The Technology-Mediated Reflection Model: Barriers and Assistance in Data-Driven Reflection

by | May 1, 2021 | Research Publications

Author(s):

  • Marit Bentvelzen
  • Jasmin Niess
  • Paweł W. Woźniak

Abstract:

Current personal informatics models consider reflection as an important stage in users’ journeys with trackers. However, these models describe reflection from a meta perspective and it remains unclear what this stage entails. To design interactive technologies that support reflection, we need a more thorough understanding of how people reflect on their personal data in practice. To that end, we conducted semi-structured interviews with users of fitness trackers and an online survey to study practices in reflecting on fitness data. Our results show that users reported reflecting on data despite lacking reflection support from their tracking technology. Based on our results, we introduce the Technology-Mediated Reflection Model, which describes conditions and barriers for reflection on personal data. Our model consists of the temporal and conceptual cycles of reflection and helps designers identify the possible barriers a user might face when using a system for reflection.

Documentation:

https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445505

References:
  1. Amid Ayobi, Paul Marshall, and Anna L Cox. 2020. Trackly : A Customisable and Pictorial Self-Tracking App to Support Agency in Multiple Sclerosis Self-Care. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2020), 1–15.
  2. Eric P.S. Baumer, Vera Khovanskaya, Mark Matthews, Lindsay Reynolds, Victoria Schwanda Sosik, and Geri Gay. 2014. Reviewing reflection: On the use of reflection in interactive system design. Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques, DIS(2014), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2598598
  3. Eric P S Baumer. 2015. Reflective Informatics: Conceptual Dimensions for Designing Technologies of Reflection. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 585–594. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702234
  4. Ann Blandford, Dominic Furniss, and Stephann Makri. 2016. Qualitative HCI Research: Going Behind the Scenes. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 9 (2016), 1–115. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00706ED1V01Y201602HCI034
  5. Patrick Carrington, Kevin Chang, Helena Mentis, and Amy Hurst. 2015. ”But, I don’t take steps”: Examining the inaccessibility of fitness trackers for wheelchair athletes. In ASSETS 2015 – Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 193–201. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700648.2809845
  6. Eun Kyoung Choe, Bongshin Lee, Matthew Kay, Wanda Pratt, and Julie A. Kientz. 2015. SleepTight: Low-burden, self-monitoring technology for capturing and reflecting on sleep behaviors. UbiComp 2015 – Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing(2015), 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2804266
  7. Eun Kyoung Choe, Bongshin Lee, Haining Zhu, and Nathalie Henry Riche. 2017. Understanding self-reflection: How people reflect on personal data through visual data exploration. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series(PervasiveHealth ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 173–182. https://doi.org/10.1145/3154862.3154881
  8. Eun Kyoung Choe, Nicole B. Lee, Bongshin Lee, Wanda Pratt, and Julie A. Kientz. 2014. Understanding quantified-selfers’ practices in collecting and exploring personal data. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings (2014), 1143–1152. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557372
  9. Sunny Consolvo, Predrag Klasnja, David W. McDonald, and James A. Landay. 2012. Designing for healthy lifestyles: Design considerations for mobile technologies to encourage consumer health and wellness. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 6, 3-4(2012), 167–315. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000040
  10. Daniel A Epstein, Clara Caldeira, Mayara Costa Figueiredo, Xi Lu, Lucas M Silva, Lucretia Williams, Jong Ho Lee, Qingyang Li, Simran Ahuja, Qiuer Chen, Payam Dowlatyari, Craig Hilby, Sazeda Sultana, Elizabeth V Eikey, and Yunan Chen. 2020. Mapping and Taking Stock of the Personal Informatics Literature. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 4, 4 (12 2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3432231
  11. Daniel A. Epstein, Monica Caraway, Chuck Johnston, An Ping, James Fogarty, and Sean A. Munson. 2016. Beyond Abandonment to Next Steps: Understanding and Designing for Life after Personal Informatics Tool Use. Proc SIGCHI Conf Hum Factor Comput Syst 165, 7 (2016), 1109–1114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.05.007.Mapping
  12. Daniel A. Epstein, An Ping, James Fogarty, and Sean A. Munson. 2015. A lived informatics model of personal informatics. UbiComp 2015 – Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing(2015), 731–742. https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2804250
  13. Clayton Feustel, Shyamak Aggarwal, Bongshin Lee, and Lauren Wilcox. 2018. People Like Me: Designing for Reflection on Aggregate Cohort Data in Personal Informatics Systems. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2, 3 (2018), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3264917
  14. Rowanne Fleck and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2010. Reflecting on reflection: Framing a design landscape. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series (2010), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1145/1952222.1952269
  15. Garmin. [n.d.]. Forerunner 935 – About Training Effect. https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/forerunner935/EN-US/GUID-7275629E-743A-4658-A284-C84F42A66AE5.html
  16. Rúben Gouveia, Evangelos Karapanos, and Marc Hassenzahl. 2018. Activity tracking in vivo. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings, Vol. 2018-April. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173936
  17. Anthony M Grant, John Franklin, and Peter Langford. 2002. The Self-Reflection and Insight Scale: A new measure of private self-consciousness. Social Behavior and Personality 30, 8 (2002), 821–836. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821
  18. Jonathan Gutman. 1982. A Means-End Chain Model Based on Consumer Categorization Processes. Journal of Marketing 46, 2 (1982), 60. https://doi.org/10.2307/3203341
  19. Ellen Isaacs, Artie Konrad, Alan Walendowski, Thomas Lennig, Victoria Hollis, and Steve Whittaker. 2013. Echoes from the past: How technology mediated reflection improves well-being. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings (2013), 1071–1080. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466137
  20. Malte F. Jung, Nik Martelaro, Clifford Nass, and Halsey Hoster. 2014. Participatory materials: Having a reflective conversation with an artifact in the making. Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques, DIS(2014), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2598591
  21. Rafal Kocielnik, Daniel Avrahami, Jennifer Marlow, Di Lu, and Gary Hsieh. 2018. Designing for workplace reflection: A chat and voice-based conversational agent. DIS 2018 – Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference (2018), 881–894. https://doi.org/10.1145/3196709.3196784
  22. Rafal Kocielnik, Lillian Xiao, Daniel Avrahami, and Gary Hsieh. 2018. Reflection Companion: A Conversational System for Engaging Users in Reflection on Physical Activity. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 2, 2 (7 2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3214273
  23. Ian Li, Anind Dey, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2010. A Stage-Based Model of Personal Informatics Systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 557–566. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753409
  24. Ian Li, Anind K Dey, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2011. Understanding My Data, Myself: Supporting Self-Reflection with Ubicomp Technologies. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing(UbiComp ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 405–414. https://doi.org/10.1145/2030112.2030166
  25. Ine Mols, Elise Van Den Hoven, and Berry Eggen. 2016. Informing design for reflection: An overview of current everyday practices. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series 23-27-Octo (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2971494
  26. Jennifer Moon. 1999. Reflection in learning & professional development. RoutledgeFalmer, New York, NY, USA. 229 pages. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203822296
  27. Elizabeth L. Murnane, Tara G. Walker, Beck Tench, Stephen Voida, and Jaime Snyder. 2018. Personal informatics in interpersonal contexts: Towards the design of technology that supports the social ecologies of long-term mental health management. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (11 2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3274396
  28. Jasmin Niess and Paweł W. Woźniak. 2018. Supporting meaningful personal fitness: The tracker goal Evolution Model. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings 2018-April (2018), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173745
  29. Jenny Preece, Yvonne Rogers, Helen Sharp, David Benyon, Simon Holland, and Tom Carey. 1994. Human-Computer Interaction. Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd., GBR.
  30. Shriti Raj, Joyce Lee, Ashley Garrity, and Mark Newman. 2019. Clinical Data in Context: Towards Sensemaking Tools for Interpreting Personal Health Data. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3, 1 (2019), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3314409
  31. Wolfgang Reitberger, Wolfgang Spreicer, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2014. Nutriflect: Reflecting collective shopping behavior and nutrition. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings (2014), 3309–3318. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557384
  32. Samara Ruiz, Sven Charleer, Maite Urretavizcaya, Joris Klerkx, Fernández Castro Isabel, and Erik Duval. 2016. Supporting learning by considering emotions: Tracking and visualization. A case study. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series 25-29-Apri (2016), 254–263. https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883888
  33. Johnny Saldaña. 2015. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
  34. Samsung. [n.d.]. Measure your stress level with Samsung Health. https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS00080574/
  35. Donald A. Schön. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2005-0209
  36. Petr Slovak, Chris Frauenberger, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2017. Reflective practicum: A framework of sensitising concepts to design for transformative reflection. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings 2017-May (2017), 2696–2707. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025516
  37. Minhyang Suh and Gary Hsieh. 2016. Designing for future behaviors: Understanding the effect of temporal distance on planned behaviors. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1084–1096. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858591
  38. Lie Ming Tang and Judy Kay. 2017. Harnessing Long Term Physical Activity Data—How Long-term Trackers Use Data and How an Adherence-based Interface Supports New Insights. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 2 (2017), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3090091
  39. Yaacov Trope and Nira Liberman. 2010. Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance. Psychological Review 117, 2 (2010), 440–463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963