Towards an index of opportunity: Understanding in mental workload during task execution

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 311-320

  Iqbal, Shamsi T ^a   Adamczyk, Piotr D ^b   Zheng, Xianjun Sam ^b   Bailey, Brian P ^a,b  

^a University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Interruption; Pupil size; Task models

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; USER INTERFACES;

ATTENTION; INTERRUPTION; PUPIL SIZE; TASK MODELS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 84861300592     PISSN: 02749696     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (36)

1. Adamczyk, P.D. and B.P. Bailey. If Not Now When? The Effects of Interruptions at Various Moments within Task Execution. CHI, 2004, 271-278.
2. Bailey, B.P., J.A. Konstan and J.V. Carlis. The Effects of Interruptions on Task Performance, Annoyance, and Anxiety in the User Interface. INTERACT, 2001, 593-601.
3. Beatty, J. Task-Evoked Pupillary Responses, Processing Load, and the Structure of Processing Resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91 (2), 276-292, 1982.
4. Bradshaw, J.L. Pupil Size as a Measure of Arousal During Information Processing. Nature, 216, 515-516, 1967.
5. Card, S., T. Moran and A. Newell. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983.
6. Cutrell, E., M. Czerwinski and E. Horvitz. Notification, Disruption and Memory: Effects of Messaging Interruptions on Memory and Performance. INTERACT, 2001, 263-269.
7. Czerwinski, M., E. Cutrell and E. Horvitz. Instant Messaging and Interruption: Influence of Task Type on Performance. Proc. OZCHI, 2000, 356-361.
8. Czerwinski, M., E. Cutrell and E. Horvitz. Instant Messaging: Effects of Relevance and Timing. In People and Computers XIV: Proceedings of HCI, 2000, 71-76.
9. Gillie, T. and D. Broadbent. What Makes Interruptions Disruptive? A Study of Length, Similarity, and Complexity. Psychological Research, 50, 243-250, 1989.
10. Hess, E.H. and J.M. Polt. Pupil Size in Relation to Mental Activity During Simple Problem Solving. Science, 132, 1190-1192, 1964.
11. Hoecks, B. and W. Levelt. Pupillary Dilation as a Measure of Attention: A Quantitative System Analysis. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 16-26, 1993.
12. Horvitz, E. and J. Apacible. Learning and Reasoning About Interruption. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces, 2003, 20-27.
13. Horvitz, E., J. Breese, D. Heckerman, D. Hovel and K. Rommelse. The Lumiere Project: Bayesian User Modeling for Inferring the Goals and Needs of Software Users. Proc. Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 1998, 256-265.
14. Horvitz, E., A. Jacobs and D. Hovel. Attention-Sensitive Alerting. Proc. Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 1999, 305-313.
15. Hudson, S.E., J. Fogarty, C.G. Atkeson, D. Avrahami, J. Forlizzi, S. Kiesler, J.C. Lee and J. Yang. Predicting Human Interruptibility with Sensors: A Wizard of Oz Feasibility Study. CHI, 2003, 257-264.
16. Hytintk, J., J. Tommola and A. Alaja. Pupil Dilation as a Measure of Processing Load in Simultaneous Interpretation and Other Language Tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A (3), 598-612, 1995.
17. Iqbal, S.T., X.S. Zheng and B.P. Bailey. Task-Evoked Pupillary Response to Mental Workload in Human-Computer Interaction. CHI, 2004, 1477-1480.
18. Jackson, T.W., R.J. Dawson and D. Wilson. The Cost of Email Interruption. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 5 (1), 81-92, 2001.
19. John, B., A. Vera, M. Matessa, M. Freed and R. Remington. Automating CPM-Goms. CHI, 2002, 147-154.
20. Juris, M. and M. Velden. The Pupillary Response to Mental Overload. Physiological Psychology, 5 (4), 421-424, 1977.
21. Kahneman, D. Pupillary Responses in a Pitch-Discrimination Task. Perception & Psychophysics, 2, 101-105, 1967.
22. Kramer, A.F. Physiological Metrics of Mental Workload: A Review of Recent Progress. In Damos, D.L. ed. Multiple-Task Performance, Taylor and Francis, London, 1991, 279 - 328.
23. Kreifeldt, J.G. and M.E. McCarthy. Interruption as a Test of the User-Computer Interface. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference on Manual Control, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JPL Publication 81-95, 1981, 655-667.
24. Maes, P. Agents That Reduce Work and Information Overload. Communications of the ACM, 37 (7), 30-40, 1994.
25. Marshall, S.P. New Techniques for Evaluating Innovative Interfaces with Eye Tracking. UIST, 2003, Keynote Talk.
26. McFarlane, D.C. Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-Computer Interaction. INTERACT, 1999, 295-303.
27. 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 Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1986.
28. Nakayama, M. and K. Takahashi. The Act of Task Difficulty and Eye-Movement Frequency for the Ocul-Motor Indices. In Proceedings of Eye Tracking Research and Application, 2002, 37-42.
29. Picard, R.W. Affective Computing. MIT Press, 1997.
30. Rowe, D.W., J. Sibert and D. Irwin. Heart Rate Variability: Indicator of User State as an Aid to Human-Computer Interaction. CHI, 1998, 480-487.
31. Shell, J.S., T. Selker and R. Vertegaal. Interacting with Groups of Computers. CACM, 46 (3), 40-46, 2003.
32. Speier, C., J.S. Valacich and I. Vessey. The Influence of Task Interruption on Individual Decision Making: An Information Overload Perspective. Decision Sciences, 30 (2), 337-360, 1999.
33. Takahashi, K., M. Nakayama and Y. Shimizu. The Response of Eye-Movement and Pupil Size to Audio Instruction While Viewing a Moving Target. Proc. Eye Tracking Research & Applications, 2000.
34. Tobii-Systems. http://www.tobii.se/
35. Wilson, G.M. and M.A. Sasse. The Head or the Heart?: Measuring the Impact of Media Quality. CHI, 2000, 117-118.
36. 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.