Interruption science: Difference between revisions
Thirdright (talk | contribs) →In office work: rmv spam link |
|||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
A study of interruption rates for practice nurses and GPs, |
A study of interruption rates for practice nurses and GPs, |
||
Nursing Standard, 10 (43), 33-36</ref> |
Nursing Standard, 10 (43), 33-36</ref> |
||
Interruption caused by smart phone use in health care settings can be deadly. Hence, it may be worthwhile for health care organizations to craft effective cell phone usage policies to maximize technological benefits and minimize unnecessary distraction associated with smart phone use. <ref name="H">{{cite web|url=http://www.dovepress.com/distraction-an-assessment-of-smartphone-usage-in-health-care-work-sett-peer-reviewed-article-RMHP |title=Distraction: an assessment of smartphone usage in health care work settings |date=|accessdate=2012-10-09}}</ref> |
|||
==References== |
==References== |
||
Revision as of 16:30, 9 October 2012
The template {{Wikify}} has been deprecated since 25 August 2012, and is retained only for old revisions. If this page is a current revision, please remove the template.
 | Template:Wikify is deprecated. Please use a more specific cleanup template as listed in the documentation. |
Interruption science is the "study of the effect of disruptions on job performance".[1] Office workers face a number of interruptions due to e-mail, phone calls, and visits from co-workers, all of which may be annoying and affect their productivity. For professions such as jet pilots or nurses, interruptions could have major consequences, as they could lead to costly or even life-threatening errors.
In office work
According to Gloria Mark, a leader in interruption science, the average knowledge worker switches tasks every three minutes, and, once distracted, a worker takes nearly a half-hour to resume the original task.”[2]
Gloria Mark conducted a study on office workers, which revealed that "each employee spent only 11 minutes on any given project before being interrupted" and that it took, "on average, 25 minutes to return" to their initial task.[3] At the same time, Mark's study indicated that constant e-mail interruptions are also an important source of information for office workers.[3]
A study indicates that "employers seeking to decrease interruptions may want to have their workers use instant messaging software". The study showed that "workers who used instant messaging on the job reported less interruption than colleagues who did not". Even though "using instant messaging led to more conversations on the computer, ...the conversations were briefer".[4]
Pilots and health care professionals
For professions such as jet pilots,[5] astronauts, or surgeons in the operating room, interruptions at the wrong time could even have major consequences. Mary Czerwinski, "one of the world's leading experts in interruption science" helps "NASA design the information systems for the International Space Station". She has to try to figure out how to "deliver an interruption to a busy astronaut" regarding mechanical errors without being "too distracting, [because] it could throw off the astronauts and cause them to mess up million-dollar experiments".[3]
In nursing, a study has been conducted of the impact of interruptions on nurses in a trauma center.[6] Another study has been done on the interruption rates of nurses and doctors.[7]
Interruption caused by smart phone use in health care settings can be deadly. Hence, it may be worthwhile for health care organizations to craft effective cell phone usage policies to maximize technological benefits and minimize unnecessary distraction associated with smart phone use. [8]
References
- ^ Interruption Science': Costly Distractions at Work October 14, 2005 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4958831 Accessed on June 18, 2011
- ^ Marci Alboher. “Fighting a War Against Distraction”. New York Times. June 22, 2008
- ^ a b c "Meet the Life Hackers" by Clive Thompson. October 16, 2005, web: NYT6.
- ^ Instant Messaging Proves Useful In Reducing Workplace Interruption ScienceDaily (June 4, 2008) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080603120251.htm
- ^ Damos D. L. & Tabachnick B. G. (2001) The Effect of Interruptions on Flight Crew Performance: ASRS Reports, Los Angeles: Damos Research Associates
- ^ Brixey J. J., Robinson D. J., Tang Z., Johnson T. R., Zhang J. & Turley J. P. (2005) Interruptions in workflow for RNs in a level one trauma center, in: AMIA 2005 Annual Symposium Proceedings, Bethesda: American Medical Informatics Association, 86-90
- ^ Paxton F., Heaney D. J., Howie J. G. & Porter A. M. (1996) A study of interruption rates for practice nurses and GPs, Nursing Standard, 10 (43), 33-36
- ^ "Distraction: an assessment of smartphone usage in health care work settings". Retrieved 2012-10-09.
Further reading
- Adamczyk P. D. & Bailey B. P. (2004) If not now, when?: The effects of interruption at different moments within task execution, in: Human Factors in Computing Systems: Proceedings of CHI'04, New York: ACM Press, 271-278
- Altmann E. M. & Trafton J. G. (2007) Timecourse of recovery from task interruption: Data and a model, Psychonomic Bullletin & Review, 14 (6), 1079–1084
- Andrews P. (2004) Vying for your attention: Interruption management, Executive Technology Report, 7, 1-8
- Arroyo E. & Selker T. (2003) Arbitrating multimodal outputs: Using ambient displays as interruptions, in: J. Jacko & C. Stephanidis (Eds.) Human-Computer Interaction: Theory and Practice (Part II) - Proceedings of HCI International 2003, Vol. 2, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 591-595
- Botvinick M. M. & Bylsma L. M. (2005) Distraction and action slips in an everyday task: Evidence for a dynamic representation of task context, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12 (6), 1011–1017
- Edwards M. B. & Gronlund S. D. (1998) Task interruption and its effects on memory, Memory, 6 (6), 665-687
- Gillie T. & Broadbent D. (1989) What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity and complexity, Psychological Research, 50 (4), 243-250