Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Towards
Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design
of Behavior Change Technologies
Evangelos Karapanos
Ruben Gouveia
Assistant Professor
UTwente
Ana Caraban
PhD Candidate
M-ITI
Chrysanthi
Konstanti
PhD Candidate
CUT
Loukas
Co...
1200
steps
Behavior Change Technologies in the context
of Physical Activity Promotion
tiny share of U.S. workers and use 5 million tractors in place of the horses
and mules of earlier days.
As a result of thi...
1200
steps
Physically active jobs make less than 20% of the
occupations (1950s: 50%)
American Heart Association (2015) The...
1200
steps
Globally, 1 in 4 adults is not active enough.
1200
steps
a dose-response association between sitting
time and mortality from all causes and CVD,
independent of leisure ...
1200
stepsFrom infectious diseases (as the primary cause
of illness, mortality, and healthcare
expenditures), to chronic, ...
1200
steps
From cure to prevention
Gordon Brown: ”NHS [National Health Service] of
the future [being] one of patient power...
1200
steps
Behavior Change Technologies for physical
activity promotion can be more than gadgets
1200
steps
Behaviour Change Technologies
But, are those technologies grounded on
theories of behavior change?
•Cowan et al. (2013): mean behavioural score of 10/100
•Azar et al. (2013): mean behavioural score of 8.1/100
•Riley et al...
83 Theories of Behavior & Behavior Change

Davis et al., 2015
"designers and researchers are having a hard time
deciding w...
Can we use design cards to make theory more
accessible during design meetings?
Design cards as a design tool for providing for knowledge
transfer - the translation of research findings from one discipli...
Behavior Change Techniques Taxonomy (v1) Michie et al. (2013)
Behavior Change Design Cards
Behavior Change Design Cards
Transtheoretical model / Stages of behavior change
Figure reproduced from Kersten-van Dijk et ...
Behavior Change Design Cards
5 stage of change cards 33 technique cards
Pre-contemplation
The individual has no intention ...
The Nudge Deck
Nudging

any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people's behavior in a
predictable way without f...
Simply moving bottles of water (instead of soda bottles) so that they were at eye-level in
the kitchens at Google increase...
we still lack an understanding of how to design
effective technology-mediated nudges
• the why of nudging (i.e., which cogn...
CHI, 32 papers Persuasive, 10 Ubicomp, 5 Others, 24
Venues
71
papers selected
Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., &...
Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging ...
Reminding the consequences
Availability heuristic: our tendency to judge the probability of
occurrence of an event based o...
The Nudge Deck
Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Me...
Defining the problem and laying out directions for design
“I see these cards as personas, one does not have the motivation…...
Did cards support the design process?
Figure 4. Participants’ self-reported Self-Efficacy increased after the
design sessio...
Is theory sufficient?
Empirically Grounded Design
1200
steps
User engagement
Gouveia, R., Karapanos, E., & Hassenzahl, M. (2015). How do we engage with activity trackers? A...
1200
steps
1. Did people adopt the technology?
2. Was their use of the technology in line with what expected from theory?
...
1. Did people adopt the technology?
One third stop using their devices within
6 months of receiving it.
Hammond, 2014.
do activity trackers create new practices up to
a point they are no longer necessary or fail
to address users needs?
goal setting
informational and
persuasive messages
contextualising historical
data through location
how frequently do people engage
with their historical information?
256 users downloaded Habito over
the course of 10 months
none of these users were recruited or rewarded towards usage
62% (159) stopped using Habito
within their first week of use
97 adopters, which used the app for more than a week
1a. Did all people equally adopt the
technology?
stages of behavior change
questionnaire
understanding how different stages of ‘readiness’ impacted adoption
precontemplatio...
precontemplation
5 of 36, 14%
contemplation
preparation
action
maintenance
14 of 26, 54%
19 of 33, 58%
7 of 24, 29%
4 of 1...
2. Was their use of the technology in line
with what expected from theory?
Figure reproduced from Li et al. (2010)
Li, I., Dey, A., & Forlizzi, J. (2010, April). A stage-based model of personal inf...
Usage sessions
historical information was only accessed
in 30% of all usage sessions
even more, 87% of these concerned an ...
Glances
sessions in which users open and
close Habito with no additional
actions or inputs
57%, 5 sec
Review Engage
22%,12...
Glances
73%
Review Engage
18% 9%
Usage sessions
Figure reproduced from Li et al. (2010)
Li, I., Dey, A., & Forlizzi, J. (2010, April). A stage-based model of personal inf...
Exploring the Design Space of Glanceable
Feedback for Physical Activity Trackers
Ruben Gouveia, Fábio Pereira, Evangelos K...
#1 what are some of the attributes that GFI should have for activity
trackers?
#1 Abstract
#2 Integrate with existing activities
#3 Support comparison to targets and norms
#4 Actionable
#5 Lead to chec...
deployment
TickTock portrays periods in
which one was physically
active over the past hour
deployment
Normly compares one’s goal
completion to that of others
having a similar walking goal
2. Can we measure the proximal impact of
each engagement on people’s behaviors?
Those interfaces did not increase,

but they redistributed physical activity.
participants were more
likely to initiate a new
walk when closely ahead
or behind of others
results
Things can go wild in the wild
Towards
Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design
of Behavior Change Technologies
Evangelos Karapanos
Thank you
Towards 
Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design of Behavior Change Technologies
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

1

Share

Download to read offline

Towards 
Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design of Behavior Change Technologies

Download to read offline

Behavior Change Technologies can address key societal problems – from global warming, to the rising cost of healthcare worldwide, and emerging concerns of the technological age, such as online privacy and the propagation of misinformation online. But are the technologies we develop grounded on theories of behavior change? And, if not, why? In this talk we will argue for the need for theoretically and empirically grounded design, and will present our recent work on making behavioral theory accessible to design teams, along with empirical studies of the adoption, engagement with, and impact of behavior change technologies in the context of health.

** Presentation given at the "Considering Health Behavior Change" Symposium, on Feb 11, 2020, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Towards 
Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design of Behavior Change Technologies

  1. 1. Towards Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design of Behavior Change Technologies Evangelos Karapanos
  2. 2. Ruben Gouveia Assistant Professor UTwente Ana Caraban PhD Candidate M-ITI Chrysanthi Konstanti PhD Candidate CUT Loukas Constantinou PhD Candidate CUT
  3. 3. 1200 steps Behavior Change Technologies in the context of Physical Activity Promotion
  4. 4. tiny share of U.S. workers and use 5 million tractors in place of the horses and mules of earlier days. As a result of this transformation, U.S. agriculture has become increasingly efficient and has contributed to the overall growth of the U.S. economy. Output from U.S. farms has grown dramatically, allowing consumers to spend an increasingly smaller portion of their income on food and freeing a large share of the population to enter nonfarm occupations that have supported economic growth and development. As a part of the transforma- tion spurred by technological innovation and changing market conditions, production agriculture has become a smaller player in the national and rural economies. While the more broadly defined food and agriculture sector continues to play a strong role in the national economy, farming has progressively contributed a smaller share of gross domestic product (GDP) and employed a smaller share of the labor force over the course of the century (see box, “Farming’s changing role in the Nation’s economy”). Over the same period, the share of the U.S. population living on farms also declined (fig. 1), as did agriculture’s central role in the rural economy; while farming-dependent counties once comprised most of the rural economy, only 20 percent of nonmetro counties were considered farming-dependent in 2000 (fig. 2). The altered role of farming in the overall economy reflects changes at the farm and farm household level. Since 1900, the number of farms has fallen by 63 percent, while the average farm size has risen 67 percent (fig. 3). Farm operations have become increasingly specialized as well (fig. 4)— from an average of about five commodities per farm in 1900 to about one per farm in 2000—reflecting the production and marketing efficiencies gained by concentration on fewer commodities, as well as the effects of farm price and income policies that have reduced the risk of depending on returns from only one or a few crops. All of this has taken place with almost no variation in the amount of land being farmed. Farm households have adapted as dramatic increases in productivity have reduced the need for household labor on the farm, and as alternative employment opportunities have developed in nearby rural and metro economies. Although measures of off-farm work and income have varied over the century, making comparisons over time difficult, about a third of 1900 41 percent of workforce employed in agriculture 1930 21.5 percent of workforce employed in agriculture Agricultural GDP as a share of total GDP, 7.7 percent 1945 16 percent of the total labor force employed in agriculture Agricultural GDP as a share of total GDP, 6.8 percent 1970 4 percent of employed labor force worked in agriculture Agricultural GDP as a share of total GDP, 2.3 percent 2000/02 1.9 percent of employed labor force worked in agriculture (2000) Agricultural GDP as a share of total GDP (2002), 0.7 percent Source: Compiled by Economic Research Service, USDA. Share of workforce employed in agricul- ture, for 1900-1970, Historical Statistics of the United States; for 2000, calculated using data from Census of Population; agricultural GDP as part of total GDP, calcu- lated using data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Farming’s changing role in the Nation’s economy gure 2 onmetro farming-dependent counties, 1950 and 2000 2000 1950 2000 Nonmetro farming-dependent Other nonmetro Metro Source: Economic Research Service, USDA. Farming-dependent counties are defined by ERS. Dimitri, C., Effland, A., Conklin, N. (2005) The 20th Century Transformation of U.S. Agriculture and Farm Policy, Economic Information Bulletin Number 3. US workforce employed in agriculture dropped from 41% to 1.9% in the 20th century 2000 Nonmetro farming-dependent Other nonmetro Metro Source: Economic Research Service, USDA. Farming-dependent counties are defined by ERS. For 1950, at least 20 percent of income in the county was derived from agriculture. For 2000, either 15 percent or more of average annual labor and proprietors' earnings were derived from farming during 1998-2000 or 15 percent or more of employed residents worked in farm occupa- tions. Metro/nonmetro status is based on the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) June 2003 classification.
  5. 5. 1200 steps Physically active jobs make less than 20% of the occupations (1950s: 50%) American Heart Association (2015) The Price of Inactivity, Retrieved online from Heart.org, 4 February 2020.
  6. 6. 1200 steps Globally, 1 in 4 adults is not active enough.
  7. 7. 1200 steps a dose-response association between sitting time and mortality from all causes and CVD, independent of leisure time physical activity. those who spent most of their time sitting were 50% more likely to die during the follow-up than those that sit the least, even after controlling for age, smoking, and physical activity levels. Katzmarzyk, P. T., Church, T. S., Craig, C. L., & Bouchard, C. (2009). Sitting time and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 41(5), 998-1005.
  8. 8. 1200 stepsFrom infectious diseases (as the primary cause of illness, mortality, and healthcare expenditures), to chronic, non- communicable conditions (‘diseases of lifestyle’)
  9. 9. 1200 steps From cure to prevention Gordon Brown: ”NHS [National Health Service] of the future [being] one of patient power, with patients engaged and taking control over their own health and healthcare".
  10. 10. 1200 steps Behavior Change Technologies for physical activity promotion can be more than gadgets
  11. 11. 1200 steps Behaviour Change Technologies
  12. 12. But, are those technologies grounded on theories of behavior change?
  13. 13. •Cowan et al. (2013): mean behavioural score of 10/100 •Azar et al. (2013): mean behavioural score of 8.1/100 •Riley et al. (2011): the use of theory varied substantially per domain: •1/20 of disease management interventions were theory based, •0/10 in treatment adherence •7/12 in weight loss •5/7 in smoking cessation Apps lack theoretical content
  14. 14. 83 Theories of Behavior & Behavior Change
 Davis et al., 2015 "designers and researchers are having a hard time deciding with confidence which of the theories and techniques to use in their design and research” Michie & Prestwich (2010) Abundance of theories
  15. 15. Can we use design cards to make theory more accessible during design meetings?
  16. 16. Design cards as a design tool for providing for knowledge transfer - the translation of research findings from one discipline into another (Rogers, 2004) • they make the design process visible and less abstract, • they communicate knowledge between the group members • they increase creativity and idea generation (Wolfer & Merit 2013)
  17. 17. Behavior Change Techniques Taxonomy (v1) Michie et al. (2013) Behavior Change Design Cards
  18. 18. Behavior Change Design Cards Transtheoretical model / Stages of behavior change Figure reproduced from Kersten-van Dijk et al., (2017) Kersten-van Dijk, E. T., Westerink, J. H., Beute, F., & IJsselsteijn, W. A. (2017). Personal informatics, self-insight, and behavior change: A critical review of current literature. Human–Computer Interaction, 32(5-6), 268-296.ISO 690
  19. 19. Behavior Change Design Cards 5 stage of change cards 33 technique cards Pre-contemplation The individual has no intention to change the behavior, yet. NO, NOT ME. Designing for Pre-contemplation How would you increase the user’s awareness of the need for change? How would you lead the user to understand the right decision (i.e. perceived procs and cons of behavior)? person’s belief that they are capable of adopting a new pattern of behavior)? Possible Directions: Show attention to problematic behaviors; informing about long term consequences; think of alternative behaviors; Goal Setting Setting a goal to increase physical activity by walking the dog at the park for 3 miles a day, for 3-4 times a week. the behavior to be achieved or the outcome of the wanted behavior. ActionMaintenanceContemplationPreparationPreContemplation How will you guide the user in setting an appropriate goal? What types of goals are you designing for: behavior (eg. steps) or outcome (e.g. weight loss)? How will the feedback provided challenge the Goal setting HINT: Goals that are self-set, important to effective. ActionMaintenanceContemplationPreparationPreContemplation
  20. 20. The Nudge Deck Nudging
 any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people's behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any option or signicantly changing their economic incentives Thaler and Sunstein (2008) Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human- Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI’19 (p. 503). ACM.
  21. 21. Simply moving bottles of water (instead of soda bottles) so that they were at eye-level in the kitchens at Google increased water uptake by a whopping 47% (Kuang 2012) The Nudge Deck
  22. 22. we still lack an understanding of how to design effective technology-mediated nudges • the why of nudging (i.e., which cognitive biases can nudges combat), • the how of nudging (i.e., what exact mechanisms can nudges employ to incur behavior change) The 23 ways to nudge framework Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human- Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI’19 (p. 503). ACM.
  23. 23. CHI, 32 papers Persuasive, 10 Ubicomp, 5 Others, 24 Venues 71 papers selected Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human- Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI’19 (p. 503). ACM.
  24. 24. Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human- Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI’19 (p. 503). ACM. 23 Ways to Nudge: The Framework What 6 categories Why 15 cognitive biases How 23 nudging mechanisms
  25. 25. Reminding the consequences Availability heuristic: our tendency to judge the probability of occurrence of an event based on the ease at which it can be recalled
  26. 26. The Nudge Deck Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human- Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI’19 (p. 503). ACM.
  27. 27. Defining the problem and laying out directions for design “I see these cards as personas, one does not have the motivation… think of someone like Jennifer” Provided a common vocabulary Jump-off ideation: helped shifted focus when discussion was becoming unproductive “the prize should be something that she likes, based on her preferences … [extended pause] … let’s see this one” Participants did not fixate on the examples provided “I only saw the examples in the beginning. I used to focus on the category and on the questions of the mechanism selected” Facilitate collaborative work and support lateral thinking Design considerations & hints used as heuristics for evaluation Did cards support the design process?
  28. 28. Did cards support the design process? Figure 4. Participants’ self-reported Self-Efficacy increased after the design session across both conditions (control vs experimental) and cases (physical activity vs misinformation). (control vs Nudge Deck) and case (physical activity vs mis- information) as independent variables revealed no sıgnıfıcant main effects for condıtıon (F(1,55) = 0.30, p > .05 , h2 p = .3005, control: M = 7.54, SD = 1.51, Nudge Deck: M = 7.29, SD = 1.17) and for the case (F(1,55) = 2.48, p > .05 , h2 p = .04, physical activity: M = 7.14, SD = 1.37, misinformation: M = 7.66, SD = 1.26), and no interaction effect. th in ca p th (m H A 5 5 in 4 th fe to ca in to u ca “T th H o Figure 4. Participants’ self-reported Self-Efficacy increased after the design session across both conditions (control vs experimental) and cases (physical activity vs misinformation). (control vs Nudge Deck) and case (physical activity vs mis- information) as independent variables revealed no sıgnıfıcant main effects for condıtıon (F(1,55) = 0.30, p > .05 , h2 p = .3005, control: M = 7.54, SD = 1.51, Nudge Deck: M = 7.29, SD = 1.17) and for the case (F(1,55) = 2.48, p > .05 , h2 p = .04, physical activity: M = 7.14, SD = 1.37, misinformation: M = 7.66, SD = 1.26), and no interaction effect. Figure 5. Participants reported significantly higher reward/effort trade- off and perceived expressiveness in the misinformation case. An inter- action effect between case and conditon was observed in related to per- ceived expressiveness. A closer look at the ındıvıdual ıtems of the CSI questıonnaıre revealed a significant effect of the case (misinformation vs physical activity) on expressiveness ("I was able to be very expressive and creative during the activity"; F(1,50) = 5.4, p < .05 , h2 p = .098) and a significant interaction effect between case and condition (F(1,50) = 5.5, p < .05 , h2 p = .099)). Sim- ilarly, we found a significant effect of case on effort/reward trade off ("What I was able to produce was worth the effort I had to exert to produce it"; F(1,55) = 4.4, p < .05 , h2 p = .074). Participants felt more expressive and thought that what the cards (M = 4.9, STD =1.2). Some participants reported feeling overwhelmed at the start of the session, struggling to understand the relation between the different levels of the cards (i.e., triggers, categories and mechanisms). This feel- ing of confusion, however, dissipated as participants started to explore the cards P[7]: “At the beginning it was hard to understand all the cards and to connect the different types of cards but after a while you understand and it helps”, P[3] “The part that was hard was to understand the connection of the different levels”. How did the Nudge Deck influence the quality of design output? Theoretical Grounding Given that participants in the experimental condition were provided with the Nudge Deck, it was natural to expect that their ideas would have a stronger grounding to theory, as compared to the control condition, where participants had no interaction with theoretical content, apart from the definition of nudging and the provision of one example. As expected, ideas produced in the experimental condition were rated as more theoretically grounded than ones produced in the control condition. A two-way ANOVA with theoretical grounding as the dependent variable and condition (control vs Nudge Deck) and case (physical activity vs misinformation) as indepen- dent variables revealed a significant main effect for condition (F(1,19) = 6.3, p < .05 , h2 p = .25, control: M = 4.42, SD = 2.38, experimental: M = 6.91, SD = 2.96) as well as for the case (F(1,19) = 5.6, p < .05 , h2 p = .23, physical activity: M = 4.50, SD = 3.32, misinformation: M = 6.91, SD = 2.96), and no interaction effect (see figure 6). For instance, looking at the control condition, participants in the physical activity case often drew inspiration from their own personal experience using activity trackers and employed features such as prompting (N=6), social comparison and social support (N=6), self-monitoring (N=3), feedback on performance (N=3), goal-setting (N=2) and rewards (N=1). While these features are based on theoretically and empirically grounded behavior change techniques (see [36]), participants only superficially drew on these techniques without much elab- oration on their functioning. For instance, when designing a goal-setting feature, participants did not elaborate on how they will engage users to self-set a concrete, and challenging yet attainable goal, which is considered to be a key predictor to the success of goal-setting [33, 22]. Similarly, when designing for Figure 6. The Nudge Deck led to more theoretically grounded, fit to con- text of use, and creative ideas. Ideas from the misinformation case were more theoretically grounded and creative than ones from the physical activity case. social comparison, they didn’t reflect on ways to support ap- propriate comparisons (e.g., comparisons to users with similar activity level), that have been found to lead to higher perfor- mance [23]. In contrast, ideas resulting from the experimental Fitness to the context of use Drawing on, and combing different mechanisms during ideation made participants better able to design solutions that fit the context of use. A two-way ANOVA with fitness to the context of use as the dependent variable and condition (control vs Nudge Deck) and case (physical activity vs misinformation) as independent variables revealed a significant main effect for condition (F(1,19) = 8.0, p < .05 , h2 p = .30, control: M = 4.42, SD = 2.38, experimental: M = 6.91, SD = 2.96) but not for the case (F(1,19) = 0.4, p > .05 , h2 p = .21, physical activity: M = 4.50, SD = 3.32, misinformation: M = 6.91, SD = 2.96), and no interaction effect. We observed that the cards supported participants in search- ing for strategies and mechanisms that better suit the context under concern. For instance, when designing interventions to promote physical activity, participants would narrow their inquiry based on the most relevant trigger category. Trigger cards, thus, served as a way to understand the problem they wanted to solve (e.g., do users fail to perform sufficient lev- els of physical activity because they lack the motivation, the ability, or do they simply need a reminder?). Based on the answer to the above questions, participants would explore the mechanisms that were most relevant to the identified trigger. Creativity A two-way ANOVA with creativity as the dependent variable and condition (control vs Nudge Deck) and case (physical Quality of ideas Experienced Creativity Self-efficacy
  29. 29. Is theory sufficient?
  30. 30. Empirically Grounded Design
  31. 31. 1200 steps User engagement Gouveia, R., Karapanos, E., & Hassenzahl, M. (2015). How do we engage with activity trackers? A longitudinal study of Habito. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 1305-1316). Gouveia, R., Pereira, F., Karapanos, E., Munson, S. A., & Hassenzahl, M. (2016). Exploring the design space of glanceable feedback for physical activity trackers. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 144-155).
  32. 32. 1200 steps 1. Did people adopt the technology? 2. Was their use of the technology in line with what expected from theory? 3. Can we measure the proximal impact of each engagement on people’s behaviors?
  33. 33. 1. Did people adopt the technology?
  34. 34. One third stop using their devices within 6 months of receiving it. Hammond, 2014.
  35. 35. do activity trackers create new practices up to a point they are no longer necessary or fail to address users needs?
  36. 36. goal setting
  37. 37. informational and persuasive messages
  38. 38. contextualising historical data through location how frequently do people engage with their historical information?
  39. 39. 256 users downloaded Habito over the course of 10 months none of these users were recruited or rewarded towards usage
  40. 40. 62% (159) stopped using Habito within their first week of use 97 adopters, which used the app for more than a week
  41. 41. 1a. Did all people equally adopt the technology?
  42. 42. stages of behavior change questionnaire understanding how different stages of ‘readiness’ impacted adoption precontemplation currently have no intention of being active contemplation not active but intend to be soon preparation trying, but not regularly active action regularly active, but for less than 6 months maintenance regularly active for 6 months or more
  43. 43. precontemplation 5 of 36, 14% contemplation preparation action maintenance 14 of 26, 54% 19 of 33, 58% 7 of 24, 29% 4 of 19, 21% Readiness for use: motivation and adoption
  44. 44. 2. Was their use of the technology in line with what expected from theory?
  45. 45. Figure reproduced from Li et al. (2010) Li, I., Dey, A., & Forlizzi, J. (2010, April). A stage-based model of personal informatics systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 557-566).
  46. 46. Usage sessions historical information was only accessed in 30% of all usage sessions even more, 87% of these concerned an ongoing day
  47. 47. Glances sessions in which users open and close Habito with no additional actions or inputs 57%, 5 sec Review Engage 22%,12 sec 21%,45 sec sessions with at least one additional actions and last up to 22 seconds sessions with at least one additional actions and last more than 22 seconds Usage sessions
  48. 48. Glances 73% Review Engage 18% 9% Usage sessions
  49. 49. Figure reproduced from Li et al. (2010) Li, I., Dey, A., & Forlizzi, J. (2010, April). A stage-based model of personal informatics systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 557-566).
  50. 50. Exploring the Design Space of Glanceable Feedback for Physical Activity Trackers Ruben Gouveia, Fábio Pereira, Evangelos Karapanos, Sean Munson & Marc Hassenzahl 1200 steps
  51. 51. #1 what are some of the attributes that GFI should have for activity trackers?
  52. 52. #1 Abstract #2 Integrate with existing activities #3 Support comparison to targets and norms #4 Actionable #5 Lead to checking habits #6 Act as proxy to further engagement
  53. 53. deployment TickTock portrays periods in which one was physically active over the past hour
  54. 54. deployment Normly compares one’s goal completion to that of others having a similar walking goal
  55. 55. 2. Can we measure the proximal impact of each engagement on people’s behaviors?
  56. 56. Those interfaces did not increase,
 but they redistributed physical activity.
  57. 57. participants were more likely to initiate a new walk when closely ahead or behind of others results
  58. 58. Things can go wild in the wild
  59. 59. Towards Theoretically and Empirically Grounded Design of Behavior Change Technologies Evangelos Karapanos Thank you
  • LamprosRoussos

    Mar. 16, 2020

Behavior Change Technologies can address key societal problems – from global warming, to the rising cost of healthcare worldwide, and emerging concerns of the technological age, such as online privacy and the propagation of misinformation online. But are the technologies we develop grounded on theories of behavior change? And, if not, why? In this talk we will argue for the need for theoretically and empirically grounded design, and will present our recent work on making behavioral theory accessible to design teams, along with empirical studies of the adoption, engagement with, and impact of behavior change technologies in the context of health. ** Presentation given at the "Considering Health Behavior Change" Symposium, on Feb 11, 2020, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

Views

Total views

80

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

2

Actions

Downloads

2

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

1

×