Way back in 2008, three University professors (two from Germany, one from California, USA) published a study called
The cost of interrupted work: more speed and stress.
Access to the full study is not available for free at the source linked, but the abstract indicates some interesting findings.
They explain:
"We performed an empirical study to investigate whether the context of interruptions makes a difference. We found that context does not make a difference but surprisingly, people completed interrupted tasks in less time with no difference in quality."
Is it possible, now that we're fully engulfed in the digital device era, that a similar study would produce different results? That certainly seems likely.
The authors go on to further explain:
"Our data suggests that people compensate for interruptions by working faster, but this comes at a price: experiencing more stress, higher frustration, time pressure and effort."
It makes sense that people would work faster after an interruption, so the overall quality of the work still stays the same. But, as they mention, it comes at a cost, which isn't necessarily factored into the actual results, but is more related to the overall demeanor and wellbeing of the worker.
Now on to this week's hand-picked productivity links!
