The cost of interrupted work (2023)

Variability in Interruption Cost

• Commenters report huge day‑to‑day variation: sometimes an interruption ruins the rest of the day, other times it’s almost free.
• Cost depends on task type (deep design vs. rote coding), where you are in the problem, novelty of the mental path, emotional load of the interruption, sleep, and caffeine.
• Some say minor questions or “pull from memory” queries are cheap; cognitively heavy or emotional interruptions are very expensive.
• Several note aging makes context harder to re‑load; they increasingly rely on notes, larger screens, and stricter interruption boundaries.

Task Type, Flow, and Meetings

• Many describe “flow state” interruptions as physically painful and taking far longer than 20–25 minutes to recover from.
• Anticipation of meetings often destroys half a day: people avoid starting deep work if a meeting is within an hour, and reschedules amplify waste.
• Some partition their week: in‑office days for shallow/interactive work, specific home days for uninterrupted deep work.

Knowledge vs Physical Work

• One view: knowledge work is uniquely sensitive; a quick question can cost 15+ minutes.
• Counter‑view: good “physical” workers (movers, forklift drivers, trades) also run complex plans in their heads; interruptions degrade their efficiency similarly. The real distinction is depth of planning/skill, not “knowledge vs labor”.

Pair Programming and Collaboration

• Experiences are sharply split. Some say pairing makes resuming after interruptions almost seamless and improves quality; measured output as a pair matched both working separately.
• Others find pairing exhausting, frustratingly slow, or incompatible with how they think; interruptions would “cost less only because productivity is already in the gutter”.
• Several point out it works best with clear driver/navigator roles, psychological safety, and the right kind of work (not research‑heavy tasks).

Company Culture, Management, and “Being Interruptible”

• Some celebrate flexible, output‑oriented cultures, especially with remote work: walking, chores, or gardening are used deliberately to reset focus.
• Others describe environments where flow, deep work, or even basic productivity arguments (e.g., about tool friction) are not believed by management.
• Tension noted between being helpful/interruptible (good for the team) and protecting one’s own focus and stress levels. Some argue individual well‑being should trump “good for the company”.

Science Reporting, Citogenesis, and the 23:15 Figure

• Multiple comments criticize pop‑science reporting: secondary sources often misstate or oversimplify results, fueling public mistrust and “citogenesis”.
• Several people track down the 23:15 interruption number:
  • A Gallup interview quotes it.
  • A 2005 paper reports ~25:26 average resumption time, with ~22:37 for externally caused interruptions.
  • A later book page explicitly mentions “23 minutes”.
• Discussion notes the original article’s main point: how an unsourced‑seeming number can propagate, be slightly mutated, and then be treated as authoritative.