264 PROCEEDINGS of the H U M A N FACTORS A N D ERGONOMICS SOCIETY 41st A N N U A L MEETING-1997

USING TEMPORAL INFORMATION IN TIME-CONSTRAINED TASKS

Prasad Prabhu
Human Factors Lab
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650
Colin Drury and Joseph Sharit
State University of New York at Buffalo
Department of Industrial Engineering
Buffalo, NY 14260

Studies on time constraints have not bridged the gap between the experience of time and task performance. This
paper presents the hypothesis that, under temporal constraints, time becomes a limited resource, and the utilization
of this resource becomes one of the main goals of task performance. Thus, time experience in terms of the use of
temporal information is predicted to play a critical role in defining task performance. A framework is presented to
explain how time information is used under temporal constraints. Further, the cognitive processes underlying time
use are described as a process model. The framework and the process model together describe the phenomenon of
the use of time information under time constraints. The method used to validate this framework is briefly
described and a set of issues that arise out of the proposed framework is also presented.

INTRODUCTION goals in these tasks. The relation, if any, between the

A wide variety of human interaction in industry is
characterized by some form of temporal or time
constraints. There has been a large body of work in
the area of time constraints in decision-making,
judgment and problem solving. The most common
human responses to increasingly severe time
constraints are (Miller, 1960., Payne, et al., 1988;
Svensson and Edland, 1993):
Acceleration or speeded processing (increasing
information processing/action rate),
Filtration or increased selectivity
(processing/seeking only a subset of task
information),
0 Changing strategies (heuristics; short cuts or less
demanding strategies),
0 Avoidance (consciously avoiding parts of a task).
While there has been some excellent research in
the area of task performance under temporal
constraints, the “use of time information”’ has not
been investigated in any great detail. Although time
is very important as an organizing principle for
behavior, surprisingly little attention has been paid to
the “use of time inforamation” as a factor in decision-
making or task performance (MacGregor, 1993).
This becomes especially relevant when time-
constrained tasks are considered, because task
performance in such cases is unequivocally rooted in
the concept of time -- time being one of the primary
subjective perception of time and task perception is
still not understood. Similarly, the role of past
experience (e.g., specific time-constraint training) in
task performance in the temporal domain has not
been investigated. Equally, the presence of individual
differences and their influence (if any) on task
performance under duration constraints is not well
defined. The proposed framework addresses these
issues to facilitate experimental investigation of the
interactions between various factors that influence
task performance under time constraints. It is
proposed that the behavior of humans under time-
constraints is also influenced by the perception of
time and that humans use time information to control
behavior. Thus, time perception and task
performance are linked through the concept of use of
time information.
A FRAMEWORK FOR THE USE OF
TEMPORAL INFORMATION UNDER
TIME CONSTRAINTS
In the following sections a framework is outlined
that describes the process of temporal information
use under time constraints on the task. The
characteristics of the time use process are first
described and then the framework is presented. This
framework consists of (a) the factors that influence
the process of time use and (b) a process model for
the use of temporal information.
 PROCEEDINGS of the HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SOCIETY 41st ANNUAL MEETING-I997
Characteristics of Time Use
During time-constrained tasks, time can be
viewed as a limited resource. As such, achieving the
temporal goals of a task can be thought of as utilizing
this limited resource efficiently; subject to any
constraints imposed by other task requirements.
Time use can be described by three broad
characteristics: (1) awareness of time, (2) allocation
of time, and (3) control of time. Each of these three
characteristics represent distinct aspects of time usage
as related to task performance.
Time Awareness refers to what an operator
knows about time. Temporal awareness can be of
two types (a) task temporal awareness and (b)
process temporal awareness. The task temporal
awareness is the knowledge that an operator brings
to the task. Thus, task temporal awareness relates to
what the operator knows a-priori about the task time,
subtask times, temporal cues that exist in the task
environment, etc. The process temporal
awareness, on the other hand, refers to the real-
time knowledge of temporal information that the
operator acquires or generates during the task
performance. Process temporal awareness could be
either subjective perception (e.g., time estimation) or
objective knowledge (e.g., based on a clock)
acquired from contextual information, clock
information, temporal cues, etc., during task
performance.
Time Allocation refers to the process of
assigning a time duration to a component subtask or
activities within the taskhubtask. This is a real-time
process that can be influenced by: (1) pre-determined
strategy based on previous experience, and (2)
current context or on-the-job changes. It can be either
attentional or non-attentional or both.
Time Control refers to the process of
intentionally controlling (sampling, and revising if
necessary) the time allocation to any task activity or
component subtask of a task. It implies a conscious
and voluntary cognitive process. It includes such
things as sampling, tracking temporal progress, and
changing cognitive strategies.
Factors Influencing the Use of Temporal
Information
A framework for the use of temporal information
is shown in Figure 1. The use of time under temporal
constraints is hypothesized to be influenced by five
distinct factors: (1) task requirements, (2) task
temporal features, (3) operator's level of cognitive
control, (4) nature of the limited resource (e.g., time
constraint) and, ( 5 ) individual characteristics. The
use of time information during time-constrained tasks
is affected by the interaction of these factors. The
265
process model shown in Figure 2, hypothesizes how
the cognitive temporal processes interact with each
other during the use of temporal information.
Tusk Requirements. These indicate the influence
of the overall task requirements on how and when
the operator will use temporal information. Temporal
information during task performance will be sought
based on the degree to which a task supports or
requires these information needs.
Task Temporal Features. A task has certain
features that define its temporal qualities. These
features include (1) discontinuity, (2) lag, (3)
change, (4) frequency, (5) uncertainty, and (6)
constraint. In the research that explored the validation
of this framework, only the last of these aspects,
i.e., time as a limited resource or constraint was
considered. The thesis is that this temporal factor
presupposes use of time information, while the other
factors are contextual factors influencing the process.
Operator's Level of Cognitive Control. This
defines the level of the operator's familiarity with the
temporal environment, i.e., the role of previous
experience in task performance. The nature of the
temporal environment can vary and the operator has
to cope with the various temporal scenarios resulting
in, hypothetically, different subjective time
perception as well as time pressure.
Severity of Temporal Constraint. The severity of
the temporal constraint on the task could, induce
qualitatively distinct changes in the way temporal
information is utilized. Awareness, allocation, and
control of temporal information should reflect this
difference.
Individual Characteristics.Individual
differences in terms of human abilities, aptitudes and
cognitive styles have an impact on performance that
is not clearly understood. Cognitive styles are
characteristic, self-consistent modes of functioning
that individuals show in their perceptual and
intellectual activities. A logical assumption would be
that cognitive styles influence how individuals
perceive time, and time pressure, and also how they
change or select strategies to cope with such
perceptions.
A Process Model for the Use of Temporal
Information
Figure 2 illustrates how the use of time, as
characterized by the framework in Figure 1, can be
explained in terms of cognitive functions or
processes that govern temporal information
processing. The interrelationships of the cognitive
functions describe how humans might use time
information in a temporally constrained task. Thus,
this model treats time as information and describes
266 PROCEEDINGS of the HUMAN FACTORS A N D ERGONOMICS SOCIETY 41st A N N U A L MEETING-1997

Task Requirements Cognitive Control

Confirm teniporal goal Skill

Initiate temporal activity Rule
Plan temporal strategy Knowledge
1 I

'ask Temporal Features ~~

Resdurce Nature
-
Discontinuities
Lag 1
I
Time Use Characteristics (+___ITinlc
I
I

I
constraint severity
Change --b
Awareness
Frequency Allocation 4
Uncertainty Control Individual
Charnrteristics

Figure 1. Framework for the use of temporal information under time constraints.

A
Strategies
and 'l'iinc
Temporal
- Alloc:ctions

Estimation
I.)uration
Estimate
Inforina ion
v- 4 -
IdontTtrm ask 'fentpora\ Working + lemporrl
Memory fionledge l'etnpornl Info Control

Figure 2. A process model for the use of temporal information.

 PROCEEDINGS of the HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SOCIETY 41st ANNUAL MEETING-1997
the use of such information within a human
information-processing paradigm. The features of
this model are presented below.
Memory and Information Integration. Long-term
memory and working memory store and process all
the temporal information. Process temporal
awareness (real-time knowledge) as reflected by
contextual information, temporal cues information,
and clock information (when available) is available
through perception of the environment and processed
in working memory (WM). Task temporal
awareness is acquired from long-term memory
(LTM). Integration of temporal information takes
place in WM through both attentional and non-
attentional processes. The temporal information in
both the LTM and the WM is subject to decay.
Temporal information from the environment will be
actively sought if required by the temporal control
function or if the information supports a task goal.
Temporal Estimation. The temporal estimation
function (TE) estimates durations of activities/events.
It contributes to process time awareness. Time
estimation is initiated by either the temporal
scheduling or the temporal control functions. TE
uses temporal information from the WM to supply
duration estimates. TE is assumed to be influenced
by contextual factors as defined in the framework
(Figurel).
Temporal Allocation. The temporal allocation
process may supply either a predetermined temporal
pladstrategy or a learned activity ratehime. This
implies training and learning or previous experience.
The learnt activity rate refers to the fact that the
person learns to do the task at a certain rate (speed)
so that the constraints are met. Strategies from
temporal allocation can be modified during real-time
task performance.
Temporal Control. This refers to real time,
explicit use of time to guide task performance. It is
hypothesized that during the execution of this
function, time information is explicitly sought and
compensatory activities are initiated if necessary.
Temporal control could be either feedforward (e.g.,
depending on past experience) or feedback oriented
(which includes sampling and revision of strategies).
METHOD AND RESULTS
The framework that has been presented opens up
some questions and issues that need to be resolved.
Some of these were tested in an experiment, the
detailed results of which are beyond the scope of this
paper. However, this section presents one of the
hypotheses that was tested to provide an
understanding of how the framework was tested.
The hypothesis tested was related to the level of
26 7
cognitive control (effect of the training environment).
From the transfer of training literature it appears that
while transfers from one similar task to another are
generally positive, performance on a task can be
affected if the training environment has differences
that could lead to inappropriate responses. We
hypothesized that “subjects trained in a time-
constrained environment will have better
performance in time-constrained tasks and the
subjects trained in the non-time-constrained condition
will perform better in the task without time
constraints”.
A 3 x 6 x 2 factors experiment was designed to
test this and the other hypotheses. The training
environment (three levels - no-time-constraints
training, training under a single time constraint on the
entire task, and training under time constraint on each
of the subtasks) was the between subjects factor,
task conditions (six levels -- different levels of time
constraints on the task, and one no-time-constraint
condition) and number of temporal probes (two
levels - indicating two time points within the task
where the subjects were asked to give there
subjective estimation of elapsed time). Twenty-four
subjects, graduate or undergraduate students between
19-36 years of age, were randomly assigned (eight
each) to the three training environments. An aircraft
visual inspection task was simulated on SUN-IPC
Workstation. The task involved looking for defects
in a scanned photographic image of an aircraft wing
area on the computer screen. There were six such
contiguous screens to be inspected and these
constituted the six subtasks under the overall task.
The subjects had to inspect each area, mark a defect
if found, and write up a short description of the
defect.
An analysis of variance of the mean task
completion time imprecision (IActual time of task
completion - Task time constraintl), indicated that
while performing tasks under time constraints, the
subject groups trained under the two time-constraint
conditions were better at reaching the time criterion
then the group trained under the no-time-constraint
condition (F = 6.83, p < 0.005). This was true both
when a clock was available and when a clock was
not available (see Table 1). There seems to have been
a transfer of training from task practice in temporal
environments to actual task performance by the
development of the knowledge of task completion
rates (task temporal awareness). Thus, the two
groups maintained a task rate driven by their task
knowledge and modified in real time by either their
subjective time estimation (when no clock was
available) or by the objective time feedback (when
the clock was available). Also, comparing the three
groups in the no-time-constraint task condition, no
 268 PROCEEDINGS of the HUMAN FACTORS A N D ERGONOMICS SOCIETY 41st A N N U A L MEETING-1997
Table 1. Mean task completion time imprecision
(minutes) for the three training groups
Training Conditions
No time Time Time
constraint constraint constraint
on entire on each
task subtask
I Noclock I 3.67 I 1.14 I 1.94
Clock I 1 Coury, B. G. and Boulette, M. D. (1992). Time
[ available 1.65 0.76 [ 0.78
I Total I 2.64 I 1.14 I 1.58
significant difference was observed in the
performance measures (number of misses or task
time). Thus, it appeared that training under time
constraints was not detrimental to performance under
no time constraints. The results of testing this
hypothesis suggest that training under time
constraints resulted in highly specific training effects
that result in improvement in performance under time
constraints related only to the temporal aspects of
performance.
CONCLUSION
In this paper we presented a framework for the use
of temporal information under time constraints and
highlighted some of the issues that need to be
considered to validate this framework. The
framework proposed the notion of ‘use of time
information’ defined by three characteristics: time
awareness, time allocation, and time control. An
experimental evaluation of one of the hypotheses
that was generated to test this framework was also
described. There are other important issues
pertaining to the model, including: (1). Does time
estimation bias (either under- or over-estimation)
influence subjective time pressure perception? (2). Is
the perception of ability to complete the task related
to time pressure? (3) Is time awareness affected by
any specific individual characteristickognitivestyle?
These have been tested but the results and discussion
are beyond the scope of this paper.
The framework also has certain implications for
temporal errors that can be used to understand how
such errors arise. The framework can be used to
examine the effects of “incorrect estimation of
duration” on the way time is used. It points to an
effect on performance via over-estimation or under-
estimation. Estimating the right moment to take
action, and anticipating events or synchronizing of
action result in drawing attention to time, thereby
resulting in the activity of time confirmation. A
consistent mapping between task requirements and
task knowledge is therefore desirable. Also, seeing
that the training environment has an effect on task
temporal awareness, and as a result on task
performance, training under time constraints should
be considered as a means to reduce temporal errors.
REFERENCES
stress and processing of visual displays, Human
Factors, 34, 6, 707-725.
Drury, C. G. and Coury, B. G. (198 1). Stress,
pacing. and inmection, In Machine Pacing and
Occupational Stress, G. Salvendy and M. J. Smith
(eds), 223-229, London: Taylor and Francis.
MacGregor, D. (1993). Time pressure and task
adaptation: Alternative perspectives on laboratory
studies, In Time Pressure and Human Judgement in
Decision Malung, 0. Svenson and A. J. Made
(eds), 73-82, New York: Plenum Press.
Miller, J. G. (1960). Information input overload and
psychopathology, American Journal of Psychiatm,
116, 695-704.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R. and Johnson, E. J.
(1988). Adaptive strategy selection in decision-
making, Journal of Experimental PsvcholoE
Learning. Memory. and Cognition, 14, 534-552.
Rasmussen, J. (1986). Information Processing and
Human-Machine Interaction: An Amroach to
Cognitive Engineering, Amsterdam: North Holland.
Svensson, 0. and Edland, A. (1993). On judgement
and decision-making under time pressure and the
control of process industries, In Proceedings of the
IEEE Conference on Svstem. Man, and Cybernetics,
367-375.
Zakay, D. (1989). Subjective time and attentional
resource allocation: An integrated model of time
estimation, In Time and Human Cognition, I. Levin
and D. Zakay (eds). 365-397, New York: North
Holland.