Stress Outcomes of Four Types of Perceived Interruptions

Keaton Allen Fletcher · Sean M. Potter · Britany N. Telford

54 citations0/0 files storedHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Personal Information Management and User Behavior Workplace Health and Well-being Technostress in Professional Settings

Abstract

Objective We sought to define and measure four types of perceived interruptions and to examine their relationships with stress outcomes. Background Interruptions have been defined and measured in a variety of inconsistent ways. No study has simultaneously examined the subjective experience of all types of interruptions. Method First, we provide a synthesized definition and model of interruptions that aligns interruptions along two qualities: origin and degree of multitasking. Second, we create and validate a self-report measure of these four types of perceived interruptions within two samples (working undergraduate students and working engineers). Last, we correlate this measure with self-reported psychological and physical stress outcomes. Results Our results support the four-factor model of interruptions. Results further support the link between each of the four types of interruptions (intrusions, breaks, distractions, and a specific type of ruminations, discrepancies) and stress outcomes. Specifically, results suggest that distractions explain a unique portion of variance in stress outcomes above and beyond the shared variance explained by intrusions, breaks, and discrepancies. Conclusion The synthesized four-factor model of interruptions is an adequate representation of the overall construct of interruptions. Further, perceived interruptions can be measured and are significantly related to stress outcomes. Application Measuring interruptions by observation can be intrusive and resource intensive. Additionally, some types of interruptions may be internal and therefore unobservable. Our survey measure offers a practical alternative method for practitioners and researchers interested in the outcomes of interruptions, especially stress outcomes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 54 citations exist upstream.

References

2020Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis 1983The Brief Symptom Inventory: an introductory report 1987Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping 2008Multiple Resources and Mental Workload 2004A diary study of task switching and interruptions 1999The Influence of Task Interruption on Individual Decision Making: An Information Overload Perspective 2008The cost of interrupted work 2003Work Interrupted: A Closer Look at the Role of Interruptions in Organizational Life

Cited by

2021More Hype Than Substance? A Meta-Analysis on Job and Task Rotation 2019Workplace intrusions and employee strain: the interactive effects of extraversion and emotional stability 2024What really bothers us about work interruptions? Investigating the characteristics of work interruptions and their effects on office workers 2024Effect of Interruptions and Cognitive Demand on Mental Workload: A Critical Review 2020Emotional Footprints of Email Interruptions

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.