2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2004.09.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deciding when to switch tasks in time-critical multitasking

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Lee (personal communication, April 19, 2005) found that participants were most likely to examine wind direction right around the 30-sec mark. As another example, Kushleyeva, Salvucci, and Lee (2005) showed that participants tended to switch from one visual search task to another at the halfway point of the full 30-sec task period to ensure they were not penalized on the other task. In both cases, people tended to perform the timed tasks not as soon as possible, but rather approximately at the time they deemed appropriate, given the temporal characteristics of the task.…”
Section: The General Executive Is Dependent On Timementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lee (personal communication, April 19, 2005) found that participants were most likely to examine wind direction right around the 30-sec mark. As another example, Kushleyeva, Salvucci, and Lee (2005) showed that participants tended to switch from one visual search task to another at the halfway point of the full 30-sec task period to ensure they were not penalized on the other task. In both cases, people tended to perform the timed tasks not as soon as possible, but rather approximately at the time they deemed appropriate, given the temporal characteristics of the task.…”
Section: The General Executive Is Dependent On Timementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Elapsed time in a task is found to be a good predictor of urgency to switch away to another task (Kushleyeva et al 2005). Third, pre-knowledge of what is to be expected, in semantic memory, is used as a source for longer-term calibration of time-sharing.…”
Section: Users' Tactics and Strategies In Time-sharingmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This notion is also relevant to mobile human-computer interaction where the competition is between mobility tasks (e.g., route planning, talking, waiting, estimating time-to-target, controlling personal space) and interaction tasks, which compete mainly for the visual and motor resources (Jameson and Klöckner 2005;Oulasvirta et al 2005). 2 Although one might easily think that external events are the root cause of diverted attention, time-sharing is actually largely driven by internal processes (Kushleyeva et al 2005). Satisfactory time-sharing requires the ability to create and schedule future intentions, the facility to remember, maintain and prioritize them, and the ability to switch from carrying out one intention to another when needed (Burgess 2000).…”
Section: Internal and External Constituents Of Time-sharingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the TSS metric is indirectly affected by task urgency, the effect should be modeled more directly. For further discussion of the impact of time pressure for cognitive state, see [24] or [25].…”
Section: B Statistical Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%