Talk:Interruption science

Interruption science received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

DYK nomination

I thought the article needed more context so i began focusing on how notifications causes interruptions. I found research on how and why notifications lead to interrupting people and how it is possible to liit the impacts of these interruptions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aodunton4 (talk • contribs)

Article overhaul

I am a researcher examining the effects of Interruptions on human performance in complex settings such as aviation. I feel as though this article does not corroborate with the current scientific evidence or literature. A significant problem is the heavy focus this article has on notifications when this only makes up a small part of the literature examining task interruptions. Furthermore a wide range of new methods to reduce the impact of interruptions have been explored.

I think it would be more logical to divide the article into several main categories and rehaul them. For instance, we should have a forms of interruption section that should reflect the categories set out by McFarlane (1997). Specifically, McFarlane, D. C. (1997). Interruption of people in human-computer interaction: A general unifying definition of human interruption and taxonomy: DTIC Document. This paper outlines the four key forms of interruption which exist and provides clear examples of them. This framework for dividing interruptions is the most dominant model in the scientific literature. No reputable peer reviewed research uses “categories of notifications” to divide the forms of interruptions.

I will need to write a section outlying some of the main theoretical accounts for why interruptions may be disruptive and consequently how we may ameliorate the problems associated with interruptions. Finally, this article is too wordy to be considered a simply or readable article. Most of it seems to just be direct takes from other articles which loosely outline some intuitive reasoning.

I am willing to take feedback on my criticisms, however, the state of this article is somewhat concerning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MindRail (talk • contribs) 03:09, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given a lack of any response, as of today I am doing a massive edit on this page. I am removing the odd focus on notifications and including more relevant information. --MindRail (talk) 03:54, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]