Individual differences in failing to save everyday computing work

Abstract

It has been argued that the study of human-computer interaction (HCI) tends to neglect the user without advanced skills, and the prediction (as opposed to classification) of human error. The present work aims to redress these balances by attempting to obtain a predictive understanding of variation in susceptibility to computing error in everyday life among non-specialist users. On rare occasions, people lose the computing work they are carrying out because they forget to save it. Is this a matter only of unfortunate chance? The results of two studies indicated that this is not so. In both cases, levels of naturally occurring computing losses were found to be significantly related to individuals' general levels of susceptibility to cognitive failure, assessed by the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ), suggesting a possible explanation in terms of variation in attentional ability.

Real-world memory and executive processes in cannabis users and non-users

“…This outcome is consistent with findings reported elsewhere for nonclinical populations where a high level of agreement between selfratings and ratings by significant others has been obtained in relation to the real-world memory (e.g., Hart et al, 2005;Olsson et al, 2006;Smith-Spark et al, 2004). Beyond the issue of consistency with ratings by significant others, it has been demonstrated that the measure possesses internal consistency (Broadbent et al, 1982;Knight et al, 2004), retest reliability, face validity (Knight et al, 2004) and construct validity (Broadbent et al, 1982;Jones and Martin, 2003;Wallace, 2004;Wallace et al, 2002). The psychometric properties and construct validity of the EMQ have also been extensively explored in normal (Cornish, 2000) and clinical populations (Efklides et al, 2002;Koltai et al, 1996;Olsson et al, 2006;Schwartz and McMillan, 1989).…”

“…Beyond the issue of consistency with ratings by significant others, it has been demonstrated that the measure possesses internal consistency (Broadbent, et al 1982;Knight et al, 2004), retest reliability, face validity (Knight et al, 2004) and construct validity (Broadbent, et al 1982, Jones & Martin, 2003Wallace, 2004;Wallace et al, 2002). The psychometric properties and construct validity of the everyday memory questionnaire (EMQ) have also been extensively explored in normal (Cornish, 2000) and clinical populations (Efklides et al, 2002;Koltai et al, 1996;Olsson et al, 2006;Schwartz & McMillan, 1989).…”

Analyzing Protection Motivation Theory and Cognitive Failures in Texting While Driving Behavior Among Young Drivers

“…Also, the level of the driver's TSE (e.g., low, medium, high) may provide an intricate learning curve to detect the levels of effectively perceived severity in publicly tailored campaigns. The exploration of cognitive individual differences (Jones and Martin 2003), such as low vs high scores of CFs across drivers, could further enhance ongoing educational programs for mitigating distractions (Smith, Chappelow, and Belyavin 1995) and accidents (Wagenaar, Hudson, and Reason 1990). A comprehensive study of the variables across drivers' ages will also provide detailed information for age‐tailored needs in educational content.…”

Stress in telephone helpline nurses is associated with failures of concentration, attention and memory, and with more conservative referral decisions

“…Regardless of whether stress causes a reduction in cognitive resources, or reduced cognitive resources cause stress through an inability to meet demands, the performance consequences of reduced cognitive efficiency in the workplace are the same. Individuals with insufficient cognitive resources tend to lapse into ‘automatic’ behaviour (carrying out simple tasks without thinking), and are more likely to make mistakes (Reason, ) and less likely to initiate effortful but beneficial behaviours like saving computer documents as they work (Jones & Martin, ).…”