Interest level improves learning but does not moderate the effects of interruptions: An experiment using simultaneous multitasking

Learning and Individual Differences

Volumn 30, Issue , 2014, Pages 112-117

  Conard, Maureen A ^a   Marsh, Robert F ^a  

^a SACRED HEART UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adult learning; Interest; Interruptions; Laptop use; Multitasking

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897621168     PISSN: 10416080     EISSN: 18733425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Altmann E.M., Trafton J.G., Hambrick D.Z. Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2013, 10.1037/a0030986.
2. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:1173-1182.
3. Bowman L.L., Levine L.E., Waite B.M., Gendron M. Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging. Computers & Education 2010, 54:927-931.
4. Burmistrov I., Leonova A. Do interrupted users work faster or slower? The micro-analysis of a computerized text editing task. Human-computer interaction: Theory and practice (part I) - proceedings of HCI International 2003 2003, 621-625. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
5. Cohen J., Cohen P., Aiken S.G., West L.S. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences 2003, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. 3rd ed.
6. Conard M.A., Marsh R.F. Single and multiple interruptions increase task completion time, but don't affect stress, pressure or flow. Paper presented at the Association for Psychological Science Conference, Boston, MA May 2010.
7. Contee C. Social networking tools in politics [Video file] NDNvideo, Retrieved from. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKjuM5YTPFo.
8. Conway A.R.A., Cowan N., Bunting M.F. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2001, 8:331-335.
9. Dux P.E., Tombu M.N., Harrison S., Rogers B.P., Tong F., Marois R. Training improves multitasking performance by increasing the speed of information processing in human prefrontal cortex. Neuron 2009, 63:127-138.
10. Engle R.W. Working memory as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2002, 11:19-23.
11. Fox A.B., Rosen J., Crawford M. Distractions, distractions: Does instant messaging affect college students' performance on a concurrent reading comprehension task?. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2009, 12:51-53.
12. Fried C.B. In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education 2008, 50:906-914.
13. Grace-Martin M., Gay G. Web browsing, mobile computing, and academic performance. Educational Technology and Society 2001, 4:95-107.
14. Hambrick D.Z., Oswald F.L., Darowski E.S., Rench T.A., Brou R. Predictors of multitasking performance in a synthetic work paradigm. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2010, 24:1149-1167.
15. Hembrooke H., Gay G. The laptop and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 2003, 15:46-64.
16. Hodgetts H.M., Jones D.M. Interruptions in the tower of London task: Support for a goal-activation approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2006, 135:103-115.
17. Klingberg T. Training and plasticity of working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2010, 14:317-324. 10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.002.
18. Krapp A. An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to self-determination theory (SDT). Handbook of self-determination research 2002, 405-427. University of Rochester Press, Rochester, NY. E.L. Deci, R.M. Ryan (Eds.).
19. Leroy S. Why is it so hard to do my work? The challenge of attention residue when switching between work tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2009, 109:168-181.
20. Logie R.H. The functional organization and capacity limits of working memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2011, 20:240-245.
21. Mark G., Gudith D., Klocke U. The cost of interrupted work: More speed and stress. Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI'08 2008, 107-110. ACM, New York.
22. Meyer D.E., Kieras D.E. A computational theory of executive control and multiple task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review 1997, 104:3-65.
23. Monk C., Trafton J., Boehm-Davis D. The effect of interruption duration and demand on resuming suspended goals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 2008, 14:299-313.
24. Müller F.H., Louw J. Learning environment, motivation, and interest: Perspectives on self-determination theory. South African Journal of Psychology 2004, 34(2):169-190.
25. Nye C.D., Su R., Rounds J., Drasgow F. Vocational interests and performance: A quantitative summary of over 60years of research. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2012, 7:384-403.
26. O'Conaill B., Frohlich D. Timespace in the workplace: Dealing with interruptions. Human factors in computing systems: CHI'95 companion 1995, 262-263. ACM Press, New York.
27. Parasuraman R. Neuroergonomics: Brain, cognition, and performance at work. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2011, 20:181-186.
28. th Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA 2006, 372-375.
29. Rosen L.D., Lim A.F., Carrier M., Cheever N.A. An examination of the educational impact of text message-induced task switching in the classroom: Educational implications and strategies to enhance learning. Psicologia Educativa 2011, 17:163-177.
30. Sana F., Weston T., Cepeda N.J. Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education 2013, 62:24-31.
31. Schiffman N., Greist-Bousquet S. The effect of task interruption and closure on perceived duration. Bulletin of the Psychometric Society 1992, 30:9-11.
32. Schuh A.J. Effects of an early interruption and note taking on listening accuracy and decision-making in the interview. Bulletin of the Psychometric Society 1978, 12:242-244.
33. Speier C., Valacich J.S., Vessey I. The influence of task interruption on individual decision making: An information overload perspective. Decision Sciences 1999, 30:337-360.
34. Speier C., Vessey I., Valacich J.S. The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and information presentation on computer-supported decision-making performance. Decision Sciences 2003, 34:771-797.
35. Tétard F. On fragmentation of working time: A study of causes and effects on work interruptions. IAMSR research report 9/99 1999, Institute for Advanced Management Systems Research, Åbo.
36. Tombu M.N., Asplund C.L., Dux P.E., Godwin D., Martin J.W., Marois R. A unified attentional bottleneck in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2011, 108:13426-13431.
37. Trafton J.G., Monk C.M. Task interruptions. Reviews of Human Factors and, Ergonomics 2008, 3:111-126. D.A. Boehm-Davis (Ed.).
38. Welford A.T. The 'psychological refractory period' and the timing of high-speed performance: A review and theory. British Journal of Psychology 1952, 43:2-19.