skip to main content
10.1145/2800835.2804397acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Ask, but don't interrupt: the case for interruptibility-aware mobile experience sampling

Published:07 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

The mobile phone-based Experience Sampling Method (ESM) enables in situ recording of human behaviour and experience by querying users, via their smartphones, anywhere and anytime. Sampling can happen on a previously unimaginable scale, and across a diverse pool of participants. Therefore, mobile ESM is not limited to capturing users' manual responses, as the surrounding context can be automatically captured by mobile sensors. However, obtaining high quality data with ESM is challenging, as users may fail to respond honestly, or may even ignore the questionnaire prompts if they perceive the study as too burdensome. In this paper, we discuss the potential of using interruptibility prediction models to deliver mobile ESM questionnaires at opportune moments, and thus improve the effectiveness of a study. We examine context prediction and interruptibility inference, which are fundamental challenges that need we need to overcome in order to make mobile ESMs better aligned with a user's lifestyle, and consequently paint a truthful picture of a user's behaviour.

References

  1. Barrett, L. F., and Barrett, D. J. An introduction to computerized experience sampling in psychology. Social Science Computer Review 19, 2 (2001), 175--185. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bolger, N., Davis, A., and Rafaeli, E. Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual review of psychology 54, 1 (2003), 579--616.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Briggs, C. L. Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social science research. Cambridge University Press, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Clark, L., and Watson, D. Mood and the Mundane: Relations Between Daily Life and Self-Reported Mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 2 (1988), 296--308.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Consolvo, S., McDonald, D. W., Toscos, T., Chen, M. Y., Froehlich, J., Harrison, B., Klasnja, P., LaMarca, A., LeGrand, L., Libby, R., et al. Activity Sensing in the Wild: a Field Trial of UbiFit Garden. In CHI'08 (Florence, Italy, April 2008). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Consolvo, S., and Walker, M. Using the experience sampling method to evaluate ubicomp applications. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2 (2003), 24--31. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M., and Larson, R. The experience sampling method. New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science 15 (1983), 41--56.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Fischer, J. E., Greenhalgh, C., and Benford, S. Investigating episodes of mobile phone activity as indicators of opportune moments to deliver notifications. In MobileHCI'11 (Stockholm, Sweden, September 2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Froehlich, J., Chen, M. Y., Consolvo, S., Harrison, B., and Landay, J. A. MyExperience: A System for In Situ Tracing and Capturing of User Feedback on Mobile Phones. In MobiSys'07 (Puerto Rico, USA, June 2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Froehlich, J., Chen, M. Y., Smith, I. E., and Potter, F. Voting with your feet: An investigative study of the relationship between place visit behavior and preference. In UbiComp'06. Springer, 2006, 333--350. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hicks, J., Ramanathan, N., Kim, D., Monibi, M., Selsky, J., Hansen, M., and Estrin, D. AndWellness: An Open Mobile System for Activity and Experience Sampling. In WirelessHealth'10 (La Jolla, CA, USA, October 2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hsieh, G., Li, I., Dey, A., Forlizzi, J., and Hudson, S. E. Using visualizations to increase compliance in experience sampling. In UbiComp'08 (Seoul, South Korea, September 2008). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., and Stone, A. A. A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science 306, 5702 (2004), 1776--1780.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Khan, V.-J., Markopoulos, P., Eggen, B., IJsselsteijn, W., and de Ruyter, B. Reconexp: a way to reduce the data loss of the experiencing sampling method. In MobileHCI'08 (Amsterdam, Netherlands, September 2008). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Lathia, N., Rachuri, K. K., Mascolo, C., and Rentfrow, P. J. Contextual dissonance: Design bias in sensor-based experience sampling methods. In UbiComp'13 (September 2013), 183--192. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Mehrotra, A., Musolesi, M., Hendley, R., and Pejovic, V. Designing Content-driven Intelligent Notification Mechanisms for Mobile Applications. In UbiComp'15 (Osaka, Japan, September 2015). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Mehrotra, A., Pejovic, V., and Musolesi, M. SenSocial: A Middleware for Integrating Online Social Networks and Mobile Sensing Data Streams. In Middleware'14 (Bordeaux, France, December 2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Peifer, J., and Garrett, K. Best Practices for Working with Opt-In Online Panels.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Pejovic, V., and Musolesi, M. Interruptme: designing intelligent prompting mechanisms for pervasive applications. In UbiComp'14 (Seattle, WA, USA, September 2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Rachuri, K. K., Musolesi, M., Mascolo, C., Rentfrow, P. J., Longworth, C., and Aucinas, A. EmotionSense: A Mobile Phones based Adaptive Platform for Experimental Social Psychology Research. In UbiComp'10 (Copenhagen, Denmark, September 2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Salovaara, A., Oulasvirta, A., and Jacucci, G. The panopticon?: a method for observing inter-group interactions. In CHI'06 Workshop on Reality Testing (Montreal, Canada, April 2006).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Scellato, S., Musolesi, M., Mascolo, C., Latora, V., and A., C. Nextplace: A spatio-temporal prediction framework for pervasive systems. In Pervasive'11 (San Francisco, CA, USA, June 2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Schön, D. A. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action, vol. 5126. Basic books, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Scollon, C. N., Prieto, C.-K., and Diener, E. Experience sampling: promises and pitfalls, strength and weaknesses. In Assessing well-being. Spinger, 2009, 157--180.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Ask, but don't interrupt: the case for interruptibility-aware mobile experience sampling

          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
            UbiComp/ISWC'15 Adjunct: Adjunct Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers
            September 2015
            1626 pages
            ISBN:9781450335751
            DOI:10.1145/2800835

            Copyright © 2015 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 the author(s) 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: 7 September 2015

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate764of2,912submissions,26%

            Upcoming Conference

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader