This concept of plastic time seems to be a promising way to think about what happens in-between our directed computing tasks. But how to measure this? I started this exercise by just paying attention to the things I do when I (inevitably) get on the computer first thing in the morning. There is always a period of time, which changes duration every day, before I actually "start working" on things I need to do. Broadly, the tasks i "need" to do are usually contained in software like word and excel, and certain applications of the browser such as logging into my Illinois email account and accessing the library remotely. Other, more "plastic" tasks, are accessed via my RSS reader application, iTunes, and web apps such as my personal email and "surfing the web." The order in which I engage these various applications upon starting up my computer roughly gives a certain measure of the particular use of my "morning plastic time." So some measure of plastic time can be represented as follows:
Start 1:
1. Browser
- Email (personal)
- News item (link from email homepage)
- Youtube (from link in email message)
- Email (work)
2. RSS reader
3. Word
-outline for reading
Start 2:
1. Browser
-Email (work)
-Facebook
-TIcketmaster
-Methods class blog site...
2. Word
This measure of plastic time takes into account the order in which we approach tasks and the links between them. Within an office setting, the average worker likely has periods of plastic time throughout the day, but if we make the assumption (for purposes of measurement) that there are distinct phases of the day in which plastic time often occurs, we can use these periods as sites of experimentation. For example, we can say that plastic time at work often appears first thing in the morning, right before/after breaks, and perhaps at the end of the day. By looking at plastic time in these contexts we can examine how users interact with various applications shortly after or just prior to the user doing something away from the computer. So, a measure of plastic time, or undirected computing, can be taken by observing what non-work related applications are engaged (and in what order) when the user initially sits down at the computer. As in the example above, does the user open a web browser first and then her work-related Outlook account second? We can better understand plastic time (if it exists at all) by understanding the order in which tasks are approached, the time intervals between them, and the links from one task to another.
Comments
procrastination!
This is a nice start and I think procrastination is definitely an interesting site to use to respond to the prompt about plastic time. This seems more like a beginning than a research design, though. I think what is lacking is that there isn't enough information here for me to really evaluate whether or not the research will work. Let me explain:
Some of the phrases in the last paragraph highlight the difficulty. I see that you have specified the prefix "work-related" in front of the e-mail account. But in your description of measures you don't have a way to distinguish between work-related and non-work related e-mail accounts. If you find a way to record the applications that are started, the time that they are started, and how long they are used, I agree you will have some useful ingredients that you can mix together to find out something about plastic time. But from the post it still isn't quite clear how you will mix these ingredients together and bake up some knowledge.
Let's say we used your measures to gather data about 1,000 people. We found that 500 of them have patterns just like you, where they use (on average) 3 applications for 3 minutes each, then they switch to one that they use for a long time. While 500 of them just launch one single application right away and use it for a long period. We've got our empiricism working, but what do we do with it? What does this say about plastic time? Every time I try to make some statement about plastic time with these ingredients, I think some crank would get angry with my methods. For instance:
Worse, real data are never this clear-cut with the 500 vs. the 500 I gave in the example. As we read in the articles for this class, you seem to expect that the data you gather with these measures will "speak" to you but you will have to impose more of an argument and a structure for that to work out well. Procrastination, the idea of using starting the computer time and ending the computer time, and the idea of looking at order are all provocative and promising... but then what? What we have here is a beginning.
Christian