• Testing a Computational Model...

*Result*: Testing a Computational Model of Interruptions: The Effects of Time Pressure on Interruption and Response Decisions.

Title:
Testing a Computational Model of Interruptions: The Effects of Time Pressure on Interruption and Response Decisions.
Authors:
Knight EB; The University of Queensland, Australia., Palada H; The University of Queensland, Australia., Neal A; The University of Queensland, Australia., Sanderson P; The University of Queensland, Australia., Ballard T; The University of Queensland, Australia.
Source:
Human factors [Hum Factors] 2026 Mar; Vol. 68 (3), pp. 331-353. Date of Electronic Publication: 2025 Oct 23.
Publication Type:
Journal Article
Language:
English
Journal Info:
Publisher: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 0374660 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1547-8181 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00187208 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Hum Factors Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s):
Publication: Santa Monica, Ca : Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Original Publication: New York, N.Y. : Pergamon Press, 1958-4
MeSH Terms:
Decision Making* , Task Performance and Analysis*, Humans ; Adult ; Male ; Female ; Time Factors
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: computational modeling; decision making; distractions and interruptions; experimental design; team communication
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20251023 Date Completed: 20260205 Latest Revision: 20260205
Update Code:
20260205
PubMed Central ID:
PMC12804418
DOI:
10.1177/00187208251388356
PMID:
41128280
Database:
MEDLINE

*Further Information*

*ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to empirically test a computational model of interruptions processes and effects, and to compare an alternative model to determine which best explains interruption and response decision making.BackgroundInterruptions in safety-critical environments (e.g., hospitals) can lead to an increased risk of error for the person being interrupted (the interruptee) but may be necessary for the person doing the interrupting (the interrupter) to maintain safety. Little research has considered the perspective of both the interrupter and interruptee.MethodWe tested a computational model of interruption and response decision processes through an experiment where participants (n = 312) worked as a nurse in a simulated clinical team. We examined how task progress, time remaining, and time pressure influenced decisions and compared the model with an alternative that allowed the effects of time pressure to be non-monotonic.ResultsUsing Bayesian hierarchical modeling, we found that a non-monotonic model best explained interruption decisions. Participants were biased toward interrupting, with time pressure only influencing decisions when it was very high. Contrastingly, the monotonic model best explained response decisions. Participants were more likely to accept interruptions as the interrupter's time pressure increased in comparison to their own.ConclusionTime pressure has a non-monotonic influence on interruption decisions, but a monotonic influence on response decisions.ApplicationFindings can inform interventions to consider the interruptions process from the perspective of both the interrupter and interruptee. Interventions could focus on training workers to more accurately assess time pressure when making interruption decisions.*

*Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.*