Background Sound Impairs Interruption Recovery in Dynamic Task Situations: Procedural Conflict?

Abstract

Interruptions impair performance even on simple, static, laboratory-based tasks, but little research has looked at their impact in more complex and realistic settings that involve dynamically evolving circumstances and other environmental stressors. Using a radar operator task with or without background sound, participants were unexpectedly interrupted to complete another task which masked the radar screen as the scenario continually evolved. Task efficiency was impaired by interruption: Decision-making time was slower immediately following interruption, this cost being greater and persevering for longer in the presence of auditory distraction. Resumption time was also increased with distraction. Eye fixation durations were shorter following interruption, reflecting participants' attempts to rapidly re-encode and update their model of the situation. These results suggest that those processes involved in task resumption are also susceptible to background sound, and indicate a need for theories of task interruption to better specify the role of attention in interruption recovery.

Effect of Redundant Haptic Information on Task Performance during Visuo-Tactile Task Interruption and Recovery

“…Regardless of the haptic stimulus, participants demonstrated decreased accuracy when they were interrupted. Hence, our data support the results of previous studies regarding interruption in a multimodal task environment (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Keus van de Poll and Sörqvist, 2016). …”

Effect of Redundant Haptic Information on Task Performance during Visuo-Tactile Task Interruption and Recovery

“…Regardless of the haptic stimulus, participants demonstrated decreased accuracy when they were interrupted. Hence, our data support the results of previous studies regarding interruption in a multimodal task environment (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Keus van de Poll and Sörqvist, 2016). …”

The Chronic Detrimental Impact of Interruptions in a Simulated Submarine Track Management Task

“…The current research adds to recent literature showing that interruption recovery in multi-item display tasks can extend well beyond the first postinterruption action (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Tremblay et al, 2012). Conceivably, some of the decrements in these recent studies and in the current study could have been due to the need to reinstate task goals (Trafton & Monk, 2007) or task switching (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), but these factors alone could certainly not explain the current decrements in performance, which were measured on average 80 s after interruption.…”

“…These effects of interruptions on SA, performance, and workload did not interact with task load (i.e., number of contacts on the display). An impact of task load manipulation was evident, however, in that high task load increased ratings of subjective workload by 12.4%, slowed SPAM query acceptance times by 0.56 s, and slowed contact engagement task decisions by 0.24 s. The current research adds to recent literature showing that interruption recovery in multi-item display tasks can extend well beyond the first postinterruption action (Hodgetts et al, 2014;Tremblay et al, 2012). Conceivably, some of the decrements in these recent studies and in the current study could have been due to the need to reinstate task goals (Trafton & Monk, 2007) or task switching (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), but these factors alone could certainly not explain the current decrements in performance, which were measured on average 80 s after interruption.…”

See no evil: Cognitive challenges of security surveillance and monitoring.

“…John & Smallman, 2008). In a dynamic military surveillance task, eye fixations were found to be quicker following interruption (Hodgetts et al, 2014), supporting the idea of a rapid re-encoding and updating of the situation upon return. In this task, interruptions were found to slow decision-making time during the post interruption period, and this cost persisted for longer under conditions of divided attention or higher workload (Hodgetts, Tremblay, Vallieres, & Vachon, 2015).…”

Effect of Redundant Haptic Information on Task Performance during Visuo-Tactile Task Interruption and Recovery

“…Regardless of the haptic stimulus, participants demonstrated decreased accuracy when they were interrupted. Hence, our data support the results of previous studies regarding interruption in a multimodal task environment (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Keus van de Poll and Sörqvist, 2016). …”

The Chronic Detrimental Impact of Interruptions in a Simulated Submarine Track Management Task

“…The current research adds to recent literature showing that interruption recovery in multi-item display tasks can extend well beyond the first postinterruption action (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Tremblay et al, 2012). Conceivably, some of the decrements in these recent studies and in the current study could have been due to the need to reinstate task goals (Trafton & Monk, 2007) or task switching (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), but these factors alone could certainly not explain the current decrements in performance, which were measured on average 80 s after interruption.…”

“…These effects of interruptions on SA, performance, and workload did not interact with task load (i.e., number of contacts on the display). An impact of task load manipulation was evident, however, in that high task load increased ratings of subjective workload by 12.4%, slowed SPAM query acceptance times by 0.56 s, and slowed contact engagement task decisions by 0.24 s. The current research adds to recent literature showing that interruption recovery in multi-item display tasks can extend well beyond the first postinterruption action (Hodgetts et al, 2014;Tremblay et al, 2012). Conceivably, some of the decrements in these recent studies and in the current study could have been due to the need to reinstate task goals (Trafton & Monk, 2007) or task switching (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), but these factors alone could certainly not explain the current decrements in performance, which were measured on average 80 s after interruption.…”

See no evil: Cognitive challenges of security surveillance and monitoring.

“…John & Smallman, 2008). In a dynamic military surveillance task, eye fixations were found to be quicker following interruption (Hodgetts et al, 2014), supporting the idea of a rapid re-encoding and updating of the situation upon return. In this task, interruptions were found to slow decision-making time during the post interruption period, and this cost persisted for longer under conditions of divided attention or higher workload (Hodgetts, Tremblay, Vallieres, & Vachon, 2015).…”

Effect of Redundant Haptic Information on Task Performance during Visuo-Tactile Task Interruption and Recovery

“…Regardless of the haptic stimulus, participants demonstrated decreased accuracy when they were interrupted. Hence, our data support the results of previous studies regarding interruption in a multimodal task environment (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Keus van de Poll and Sörqvist, 2016). …”

The Chronic Detrimental Impact of Interruptions in a Simulated Submarine Track Management Task

“…The current research adds to recent literature showing that interruption recovery in multi-item display tasks can extend well beyond the first postinterruption action (Hodgetts et al, 2014; Tremblay et al, 2012). Conceivably, some of the decrements in these recent studies and in the current study could have been due to the need to reinstate task goals (Trafton & Monk, 2007) or task switching (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), but these factors alone could certainly not explain the current decrements in performance, which were measured on average 80 s after interruption.…”

“…These effects of interruptions on SA, performance, and workload did not interact with task load (i.e., number of contacts on the display). An impact of task load manipulation was evident, however, in that high task load increased ratings of subjective workload by 12.4%, slowed SPAM query acceptance times by 0.56 s, and slowed contact engagement task decisions by 0.24 s. The current research adds to recent literature showing that interruption recovery in multi-item display tasks can extend well beyond the first postinterruption action (Hodgetts et al, 2014;Tremblay et al, 2012). Conceivably, some of the decrements in these recent studies and in the current study could have been due to the need to reinstate task goals (Trafton & Monk, 2007) or task switching (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), but these factors alone could certainly not explain the current decrements in performance, which were measured on average 80 s after interruption.…”

See no evil: Cognitive challenges of security surveillance and monitoring.

“…John & Smallman, 2008). In a dynamic military surveillance task, eye fixations were found to be quicker following interruption (Hodgetts et al, 2014), supporting the idea of a rapid re-encoding and updating of the situation upon return. In this task, interruptions were found to slow decision-making time during the post interruption period, and this cost persisted for longer under conditions of divided attention or higher workload (Hodgetts, Tremblay, Vallieres, & Vachon, 2015).…”