发表机构
Clark University; Structured; Stanford University; Max Planck Institute for Human Development; University of Cambridge（克拉克大学; Structured; 斯坦福大学; 马克斯·普朗克人类发展研究所; 剑桥大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究通过分析957名用户六周内24,265个任务日志，发现仅26.4%任务直接完成，32.0%被弃，提出用潜在剖面分析区分用户参与类型，支持按任务生命周期评估规划工具。
AI 中文摘要
日常规划有助于实现目标和提高生产力，人们越来越多地将其委托给数字工具。计划会被推迟、修改和搁置，而非按预期执行。理解这些变化需要追踪任务从创建到后续更新及记录结果的整个过程。我们报告了一项现实世界中的任务规划研究，使用了来自一款广泛使用的日常规划应用957名用户的24,265个任务的时间戳日志，并观察了六周，同时结合了自我报告调查。追踪每个任务的生命周期，只有26.4%的任务直接从创建进入完成状态，32.0%的任务被放弃；全天和长期任务被不成比例地放弃，77.6%的定时任务在晚于预期的时间被标记为完成。对909名用户的潜在剖面分析显示，高参与度（11.1%）、低参与度（19.7%）和被动型（69.2%）三种剖面；应用上的活跃天数区分了这些剖面，并与调查后的完成情况相关。这些发现支持在任务生命周期内评估规划工具。
英文摘要
Daily planning supports goal attainment and productivity, and people increasingly delegate it to digital tools. Plans are postponed, revised, and left unresolved rather than executed as intended. Understanding these changes requires following tasks from creation through later updates and recorded outcomes. We report an in-the-wild study of task planning using time-stamped logs of 24,265 tasks from 957 users of a widely used daily planner app, observed over six weeks alongside self-reported surveys. Following each task across its lifecycle, only 26.4% moved directly from creation to completion and 32.0% were abandoned; all-day and longer tasks were abandoned disproportionately, and 77.6% of timed tasks were marked complete later than intended. Latent profile analysis of 909 users indicated High Engagement (11.1%), Low Engagement (19.7%), and Passive (69.2%) profiles; active days on app distinguished the profiles and were associated with post-survey completion. These findings support evaluating planning tools across the task lifecycle.
Comments20 pages, 9 figures, 5 tables
