skip to main content
10.1145/1240624.1240732acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Understanding and developing models for detecting and differentiating breakpoints during interactive tasks

Published:29 April 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

The ability to detect and differentiate breakpoints during task execution is critical for enabling defer-to-breakpoint policies within interruption management. In this work, we examine the feasibility of building statistical models that can detect and differentiate three granularities (types) of perceptually meaningful breakpoints during task execution, without having to recognize the underlying tasks. We collected ecological samples of task execution data, and asked observers to review the interaction in the collected videos and identify any perceived breakpoints and their type. Statistical methods were applied to learn models that map features of the interaction to each type of breakpoint. Results showed that the models were able to detect and differentiate breakpoints with reasonably high accuracy across tasks. Among many uses, our resulting models can enable interruption management systems to better realize defer-to-breakpoint policies for interactive, free-form tasks.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

1240732.mp4

mp4

159.8 MB

References

  1. Adamczyk, P.D. and B.P. Bailey. If Not Now When? The Effects of Interruptions at Different Moments within Task Execution. CHI, 2004, 271--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Altheide, D.L. Qualitative Media Analysis. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Baeza-Yates, R.A. and B. Ribeiro-Neto Modern Information Retrieval. Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bailey, B.P., P.D. Adamczyk, T.Y. Chang and N.A. Chilson. A Framework for Specifying and Monitoring User Tasks. Journal of Computers in Human Behavior, 22 (4), 2006, 685--708.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bailey, B.P. and J.A. Konstan. On the Need for Attention Aware Systems: Measuring Effects of Interruption on Task Performance, Error Rate, and Affective State. Journal of Computers in Human Behavior, 22 (4), 2006, 709--732.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Card, S., T. Moran and A. Newell The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Czerwinski, M., E. Cutrell and E. Horvitz. Instant Messaging: Effects of Relevance and Timing. People and Computers XIV: Proceedings of HCI, 2000, 71--76.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Czerwinski, M., E. Horvitz and S. Wilhite. A Diary Study of Task Switching and Interruptions. CHI, 2004, 175--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dragunov, A.N., T.G. Dietterich, K. Johnsrude, M. McLaughlin, L. Li and J.L. Herlocker. Tasktracer: A Desktop Environment to Support Multi-Tasking Knowledge Workers. Proc. IUI, 2005, 75--82. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Fogarty, J., S.E. Hudson and J. Lai. Examining the Robustness of Sensor-Based Statistical Models of Human Interruptibility. CHI, 2004, 207--214. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Fogarty, J., A.J. Ko, H.H. Aung, E. Golden, K.P. Tang and S.E. Hudson. Examining Task Engagement in Sensor-Based Statistical Models of Human Interruptibility. CHI, 2005, 331--340. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Gonzalez, V.M. and G. Mark. "Constant, Constant, Multi-Tasking Craziness": Managing Multiple Working Spheres. CHI, 2004, 113--120. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hall, M.A. Correlation-Based Feature Selection for Discrete and Numeric Class Machine Learning. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning, 2000, 359--366. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Hanson, C. and W. Hirst. On the Representation of Events: A Study of Orientation, Recall, and Recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118 (2), 1989, 136--147.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Henderson, A. and S.K. Card. Rooms: The Use of Multiple Virtual Workspaces to Reduce Space Contention in a Window-Based Graphical User Interface. ACM TOG, 5 (3), 1986, 211--243. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ho, J. and S. Intille. Using Context--Aware Computing to Reduce the Perceived Burden of Interruptions from Mobile Devices. CHI, 2005, 909--918. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Horvitz, E., P. Koch and J. Apacible. Busybody: Creating and Fielding Personalized Models of the Cost of Interruption. CSCW, 2004, 507--510. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Iqbal, S.T. and B.P. Bailey. Investigating the Effectiveness of Mental Workload as a Predictor of Opportune Moments for Interruption. CHI, 2005, 1489--1492. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Iqbal, S.T. and B.P. Bailey. Leveraging Characteristics of Task Structure to Predict Costs of Interruption. CHI, 2006, 741--750. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. John, B.E. and D.E. Kieras. The GOMS Family of User Interface Analysis Techniques: Comparison and Contrast. ACM TOCHI, 3 (4), 1996, 320--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Mark, G., V.M. Gonzalez and J. Harris. No Task Left Behind? Examining the Nature of Fragmented Work. CHI, 2005, 321--330. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Nair, R., S. Voida and E. Mynatt. Frequency--Based Detection of Task Switches. Proceedings of the 19th British HCI Group Annual Conference, 2005, 94--99.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Newtson, D. Attribution and the Unit of Perception of Ongoing Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28 (1), 1973, 28--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Newtson, D. and G. Engquist. The Perceptual Organization of Ongoing Behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 1976, 436--450.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Newtson, D., G. Enquist and J. Bois. The Objective Basis of Behavior Units. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35 (12), 1977, 847--862.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Rizzolatti, G., L. Fadiga, V. Gallese and L. Fogassi. Premotor Cortex and the Recognition of Motor Actions. Cognitive Brain Research, 3, 1996, 131--141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Shen, J., L. Li, T. Dietterich and J. Herlocker. A Hybrid Learning System for Recognizing User Tasks from Desktop Activities and Email Messages. Proc. IUI, 2006, 86--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Zacks, J., B. Tversky and G. Iyer. Perceiving, Remembering, and Communicating Structure in Events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130 (1), 2001, 29--58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Zacks, J.M. and B. Tversky. Event Structure in Perception and Conception. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 2001, 3--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Understanding and developing models for detecting and differentiating breakpoints during interactive tasks

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2007
        1654 pages
        ISBN:9781595935939
        DOI:10.1145/1240624

        Copyright © 2007 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 29 April 2007

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '07 Paper Acceptance Rate182of840submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader