Individual differences in working-memory capacity and task resumption following interruptions.

Previous research has shown that there is a time cost (i.e., a resumption lag) associated with resuming a task following an interruption and that the longer the duration of the interruption, the greater the time cost (i.e., resumption lag increases as interruption duration increases). The memory-for-goals model (Altmann & Trafton, 2002) suggests that this greater time cost is a result of increased interference caused by longer duration interruptions. Therefore, the goal for this research was to determine whether individuals who can better manage interference, i.e., individuals with higher working-memory capacity (WMC), can resume tasks more quickly following interruptions than those who cannot manage interference as well (i.e., individuals with lower WMC). A procedural interruption task with 3 different interruption durations and a measure of WMC were completed by 229 students. In line with previous research, we found a strong positive relationship between interruption duration and resumption lag. We found a strong negative effect of WMC on resumption lag (i.e., increases in WMC reduced resumption lags). Notably, WMC moderated the effect of interruption duration on resumption lag (i.e., increases in WMC attenuated the positive relationship between interruption duration and resumption lag). Specifically, individuals with high WMC experienced small increases in resumption lag as interruption duration increased, whereas individuals with low WMC experienced substantial increases in resumption lag as interruption duration increased. Our data suggest that individuals with higher WMC are less susceptible to interference caused by interruptions. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mitigating disruptive effects of interruptions through training: what needs to be practiced?

It is generally accepted that, with practice, people improve on most tasks. However, when tasks have multiple parts, it is not always clear what aspects of the tasks practice or training should focus on. This research explores the features that allow training to improve the ability to resume a task after an interruption, specifically focusing on task-specific versus general interruption/resumption-process mechanisms that could account for improved performance. Three experiments using multiple combinations of primary tasks and interruptions were conducted with undergraduate psychology students. The first experiment showed that for one primary and interruption task-pair, people were able to resume the primary task faster when they had previous practice with the interruption. The second experiment replicated this finding for two other sets of primary and interruption task-pairs. Finally, the third experiment showed that people were able to resume a primary task faster only when they had previous practice with that specific primary and interruption task-pair. Experience with other primary and interruption task-pairs, or practice on the primary task alone, did not facilitate resumption. This suggests that a critical component in resuming after an interruption is the relationship between two tasks. These findings are in line with a task-specific mechanism of resumption and incompatible with a general-process mechanism. These findings have practical implications for developing training programs and mitigation strategies to lessen the disruptive effects of interruptions which plague both our personal and professional environments.