone use. Analysis of 1201 incoming calls from our experience sampling method study of cell phone use, shows that âwhoâ is calling is used most of the time (87.4%) by individuals to make deliberate call handling decisions (N=834), in contrast to the interrupteeâs current local social (34.9%) or cognitive (43%) contexts. We present implications
Keywords
Chat
Click to start Chat