Search

Task management tools allow people to record, track, and manage task-related information across their work and personal contexts. As work contexts have shifted amid the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become important to understand how these tools are continuing or failing to support peoples’ work-related and personal needs. In this article, we examine and probe practices for managing task-related information across the work–life boundary. We report findings from an online survey deployed to 150 information workers during Summer 2019 (i.e., pre-pandemic) and 70 information workers at the same organization during Summer 2020 (i.e., mid-pandemic). Across both survey cohorts, we characterize these cross-boundary task management practices, exploring the central role that physical and digital tools play in managing task-related information that arises at inopportune times. We conclude with a discussion of the opportunities and challenges for future productivity tools that aid people in managing task-related information across their personal and work contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People rely on task management applications and digital assistants to capture and track their tasks, and help with executing them. The burden of organizing and scheduling time for tasks continues to reside with users of these systems, despite the high cognitive load associated with these activities. Users stand to benefit greatly from a task management system capable of prioritizing their pending tasks, thus saving them time and effort. In this article, we make three main contributions. First, we propose the problem of task prioritization, formulating it as a ranking over a user’s pending tasks given a history of previous interactions with a task management system. Second, we perform an extensive analysis on the large-scale anonymized, de-identified logs of a popular task management application, deriving a dataset of grounded, real-world tasks from which to learn and evaluate our proposed system. We also identify patterns in how people record tasks as complete, which vary consistently with the nature of the task. Third, we propose a novel contextual deep learning solution capable of performing personalized task prioritization. In a battery of tests, we show that this approach outperforms several operational baselines and other sequential ranking models from previous work. Our findings have implications for understanding the ways people prioritize and manage tasks with digital tools, and in the design of support for users of task management applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information systems, such as task management applications and digital assistants, can help people keep track of tasks of different types and different time durations, ranging from a few minutes to days or weeks. Helping people better manage their tasks and their time are core capabilities of assistive technologies, situated within a broader context of supporting more effective information access and use. Throughout the course of a day, there are typically many short time periods of downtime (e.g., five minutes or less) available to individuals. Microtasks are simple tasks that can be tackled in such short amounts of time. Identifying microtasks in task lists could help people utilize these periods of low activity to make progress on their task backlog. We define actionable tasks as self-contained tasks that need to be completed or acted on. However, not all to-do tasks are actionable. Many task lists are collections of miscellaneous items that can be completed at any time (e.g., books to read, movies to watch), notes (e.g., names, addresses), or the individual items are constituents in a list that is itself a task (e.g., a grocery list). In this article, we introduce the novel challenge of microtask detection, and we present machine-learned models for automatically determining which tasks are actionable and which of these actionable tasks aremicrotasks. Experiments show that our models can accurately identify actionable tasks, accurately detect actionable microtasks, and that we can combine these models to generate a solution that scales microtask detection to all tasks. We discuss our findings in detail, along with their limitations. These findings have implications for the design of systems to help people make the most of their time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We seek to understand the evolving needs of people who are faced with a life-changing medical diagnosis based on analyses of queries extracted from an anonymized search query log. Focusing on breast cancer, we manually tag a set of Web searchers as showing patterns of search behavior consistent with someone grappling with the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer. We build and apply probabilistic classifiers to detect these searchers from multiple sessions and to identify the timing of diagnosis using temporal and statistical features. We explore the changes in information seeking over time before and after an inferred diagnosis of breast cancer by aligning multiple searchers by the estimated time of diagnosis. We employ the classifier to automatically identify 1,700 candidate searchers with an estimated 90% precision, and we predict the day of diagnosis within 15 days with an 88% accuracy. We show that the geographic and demographic attributes of searchers identified with high probability are strongly correlated with ground truth of reported incidence rates. We then analyze the content of queries over time for inferred cancer patients, using a detailed ontology of cancer-related search terms. The analysis reveals the rich temporal structure of the evolving queries of people likely diagnosed with breast cancer. Finally, we focus on subtypes of illness based on inferred stages of cancer and show clinically relevant dynamics of information seeking based on the dominant stage expressed by searchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Search engines help people answer consequential questions. Biases in retrieved and indexed content (e.g., skew toward erroneous outcomes that represent deviations from reality), coupled with searchers' biases in how they examine and interpret search results, can lead people to incorrect answers. In this article, we seek to better understand biases in search and retrieval, and in particular those affecting the accuracy of content in search results, including the search engine index, features used for ranking, and the formulation of search queries. Focusing on the important domain of online health search, this research broadens previous work on biases in search to examine the role of search systems in contributing to biases. To assess bias, we focus on questions about medical interventions and employ reliable ground truth data from authoritative medical sources. In the course of our study, we utilize large-scale log analysis using data from a popular Web search engine, deep probes of result lists on that search engine, and crowdsourced human judgments of search result captions and landing pages. Our findings reveal bias in results, amplifying searchers' existing biases that appear evident in their search activity. We also highlight significant bias in indexed content and show that specific ranking signals and specific query terms support bias. Both of these can degrade result accuracy and increase skewness in search results. Our analysis has implications for bias mitigation strategies in online search systems, and we offer recommendations for search providers based on our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]