skip to main content
10.1145/3290605.3300756acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Does Who Matter?: Studying the Impact of Relationship Characteristics on Receptivity to Mobile IM Messages

Authors Info & Claims
Published:02 May 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

This study examines the characteristics of mobile instant-messaging users' relationships with their social contacts and the effects of both relationship and interruption context on four measures of receptivity: Attentiveness, Responsiveness, Interruptibility, and Opportuneness. Overall, interruption context overshadows relationship characteristics as predictors of all four of these facets of receptivity; this overshadowing was most acute for Interruptibility and Opportuneness, but existed for all factors. In addition, while Mobile Maintenance Expectation and Activity Engagement were negatively correlated with all receptivity measures, each such measure had its own set of predictors, highlighting the conceptual differences among the measures. Finally, delving more deeply into potential relationship effects, we found that a single, simple closeness question was as effective at predicting receptivity as the 12-item Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

paper526p.mp4

mp4

1.3 MB

References

  1. S. Aminikhanghahi, R. Fallahzadeh, M. Sawyer, D. J. Cook, and L. B. Holder. 2017. Thyme: Improving Smartphone Prompt Timing Through Activity Awareness. In 2017 16th IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA), 315--322.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur Aron, Elaine N. Aron, and Danny Smollan. 1992. Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63, 4 (1992), 596--612.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Daniel Avrahami, Susan R. Fussell, and Scott E. Hudson. 2008. IM waiting: timing and responsiveness in semi-synchronous communication. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 285--294. Retrieved February 19, 2014 from http://dl.acm.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/citation.cfm?id=1460610 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Daniel Avrahami and Scott E. Hudson. 2006. Communication Characteristics of Instant Messaging: Effects and Predictions of Interpersonal Relationships. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '06), 505--514. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Yung-Ju Chang and John C. Tang. 2015. Investigating Mobile Users' Ringer Mode Usage and Attentiveness and Responsiveness to Communication. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '15), 6--15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Mary Czerwinski, Edward Cutrell, and Eric Horvitz. 2000. Instant messaging: Effects of relevance and timing. In People and computers XIV: Proceedings of HCI, 71--76.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Steven R. Daugheny. 1988. A questionnaire for the measurement of social networks and social support. FROM THE NEW EDITORS 11, 2 (1988), 20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jayson L Dibble, Timothy R Levine, and Hee Sun Park. 2012. The Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (URCS): reliability and validity evidence for a new measure of relationship closeness. Psychol. Assess. 24, 3 (September 2012), 565--572.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Tobias Dienlin, Philipp K. Masur, and Sabine Trepte. 2017. Reinforcement or Displacement? The Reciprocity of FtF, IM, and SNS Communication and Their Effects on Loneliness and Life Satisfaction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 22, 2 (March 2017), 71--87. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. John Dimmick, John Christian Feaster, and Artemio Ramirez. 2011. The niches of interpersonal media: Relationships in time and space. New Media & Society 13, 8 (December 2011), 1265--1282.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Tilman Dingler and Martin Pielot. 2015. I'll be there for you: Quantifying Attentiveness towards Mobile Messaging. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, 1--5. Retrieved September 25, 2015 from http://dl.acm.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/citation.cfm?id=2785840 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Shelly D. Farnham and Elizabeth F. Churchill. 2011. Faceted Identity, Faceted Lives: Social and Technical Issues with Being Yourself Online. In Proceedings of the ACM 2011 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '11), 359--368. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Joel E. Fischer, Chris Greenhalgh, and Steve Benford. 2011. Investigating Episodes of Mobile Phone Activity As Indicators of Opportune Moments to Deliver Notifications. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '11), 181--190. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Joel E. Fischer, Nick Yee, Victoria Bellotti, Nathan Good, Steve Benford, and Chris Greenhalgh. 2010. Effects of Content and Time of Delivery on Receptivity to Mobile Interruptions. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '10), 103--112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. James Fogarty, Scott E. Hudson, Christopher G. Atkeson, Daniel Avrahami, Jodi Forlizzi, Sara Kiesler, Johnny C. Lee, and Jie Yang. 2005. Predicting human interruptibility with sensors. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 12, 1 (2005), 119--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Claudio Forlivesi and Utku Günay Acer. Mindful Interruptions: A Lightweight System for Managing Interruptibility on Wearables. 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Simon Gächter, Chris Starmer, and Fabio Tufano. 2015. Measuring the Closeness of Relationships: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the ?Inclusion of the Other in the Self" Scale. PLOS ONE 10, 6 (June 2015), e0129478.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Jeffrey A. Hall and Nancy K. Baym. 2012. Calling and texting (too much): Mobile maintenance expectations, (over)dependence, entrapment, and friendship satisfaction. New Media & Society 14, 2 (March 2012), 316--331.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Joyce Ho and Stephen S. Intille. 2005. Using context-aware computing to reduce the perceived burden of interruptions from mobile devices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 909--918. Retrieved February 20, 2014 from http://dl.acm.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/citation.cfm?id=1055100 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. G. H. (Henri) ter Hofte. 2007. Xensible Interruptions from Your Mobile Phone. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '07), 178--181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Scott E Hudson, James Fogarty, Christopher G Atkeson, Daniel Avrahami, Jodi Forlizzi, Sara Kiesler, Johnny C Lee, and Jie Yang. Predicting Human Interruptibility with Sensors: A Wizard of Oz Feasibility Study. 8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Shamsi T. Iqbal and Brian P. Bailey. 2008. Effects of intelligent notification management on users and their tasks. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 93-- 102. Retrieved October 24, 2015 from http://dl.acm.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/citation.cfm?id=1357070 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Shamsi T. Iqbal and Eric Horvitz. 2010. Notifications and Awareness: A Field Study of Alert Usage and Preferences. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '10), 27--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Ellen Isaacs, Alan Walendowski, Steve Whittaker, Diane J. Schiano, and Candace Kamm. 2002. The Character, Functions, and Styles of Instant Messaging in the Workplace. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '02), 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Kyung-Hee Kim and Haejin Yun. 2007. Cying for Me, Cying for Us: Relational Dialectics in a Korean Social Network Site. J Comput Mediat Commun 13, 1 (October 2007), 298--318. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Richard Ling and Birgitte Yttri. 2002. 10 Hyper--coordination via mobile phones in Norway. Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance 139, (2002). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Lisa M. Mai, Rainer Freudenthaler, Frank M. Schneider, and Peter Vorderer. 2015. "I know you've seen it!" Individual and social factors for users' chatting behavior on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior 49, Supplement C (August 2015), 296--302. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Peter V. Marsden and Karen E. Campbell. 1984. Measuring Tie Strength. Soc Forces 63, 2 (December 1984), 482--501.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Abhinav Mehrotra, Mirco Musolesi, Robert Hendley, and Veljko Pejovic. 2015. Designing Content-driven Intelligent Notification Mechanisms for Mobile Applications. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '15), 813--824. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Abhinav Mehrotra, Veljko Pejovic, Jo Vermeulen, Robert Hendley, and Mirco Musolesi. 2016. My Phone and Me: Understanding People's Receptivity to Mobile Notifications. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16), 1021--1032. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Henry Navarro, Giovanna Miritello, Arturo Canales, and Esteban Moro. 2017. Temporal patterns behind the strength of persistent ties. EPJ Data Sci. 6, 1 (December 2017), 31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Tadashi Okoshi, Julian Ramos, Hiroki Nozaki, Jin Nakazawa, Anind K. Dey, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2015. Reducing Users' Perceived Mental Effort Due to Interruptive Notifications in Multi-device Mobile Environments. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '15), 475--486. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Fatih Kursat Ozenc and Shelly D. Farnham. 2011. Life "modes" in social media. In Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '11, 561.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Chunjong Park, Junsung Lim, Juho Kim, Sung-Ju Lee, and Dongman Lee. 2017. Don'T Bother Me. I'M Socializing!: A Breakpoint-Based Smartphone Notification System. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17), 541--554. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Malcolm R Parks and Kory Floyd. 2006. Making Friends in Cyberspace. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 1, 4 (2006), 0--0.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Veljko Pejovic and Mirco Musolesi. 2014. InterruptMe: Designing Intelligent Prompting Mechanisms for Pervasive Applications. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '14), 897--908. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Veljko Pejovic, Mirco Musolesi, and Abhinav Mehrotra. 2015. Investigating The Role of Task Engagement in Mobile Interruptibility. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct (MobileHCI '15), 1100--1105. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Jonathan Pettigrew. 2009. Text Messaging and Connectedness Within Close Interpersonal Relationships. Marriage & Family Review 45, 6--8 (August 2009), 697--716.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Martin Pielot. 2014. Large-scale Evaluation of Call-availability Prediction. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '14), 933--937. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Martin Pielot, Bruno Cardoso, Kleomenis Katevas, Joan Serrà, Aleksandar Matic, and Nuria Oliver. 2017. Beyond Interruptibility: Predicting Opportune Moments to Engage Mobile Phone Users. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 1, 3 (September 2017), 91:1--91:25. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Martin Pielot, Karen Church, and Rodrigo de Oliveira. 2014. An Insitu Study of Mobile Phone Notifications. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Human-computer Interaction with Mobile Devices & Services (MobileHCI '14), 233--242. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Martin Pielot, Rodrigo de Oliveira, Haewoon Kwak, and Nuria Oliver. 2014. Didn't you see my message?: predicting attentiveness to mobile instant messages. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems, 3319--3328. Retrieved November 5, 2014 from http://dl.acm.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/citation.cfm?id=2556973 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Martin Pielot, Amalia Vradi, and Souneil Park. Dismissed! A Detailed Exploration of How Mobile Phone Users Handle Push Notifications. 11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Benjamin Poppinga, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2014. SensorBased identification of opportune Moments for triggering notifications. Pervasive Computing, IEEE 13, 1 (2014), 22--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Artemio Ramirez and Kathy Broneck. 2009. 'IM me': Instant messaging as relational maintenance and everyday communication. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 26, 2--3 (March 2009), 291--314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Sam G. B. Roberts and Robin I. M. Dunbar. 2011. Communication in social networks: Effects of kinship, network size, and emotional closeness. Personal Relationships 18, 3 (September 2011), 439--452.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Stephanie Rosenthal, Anind K. Dey, and Manuela Veloso. 2011. Using Decision-Theoretic Experience Sampling to Build Personalized Mobile Phone Interruption Models. In Pervasive Computing, Kent Lyons, Jeffrey Hightower and Elaine M. Huang (eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 170--187. Retrieved February 19, 2014 from http://link.springer.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/chapter/10.1007/978--3642--21726--5_11 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Erin K Ruppel, Tricia J Burke, and Maura R Cherney. 2017. Channel complementarity and multiplexity in long-distance friends' patterns of communication technology use. New Media & Society (March 2017), 1461444817699995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Alireza Sahami Shirazi, Niels Henze, Tilman Dingler, Martin Pielot, Dominik Weber, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2014. Large-scale Assessment of Mobile Notifications. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14), 3055-- 3064. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Hillol Sarker, Moushumi Sharmin, Amin Ahsan Ali, Md. Mahbubur Rahman, Rummana Bari, Syed Monowar Hossain, and Santosh Kumar. 2014. Assessing the Availability of Users to Engage in Justin-time Intervention in the Natural Environment. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '14), 909--920. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Florian Schulze and Georg Groh. 2014. Studying How Character of Conversation Affects Personal Receptivity to Mobile Notifications. In Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 32Nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '14), 1729--1734. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Florian Schulze and Georg Groh. 2016. Conversational Context Helps Improve Mobile Notification Management. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '16), 518--528. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Alireza Sahami Shirazi and Niels Henze. 2015. Assessment of Notifications on Smartwatches. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct (MobileHCI '15), 1111--1116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Takahiro Tanaka and Kinya Fujita. 2011. Study of User Interruptibility Estimation Based on Focused Application Switching. In Proceedings of the ACM 2011 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '11), 721--724. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Liam D. Turner, Stuart M. Allen, and Roger M. Whitaker. 2015. Push or Delay? Decomposing Smartphone Notification Response Behaviour. In Human Behavior Understanding. Springer, Cham, 69-- 83. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Jessica Vitak. 2014. Facebook Makes the Heart Grow Fonder: Relationship Maintenance Strategies Among Geographically Dispersed and Communication-restricted Connections. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '14), 842--853. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Peter Vorderer, Dorothée Hefner, Leonard Reinecke, and Christoph Klimmt (Eds.). 2017. Permanently Online, Permanently Connected: Living and Communicating in a POPC World (1 edition ed.). Routledge, New York?; London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Jason Wiese, Patrick Gage Kelley, Lorrie Faith Cranor, Laura Dabbish, Jason I. Hong, and John Zimmerman. 2011. Are You Close with Me? Are You Nearby?: Investigating Social Groups, Closeness, and Willingness to Share. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '11), 197--206. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Jason Wiese, Jun-Ki Min, Jason I. Hong, and John Zimmerman. 2015. "You Never Call, You Never Write": Call and SMS Logs Do Not Always Indicate Tie Strength. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15), 765--774. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Fengpeng Yuan, Xianyi Gao, and Janne Lindqvist. 2017. How Busy Are You?: Predicting the Interruptibility Intensity of Mobile Users. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17), 5346--5360. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Persistence of social signatures in human communication | PNAS. Retrieved September 21, 2018 from http://www.pnas.org/content/111/3/942Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Does Who Matter?: Studying the Impact of Relationship Characteristics on Receptivity to Mobile IM Messages

    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
      CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2019
      9077 pages
      ISBN:9781450359702
      DOI:10.1145/3290605

      Copyright © 2019 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: 2 May 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '19 Paper Acceptance Rate703of2,958submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format