trapond hiransalee
Ambient Notifications & The Interruption Effect
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE (DESIGN AND PLANNING) SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN KING MONGKUT’S UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY THONBURI
2016
Technology of mobile devices have changed our daily lives.
Could ambient notification create less distraction and keep their focus on the task and environment? aim & objective http://jcourt.net
• Would ambient notifications create less distraction than smartphone? • Are ambient notifications useful for users? • Will showing only information and not able to take action to the notifications keep users’ from shifting task. • How notifying with different amount of information affect users?
research questions
H1:There is no significant difference between the
primary task’s performance when interrupted by the lamp and the smartphone devices.
H2:There is no significant difference between the
satisfaction of having the ambient notifications and not having ambient notifications.z
hypothesis
related works Egg Minder by Quriky
Primary user research Questionnaire Digital devices usages & notification experiences
Design implementation
Research Usability Testing
Prototype
Interview
Implement
Primary Information Select Interviewees
Interview Analyse
Create Personas Conclude
User Requirements
method
Final Sketch Design
Test Protoype
Test Smartphone
Refine Collect Data
3rd Sketch Design
Data
Select from options
2nd Sketch Design
Analyse
Conclusions
Design Problems
Select from options
1st Sketch Design
Iterate...
Door notifications
Lamp notifications Questionnaire & Interview
Usability Testing
Test Protoype
Test Smartphone
Simulation
Questionnaire & Interview
Data Analyse
Analyse
Conclusions Conclusions
Design Problems
significant difference between the primary task’s performance when interrupted by the lamp and the smartphone devices.
H2:There is no
Collect Data
Data
H1:There is no
Design Problems
significant difference between the satisfaction of having the ambient notifications and not having ambient notifications.
Carry device
Sound setting of device
23%
28% 25%
at work at home
75% 77%
all the time outdoor
72%
Opinions on notifications
1% Are notifications important?
31%
Are notifications annoying?
10% 6% 84%
68%
yes sometimes no
on off
calendar weather stocks
calculator
camera
browser
music map
games
messenger sms whatsapp facebook instagram blogs twitter youtube
line
phone mail
usage
Communication
Social Network
Entertainment
Functional
Information
usage
Important notifications Work related notifications Immediate response notifications
phone
line
messenger
Ignored notifications
ambient notifications .
infomation processing model (Wickens, 1992) stimuli (device)
device
attention resource sensing
self generate notification
visual
user interface
execution ignore
perception decision making
audio
server sender
notication system
respond
haptic
visual audio
engage
ambient notifications door smartphone
lamp
working memory Long Term Memory
primary task
information of the notification
method
information
application
sender
contents
secondary task
Cam
era
BACKDROP
Camera 1
SECONDARY TASK (notification on lamp)
PRIMARY TASK (calculatingworking memory)
TESTING STATION
PARTICIPANT
primary task
2
Problem 1
Problem 2
Problem 3
Problem 4
Problem 5
313 240 894 738 180 728 90 480
4600 3192 200 746 230 164 105 738 746 230 164 105 738
70 64 60 484 800 478 1990 320 12 198 165 79 68 4 35
82 1166 328 70 225 300 738 90 179 367 894 234 445 200
660 160 738 60 150 480 121 170 48 32 120 160
primary task
Accurancy
Time
dependent variables
icon + sender + brief message 1 point
1 point
notification
notification
notification
(1 point)
(2 point)
(3 point)
1
2
dependent variables
counting secondary performance
1 point
3
A
primary task
B
primary task
results / lamp vs smartphone / paired-samples t-test
primary task
primary task
There was a significant difference in the scores for being interrupted by lamp notifications (M=3.82, SD=1.25) by smartphone notifications (M=3.18, SD=1.08) conditions; t(10)=2.28, p=0.046. Smartphone notifications interrupt users more than the lamp notification. When participants have been interrupt by the smartphone notifications, the math score that the participants gained decrease than the lamp.
There was a significant difference in time doing the problems for being interrupted by lamp notifications (M=6.61, SD=2.19) by smartphone notifications (M=11.45, SD=3.13) conditions; t(10)=-11.23, p=0.000001. Having interruptions from notification from lamp or smartphone really does have an effect on the time spending on the primary task. When users have been interrupted by the smartphone notifications, it take longer time to do the math problems than have been interrupted by the lamp notifications.
results / lamp vs smartphone / paired-samples t-test
results / lamp vs smartphone / accuancy
results / lamp vs smartphone / accurancy
results / lamp vs smartphone / time
results / lamp vs smartphone / Notification noticed vs performance
door notification
did not understand LN.
1
2
3
4
take for long time to understand LN.
duration of LN. was long enough
LN. should be on until turn off
LN. should not be on until turn off
LN. does not lessen missing notifications
LN. does lessen missing notifications
can ignore smartphone
can ignore LN.
smartphone distract less
questionnaire
understand LN. take for short time to understand LN.
duration of LN. was not long enough
not able to respond to LN. make me go back to smartphone 1
5
LN. distract less
2
3
4
not able to respond to LN. does not make me 5 go back to smartphone
1
2
3
4
DN. is disturbing
5
DN. is unnecessary
DN. is not unnecessary
DN didn’t take your attention
DN took your attention
it was not appropriate on the door
it was appropriate on the door
amount of information was not appropriate
amount of information was appropriate
weather information was not appropriate
weather information was appropriate
traffic information was not appropriate
traffic information was appropriate
schedule information was not appropriate
schedule information was appropriate
DN. was easy to understand
DN. was not easy to understand
DN. is useful
DN. is not useful
DN. cannot substitute checking your smartphone
DN. can substitute checking your smartphone
should notify by sound
should notify by visual is enough
having notifications in the environment is not useful
having notifications in the environment is useful 1
questionnaire
DN. is not disturbing
2
3
4
5
One sample t-test evaluate whether their mean was significantly different from 3, which is the accepted mean for satisfactory in general. lamp
door
The sample mean of 3.56 (SD = 1.17) was significantly different from 3, t (7) = 1.35, p = .219. The 95% confidence interval of the satisfaction of the lamp notifications mean ranges from 3.42 to 4.55. The sample mean of 3.85 (SD = .67) was significantly different from 3, t (12) = 4.63, p = .001. The 95% confidence interval of the satisfaction of the door notifications mean ranges from 3.45 to 4.26. The results support the conclusion that the satisfaction of both the lamp and door notifications are somewhat more than average.
questionnaire / one sample t-test
• Would ambient notifications create less distraction than smartphone? yes • Are ambient notifications useful for users? yes • Will showing only information and not able to take action to the notifications keep users’ from shifting task. • How notifying with different amount of information affect users? user need enough amount of information in order to respond to it.
research questions
H1:There is a significant difference between the
primary task’s performance when interrupted by the lamp and the smartphone devices.
H2:There is a significant difference between the
satisfaction of having the ambient notifications and not having ambient notifications.z
hypothesis
thank you