The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why do i keep interrupting myself?: environment, habit and self-interruption
Abstract
Self-interruptions account for a significant portion of task switching in information-centric work contexts. However, most of the research to date has focused on understanding, analyzing and designing for external interruptions. The causes of self-interruptions are not well understood. In this paper we present an analysis of 889 hours of observed task switching behavior from 36 individuals across three high-technology information work organizations. Our analysis suggests that self-interruption is a function of organizational environment and individual differences, but also external interruptions experienced. We find that people in open office environments interrupt themselves at a higher rate. We also find that people are significantly more likely to interrupt themselves to return to solitary work associated with central working spheres, suggesting that self-interruption occurs largely as a function of prospective memory events. The research presented contributes substantially to our understanding of attention and multitasking in context.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Many digital devices and platforms are designed specifically to be highly engaging, using features such as notifications, alerts, personalized content, reminders and gamification to capture, retain and maintain users' attention (Dabbish et al., 2011).”
From The impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Dabbish et al., 2011
Citations
Cites
Partridge, B. E., & Mintzberg, H. (1974) · Operational Research Quarterly (1970-1977) · doi:10.2307/3007945 · Cited by 6,242
Cognitive control in media multitaskers
Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0903620106 · Cited by 1,810
The Time Famine: Toward a Sociology of Work Time
Perlow, L. A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667031 · Cited by 978
A diary study of task switching and interruptions
Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., & Wilhite, S. (2004) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/985692.985715 · Cited by 830
Memory for goals: an activation‐based model
Altmann, E. M., & Trafton, J. G. (2002) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2601_2 · Cited by 795
"Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness": managing multiple working spheres
González, V. M., & Mark, G. (2004) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/985692.985707 · Cited by 715
Self-citationThe Scope and Importance of Human Interruption in Human-Computer Interaction Design
McFarlane, D. C., & Latorella, K. A. (2002) · Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1207/s15327051hci1701_1 · Cited by 536
No task left behind?: examining the nature of fragmented work
Mark, G., Gonzalez, V. M., & Harris, J. (2005) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1054972.1055017 · Cited by 503
Self-citationLeroy, S. (2009) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.04.002 · Cited by 438
How many things do you like to do at once? An introduction to monochronic and polychronic time
Bluedorn, A. C., Kaufman‐Scarborough, C., & Lane, P. (1992) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/ame.1992.4274453 · Cited by 338
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–132 of 132
Ferguson, S. A., & Massimi, M. (2024) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642175 · Cited by 3
“We build on the body of HCI literature solving the problem of competing demands for workers’ focus [12, 18, 25– 27, 38, 66, 68–72] by providing an understanding of how and when meeting-free weeks can help.”
MethodAutomatic Task-Cluster Generation based on Document Switching and Revisitation.
Abela, C., Staff, C., & Handschuh, S. (2015) · OAR@UM (University of Malta) · Cited by 2
Detecting Multitasking Work and Negative Routines from Computer Logs
Kaburagi, H., Vasilache, S. N., & Tanaka, J. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40397-7_52 · Cited by 2
Hu, D., & Lee, S. W. (2019) · ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) · doi:10.1145/3332167.3357110 · Cited by 3
Mitigating workday fragmentation in knowledge work – task management skill training intervention
Franssila, H. (2021) · European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics · doi:10.1145/3452853.3452891 · Cited by 2
“Earlier studies of interruptions have shown that a considerable share of interruptions are self-generated and are related to unplanned task-switching to doing meta-work, work that is related to organizing and planning one’s own work [4, 8].”
BackgroundKamal, R., McCullagh, P. J., Cleland, I., & Nugent, C. (2022) · Smart innovation, systems and technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-92905-3_2 · Cited by 2
The Effects of Fragmented and Continuous Interruptions on Online Task Performance
Ariel, Y., & Levy, E. C. (2022) · Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies · doi:10.30935/ojcmt/12404 · Cited by 2
Will Break for Productivity: Generalized Symptoms of Cognitive DepletionPreprint
Franklin, L. R., Lerman, K., & Hodas, N. O. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.01521 · Cited by 2
“) will fail and person the will become unable to continue tasks [10, 14, 19, 24].”
BackgroundInfluentialTaking Back Control of Social Media Feeds with Take Back Control
Salminen, J. O., Corporan, J., Jung, S., & Jansen, B. J. J. (2021) · International Conference on Innovations in Intelligent Systems and Applications (INISTA) · doi:10.1109/inista52262.2021.9548614 · Cited by 1
“Examples of these challenges are online toxicity, hate speech, fake news, and general negativity [8,24,33,35,43].”
BackgroundHacioglu, N., Leva, M. C., Kim, N., & Lee, H. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-05002-1_6 · Cited by 1
Park, E., Sun, X., Molaib, K. M., Ram, N., Reeves, B. B., & Robinson, T. N. (2026) · Educational Psychology · doi:10.1080/01443410.2026.2619052 · Cited by 1
“…et al., 2012). interruptions can be self-initiated (e.g., voluntarily checking notifications) or externally triggered (e.g., receiving calls; Dabbish et al., 2011; Heitmayer, 2022). importantly, research indicates that once interrupted by distractions, users often struggle to regain focus…”
Lassila, H., Aledavood, T., Kulshrestha, J., & Lindqvist, J. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790822 · Cited by 2
“…is attributed to be notification initiated, while user initiated micro-usage is most commonly associated with social applications [26], and people often self-interrupt themselves from the tasks they are engaging in [22] and engage in meaningless smartphone use to escape negative emotions [60].”
Measuring Disengagement and Chaos in Multitasking Interaction with Smart Devices
Zhang, Y., Rau, P. P., & Zhong, R. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40093-8_15 · Cited by 1
Die Welt des Wissens in Organisationen im Wandel
Mader, I. (2023) · Beratung im Fokus · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-66763-7_2 · Cited by 1
Helping as Mundane Knowledge Sharing: Do Bundled Help Request and Quiet Time Increase Performance?
Käser, P. A. W., König, C. J., Fischbacher, U., & Kleinmann, M. (2014) · Journal of Information & Knowledge Management · doi:10.1142/s0219649214500257 · Cited by 1
Embedded Computation versus Embodied Interaction: Connected Objects for Connected Thinking
Hemmert, F., Bradford, E., Caetano, E., Kegel, F., Licht, E., & Höwer, M. (2018) · i-com · doi:10.1515/icom-2018-0023 · Cited by 1
“HCI research in this area has investigated how to detect points in time at which users are likely to be less disturbed by a notification [35, 43], as well as how to design for less distractive interactions with mobile devices [9, 8, 1].”
BackgroundTeoreettinen kehys viestintäteknologioiden käytön hallinnasta: toimijuus ja osaaminen tietotyössä
Huusko, A., & Sivunen, A. E. (2022) · Media & viestintä · doi:10.23983/mv.115670 · Cited by 2
Attention management to improve fallback-readiness in conditional automated vehicles
Gerber, M. A. (2023) · Queensland University of Technology · doi:10.5204/thesis.eprints.239712
Effect of self-interruption and external interruption on error detection
Yau, S. Y. (2015) · Digital Commons - Lingnan (Lingnan University)
Understanding Cognitive Depletion in Novice NMR AnalystsPreprint
Franklin, L. R., Han, K., Huang, Z., Arendt, D., & Hodas, N. O. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.01919
Okegbe, S. (2019) · OhioLink ETD Center (Ohio Library and Information Network)
Tietotyön informaatioergonomian arviointi- ja kehittämismenetelmä
Franssila, H., Okkonen, J., & Savolainen, R. (2014) · Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University)
– The Asian Conference on Psychology & the Behavioral Sciences 2020 Official Conference Proceedings
(2020) · ACP official conference proceedings · doi:10.22492/issn.2187-4743.2020 · Cited by 1
Santhosh, J., Jagtap, S., Dengel, A. R., & Ishimaru, S. (2024) · ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp) · doi:10.1145/3675094.3677591 · Cited by 1
“Several studies have indicated that notifications can substantially interfere with the work at hand, causing concentration problems and decreased output [3, 7, 11, 17].”
Facebook’s business is helping other businesses
Savage, S., Toxtli, C., & Torres, E. O. B. (2019) · doi:10.64628/aai.y434arxme
Effects of Task Switching on Depletion, Motivation, and Creativity
Nuhn, C., & Ohly, S. (2025) · Journal of Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000373
An Integrative Review of Work Interruptions and Future Research Directions
高, 世. (2025) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.12677/ap.2025.1510563
Joshi, N. V., Ratley, S., Selvakumar, P., Manjunath, T. C., Anute, N., & Arun, M. R. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-5606-8.ch004
L'impact des conditions de travail sur les capacités attentionnelles des salariés
Couffe, C. (2016) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/66fc651ezfa81z4930z8dabzb4e39affd6e6
Brazzolotto, P. (2019) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/6be88775z3a53z4c21z8f36z87023aad5089
ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT AND MULTITASKING BEHAVIORS: A MIXED-METHOD STUDY
Incerti, V., Bertolotti, F., & Mattarelli, E. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Metadata
- Authors
- Dabbish, L., Mark, G., & González, V. M.
- Affiliations
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México (MX)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2011-05-07
- Pages
- 3127-3130
- OpenAlex
- W2033910215
- Cited by
- 132
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 14.62
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Architecture › Facilities and Workplace Management
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Keywords
- self-interruption, task switching, information work, prospective memory, multitasking, attention, organizational context, individual differences
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
