{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016637478108581436, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.606936416184971, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Understanding the Design and Effectiveness of Peripheral Breathing Guide Use During Information Work

Peripheral breathing guides – tools designed to influence breathing while completing another primary task – have been proposed to provide physiological benefits during information work. While research has shown that guides can influence breathing rates under ideal conditions, there is little evidence that they can lead to underlying markers of physiological benefit under interrupted work conditions. Further, even if guides are effective during work tasks, it is unclear how personal and workplace factors affect peoples' willingness to adopt them for everyday use. In this paper, we present the results of a comparative, mixed-methods study of five different peripheral breathing guides. Our findings show that peripheral breathing guides are viable and can provide physiological markers of benefit during interrupted work. Further, we show that guides are effective – even when use is intermittent due to workplace distractions. Finally, we contribute guidelines to support the design of breathing guides for everyday information work.