Stress Outcomes of Four Types of Perceived Interruptions
-
2018/03/01
-
Details
-
Personal Author:
-
Description: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. [Description provided by NIOSH]
-
Subjects:
-
Keywords:
-
ISSN:0018-7208
-
Document Type:
-
Funding:
-
Genre:
-
Place as Subject:
-
CIO:
-
Topic:
-
Location:
-
Pages in Document:222-235
-
Volume:60
-
Issue:2
-
NIOSHTIC Number:nn:20055190
-
Citation:Hum Factors 2018 Mar; 60(2):222-235
-
Contact Point Address:Keaton A. Fletcher, MA, Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Ave, PCD4118G, Tampa, FL 33620
-
Email:fletcherk@mail.usf.edu
-
Federal Fiscal Year:2018
-
Performing Organization:Sunshine Education and Research Center, University of South Florida
-
Peer Reviewed:True
-
Start Date:20050701
-
Source Full Name:Human Factors
-
End Date:20290630
-
Collection(s):
-
Main Document Checksum:urn:sha-512:806eb3d78365b35f191ef037d90f1d9386ce621410d80caaf49ab6c75a68f77870fc46d6f75f363d580f9690a397adbbd481ff2b5bc1f38e147813a05385d267
-
Download URL:
-
File Type:
ON THIS PAGE
CDC STACKS serves as an archival repository of CDC-published products including
scientific findings,
journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other public health information authored or
co-authored by CDC or funded partners.
As a repository, CDC STACKS retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
As a repository, CDC STACKS retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
You May Also Like