skip to main content
10.1145/2998181.2998350acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Design Considerations for Social Fitness Applications: Comparing Chronically Ill Patients and Healthy Adults

Published:25 February 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper presents findings from a two-month comparative study involving a total of 36 participants using a social fitness application called HealthyTogether. Our aim was to understand whether and how patients with chronic diseases and healthy adults respond differently to social incentives, such as competition, cooperation, and accountability, and how these incentives could relate to their engagement in physical activities. We found that community leaderboard served different goals: healthy adults mainly used it to compete with others, and patients used it to validate their normalcy. For the patients, pairing up with strong ties fostered fulfilling fitness goals, while exercising with strangers diminished them. This study shows that social fitness application design for patients should take into account their need for support from communities and close relationships. Furthermore, our findings point towards opportunities for leveraging and modifying existing social fitness applications for patients' health management.

References

  1. Paul Adams. 2011. Grouped: How small groups of friends are the key to influence on the social web. New Riders.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Aino Ahtinen, Minna Isomursu, Muzayun Mukhtar, Jani Mäntyjärvi, Jonna Häkkilä, and Jan Blom. 2009. Designing social features for mobile and ubiquitous wellness applications. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM '09), 10 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Noor Ali-Hasan, Diana Gavales, Andrew Peterson, and Matthew Raw. 2006. Fitster: social fitness information visualizer. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '06), 17951800. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Apple. 2016. IOS 9 -- Health -- Apple. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://www.apple.com/ios/health/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Paul Araiza, Hilary Hewes, Carrie Gashetewa, Chantal A. Vella, and Mark R. Burge. 2006. Efficacy of a pedometer-based physical activity program on parameters of diabetes control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Metabolism 55, 10: 1382--1387.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Manuel Barrera, Russell E. Glasgow, H. Garth Mckay, Shawn M. Boles, and Edward G. Feil. 2002. Do Internet-Based Support Interventions Change Perceptions of Social Support?: An Experimental Trial of Approaches for Supporting Diabetes Self-Management. American journal of community psychology 30, 5: 637--654.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Gary Bornstein, Uri Gneezy, and Rosmarie Nagel. 2002. The effect of intergroup competition on group coordination: An experimental study. Games and Economic Behavior 41, 1: 1--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Taj Campbell, Brian Ngo, and James Fogarty. 2008. Game design principles in everyday fitness applications. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW '08), 249--252. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C-HIT. 2015. Millennials Embrace Mobile Health And Fitness Apps. Retrieved August 8, 2016 from http://chit.org/2015/07/09/millennials-embrace-mobile-healthand-fitness-apps/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yu Chen and Pearl Pu. 2014. HealthyTogether: exploring social incentives for mobile fitness applications. In Proceedings of the Second International Symposium of Chinese CHI (Chinese CHI '14), 25--34. 10.1145/2592235.2592240 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Lucas Colusso, Gary Hsieh, and Sean A. Munson. 2016. Designing Closeness to Increase Gamers' Performance. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16), 3020--3024. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Sunny Consolvo, Katherine Everitt, Ian Smith, and James A. Landay. 2006. Design requirements for technologies that encourage physical activity. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06), 457--466. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. GoalSponsor. 2016. GoalSponsor Homepage. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from https://www.goalsponsors.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Michele Heisler, and John D. Piette. 2005. "I Help You, and You Help Me" Facilitated Telephone Peer Support Among Patients With Diabetes. The Diabetes Educator 31, 6: 869--879.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. John P. Higgins. 2016. Smartphone applications for patients' health and fitness. The American journal of medicine 129, 1: 11--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Victoria Hollis, Artie Konrad, and Steve Whittaker. 2015. Change of Heart: Emotion Tracking to Promote Behavior Change. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15), 2643--2652. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Margaret Schneider Jamner, Donna Spruijt-Metz, Stan Bassin, and Dan M. Cooper. 2004. A controlled evaluation of a school-based intervention to promote physical activity among sedentary adolescent females: project FAB. Journal of Adolescent Health 34, 4: 279289.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Predrag Klasnja, Sunny Consolvo, and Wanda Pratt. 2011. How to evaluate technologies for health behavior change in HCI research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3063--3072. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Emily Knight, Melanie I. Stuckey, Harry Prapavessis, and Robert J. Petrella. 2015. Public health guidelines for physical activity: Is there an app for that? A review of android and apple app stores. JMIR mHealth and uHealth3, 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Robert E. Kraut, Paul Resnick, Sara Kiesler, Moira Burke, Yan Chen, Niki Kittur, Joseph Konstan, Yuqing Ren, and John Riedl. 2012. Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. James J. Lin, Lena Mamykina, Silvia Lindtner, Gregory Delajoux, and Henry B. Strub. 2006. Fish'n'Steps: encouraging physical activity with an interactive computer game. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp'06), 261--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Leslie S. Liu, Kori M. Inkpen, and Wanda Pratt. 2015. "I'm Not Like My Friends": Understanding How Children with a Chronic Illness Use Technology to Maintain Normalcy. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15), 1527--1539. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Andrew Macvean and Judy Robertson. 2013. Understanding exergame users' physical activity, motivation and behavior over time. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 1251--1260. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Lena Mamykina, Elizabeth D. Mynatt, and David R. Kaufman. 2006. Investigating health management practices of individuals with diabetes. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06), Rebecca Grinter, Thomas Rodden, Paul Aoki, Ed Cutrell, Robin Jeffries, and Gary Olson (Eds.), 927--936. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Siobhan K. McMahon, Beth Lewis, Michael Oakes, Weihua Guan, Jean F. Wyman, and Alexander J. Rothman. 2016. Older Adults? Experiences Using a Commercially Available Monitor to Self-Track Their Physical Activity. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 4, 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Andrew D. Miller and Elizabeth D. Mynatt. "StepStream: a school-based pervasive social fitness system for everyday adolescent health." Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. MobileHealthNews. 2016. Study: 12 percent of US consumers own a fitness band or smartwatch. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://mobihealthnews.com/content/study-12-percentus-consumers-own-fitness-band-or-smartwatch.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. François Modave, Jiang Bian, Trevor Leavitt, Jennifer Bromwell, Charles Harris III, and Heather Vincent. 2015. Low Quality of Free Coaching Apps With Respect to the American College of Sports Medicine Guidelines: A Review of Current Mobile Apps. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 3, 3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Florian Mueller, Frank Vetere, Martin Gibbs, Darren Edge, Stefan Agamanolis, Jennifer Sheridan, and Jeffrey Heer. 2012. Balancing exertion experiences. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12), 1853--1862. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Sean A. Munson, Erin Krupka, Caroline Richardson, and Paul Resnick. 2015. Effects of Public Commitments and Accountability in a TechnologySupported Physical Activity Intervention. InProceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15), 1135--1144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. John A. Naslund, Kelly A. Aschbrenner, and Stephen J. Bartels. 2016. Wearable devices and smartphones for activity tracking among people with serious mental illness. Mental health and physical activity, 10, pp.1017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. OECD. 2015. Adult Obesity Causes & Consequences. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult/causes.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. OECD. 2015. Obesity and the Economics of Prevention. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://www.oecd.org/health/health-systems/obesityand-the-economics-of-prevention-9789264084865en.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Ari H. Pollack, Uba Backonja, Andrew D. Miller, Sonali R. Mishra, Maher Khelifi, Logan Kendall, and Wanda Pratt. 2016. Closing the Gap: Supporting Patients' Transition to Self-Management after Hospitalization. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16), 5324--5336. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Chris Preist, Elaine Massung, and David Coyle. 2014. Competing or aiming to be average?: normification as a means of engaging digital volunteers. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing (CSCW '14), 1222--1233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Brian K. Smith, Jeana Frost, Meltem Albayrak, and Rajneesh Sudhakar. 2007. Integrating glucometers and digital photography as experience capture tools to enhance patient understanding and communication of diabetes self-management practices. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. 11, 4, 273--286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Statista. 2016. Market reach of the most popular Android app categories worldwide as of March 2016. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://www.statista.com/statistics/200855/favouritesmartphone-app-categories-by-share-of-smartphoneusers/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Stickk. 2016. Stickk.com. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://www.stickk.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Emily Sun, Brooke Jones, Stefano Traca, and Maarten W. Bos. "Leaderboard Position Psychology: Counterfactual Thinking." In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1217--1222. ACM, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Tammy Toscos, Anne Faber, Shunying An, and Mona Praful Gandhi. 2006. Chick clique: persuasive technology to motivate teenage girls to exercise. In CHI '06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '06), 1873--1878. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Henk A. van Dam, Frans G. van der Horst, Lut Knoops, Richard M. Ryckman, Harry FJM Crebolder, and Bart HW van den Borne. 2005. Social support in diabetes: a systematic review of controlled intervention studies. Patient education and counseling 59, 1: 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Geert Verbeke, and Geert Molenberghs. 2009. Linear mixed models for longitudinal data. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. World Health Organization. Physical Activity. Retrieved May 27, 2016 from http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/pa/en/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Design Considerations for Social Fitness Applications: Comparing Chronically Ill Patients and Healthy Adults

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CSCW '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
      February 2017
      2556 pages
      ISBN:9781450343350
      DOI:10.1145/2998181

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 February 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CSCW '17 Paper Acceptance Rate183of530submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CSCW '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader