Search for: All records

Paper and proposal deadlines are important milestones, conjuring up emotional memories to researchers. The question is if in the daily challenging world of scholarly research, deadlines truly incur higher sympathetic loading than the alternative. Here we report results from a longitudinal, in the wild study of n = 10 researchers working in the presence and absence of impeding deadlines. Unlike the retrospective, questionnaire-based studies of research deadlines in the past, our study is real-time and multimodal, including physiological, observational, and psychometric measurements. The results suggest that deadlines do not significantly add to the sympathetic loading of researchers. Irrespective of deadlines, the researchers’ sympathetic activation is strongly associated with the amount of reading and writing they do, the extent of smartphone use, and the frequency of physical breaks they take. The latter likely indicates a natural mechanism for regulating sympathetic overactivity in deskbound research, which can inform the design of future break interfaces. 

Deadlines are constitutional aspects of research life that the CHI community frequently observes. Despite their importance, deadlines are understudied. Here we bring a mixed art and science perspective on deadlines, which may find broader applications as a starter methodology. In a field study, we monitored four academics at the office, two days before a deadline and two regular days, after the deadline had passed. Based on face video, questionnaire, and interview data we constructed their profiles. We added a dose of fictionalization to these profiles, composing anonymized comic stories that are as humorous as they are enlightening. In the stressful and lonely days towards deadlines, the only common presence in all cases is the researchers’ computer. Accordingly, this work aspires to prompt an effort for a deeper understanding of “deadline users’’, in support of designing much needed affective interfaces.