# Investigating the Effectiveness of Self-Regulated, Pomodoro, and Flowtime Break-Taking Techniques Among Students

## TL;DR

This study compares Pomodoro, Flowtime, and self-regulated break techniques among students, finding no significant differences in productivity or motivation despite varying break patterns.

## Contribution

The study introduces a novel comparison of three break-taking techniques in a self-regulated learning context using an online intervention with real study tasks.

## Key findings

- Pomodoro breaks caused faster increases in fatigue and decreases in motivation compared to self-regulated breaks.
- No overall differences in productivity, task completion, or flow were observed across the three break-taking conditions.
- Flowtime breaks showed similar effects to Pomodoro in terms of motivation and fatigue changes.

## Abstract

Effective break taking during study sessions is crucial for maintaining performance, especially in self-regulated learning settings where students plan their own tasks. However, research on break taking in these contexts is limited. This study investigates the effect of self-regulated, Pomodoro, and Flowtime breaks on subjective study experiences, task completion, and flow. Ninety-four university students participated in an online intervention that provided instruction on how to take breaks in a 2 h authentic study session. In the self-regulated break condition (n = 25), students decided when and how long to take breaks. In the Pomodoro condition (n = 36), students took 5 min breaks after every 25 min of studying. In the Flowtime group (n = 33), participants decided when to take breaks; however, the break duration was determined based on prior study duration. Results showed that Pomodoro breaks led to a faster increase in fatigue, and Pomodoro and Flowtime breaks led to a faster decrease in motivation compared with self-regulated breaks; however, these differences did not result in overall differences in fatigue or motivation levels between conditions. Similarly, no differences were found in productivity levels, task completion, and flow. Future research should further examine these techniques by including variables like personality and mental effort.