Time for microbreaks

The importance of Microbreaks

Participating within breaks are a practical necessity as according to Schaufeli & Bakker, (2004) humans are not able to expend prolonged energy without the cost to personal health and professional performance. In-fact human energy has been spoken about as being a moment-to-moment assessment of how much an individual feels refreshed and energised (Quinn, Spreitzer, & Lam, 2012) which according to Sonnentag (2012) is a considering factor in the physical and mental well-being of the human. This understanding of human energy has been taken further by Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter (2001) who mention that every changing fluctuation of energy that a human experience on a moment-to-moment fluctuations is a predictor to the outcomes seen withing humans’ health and performance. Dalal, Bhave, & Fiset (2014)., Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter (2001) and Wright & Cropanzano, (1998) mentioning that feelings of low energy fluctuations can be defined as feelings of fatigue, exhaustion and burnout impacting the mental, physical and performance health of the human. Research on the participation within breaks suggest that the low energy fluctuations can be neglected by participating in constant and randomised breaks, also known as microbreaks (Henning, Jacques, Kissel, Sullivan, & Alteras-Webb, 1997; Henning, Sauter, Salvendy, & Krieg Jr, 1989). Psychologist and neuroscientist have recently highlighted that human have several cognitive resources available to them, and that cognitive skills like attention and memory are taken from a limited capacity of cognitive resources and energy (Halbesleben, Neveu, Paustian-Underdahl & Westman, 2014., Spreng, Mar, & Kim, 2009). The term recovery according to Meijman & Mulder (1998) is the process of stopping resource loss and replenishing resources and by stopping the task that consumed resources, only then can the depletion of the of resources be replenished. Sonnentag & Zijlstra (2006) defines recovery as a conscious emotional state characterized by a temporal reluctance to continue with the present demands or to accept new demands, in other words, people feel that they need to recover (or need a break) when they are either physically and emotionally drained or mentally exhausted. These recovery periods or microbreaks can be as short as a few seconds or several days, depending on the depletion and circumstances (Sluiter, 2000). These short-term recovery opportunities are according to Dalal (2014) vitally important in maintaining attention and improving future performance as well as keeping optimal mental and physical health of the human. Within the research of microbreaks, five theories have emerged which outline the need for microbreaks, and which are a fundamental aspect of the humans mental, physical and performance health. The five theories are Effort-Recovery Model (ERM; Meijman & Mulder, 1998), which explained that cognitive resources can also be replenished and how recovery impacts employee task performance, energy, and well-being. The Conservation of resources theory (COR; Hobfoll, 1989) which suggest that individuals have limited resources (e.g., energy) necessary to address various demands in their life and these resource depletions causes strain and poor functioning, so individuals try to conserve resources and avoid resource losses. Finally, the ego-depletion theory (EDT; Baumeister et al., 1998, 2000) is based on the resource scarcity perspective: a central, psychological resource (ego) determines individuals’ self-regulation capacity, but it is finite and drains easily if used continuously. Broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001) states that humans’ positive emotions from positive episodes can widen when the cognitive resources are high which increases mental, health and performance over various contexts. This theory is relating with the episodic model of affective influences on performance (Beal et al., 2005) as the model suggest that positive affective states influence cognition and behavioral styles that are conducive to effective in various task activities. It can be suggested, according to the theories highlighted above that participating within microbreak is positively related to mental, physical and performance health leading to higher fluctuations of energy. In addition to the above theoretical frameworks, understanding how microbreaks are constructed along with when to do them and how long to do them for are a vital aspect of the microbreak framework. Three microbreaks that can be used are relaxation, socialization, and cognitive activities.

Relaxation has been suggested by Sianoja, Syrek, de Bloom, Korpela, & Kinnunen, 2017; Trougakos & Hideg, 2009 as the momentarily relieve of psychological and physical tension from a continuous task or set of tasks and is seen as major recovery process. Common relaxation activities include taking a short nap or walk, meditating, looking at plants and greenery, breathing, watching comedy, mindfulness, daydreaming, and stretching, of which are low effort or effortless activities which replenishes depilated cognitive resources and help the humans physical and psychological systems return to pre-stress levels (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007., Meijman & Mulder, 1998). Socialisation activities recovery research suggests that participating in activities like sports, hobbies, playing games, chatting with friends and family help to detach from work-related thoughts (Sonnentag, 2001; Brummelhuis & Bakker, 2012). The concept of relational energy outlined by Owens, Baker, Sumpter, & Cameron (2016) explains that interpersonal interactions heighten the levels of psychological resourcefulness that replenishes the depleted cognitive recourses. Finally, Cognitive micro-break activities refer to any activities that facilitate a mental break from task being carried out (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015). These activities can include reading, browsing the Internet for entertainment or personal learning, playing computer games, crosswords and sudoku. It is important that in relaxation, socialising and cognitive recovery that there are cognitive shifts away from the task that was depleting the cognitive resources towards the activity you are carrying out. Recovery literature has suggested that psychological detachment from the activates that is depleting the cognitive recourses is critical for replenishing energy and affective resources (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015). Breaks are spoken about differently throughout the literature; they consist of breaks lasting anywhere from 2-10 minutes (Henning, 1996; Henning, 1997) up to 2-5 weeks (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006; Westman & Eden, 1997). Microbreaks can be a short as 10 seconds up to 5 minutes (Trougakos & Hideg, 2009).

Human experience breaks on two distinct levels, physical and cognitive (Froehle & White, 2014). According to Froehle & White (20140; Jett & George (2003) three types of breaks that can be adopted: (1) traditional, expected breaks; (2) unexpected breaks that are distracting; (UD) and (3) unexpected breaks during which a person maintains focus. (UF) Firstly, traditional breaks are planned rest-periods. Secondary, unexpected breaks (UD) that involve a distraction are unplanned pauses of unknown length during the activity/task which a human diverts attention from the primary activity/task. Finally, unexpected breaks (UF) are when the human maintains focus within unplanned pauses of unknown length during the activity/task which the human is not required to attend to anything outside the primary work task. Research suggests that unexpected (UF) breaks that maintain focus have the potential to improve cognitive resources by offering the human much-needed refreshment, but without the negative post-break costs to productivity and cognitive switching seen in typical of traditional breaks or those that involve some sort of distraction (Froehle & White 2014; Jett & George.2003; Wickens & Hollands, 2000).