Choosing your Moment: Interruptions in Multimedia Annotation

  • Christopher P. Bowers
  • Will Byrne
  • Benjamin R. Cowan
  • Chris Creed
  • Robert J. Hendley
  • Russell Beale
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6947)


In a cooperative mixed-initiative system, timely and effective dialogue between the system and user is important to ensure that both sides work towards producing the most effective results, and this is affected by how disruptive any interruptions are as the user completes their primary task. A disruptive interaction means the user may become irritated with the system, or might take longer to deal with the interruption and provide information that the system needs to continue. Disruption is influenced both by the nature of the interaction and when it takes place in the context of the user’s progress through their main task. We describe an experiment based on a prototype cooperative video annotation system designed to explore the impact of interruptions, in the form of questions posed by the system that the user must address. Our findings demonstrate a preference towards questions presented in context with the content of the video, rather than at the natural opportunities presented by transitions in the video. This differs from previous research which concentrates on interruptions in the form of notifications.


Task interruption multimedia annotation mixed-initiative annotation 


  1. 1.
    Adamczyk, P.D., Bailey, B.P.: If Not Now When? The Effects of Interruptions at Different Moments Within Task Execution. In: Proc. of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2004, pp. 271–278. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, J.F.: Mixed-Initiative Interaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems and their Applications 14(5), 14–23 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bailey, B.P., Konstan, J.A., Carlis, J.V.: Measuring the Effects of Interruptions on Task Performance in the User Interface. In: IEEE Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 757–762 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bailey, B.P., Konstan, J.A., Carlis, J.V.: The Effects of Interruptions on Task Performance, Annoyance, and Anxiety in the User Interface. In: Proc. of INTERACT 2001, pp. 593–601 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bailey, B.P., Iqbal, S.T.: Understanding changes in mental workload during execution of goal-directed tasks and its application for interruption management. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 14(4), 1–28 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Creed, C., Lonsdale, P., Hendley, B., Beale, R.: Synergistic Annotation of Multimedia Content. In: Proc. of the 2010 Third International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, pp. 205–208 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cutrell, E., Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E.: Notification, Disruption, and Memory: Effects of Messaging Interruptions on Memory and Performance. In: Proc. of INTERACT 2001, pp. 263–269 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Czerwinski, M., Cutrel, E., Horvitz, E.: Instant Messaging and Interruption: Influence of Task Type on Performance. In: OZCHI 2000 Conference Proceedings, pp. 356–361 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horvitz, E.: Principles of Mixed-Initiative User Interfaces. In: Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 159–166 (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horvitz, E., Kadie, C., Paek, T., Hovel, D.: Models of attention in computing and communication: from principles to applications. Comm. ACM 46(3), 52–59 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iqbal, S.T., Bailey, B.P.: Effects of Intelligent Notification Management on Users and Their Tasks. In: Proc. of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2008, pp. 93–102 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Latorella, K.A.: Effects of modality on interrupted flight deck performance: Implications for data link. In: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, Aerospace Systems, vol. (5), pp. 87–91 (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mark, G., Gudith, D., Klocke, U.: The Cost of Interrupted Work: More Speed and Stress. In: Proc. of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2008, pp. 107–110 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mcfarlane, D.C.: Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-computer Interaction. In: Proc. of Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT 1999), pp. 295–303. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miyata, Y., Norman, D.A.: Psychological Issues in Support of Multiple Activities. In: User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 265–284 (1986)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Monk, C.A., Boehm-Davis, D.A.: The Attentional Costs of Interrupting Task Performance at Various Stages. In: Proc. of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting, pp. 1824–1828 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rubinstein, J.S., Meyer, D.E., Evans, J.E.: Executive Control of Cognitive Processes in Task Switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27(4), 763–797 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Speier, C., Valacich, J.S., Vessey, I.: The influence of task interruption on individual decision making: An information overload perspective. Decision Sciences 30(2), 337–360 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zijlstra, F.R.H., Roe, R.A.: Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of interrupted activities. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 72, 163–185 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher P. Bowers
    • 1
  • Will Byrne
    • 1
  • Benjamin R. Cowan
    • 1
  • Chris Creed
    • 1
  • Robert J. Hendley
    • 1
  • Russell Beale
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations