Hi, my name is Namrata.
Today, I will explain how we can mitigate the effects of reading.
interruptions by providing reviews and previews.
This work was done in collaboration with Adobe Research and The
University of Melbourne.
Nowadays, the number of people reading on their phones is increasing day by day.
Further for effective reading,
it is suggested that we should either postpone the interruption or
avoid interruptions while reading.
However, in real scenarios, these interruptions are mostly unplanned
and therefore unavoidable.
What do we need in such scenarios is a tool which can help us.
re-engage with the reading tasks.
How about a review or a summary of the text you have just read till now.
These reviews can help you or remind you of what you have read.
Further, how about a preview or a summary of the text you will be reading next.
These previews can help you to motivate to read further.
In this late-breaking work, we conducted a series of pilot studies to understand
the benefits of reviews and previews in mitigating the interruptions.
The basic flow of the experiment looks like this.
The basic flow of the experiment consists of multiple reading rounds.
In each reading rounds, the participant has to read a passage.
While reading the passage, the participants were interrupted in between
and asked to complete three interruptions tasks.
After reading the passage, the participant answered 10
multiple-choice comprehension questions.
For the reading task, we chose fictional and non-fictional passages
from standard reading literature databases.
For interruptions, we chose interruptions which requires a certain amount of mental effort.
For example, letter task and mental maths.
They were considered as memory wiping tasks
and the Tetris game is considered as an active distraction.
In the letter task,
the participants were shown a sequence of letters and they
were asked to remember it.
In the Math task,
the participants were asked to perform fast addition for 20 seconds.
Finally, for the Tetris task the participants were asked to play
a game of Tetris for one minute.
The experimental setup
consists of three pilot studies.
For the first pilot study, we used a between-subject design with shorter passages.
For the second pilot study, we used the same between-subject design,
but longer fictional passages and 8th grade US reading level.
For the third pilot study, we switched to within-subject design, with longer non-fictional passages,
with 11-12th grade US reading level.
We next evaluated the effects of priming cues on reading
comprehension and different location like preview-after, preview-before,
review-after, review-before, and no-summary.
We found that for Pilot 2 where longer fictional passages were shown
participant who viewed priming cues scored higher than the participant who didn't see any priming cues.
Further for Pilot 1 and Pilot 3 participants who viewed previews after
the interruptions scored better than the participant who saw no priming cues
When participants were asked for the preference of the location
for the previews, 43% of the participant
like to see previews after the interruptions, 30%
liked to see previews before the interruptions and the remaining 27%.
didn't like to see any previews.
Similarly for the reviews, 76% of the participants would like to see the reviews
after the interruptions, 16% before the interruption and 8% no reviews
Over all, the participant had a positive experience with the priming cues.
Only 21%.
Didn't like.
Only 21% of the participants found the priming cues repetitive and
unnecessary, remaining 79% had positive experience with reviews and previews.
As a next step, we would like to generalize this study to larger
population and conditions, closer to leading reading-in-the-wild,
Further, we would like to test different kind of priming representation beyond
summaries such as list or mind-maps
To help you recall my presentation,
this is the review of the presentation.
Hope you like the presentation. :)
Thank you. For more details, please read our paper.
Thank you.