Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
Using Distraction-Conflict Theory to Measure the Effects of Distractions on
Individual Task Performance in a Wireless Mobile Environment
Darren B. Nicholson 1
College of Business and Economics
Washington State University, Pullman WA 99164
[email protected]
Jennifer A. Nicholson
College of Business and Economics
Washington State University, Pullman WA 99164
[email protected]
D. Veena Parboteeah
College of Business and Economics
Washington State University, Pullman WA 99164
[email protected]
Joseph S. Valacich
College of Business and Economics
Washington State University, Pullman WA 99164
[email protected]
Abstract
cords or computer wires that limit personal movement
while mobile computing means that no one is ‘out of
Mobile wireless computing is changing the way in
touch’ because of his/her location [28]. The ability to
which people work. It is believed that mobile
communicate any time/any place offers new levels of
environments contain various distractions that can
flexibility and convenience [20]. The mobile world
affect the performance of knowledge workers. This
opens up numerous possibilities within the realm of
paper draws on distraction-conflict theory to propose a
work. Tasks that have been traditionally undertaken in
model that explains the effects of distraction on
a fixed setting, such as an office, can now be
individual
mobile
performed virtually anywhere [14]. Similarly, many
environment. Initial findings indicated that even a low-
types of field work can now benefit from any time/any
level
in
place information accessibility and communications
performance. Our findings have important implications
capabilities [14, 28]. It is believed that mobile wireless
performance
distraction
can
in
lead
a
to
wireless
a
reduction
for organizations proposing wireless initiatives.
1
computing
will
‘foster
increased
on-the-job
productivity and promote the freedom to travel while
working or playing’ [28, p.68]. However, a review of
1. Introduction
current literature on mobile wireless computing reveals
that little is known about how mobile wireless
Mobile wireless computing is quickly growing in
technologies can be systematically integrated into
scope and popularity, and holds the promise of being
organizational activities and how this will impact day-
the next major paradigm in personal computing [5].
to-day processes and overall performance.
Mobile wireless systems offer two major advantages –
Research on mobile wireless computing can be
being mobile and wireless [23]. Wireless computing
classified into three categories. First, the acceptance of
means that there are no longer any strangling telephone
these new technologies has been the focus of several
studies [1, 21, 27, 31]. For example, Okoli et al. [27]
1
describe the challenges that are associated with
All authors contributed equally in this work; the
deploying mobile wireless computing technologies
names have been listed alphabetically.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
1
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
within the realm of professional conferences. Second,
technologies, there is also the possibility that such
the technical design aspects of the technology have
environments have unforeseen negative consequences.
been examined [8, 33, 40]. For example, Boncella [8]
For example, these new, unstable, mobile wireless
provided an overview of how a secure channel can be
work environments harbor a host of potential
established in a wireless environment. Third, the
distractions that, under the right conditions, may
implications of mobile commerce or m-commerce have
influence individual performance. Thus, the goal of this
been studied extensively [4, 16, 34, 39].
research is to gain an understanding of the effects of
In addition to these relatively more established
various levels of distraction and task complexity on an
areas, a new stream of research is emerging which
individual’s performance in a mobile wireless work
focuses on the examination of mobile wireless
environment. Based on the distraction conflict theory, a
computing within organizational settings. However,
research model is proposed to explain how different
only a few studies were found to investigate such
levels of distraction and task complexity affect the
phenomenon [7, 32]. Beulen and Streng [7] reported a
performance of individuals in a mobile wireless work
field experiment that tested the hypothesis that mobile
setting. An experimental study has been designed to
workers benefit from a specific kind of wireless
empirically validate the model. The empirical findings
application protocol (WAP) technology. The results of
will provide more insight for understanding the
this study showed a clear increase in the perceived
performance
usefulness and also the effectiveness of the technology.
computing environments.
of
individuals
in
mobile
wireless
They found that workers had a positive attitude
The paper is organized in the following manner.
towards WAP if, when mobile, their working
First, the theoretical framework and the research model
environment was available. Additionally, Shen and
are proposed. Next, a study is described to empirically
Jones [32] described a field study of knowledge
validate the research model. Lastly, this paper
sharing in mobile work settings and examined how rich
concludes by outlining the contributions, limitations
data capture ‘in situ’ can be utilized to improve
and implications of this study.
knowledge management practices. This study enhances
the understanding of how future mobile multimedia
messaging technology can be used in the design of
organizational knowledge management systems. To
date, however, research on mobility, specifically the
influence of mobile wireless work environments on
individual performance, has not been extensively
examined.
In his editorial comment in 1999, Lee stressed that
information systems researchers should focus on the
rich
phenomena
that
emerge
whenever
the
technological and social factors come into contact with
each other, react to and transform each other. One
important area of research, which matches the
emergent perspective, is to understand the effects of
wireless mobility on the individual’s work practices. In
addition to the potential positive impacts of mobile
2. Theoretical Framework and Research
Model
A distraction is any stimuli which is irrelevant to a
subject’s primary task [30]; the primary task being that
activity on which the subject focuses all his/her
attention. The distraction and the primary task may
require different sensory channels, and as a result, the
distraction may be ignored or processed concurrently
with the primary task [15]. The distraction can differ in
its nature. It can be social or nonsocial; an external
stimulus or an internal thought; imposed by a second
party or created by the individual himself [30].
The distraction-conflict theory has been used to
explain how the presence of others, which is a
distraction, can affect the performance of the primary
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
2
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
task. It postulates that the presence of others distracts
dominant responses. Zajonc [41] found that the
an individual, causing an attentional conflict [30].
presence of others creates a physiological arousal,
Attentional conflict refers to the situation where the
which increases our tendency to perform dominant
individual feels the tendency, desire or obligation to
responses and decreases our tendency to perform non-
allocate attention to these two (or more) exclusive
dominant responses. However, the quality of the
inputs [6, 30]. This type of conflict leads to a cognitive
individual’s performance will vary depending on the
overload, which in turn can elevate stress, arousal and
task, which may also increase an individual’s
drive in the individual [6]. The increased drive has a
physiological arousal, or cognitive load. In other
beneficial effect on simple task performance, but a
words, if others are present, and we are asked to
disruptive effect on a more complex task, which is
perform an easy task (either simple or well-learned),
known as the social facilitation effect [41]. In order to
then social facilitation occurs and the dominant
better understand the distraction-conflict theory, it is
response would be to perform well. On the other hand,
important to examine the concepts of social facilitation,
if the task were difficult (either complex or unfamiliar
working memory and cognitive load, as well as task
to the individual), then the individual would need to
complexity.
call on non-dominant responses, and the presence of
others would interfere with performance. Thus, it is the
increased arousal state, or cognitive load, that is
2.1. Social Facilitation
created by both the presence of others and the
Norman Triplett [38] conducted the first study that
complexity of the task that is really affecting the
documented the enhancement of an individual’s
individual’s performance. High arousal, or cognitive
performance
This
load, affects performance by reducing an individual’s
phenomenon was later coined Social Facilitation by
attentional control, accuracy, short-term memory
Floyd Allport [2]. Subsequent studies in the area of
(working memory), and retrieval efficiency [12].
when
others
are
present.
social facilitation resulted in mixed findings. While
some researchers found an increase in performance
2.2. Working Memory and Cognitive Load
when others were present, performance decreases were
also reported. It was hence apparent that there was
Working
memory,
as
defined
by
cognitive
more to this effect than could be explained by the mere
psychologists, refers to ‘a system for the temporary
presence of others. In an effort to integrate these
holding and manipulation of information during the
divergent results, Zajonc [41] theorized that an
performance of a range of cognitive tasks such as
individual’s performance was linked to a physiological
comprehension, learning and reasoning’ [3]. Working
arousal state, not simply the presence of others.
memory, commonly referred to as short-term memory,
In order to gain a better understanding of Zajonc’s
cognitive capacity, blackboard of the mind, and mental
explanation, it is important to distinguish between
scratch pad, is characterized by its limited storage
dominant and non-dominant responses. Zajonc [41]
capacity and quick turnover and is set apart from the
noted that some behaviors are easier to learn and
larger
perform than others. These dominant responses are
traditionally referred to as long-term memory [3, 13,
located at the top of the organism's response hierarchy,
29]. Working memory is intimately related to where
so they dominate all other potential responses.
and how we direct our attention to think about things,
Behaviors that are part of the organism's behavioral
or to process information.
repertoire, but are less likely to be performed, are non-
capacity
and
archival
memory
system
The biggest limitation of working memory is its
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
3
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
capacity to deal with no more than about seven
likely to create disruptions in cognitive capacity.
elements
information
Easterbrook [11] found that reduced performance
simultaneously [24]. With this limitation in mind,
occurred when individuals performed complex tasks in
Baddeley
of
combination with high arousal states such as high
memory.
emotionality or anxiety. The findings above suggest
Displacement/interference refers to the repercussions
that the presence of others, or a distraction, acts as a
involved
when additional new items enter an
cognitive load, or adds to the existing cognitive load,
individual’s working memory – existing items tend to
on working memory, resulting in reduced performance
become harder to access, can become displaced by new
on tasks requiring more of a person’s cognitive
information, and can result in decreased cognitive
capacity [12, 17].
(plus
[3]
or
minus
two)
discusses
displacement/interference
the
in
of
concept
working
efficiency. The displacement or interference of
additional new items can be conceptualized as placing
2.4. Proposed Model
an additional cognitive load on working memory.
Cognitive load refers to the total amount of mental
Our research model (Figure 1) extends Distraction-
activity imposed on working memory at an instance in
Conflict Theory in that we are proposing that any type
time [35, 36]. The major factor that contributes to
of prolonged distraction, not just a distraction created
cognitive load is the number of elements or chunks [24]
by the presence of others, will increase an individual’s
that needs to be attended to. Complex tasks, which
arousal. The effect that this arousal will have on an
require more mental activity, are one of many culprits
individual’s performance will be moderated by the type
that can lead to cognitive overload.
of task the individual is trying to accomplish [41].
2.3. Task Complexity
According to Campbell [10], task complexity can be
Distraction
Arousal
Decision Making
Outcomes
objectively defined and determined independently of
the particular individual performing the task. Utilizing
Task complexity
information processing literature, Campbell proposed a
framework in which ‘any objective task characteristic
that
implies
an
increase
in
information
load,
Figure 1 – Research Model
information diversity, or rate of information change can
be considered a contributor to complexity’. Simpler
If the task is complex, then we propose that the
tasks are associated with lower cognitive load while
arousal generated by both the task and the distraction
tasks that are highly complex result in excessive
will have a negative impact on an individual’s
cognitive load, which produces negative effects on
performance due to the increase in cognitive load.
performance, learning, and motivation [37]. Kahneman
[17] found that harder or more difficult tasks, as
Hypothesis 1a: When given a complex task, subjects in
opposed to easier tasks, place greater demands on an
the no distraction condition will perform significantly
individual’s mental or cognitive capacity. Moreno and
better than those in the low-level distraction condition.
Bodenhausen [25] found that the effortfulness of
determines
Hypothesis 1b: When given a complex task, subjects in
whether or not the imposition of a cognitive load is
the low-level distraction condition will perform
information
processing
tasks
clearly
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
4
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
significantly better than those in the high-level
additional incentives were provided. Past research
distraction condition.
using similar populations indicate an average age of
20.6, with slightly more males than females. Pilot tests
However, if the task is simple, the arousal generated
confirmed these demographics. All subjects received
by the distraction alone will not create enough of a
course-based training on necessary office automation
cognitive load to negatively impact performance.
software prior to participating in the experiment.
Hypothesis 2a: When given a simple task, there will be
3.3. Stimuli
no significant difference between the performance of
subjects in the no distraction condition and those in the
low-level distraction condition.
The high-level distraction used in this study was a
gender-balanced social distraction. A conversation
between four college-aged students discussing their
Hypothesis 2b: When given a simple task, there will be
weekend was video taped and played in the presence of
no significant difference between the performance of
the HD/CT and HD/ST groups. For the low-level
subjects in the low-level distraction condition and
distraction groups (LD/CT and LD/ST), a taping of the
those in the high-level distraction condition.
world news was played. The no-distraction groups
(ND/CT and ND/ST) did not have any purposeful
3. Methodology
distractions.
3.1. Research Design
matter were chosen based on Similarity-Attraction
For the high-level distraction, the actors and subject
Theory [9]. The theory posits that individuals will be
A lab experiment methodology with a 3 X 2 full
factorial
design
was
employed.
Subjects
more
attracted
to
others
who
exhibit
similar
were
characteristics (personality traits, interests, etc.). Based
presented with two different computer-based tasks –
on this theory, we posited that a level of attraction to
simple (ST) and complex (CT) – under three different
the distraction object would provide a realistic and
conditions – no distraction (ND), low distraction (LD)
conscious shift in cognitive resources, as opposed to a
and high distraction (HD). Subjects were randomly
purposeful shift in work location. Given the nomadic
assigned to one of six treatment treatments –ST/ND,
nature of wireless mobile computing, one would not
ST/LD, ST/HD, CT/ND, CT/LD and CT/HD.
expect an individual to remain in the presence of an
annoying high-level distraction – they would remove
themselves from the nuisance – whereas, an interesting
3.2. Subjects
or enjoyable high-level distraction may not result in the
A post hoc power analysis performed on pilot data
same behavior. We expect that a low-level distraction
[26] indicated a strong effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.97)
will simply be ignored. However, as identified in the
suggesting a sample size of 48. Subjects were
pilot tests, as well as being supported by the extant
randomly selected from a sophomore-level business
working memory and social cognition literature,
course with a research study participation requirement.
ignoring a stimulus will unknowingly cause a cognitive
The experiment was conducted in a controlled
load and therefore lead to impaired performance as
laboratory environment, and subjects received credit
well (e.g., [18]).
for this scheduled research only if they completed the
study in a conscientious and responsible manner. No
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
5
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
which they were able to invoke questionnaires and
3.4. Task
launch their web-based email. The homepage contained
Individuals were randomly assigned to one of two
a text-based message informing subjects that their boss
tasks – simple or complex. To simulate a typical
had just emailed them with a request and that they
business-related event, subjects were told that their
could retrieve it by clicking the “open email” button
boss had just emailed them with a request and that they
below. Once selected, a web-based email application
were expected to evaluate and respond to the request in
was launched with a text-only request corresponding to
a timely manner. The web-based email messages
their treatment group. Upon task completion, subjects
differed only with respect to the corresponding
submitted their solutions in an email response.
treatments (the complex condition contained more
Following the submission, subjects’ home pages were
difficult requests); all other features were identical. The
reconfigured with a new message and link requesting
web-based
that they complete a final questionnaire (this was the
email
application
was
specifically
developed for this study. The body of the email
questionnaire
contained a brief message, including a detailed list of
complexity and distraction). Subjects’ home pages
the desired data analysis, and an attached MS Excel
were then reconfigured with a message asking them to
file. The complex task and simple task asked users to
sit quietly and wait for further instructions. During
perform the same type of calculations (e.g., sum and
debriefing, subjects were asked not to share their
difference), however, the complex task asked users to
experiences or the purpose of the study with any of
work with more data. The difference in treatments
their fellow classmates.
with
the
manipulation
check
for
forced subjects in the complex condition to expend
additional cognitive resources in that they were
4. Results
required to keep track of more data, develop more
complicated formulas, and account for a larger number
4.1. Pilot Test
of sub-tasks.
A pilot test was conducted early on to validate our
measures, to test our manipulations, and to elicit
3.5. Procedure
higher-level
distractions
specific
to
the
tested
Subjects entered a wireless computing lab and were
population. Results identified a strong effect size
evenly dispersed throughout the room. The lab was
(Cohen’s d = 0.97) between groups (CT/LD and
equipped with two large RGB projectors, equally
CT/ND) on performance. Performance for individuals
positioned across one wall. Researchers introduced
(e.g., answer quality) in the CT/ND group was
themselves, and gave specific instructions to subjects.
significantly higher than the CT/LD group, F(1, 19) =
Subjects were then given a brief tutorial on how to use
4.361 , p = .05. Demographics and individual
simple formulas in Excel (e.g., sum and difference).
characteristics were not significantly different across
Following this, each subject, using their student
groups, indicating a true random assignment. Computer
identification number, logged into the research
self-efficacy
application on a wireless laptop computer running
significantly correlated with performance. Only the
802.11g. All phases of the study were automated from
complex task was tested. Post hoc, informal interviews
this application. The research application was located
with subjects indicated that our low-level distraction (a
on a local server, so latency and bandwidth issues were
taping of the world news – both audio and video) was,
equivalent. The first screen was a home location from
as we expected, not particularly interesting to them;
and
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
Excel
experience
were
not
6
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
that is, they were aware of it, but did not purposefully
constantly remind themselves of what it is that they are
attend to it. Our manipulation check on distraction
trying to ignore in order to expend the effort to ignore
indicated that subjects in the CT/LD group were
it [18]. Basically, choosing to attend to or ignore a
slightly more distracted than subjects in the CT/ND
stimulus, whether internal or external, results in a load
group. Subjects indicated that they would have been
on working memory, thereby leaving an individual
distracted to a greater extent by something more
with less cognitive resources for completing the task at
interesting or personally salient. For instance, subjects
hand.
suggested that other students having a conversation in
their presence would have created a greater distraction
6. Limitations and Future Research
for them. For this reason, we developed a higher-level
Inherent with any study are limitations that can
distraction for the full data collection (as described
potentially affect the findings. Using homogenous
above).
student subjects can lead to issues regarding the
generalizability of the results.
4.2. Status and Initial Results
experiments,
there
is
a
When conducting
tradeoff
between
We are currently in the process of collecting data for
generalizability and precision [22]. In early studies of
the three levels of distraction (no, low-level, and high-
an emerging phenomenon, it is important to focus on
level) across two levels of task complexity (low and
precision to isolate the effects of the treatment. Future
high). At this time, initial data strongly supports the
research will then focus on improving generalizability
posited hypotheses. Full hypothesis testing and results
by replicating the study across different populations
will be presented at the conference.
and in more natural settings.
Despite using homogenous subjects, we believe that
5. Discussion
the tasks used in this study would certainly be relevant
to
those
working
in
a
business
environment.
We expected that subjects would redirect their
Furthermore, the distraction, while being highly salient
cognitive resources only when in the presence of an
for college-aged students, may not be salient for other
interesting distraction and would either move away
populations. However, we would argue that regardless
from an uninteresting distraction or choose not to
of the type of distraction, the outcomes for no, low, and
attend to it. Pilot tests indicated the latter was the case
high levels would be very similar to those observed in
– subjects ignored the distraction and remained in the
this study.
wireless footprint to complete their task. Whether
Future research should focus on examining how
attending to or ignoring a stimulus distraction, an
individual differences, such as culture, gender, and
individual’s cognitive capacity is still being loaded by
personality traits, affect how people respond to
a set of non-task related cognitions [18].
different types of distractions. The effects of distraction
The pilot results suggested that the load placed on
should
also
be
investigated
with
respect
to
working memory by the distraction was either from an
collaborative tasks. Specifically, researchers may want
individual purposefully attending to the distraction, or
to investigate the affect of distractions on performance
purposefully remaining in the presence of the
for wireless mobile collaboration tasks at the individual
distraction and trying to ignore it. Empirical evidence
and group levels. Moreover, our study was cross
indicates that the mental process of ignoring something
sectional and can in no way predict the influence of
requires cognitive effort, that is, individuals must
distractions on individual performance over time.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
7
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
Hence, future research may want to explore how, why,
[4] S. Balasubramanian, R.A. Peterson, and S.L. Jarvenpaa,
and
work
“Exploring the Implications of M-Commerce for Markets and
performance
Marketing”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
under
what
environments
conditions
influence
distracting
individual
longitudinally.
30:4, 2002, pp. 348 – 361.
[5] S.J. Barnes, “Big in Japan – iMode and the Mobile
7. Conclusion
Internet”, Journal of Information Technology: Theory and
Application, 3:4, 2001, pp. 27 – 32.
The results of the pilot test supported our
hypotheses,
individual’s
Problems”, In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental
performance on complex tasks, those requiring higher-
Social Psychology, New York: Academic Press, 19, 1986, pp.
levels of cognitive effort, would be significantly worse
1 – 40.
when in the presence of a distraction. We found a
[7] E. Beulen, and R. Streng, “The Impact of Online Mobile
significant effect on performance in the presence of a
Office Applications on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of
lower-level distraction, one in which subjects felt
Mobile Workers’ Behavior: A Field Experiment in the IT
minimally distracted. We expect performance to decay
Services Sector”, Proceedings of ICIS, 2002, pp. 629 –640.
even further in the high-distraction condition. It is to be
[8] R.J. Boncella, “Wireless Security: An Overview”,
seen if performance on simple tasks will prove to be
Proceedings of AMCIS, 2002, pp. 2381 – 2386.
immune from distraction as hypothesized.
[9] D. Byrne, and W. Griffitt, “Similarity and Awareness of
We
specifically,
believe
implications
for
our
that
findings
an
[6] R.S. Baron, “Distraction-Conflict Theory: Progress and
will
organizations
have
which
serious
may
be
Similarity of Personality Characteristics as Determinants of
Attraction”,
Journal
of
Experimental
Research
in
considering a mobile wireless initiative for their
Personality, 3, 1969, pp. 179 – 186.
employees. The results indicate that for tasks requiring
[10] D.J. Campbell, “Task Complexity: A Review and
a greater amount of cognitive effort, being in an
Analysis”, Academy of Management Review, 13:1, 1988, pp.
environment where there are moderate to high levels of
40-52.
distractions may impair the performance of an
[11] J.A. Easterbrook, “The Effect of Emotion on Cue
individual. We suggest that a mobile wireless work
Utilization and the Organization of Behavior”, Psychological
environment is more suitable for simple or well-learned
Bulletin, 66, 1959, pp. 183-201.
tasks, while more complex tasks should be performed
[12] Eysenck, M. W., A Handbook of Cognition Psychology,
in a more controlled setting, such as an office.
London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Ltd., Publishers,
1984.
8. References
[13] P.S. Goldman-Rakic, “Circuitry of the prefrontal cortex
and
the
regulation
of
behavior
by
representational
[1] D.L. Abraham, “Mobile Enterprise Computing and the
knowledge”, In F. Plum and V. Mountcastle (Eds.),
Diffusion of Mobile Enterprise Business Applications in
Handbook
Organizations”, Proceedings of AMCIS, 2001, pp. 461 – 464.
Physiological Society, 1987, pp. 373-417.
[2] F.H. Allport, “The Influence of the Group Upon
[14] L. Gorlenko, and R. Merrick, “No Wires Attached:
Association
and
Thought”,
Journal
of
Experimental
of
Physiology.
Bethesda,
MD:
American
Usability Challenges in the Connected Mobile World”, IBM
Psychology, 3, 1920, pp. 159-182.
Systems Journal, 42:4, 2003, pp. 639 – 651.
[3] Baddeley, A., Working Memory, London: Oxford
[15] B.D. Groff, R.S. Baron, and D.L. Moore, “Distraction,
University Press, 1986.
Attentional Conflict, and Drivelike Behavior”, Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 19:4, 1983, pp. 359-380.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
8
Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005
[16] S.L. Jarvenpaa, K.R. Lang, Y. Takeda, and V.K.
Effects”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14:3,
Tuunainen,
1978, pp. 291-303.
“Mobile
Commerce
at
Crossroads”,
Communications of the ACM, 46:12, 2003, pp. 41 – 44.
[31] S. Sarker, and J.D. Wells, “Understanding Mobile
[17] Kahneman, D., Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs:
Handheld Device Use and Adoption”, Communications of the
Prentice Hall, 1973.
ACM, 4612, 2003, pp. 35 – 40.
[18] Kunda, Z., Social Cognition: Making Sense of People,
[32] J. Shen and Q. Jones, “In Situ Data Capture and Mobile
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.
Knowledge Management: Helping Technicians Share Case
[19] A. Lee, Editorial Comments, MIS Quarterly, 23:1, 2001.
Stories”, Proceedings of AMCIS, 2003, pp. 2231 - 2236.
[20] C.A. Looney, L.M. Jessup, and J.S. Valacich,
[33] J.P. Shim, U. Varshney, S.M. Dekleva, and G. Knoerzer,
“Emerging Business Models for Mobile Brokerage Services”,
“Mobile Wireless Technology and Services: Evolution and
Communications of the ACM, 47:6, 2004, pp. 71 – 77.
Outlook”, Proceedings of AMCIS, 2002, pp. 1998 - 1999.
[21] J. Lu, C. Liu, C. Yu, and J.E. Yao, “Acceptance of
[34] T.F. Stafford, and M.L. Gillenson, “Mobile Commerce:
Wireless Internet via Mobile Technology in China”,
What It Is and What It Could Be”, Communications of the
Proceedings of AMCIS, 2003, pp. 1165 – 1173.
ACM, 46:12, 2003, pp. 33 – 34.
[22] McGrath, J.E., Martin, J., and Kulka, R., Judgment Calls
[35] J. Sweller, “Cognitive Load during Problem Solving:
in Research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1984.
Effects on Learning”, Cognitive Science, 12, 1988, pp. 257-
[23] R. Malladi, and D.P. Agrawal, “Current and Future
285.
Applications
[36] J. Sweller, “Cognitive Load Theory, Learning Difficulty
of
Mobile
and
Wireless
Networks”,
Communications of the ACM, 45:10, 2002, pp. 144 – 146.
and Instructional Design”, Learning and Instruction, 4, 1994,
[24] G.A. Miller, “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or
pp. 295-312.
Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing
[37] J. Sweller, J.J.G. vanMerrienboer, and F.G.W.C. Paas,
Information”, Psychological Review, 63, 1956, pp. 81-97.
“Cognitive
[25] K.N. Moreno, and G.V. Bodenhausen, “Resisting
Educational Psychology Review, 10, 1998, pp. 251-296.
Stereotype Change: The Role of Motivation and Attentional
[38] N. Triplett, American Journal of Psychology, 9, 1897,
Capacity in Defending Social Beliefs”, Group Processes &
pp. 507.
Intergroup Relations, 2:1, 1999, pp. 5-16.
[39] A. Urbaczewski, J.S. Valacich, and L.M. Jessup,
[26] Nunally, J. C. and Bernstein, I. H., Psychometric
“Mobile
Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.
Communications of the ACM, 46:12, 2003, pp. 31 – 32.
[27] C. Okoli, B. Ives, L.M. Jessup, and J.S. Valacich, “The
[40] D. Viehland, and J. Hughes, “The Future of Wireless
Mobile Conference Information System: Unwiring Academic
Application Protocol”, Proceedings of AMCIS, 2002, pp.
Conferences
1883 - 1891.
with
Wireless
Mobile
Computing”,
Architecture
Commerce:
and
Instructional
Opportunities
and
Design”,
Challenges”,
Communications of the Association for Information Systems,
[41] R.B. Zajonc, “Social Facilitation”, Science, 149, 1965,
9, 2002, pp. 180 – 206.
pp. 269-274.
[28] J.T. Philips, “Welcome to the New Wireless Culture”,
Information Management Journal, 36:1, 2002, pp. 64 – 68.
[29] E.R. Reddy, “Machine Models of Speech Perception”, In
R. A. Cole (Ed.), Perception and Production of Human
Speech, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980, pp. 215-242.
[30] G.S. Sanders, R.S. Baron, and D.L. Moore, “Distraction
and Social Comparison as Mediators of Social Facilitation
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE
9