Skip to main content

Office Workers’ Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Taking Regular Micro-breaks at Work: A Diary-Probed Interview Study

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10171))

Abstract

Research has suggested regular breaks in sedentary office work are important for health, wellbeing and long-term productivity. Although many computerized break reminders exist, few are based on user needs and requirements as determined by formative research. This paper reports empirical findings from a diary-probed interview study with 20 office workers on their perceived barriers and facilitators to taking regular micro-breaks at work. This work makes two contributions to the Persuasive Technology (PT) community: a diagnosis of the full range of determinants and levers for changing office work break behaviours; a demonstration of applying the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW), an intervention development framework originating from Health Psychology, to elicit theory-based design recommendations for a potential PT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Aarts, H., Custers, R.: Unconscious goal pursuit: nonconscious goal regulation and motivation. In: Ryan, R. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation, pp. 232–247. Oxford University Press, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bargh, J.A., Ferguson, M.J.: Beyond behaviorism: on the automaticity of higher mental processes. Psychol. Bull. 126(6), 925–945 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cane, J., et al.: Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement. Sci. 7(1), 37 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cirillo, F.: The Pomodoro Technique. FC Garage, Berlin (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Consolvo, S., et al.: Theory-driven design strategies for technologies that support behavior change in everyday life. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2009, pp. 405–414 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fogg, B.: A behavior model for persuasive design. In: The 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, p. 40. ACM Press, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Francis, J.J., et al.: Evidence-based selection of theories for designing behaviour change interventions: using methods based on theoretical construct domains to understand clinicians’ blood transfusion behaviour. Br. J. Health Psychol. 14(Pt 4), 625–646 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. French, S.D., et al.: Developing theory-informed behaviour change interventions to implement evidence into practice: a systematic approach using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Implement. Sci. 7(1), 38 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fritz, C., et al.: It’s the little things that matter: an examination of knowledge workers’ energy management. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 25, 28–39 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Herrmanny, K., Ziegler, J., Dogangün, A.: Supporting users in setting effective goals in activity tracking. In: Meschtscherjakov, A., Ruyter, B., Fuchsberger, V., Murer, M., Tscheligi, M. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9638, pp. 15–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31510-2_2

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jett, Q.R., George, J.M.: Work interrupted: a closer look at the role of interruptions in organizational life. Acad. Manage. Rev. 28, 494–507 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mark, G., et al.: No task left behind? Examining the nature of fragmented work. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2005, pp. 321–330 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Michie, S., et al.: The Behaviour Change Wheel: A Guide to Designing Interventions. Silverback Publishing, London (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Owen, N., et al.: Too much sitting: a novel and important predictor of chronic disease risk? Br. J. Sports Med. 43(2), 81–83 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pate, R.R., et al.: The evolving definition of “sedentary”. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 36(4), 173–178 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Prochaska, J.O., Velicer, W.F.: The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am. J. Heal. Promot. AJHP 12(1), 38–48 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ryan, C.G., et al.: Sitting patterns at work: objective measurement of adherence to current recommendations. Ergonomics 54(6), 531–538 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Srivastava, A., Thomson, S.B.: Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research. J. Adm. Gov. 4(2), 72–79 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tremblay, M.S., et al.: Physiological and health implications of a sedentary lifestyle. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 35(6), 725–740 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. West, R.: Time for a change: putting the Transtheoretical (Stages of Change) Model to rest. Addiction 100, 1036–1040 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Züger, M., Fritz, T.: Interruptibility of software developers and its prediction using psycho-physiological sensors. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2015, pp. 2981–2990 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Kathryn Morgan and Rachael Travers for helping transcribe interviews, and Anna Roberts for reviewing the coding and intervention mapping. This research was supported by the Horizon Centre for Doctoral Training at the University of Nottingham (RCUK Grant No. EP/L015463/1) and by the RCUK’s Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute (RCUK Grant No. EP/G065802/1) and Unilever UK Ltd. The study received ethics approval from School of Computer Science Ethics Committee, University of Nottingham.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yitong Huang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Huang, Y., Benford, S., Hendrickx, H., Treloar, R., Blake, H. (2017). Office Workers’ Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Taking Regular Micro-breaks at Work: A Diary-Probed Interview Study. In: de Vries, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Siemons, L., Beerlage-de Jong, N., van Gemert-Pijnen, L. (eds) Persuasive Technology: Development and Implementation of Personalized Technologies to Change Attitudes and Behaviors. PERSUASIVE 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10171. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55134-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55134-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-55133-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-55134-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics