The Anatomy of An Interruption - What the Research Says

the impact

In our ongoing Reclaim the Floor series, we began last week by exploring some of the context and considerations that will set the stage for how we handle interruptions. Before we tackle tools and techniques, we’re going to dive a bit deeper into what makes up an interruption, and we’ll link to some of the research and literature throughout this article.

Firstly, let’s look at the impact of an interruption. When we asked attendees how they felt when interrupted, we saw a diversity of replies, even from within a small sample. 

Each different reaction can indicate different types of internal and external impacts. Importantly for our discussion, they can also warrant different responses and mitigations.

Here is a sampling of some of the impacts of verbal interruptions in the workplace. 

  • Disruption - They can distract us, disrupting our delivery and causing us to lose our train of thought or stumble in our articulation. 

  • Silencing - They can stop our input and ideas from being contributed if we decide (or are forced) to cede the floor to the interrupter. Not only is this a wasteful use of the diverse insights of the team, it can also lead to proactive self-silencing which has been tied to negative health outcomes amongst other holistic impacts. 

  • Dismissal - They send a message that our contribution is less valued than the interrupter's. This can sometimes contribute to imposter phenomenon and lack of psychological safety. 

  • Status - Research shows that when people interrupt, it often elevates their status. Unfortunately for women, this also comes with a significant likeability penalty which men do not experience. These power dynamics and status assertions can have broader implications beyond the boundaries of the conversation itself. 

  • The Double Bind - They force us to choose between being silenced (and possibly less effective) or speaking up at the risk of being seen as confrontational or abrasive. This is especially true for women because interruptions are viewed more negatively for women than for men. We also perceive them as occurring more frequently by women, even when women are interrupting equally or even less often than men. 

  • Exclusion - They indicate to others on the team which types of people are valued and which voices are prioritized. This can undermine efforts to foster inclusive, collaborative workplaces with diverse thought and experience. 

but why?

Ok, ok! So we know the stakes can be high. And we know that those stakes are influenced by context, environment, micro and macro cultures, and hierarchy within an organization. But why are interruptions occurring in the first place? What’s actually causing one person to speak over another? Well, you’re probably not surprised by the answer. “It depends.”

Interruptions tend to fall into two primary categories: Collaborative and Intrusive. Yet, as we see in so many other parts of life, intent does not always align with impact. Understanding the different types of interruptions can help us determine how best to respond. It may be difficult to interpret someone’s true intent, especially in the heat of the moment. Sometimes, people don’t even understand their own reasons for interrupting and the intent may be subconscious. We can use context clues to help us understand what type of interruption we’re dealing with. 

  • Collaboration - As we mentioned, some interruptions can be collaborative or supportive, such as agreeing with a point or building off of it. Many of us neurodivergent folks will often try to build or display empathy by relating it back to ourselves, such as, “Oh my gosh! That happened to me, too!” These rapport-building interruptions differ from intrusive interruptions, which contradict or derail the conversation or attempt to take over. 

  • Excitement - Eagerness can be another reason for interruptions. Overlapping speech in one conversation may be seen as an interruption in another, depending on culture, power dynamics, and neurodiversity. This is a great example of interruptions that intend to be collaborative but can still cause a negative impact. Oftentimes, impulsivity or a tendency to lose a train of thought will lead people to jump in with an idea as soon as it comes to mind. 

  • Culture and Pacing - While research shows that conversational turn-taking is fairly universal across cultures (i.e. Italians don’t actually interrupt more than Brits), there are measurable differences in the typical pauses between turns. These different norms can give the perception of interruption because our brains are so highly attuned to microseconds of pause. It can also cause more interruptions to occur in cross-cultural conversations the way even the slightest lag on Zoom can cause us to speak over each other or misinterpret subtle verbal cues. 

  • Regional Styles - Regional differences and norms can also play a role in perceived and actual interruptions. Some regional cultures, teams, and individuals may be considered high involvement versus high consideration. Think New York versus California. “‘High involvement’ speakers give priority in a conversation to expressing enthusiastic support even if it involves simultaneous speech, while ‘high considerateness’ speakers are more concerned with being considerate of others.” When these two styles meet, it can lead to clashes and unintended interruptions. 

  • Gender Roles - Another gender-based difference is that society often expects (and socializes) women to act in ways that are communally conscious while expecting men to assert agency and compete for a position within the hierarchy. When competitive conversation meets collaborative conversation, we can expect to see more interruptions of the collaborative conversants by the competitive conversants. 

  • Power Plays - It’s unfortunate, but we’ve all witnessed the use of interruptions as an intentional power play to dominate a conversation. Sometimes this power is backed by the official hierarchy of an organization, such as when your manager interrupts you. (That doesn’t necessarily make it an appropriate or supportive way to communicate, but it changes how we’d handle it). Other times, the interrupter is someone with equal or less formal status who is attempting to elevate themselves in the “invisible org structure.” Either way, it’s important to handle these proactively in order to set the stage for effective communication going forward.

Now that we understand some of the theory behind the anatomy of an interruption, we can better explore the ways to manage them, both reactively in the moment and proactively going forward. 

Stay tuned for this week’s content which is all about tools and techniques for handling interruptions!