Note from Ben: After just one reader commented that there may be some flaws is Koopmann’s analysis (these flaws don’t change the overall conclusion about the data), Koopmann took upon himself to invest considerable time in re-working the data. Below is the re-work of that data directly from him, with the original article (here) preserved as it was originally published.
Methodology
The poll was presented as post with an embedded iframe on The Brooks Review website. The post, titled Interruption Survey, contained the following introduction and note:
I’d appreciate you taking a moment to fill this out (note this is an iframe, you need to scroll the frame to get to the “finish” button):
Note: I’m assuming you want to interrupt someone and they are using the device.
Instrument
The poll consisted to two questions:
- I am more likely to interrupt someone using:
- a pad of paper to write.
- an iPad.
- a Desktop.
- a Laptop.
- an iPhone.
- I am least likely to interrupt someone using:
- a pad of paper to write.
- an iPhone.
- a Desktop.
- an iPad.
- a Laptop.
Each of these items was required and only one choice was allowed per item.
Results
Respondents
There were 499 submissions received between 2014-06-11 18:44:51 and 2014-06-14 14:34:49[^GMT?].
Note that some percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Geography
The majority of respondents (58%) were from the United States; the next-largest group of respondents (9%) was from the United Kingdom. The remaining 33% of respondents came from 49 other countries with each country contributing less than 5% of respondents.
See Respondents by Country for full breakdown.
Operating System
Of the 441 (88%) respondents where the platform was detected, the overwhelming majority (93%) were running an iOS (56%) or OS X (38%) device. Windows (5%) and Linux (2%) were the remaining identified operating systems; the tool was unable to identify platform for the remaining 58 (12%) respondents.
iOS 7.1 (52%) and Mac OS X 10.9 Mavericks (33%) were the largest group of respondents; 9 respondents (2%) were bleeding-edge dev-types running iOS 8; 14 respondents (3%) were old-school OS X 10.1 Puma (released Sep 2001).
See [Respondents by Operating System & Platform][respondentsByPlatform] and [Respondents by Browser Agent][respondentsByAgent] for full breakdowns.
Q1. I am more likely to interrupt someone using
The frequency plot below shows the portion of responses per option.
We can see significant deviation[^q1equal-chi] in the deviation plot below if we assume an equal 20% of responses per response option (100% across 5 options). Specifically the an iPhone[^q1equal-iphone] option was selected at a higher rate and the a Laptop[^q1equal-laptop] , a pad of paper to write[^q1equal-paper], a Desktop[^q1equal-desktop], and an iPad[^q1equal-ipad] response options were all selected at lower rates than expected.
[^q1equal-chi]: χ² = 317.7635; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-iphone]: Z = -17.3693; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ipad]: Z = -2.4398; p = 0.0147;
[^q1equal-paper]: Z = -4.2304; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-laptop]: Z = -8.0355; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-desktop]: Z = -2.6636; p = 0.0077;
OS X Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response option we can see that OS X users (33% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q1equal-osx-chi] as well. The an iPhone[^q1equal-osx-iphone] option was selected at a higher rate and the a Laptop[^q1equal-osx-laptop] and a pad of paper to write[^q1equal-osx-paper] options were selected at lower rates than expected. The a Desktop[^q1equal-osx-desktop] and an iPad[^q1equal-osx-ipad] response options were selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q1equal-osx-chi]: χ² = 82.9102; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-osx-iphone]: Z = 8.8216; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-osx-ipad]: Z = -0.6577; p = 0.5107;
[^q1equal-osx-paper]: Z = -2.7858; p = 0.0053;
[^q1equal-osx-laptop]: Z = -3.9465; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-osx-desktop]: Z = -1.4316; p = 0.1523;
If instead we assume OS X respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool (identical to the pattern shown in Q1 Frequency Plot above), we can see that these users responded as expected[^q1-osx-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q1-osx-chi]: χ² = 2.6182; df = 4; p = 0.6236;
See [Q1 Responses by Operating System][q1ByOs] for details.
iOS Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response option, we can see that iOS users (49% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q1equal-ios-chi]. The an iPhone[^q1equal-ios-iphone] option was selected at a higher rate and the a Laptop[^q1equal-ios-laptop], a pad of paper to write[^q1equal-ios-paper], a Desktop[^q1equal-ios-desktop], and an iPad[^q1equal-ios-ipad] response options were selected at lower rates than expected.
[^q1equal-ios-chi]: χ² = 184.9796; df = 4; p < 0.001;
[^q1equal-ios-iphone]: Z = 13.2567; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-ipad]: Z = -2.2361; p = 0.0253;
[^q1equal-ios-paper]: Z = -2.7152; p = 0.0066;
[^q1equal-ios-laptop]: Z = -6.2290; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-desktop]: Z = -2.0763; p < 0.0001;
If instead we assume iOS respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool, we can see that these users responded as expected[^q1-ios-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q1-ios-chi]: χ² = 1.8008.; df = 4; p = 0.7723;
See [Q1 Responses by Operating System][q1ByOs] for details.
iPhone Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response option, we can see that iPhone users (34% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q1equal-ios-iphone-chi]. The an iPhone[^q1equal-ios-iphone-iphone] option was selected at a higher rate and the a Laptop[^q1equal-ios-iphone-laptop] and a pad of paper to write[^q1equal-ios-iphone-paper] options were selected at lower rates than expected. The a Desktop[^q1equal-ios-iphone-desktop] and an iPad[^q1equal-ios-iphone-ipad] response options were selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q1equal-ios-iphone-chi]: χ² = 151.5882; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-iphone-iphone]: Z = 12.0797; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-iphone-ipad]: Z = -1.9174; p < 0.0552;
[^q1equal-ios-iphone-paper]: Z = -3.0679; p = 0.0022;
[^q1equal-ios-iphone-laptop]: Z = -5.1770; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-iphone-desktop]: Z = -1.9174; p = 0.0552;
If instead we assume iPhone respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool, we can see that these users responded as expected[^q1-iphone-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q1-iphone-chi]: χ² = 2.7051.; df = 4; p = 0.6083;
See [Q1 Responses by iOS Agent][q1ByIosAgent] for details.
iPad Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response option, we can see thatiPad users (15% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q1equal-ios-ipad-chi]. The an iPhone[^q1equal-ios-ipad-iphone] option was selected at a higher rate and the a Laptop[^q1equal-ios-ipad-laptop] option was selected at a lower rate than expected. The a Desktop[^q1equal-ios-ipad-desktop], an iPad[^q1equal-ios-ipad-ipad], and a pad of paper to write[^q1equal-ios-ipad-paper] response options were selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q1equal-ios-ipad-chi]: χ² = 36.5205; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-ipad-iphone]: Z = 5.6765; p < 0.0001;
[^q1equal-ios-ipad-ipad]: Z = -1.0534; p = 0.2922;
[^q1equal-ios-ipad-paper]: Z = -0.4682; p = 0.6397;
[^q1equal-ios-ipad-laptop]: Z = -3.3942; p = 0.0007;
[^q1equal-ios-ipad-desktop]: Z = -0.7608; p = 0.4468;
If instead we assume iPad respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool, we can see that these users responded as expected[^q1-ipad-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q1-ipad-chi]: χ² = 2.3735.; df = 4; p = 0.6674;
See [Q1 Responses by iOS Agent][q1ByIosAgent] for details.
Q2. I am least likely to interrupt someone using
The frequency plot below shows the portion of responses per response option.
We can see significant deviation[^q2-chi] in the deviation plot below if we assume an equal 20% of responses per response option. Specifically, the a pad of paper to write[^q2-paper] option was selected at a higher rate while the a Laptop[^q2-laptop] and an iPad[^q2-ipad] response options were selected at lower rates than expected. The an iPhone[^q2-iphone] and a Desktop[^q2-desktop] response options were selected at rates consistent with expectations.
[^q2-chi]: χ² = 264.4569; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-iphone]: Z = 0.6939, p = 0.4878;
[^q2-ipad]: Z = -9.9381, p < 0.0001;
[^q2-paper]: Z = 13.8999, p < 0.0001;
[^q2-laptop]: Z = -6.0210, p < 0.0001;
[^q2-desktop]: Z = 1.3654, p = 0.1721;
OS X Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response option we can see that OS X users (33% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q2-osx-chi] as well. The a pad of paper to write[^q2-osx-paper] option was selected at a higher rate while the an iPad[^q2-osx-ipad], a Laptop[^q2-osx-laptop], and an iPhone[^q2-osx-iphone] options were selected at lower rates than expected. The a Desktop[^q2-osx-desktop] response option was selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q2-osx-chi]: χ² = 78.4790; df = 4; p < 0.001
[^q2-osx-desktop]: Z = -0.2708; p = 0.7865;
[^q2-osx-laptop]: Z = -3.5596; p = 0.0004;
[^q2-osx-paper]: Z = 7.0805; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-osx-ipad]: Z = -5.4941; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-osx-iphone]: Z = 2.2441; p = 0.0248;
If instead we assume OS X respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool (identical to the pattern shown in Q2 Frequency Plot above), we can see that these users responded as expected[^q2-osx-chi]. Since these respondents did not significantly deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q2-osx-chi]: χ² = 4.1709.; df = 4; p = 0.3834;
iOS Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response options, we can see that iOS users (49% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q2-ios-chi]. The a pad of paper to write[^q2-ios-paper] option was selected at a higher rate while the a Laptop[^q2-ios-laptop] and an iPad[^q2-ios-ipad] response options were selected at lower rates than expected. The a Desktop[^q2-ios-desktop] and an iPhone[^q2-ios-iphone] response options were selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q2-ios-chi]: χ² = 151.7143; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-desktop]: Z = 1.5972; p = 0.1102;
[^q2-ios-laptop]: Z = -4.7916; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-paper]: Z = 10.7012; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-ipad]: Z = -7.0276; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-iphone]: Z = -0.4792; p = 0.6318;
If instead we assume iOS respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool, we can see that these users responded as expected[^q2-osx-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q2-osx-chi]: χ² = 1.9227.; df = 4; p = 0.7500;
iPhone Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response options, we can see that iPhone users (34% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q2-ios-iphone-chi]. The a pad of paper to write[^q2-ios-iphone-paper] option was selected at a higher rate while the an iPad and a Laptop[^q2-ios-iphone-laptop] options were selected at lower rates than expected. The a Desktop[^q2-ios-iphone-desktop] and an iPhone[^q2-ios-iphone-iphone] response options were selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q2-ios-iphone-chi]: χ² = 105.5882; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-iphone-desktop]: Z = 0.7670; p = 0.4431;
[^q2-ios-iphone-laptop]: Z =-3.6431; p = 0.0003;
[^q2-ios-iphone-paper]: Z = 9.2036; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-iphone-ipad]: Z =-5.7522; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-iphone-iphone]: Z =-0.5752; p = 0.5651;
If instead we assume iPhone respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool, we can see that these users responded as expected[^q2-iphone-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q2-iphone-chi]: χ² = 1.1940.; df = 4; p = 0.8791;
iPad Respondents
If we assume an even distribution of responses per response option, we can see that iPad users (15% of respondents) responded with significant deviation[^q2-ios-ipad-chi]. The a pad of paper to write[^q2-ios-ipad-paper] option was selected at a higher rate while the an iPad[^q2-ios-ipad-ipad] and a Laptop[^q2-ios-ipad-laptop] options were selected at lower rates than expected. The a Desktop[^q2-ios-ipad-desktop] and an iPhone[^q2-ios-ipad-iphone] response options were selected at a rate consistent with expectations.
[^q2-ios-ipad-chi]: χ² = 46.3836; df = 4; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-ipad-desktop]: Z = 1.8727; p = 0.0611;
[^q2-ios-ipad-laptop]: Z =-3.1016; p = 0.0019;
[^q2-ios-ipad-paper]: Z = 5.3839; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-ipad-ipad]: Z =-3.9794; p < 0.0001;
[^q2-ios-ipad-iphone]: Z =-0.1756; p = 0.8606;
If instead we assume iPad respondents would respond similar to the entire respondent pool, we can see that these users responded as expected[^q2-ipad-chi]. Since these respondents did not deviate on the whole, there is no need to inspect individual response options.
[^q2-ipad-chi]: χ² = 2.7858.; df = 4; p = 0.5943;
Interaction
The matrix plot below shows responses to Q1 and Q2 (data points jittered to reduce overlap of plotted data points). We can see that the most-frequent combination was more likely to interrupt someone using an iPhone and least likely to interrupt someone using a pad of paper to write (29% of respondents). The next most-frequent combination was more likely to interrupt someone using an iPhone and least likely to interrupt someone using a desktop (14% of respondents).
There were only 3 respondents (0.6% of respondents) who selected the same option for both questions.
Appendix
Respondents by Country
| Country | Frequency | Percent | Cume Freq | Cume Pct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 289 | 58% | 289 | 58% |
| United Kingdom | 44 | 9% | 333 | 67% |
| Australia | 22 | 4% | 355 | 71% |
| Germany | 17 | 3% | 372 | 75% |
| Canada | 16 | 3% | 388 | 78% |
| Italy | 11 | 2% | 399 | 80% |
| Netherlands | 10 | 2% | 409 | 82% |
| Unknown | 10 | 2% | 419 | 84% |
| Sweden | 8 | 2% | 427 | 86% |
| India | 6 | 1% | 433 | 87% |
| Belgium | 5 | 1% | 438 | 88% |
| Austria | 4 | 0% | 442 | 89% |
| France | 3 | 0% | 445 | 89% |
| New Zealand | 3 | 0% | 448 | 90% |
| Poland | 3 | 0% | 451 | 90% |
| Portugal | 3 | 0% | 454 | 91% |
| Singapore | 3 | 0% | 457 | 92% |
| China | 2 | 0% | 459 | 92% |
| Costa Rica | 2 | 0% | 461 | 92% |
| Denmark | 2 | 0% | 463 | 93% |
| Hungary | 2 | 0% | 465 | 93% |
| Mexico | 2 | 0% | 467 | 94% |
| Norway | 2 | 0% | 469 | 94% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 0% | 471 | 94% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 0% | 473 | 95% |
| Taiwan | 2 | 0% | 475 | 95% |
| Argentina | 1 | 0% | 476 | 95% |
| Armenia | 1 | 0% | 477 | 96% |
| Bermuda | 1 | 0% | 478 | 96% |
| Brazil | 1 | 0% | 479 | 96% |
| Finland | 1 | 0% | 480 | 96% |
| Greece | 1 | 0% | 481 | 96% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 0% | 482 | 97% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 0% | 483 | 97% |
| Ireland | 1 | 0% | 484 | 97% |
| Japan | 1 | 0% | 485 | 97% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 0% | 486 | 97% |
| Latvia | 1 | 0% | 487 | 98% |
| Lithuania | 1 | 0% | 488 | 98% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 0% | 489 | 98% |
| Malta | 1 | 0% | 490 | 98% |
| Peru | 1 | 0% | 491 | 98% |
| Philippines | 1 | 0% | 492 | 99% |
| Puerto Rico | 1 | 0% | 493 | 99% |
| Romania | 1 | 0% | 494 | 99% |
| Serbia | 1 | 0% | 495 | 99% |
| South Africa | 1 | 0% | 496 | 99% |
| Spain | 1 | 0% | 497 | 100% |
| Thailand | 1 | 0% | 498 | 100% |
| Ukraine | 1 | 0% | 499 | 100% |
Respondents by Operating System & Platform
| OS | Platform | Frequency | Percent | Cume Freq | Cume Pct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| unknown | 58 | ||||
| iOS | iOS 7.1 | 229 | 52% | 229 | 52% |
| iOS 8 | 9 | 2% | 238 | 54% | |
| iOS 7 | 5 | 1% | 243 | 55% | |
| iOS 5.1 | 1 | 0% | 244 | 55% | |
| iOS 6.1 | 1 | 0% | 245 | 56% | |
| OS X | Mac OS X 10.9 | 145 | 33% | 390 | 88% |
| Mac OS X 10.1 | 14 | 3% | 404 | 92% | |
| Mac OS X 10.6 | 4 | 0% | 408 | 93% | |
| Mac OS X 10.8 | 4 | 0% | 412 | 93% | |
| Windows | Windows 7 | 16 | 4% | 428 | 97% |
| Win7 | 2 | 0% | 430 | 98% | |
| WinVista | 1 | 0% | 431 | 98% | |
| WinXP | 1 | 0% | 432 | 98% | |
| Windows 8 | 1 | 0% | 433 | 98% | |
| Linux | Linux | 8 | 2% | 441 | 100% |
Respondents by Operating System & Browser Agent
| OS | Agent | Frequency | Percent | Cume Freq | Cume Pct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| unknown | 58 | ||||
| iOS | iPhone | 170 | 39% | 170 | 39% |
| iPad | 73 | 17% | 243 | 55% | |
| Safari 5.1 | 1 | 0% | 244 | 55% | |
| iPod Touch | 1 | 0% | 245 | 56% | |
| OS X | Safari 0.0 | 129 | 29% | 374 | 85% |
| Chrome 0.0 | 34 | 8% | 408 | 93% | |
| Safari 5.1 | 3 | 0% | 411 | 93% | |
| Safari 6.0 | 1 | 0% | 412 | 93% | |
| Windows | Chrome 0.0 | 16 | 4% | 428 | 97% |
| IE 10.0 | 2 | 0% | 430 | 98% | |
| IE 9.0 | 2 | 0% | 432 | 98% | |
| Opera 12.00 | 1 | 0% | 433 | 98% | |
| Linux | Safari 0.0 | 4 | 0% | 437 | 99% |
| Safari 4.0 | 4 | 0% | 441 | 100% |
Q1 Responses by Operating System
| Response | unknown | iOS | OS X | Windows | Linux | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iphone | 30 | 132 | 79 | 9 | 5 | 225 |
| 54% | 47% | 43% | 63% | |||
| ipad | 9 | 35 | 30 | 3 | 1 | 69 |
| 14% | 18% | 14% | 13% | |||
| desktop | 9 | 36 | 26 | 4 | 1 | 67 |
| 15% | 16% | 19% | 13% | |||
| paper | 6 | 32 | 19 | 4 | 1 | 56 |
| 13% | 11% | 19% | 13% | |||
| laptop | 4 | 10 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 24 |
| 4% | 8% | 5% | 0% | |||
| Total | 245 | 167 | 21 | 8 | 441 |
Q1 Responses by iOS Agent
| Col Pct | iPhone | iPad | Safari 5.1 | iPod Touch | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iphone | 97 | 34 | 0 | 1 | 132 |
| 57% | 47% | 0% | 100% | ||
| desktop | 24 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 36 |
| 14% | 16% | 0% | 0% | ||
| ipad | 24 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 35 |
| 14% | 15% | 0% | 0% | ||
| paper | 18 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 32 |
| 11% | 18% | 100% | 0% | ||
| laptop | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| 4% | 4% | 0% | 0% | ||
| Total | 170 | 73 | 1 | 1 | 245 |
Q2 Responses by Operating System
| Response | unknown | iOS | OS X | Windows | Linux | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| paper | 25 | 116 | 70 | 8 | 5 | 199 |
| 47% | 42% | 38% | 63% | |||
| desktop | 13 | 59 | 32 | 6 | 2 | 99 |
| 24% | 19% | 29% | 25% | |||
| iphone | 9 | 46 | 45 | 5 | 1 | 97 |
| 19% | 27% | 24% | 13% | |||
| laptop | 10 | 19 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 36 |
| 8% | 9% | 0% | 0% | |||
| ipad | 1 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| 2% | 3% | 0% | 0% | |||
| Total | 245 | 167 | 21 | 8 | 441 |
Q2 Responses by iOS Agent
| Col Pct | iPhone | iPad | Safari 5.1 | iPod Touch | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| paper | 82 | 33 | 0 | 1 | 116 |
| 48% | 45% | 0% | 100% | ||
| desktop | 38 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 59 |
| 22% | 29% | 0% | 0% | ||
| iphone | 31 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 46 |
| 18% | 19% | 100% | 0% | ||
| laptop | 15 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 19 |
| 9% | 5% | 0% | 0% | ||
| ipad | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | ||
| Total | 170 | 73 | 1 | 1 | 245 |