Auditory Versus Visual Interruptions: A Skeptical Perspective on Auditory Preemption and Suggestions for Advancing Theory

References

• Allen, M., Poggiali, D., Whitaker, K., Marshall, T. R., & Kievit, R. A. (2019). Raincloud plots: A multi-platform tool for robust data visualization. Wellcome Open Research, 4, 63. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15191.1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Amrhein, V., Greenland, S., & McShane, B. (2019). Scientists rise up against statistical significance. Nature, 567(7748), 305–307. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00857-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks, G. C., Field, J. G., Oswald, F. L., O’Boyle, E. H., Landis, R. S., Rupp, D. E., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2019). Answers to 18 questions about open science practices. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34(3), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9547-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrass, S., & Adcock, M. (2004). Cultivating design patterns for auditory displays. https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/50832
   Google Scholar
• Bendell, R., Vasquez, G., & Jentsch, F. (2019). Multiple resource loading and auditory preemption during a continuous signal detection task. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 63(1), 1244–1248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181319631478
   Google Scholar
• Blumenthal, T. D. (2015). Presidential address 2014: The more-or-less interrupting effects of the startle response: Startle and interruption. Psychophysiology, 52(11), 1417–1431. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12506
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boiteau, T. W., Malone, P. S., Peters, S. A., & Almor, A. (2014). Interference between conversation and a concurrent visuomotor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(1), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031858
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2011). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1990). Startle reflex modification: Emotion or attention? Psychophysiology, 27(5), 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1990.tb01966.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruyas, M.-P., Brusque, C., Debailleux, S., Duraz, M., & Aillerie, I. (2009). Does making a conversation asynchronous reduce the negative impact of phone call on driving? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2008.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao, Y., Theune, M., & Nijholt, A. (2010). Cognitive-Aware Modality Allocation in Intelligent Multimodal Information Presentation. In L. Shao, C. Shan, J. Luo, & M. Etoh (Eds.), Multimedia interaction and intelligent user interfaces (pp. 61–83). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-507-1_3
   Google Scholar
• Chamberland, C., Hodgetts, H. M., Vallières, B. R., Vachon, F., & Tremblay, S. (2018). The benefits and the costs of using auditory warning messages in dynamic decision-making settings. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12(2), 112–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343417735398
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, C.-C., Sodnik, J., & Boyle, L. N. (2016). Don’t speak and drive: Cognitive workload of In-vehicle speech interactions. Adjunct Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, (pp. 99–104). https://doi.org/10.1145/3004323.3004351
   Google Scholar
• Chong, J., & Siino, R. (2006). Interruptions on software teams: A comparison of paired and solo programmers. CSCW ’06: Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, (pp. 29–38). https://doi.org/10.1145/1180875.1180882
   Google Scholar
• Damos, D. (1981). Response strategies and individual differences in multiple-task performance. Air Force Office of Scientific Research. (AFSOR-79-0014; p. 100). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA097245
   Google Scholar
• Damos, D. (1991). Multiple task performance. CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Damos, D. (2020). Individual differences in multiple-task performance: Status and issues. Air Force Personnel Center. (AFCAPS-IR-2020-0004; p. 49). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD1110817
   Google Scholar
• Dehais, F., Causse, M., Vachon, F., Régis, N., Menant, E., & Tremblay, S. (2014). Failure to detect critical auditory alerts in the cockpit: Evidence for inattentional deafness. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 56(4), 631–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720813510735
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dismukes, R., Young, G. E., Sumwalt, R. L., III, & Null, C. H. (1998). Cockpit interruptions and distractions: Effective management requires a careful balancing act. ASRS Directline, 10.
   Google Scholar
• Earp, B. D., & Trafimow, D. (2015). Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00621
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edworthy, J. (1994). The design and implementation of non-verbal auditory warnings. Applied Ergonomics, 25(4), 202–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(94)90001-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edworthy, J., & Hellier, E. (2000). Auditory warnings in noisy environments. Noise and Health, 2(6), 27–39.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fox, E. L., & Houpt, J. W. (2018). Quantifying the effects of multi-tasking on processing efficiency. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 62(1), 1717–1721. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931218621389
   Google Scholar
• Gopher, D., Brickner, M., & Navon, D. (1982). Different difficulty manipulations interact differently with task emphasis: Evidence for multiple resources. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8(1), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.8.1.146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grahek, I., Schaller, M., & Tackett, J. L. (2021). Anatomy of a psychological theory: Integrating construct-validation and computational-modeling methods to advance theorizing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966794
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granier, J. P., Robin, D. A., Shapiro, L. P., Peach, R. K., & Zimba, L. D. (2000). Measuring processing load during sentence comprehension: Visuomotor tracking. Aphasiology, 14(5–6), 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/026870300401270
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas, E., & Edworthy, J. (2006). An introduction to auditory warnings and alarms. In M. S. Wogalter (Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 189–198). Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Helleberg, J. R., & Wickens, C. D. (2003). Effects of data-link modality and display redundancy on pilot performance: An attentional perspective. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 13(3), 189–210. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327108IJAP1303_01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horrey, W. J., & Wickens, C. (2002). Driving and side task performance: The effects of display clutter, separation, and modality (Tech. Report AHFD-02-13/GM-02-2). University of Illinois, Aviation Human Factors Division.
   Google Scholar
• Horrey, W. J., & Wickens, C. D. (2004). Driving and side task performance: The effects of display clutter, separation, and modality. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 46(4), 611–624. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.4.611.56805
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, R. W. (2014). Auditory distraction: A duplex-mechanism account. PsyCh Journal, 3(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.44
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iani, C., & Wickens, C. D. (2007). Factors affecting task management in aviation. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 49(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007779598118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iqbal, S. T., & Horvitz, E. (2007). Disruption and recovery of computing tasks: Field study, analysis, and directions. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 677–686. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240730
   Google Scholar
• Isreal, J. (1980). Structural interference in dual task performance: behavioral and electrophysiological data [ Unpublished doctoral dissertation] University of Illinois.
   Google Scholar
• Kalisch, B. J., & Aebersold, M. (2010). Interruptions and multitasking in nursing care. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 36(3), 126–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(10)36021-1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kanaan, D. A., & Moacdieh, N. M. (2018). Effects of workload and auditory interruptions on emergency dispatching performance. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 62(1), 1684–1688. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931218621382
   Google Scholar
• Koelewijn, T., Bronkhorst, A., & Theeuwes, J. (2009). Competition between auditory and visual spatial cues during visual task performance. Experimental Brain Research, 195(4), 593–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-009-1829-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer, G. (1994). An introduction to auditory display. In G. Kramer (Ed.), Auditory display: Sonification, audification, and auditory interfaces (pp. 1–78). Addison Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Kushlev, K., Proulx, J., & Dunn, E. W. (2016). “Silence your phones”: Smartphone notifications increase inattention and hyperactivity symptoms. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1011–1020. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858359
   Google Scholar
• Latorella, K. A. (1998). Effects of modality on interrupted flight deck performance: Implications for data link. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 42(1), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129804200120
   Google Scholar
• Latorella, K. A. (1999). Investigating interruptions: Implications for flightdeck performance (Vol. 99). National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center. http://www.cs.odu.edu/~mln/ltrs-pdfs/NASA-99-tm209707.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J. D. (2014). Dynamics of driver distraction: The process of engaging and disengaging. Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine, 58, 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2601_2
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee, A. M. C., Cerisano, S., Humphreys, K. R., & Watter, S. (2017). Talking is harder than listening: The time course of dual-task costs during naturalistic conversation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 71(2), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, B. A., Penaranda, M. N., Roberts, D. M., & Baldwin, C. L. (2013). Effectiveness of bimodal versus unimodal alerts for distracted drivers. Driving Assessment Conference, 7(2013). https://doi.org/10.17077/drivingassessment.1515
   Google Scholar
• Loukopoulos, L. D., Dismukes, R. K., & Barshi, I. (2001). Cockpit interruptions and distractions: A line observation study. Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, (pp. 1–6). Ohio State University Dept. of Aviation and Aeronautical Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Lu, S. A., Wickens, C. D., Prinet, J. C., Hutchins, S. D., Sarter, N., & Sebok, A. (2013). Supporting interruption management and multimodal interface design: Three meta-analyses of task performance as a function of interrupting task modality. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 55(4), 697–724. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720813476298
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marincola, L. B., & Long, G. M. (1985). Perceptual style and dual-task performance as a function of task difficulty and task emphasis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61(3_suppl), 1091–1105. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1985.61.3f.1091
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maslovat, D., Kennedy, P. M., Forgaard, C. J., Chua, R., & Franks, I. M. (2012). The effects of prepulse inhibition timing on the startle reflex and reaction time. Neuroscience Letters, 513(2), 243–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2012.02.052
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nees, M. A. (2023). Effects of auditory versus visual interruptions on a visual on-going task: An attempted reproduction and Re-analysis of the A-V Meta-analysis in Lu et al. (2013). https://osf.io/grxj9/
   Google Scholar
• Nees, M. A., & Fortna, A. (2015). A comparison of human versus virtual interruptions. Ergonomics, 58(5), 852–856. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.990934
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nees, M. A., & Sampsell, N. G. (2021). Simple auditory and visual interruptions of a continuous visual tracking task: Modality effects and time course of interference. Ergonomics, 64(7), 879–890. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2021.1873424
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nees, M. A., & Walker, B. N. (2011). Auditory displays for in-vehicle technologies. In P. Delucia (Ed.), Reviews of human factors and ergonomics (pp. 58–99). Sage Publishing/Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Oberauer, K., & Lewandowsky, S. (2019). Addressing the theory crisis in psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(5), 1596–1618. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01645-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patterson, R. D. (1982). Guidelines for auditory warning systems on civil aircraft. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 72(6), 1788–1803. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.388652
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peryer, G., Noyes, J., Pleydell-Pearce, K., & Lieven, N. (2005). Auditory alert characteristics: A survey of Pilot views. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 15(3), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap1503_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitts, B., Riggs, S. L., & Sarter, N. (2016). Crossmodal matching: A critical but neglected step in multimodal research. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 46(3), 445–450. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2015.2501420
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., & Klein, R. M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origins and significance. Psychological Review, 83(2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.83.2.157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratwani, R., & Trafton, J. G. (2010). An eye movement analysis of the effect of interruption modality on primary task resumption. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 52(3), 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810374195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehmann, A., Mitman, R., Neumeier, M., & Reynolds, M. C. (1995). Flightdeck crew alerting issues: An aviation safety reporting system analysis. (DOT/FAA/CT-TN94/18). DOT/Federal Aviation Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Rodway, P. (2005). The modality shift effect and the effectiveness of warning signals in different modalities. Acta Psychologica, 120(2), 199–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.05.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruskin, K. J., Corvin, C., Rice, S., Richards, G., Winter, S. R., & Clebone Ruskin, A. (2021). Alarms, alerts, and warnings in air traffic control: An analysis of reports from the aviation safety reporting system. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 12, 100502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100502
   Google Scholar
• Russell, M. K., & Hall, M. D. (2019). Responding to confidence and reproducibility crises: Registered reports and replications in auditory perception & cognition. Auditory Perception and Cognition, 2(4), 181–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/25742442.2020.1790151
   Google Scholar
• Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santangelo, V., Olivetti Belardinelli, M., & Spence, C. (2007). The suppression of reflexive visual and auditory orienting when attention is otherwise engaged. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(1), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.1.137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarter, N. (2013). Multimodal support for interruption management: Models, empirical findings, and design recommendations. Proceedings of the IEEE, 101(9), 2105–2112. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2013.2245852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sato, T., Islam, S., Still, J. D., Scerbo, M. W., & Yamani, Y. (2023). Task priority reduces an adverse effect of task load on automation trust in a dynamic multitasking environment. Cognition, Technology & Work, 25(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-022-00717-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spence, C., & Driver, J. (1997). Audiovisual links in attention: Implications for interface design. In D. Harris (Ed.), Engineering psychology and cognitive ergonomics vol. 2: Job design and product design (pp. 185–192). Ashgate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telephone. Psychological Science, 12(6), 462–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00386
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, C. (1990). The negative difference event-related brain potential during cross-modality time-sharing. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 34(19), 1436–1440. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129003401903
   Google Scholar
• Szollosi, A., & Donkin, C. (2021). Arrested theory development: The misguided distinction between exploratory and confirmatory research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 717–724. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966796
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thackray, R. I. (1988). Performance recovery following startle: A laboratory approach to the study of behavioral response to sudden aircraft emergencies. Civil Aeromedical Institute. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/21299
   Google Scholar
• Thackray, R. I., & Touchstone, R. M. (1970). Recovery of motor performance following startle. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 30(1), 279–292. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1970.30.1.279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsang, P. S., & Wickens, C. D. (1988). The structural constraints and strategic control of resource allocation. Human Performance, 1(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup0101_3
   Google Scholar
• Veitengruber, J., Boucek, G., Jr., & Smith, W. (1977). Aircraft alerting systems criteria study volume 1: Collation and analysis of aircraft alerting systems data. ( Rep. FAA-RD-76-222). Department Transportation Federal Aviation Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Vieane, A., Funke, G., Greenlee, E., Mancuso, V., Borghetti, B., Miller, B., Menke, L., Brown, R., Foroughi, C. K., & Boehm-Davis, D. (2017). Task interruptions undermine cyber defense. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 61(1), 375–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601576
   Google Scholar
• Ward, L. M. (1994). Supramodal and modality-specific mechanisms for stimulus-driven shifts of auditory and visual attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 48(2), 242–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/1196-1961.48.2.242
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wicherts, J. M., Veldkamp, C. L. S., Augusteijn, H. E. M., Bakker, M., van Aert, R. C. M., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2016). Degrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies: A checklist to avoid p-hacking. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220210123806
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., Braune, R., & Stokes, A. (1987). Age differences in the speed and capacity of information processing: 1. A dual-task approach. Psychology and Aging, 2(1), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.2.1.70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., Dixon, S., & Seppelt, B. D. (2002). In vehicle displays and control task interference: The effects of display location and modality. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., Dixon, S. R., & Seppelt, B. (2005). Auditory preemption versus multiple resources: Who wins in interruption management? Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 49(3), 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120504900353
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., Fracker, L., & Webb, J. (1987). Cross-modal interference and task integration: Resources or preemption switching? Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 31(6), 679–683. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193128703100615
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., & Gosney, J. L. (2003). Redundancy, Modality, and Priority in Dual Task Interference. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 47(13), 1590–1594. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120304701301
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., & Liu, Y. (1988). Codes and modalities in multiple resources: A success and a qualification. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 30(5), 599–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088803000505
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yucel, G., Petty, C., McCarthy, G., & Belger, A. (2005a). Graded visual attention modulates brain responses evoked by task-irrelevant auditory pitch changes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(12), 1819–1828. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892905775008698
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yucel, G., Petty, C., McCarthy, G., & Belger, A. (2005b). Visual task complexity modulates the brain’s response to unattended auditory novelty. NeuroReport, 16(10), 1031. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200507130-00001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar