Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Exploring Plural Perspectives in Self-Tracking Technologies: Trust and Reflection in Self Tracking Practices

Sujay Shalawadi, Rosa van Koningsbruggen, Rikke Hagensby Jensen

TL;DR

A between-group analysis of 156 and 121 participants from Global North and South through two iterative surveys is conducted, uncover significant differences in perceived trust with their STTs and reflection practices between the groups.

Abstract

Contemporary self-tracking technologies (STTs), such as smartwatches and smartphone apps, allow people to become self-aware through the datafication of their everyday lives. However, concerns are emerging over the global north/Western portrayal of the self in the envisionment of STTs. Given the call to diversify participant samples in HCI knowledge building, we see it timely in understanding the influence of ubiquitous STTs in global south societies. We conduct a between-group analysis of 156 and 121 participants from Global North and South through two iterative surveys, respectively. We uncover significant differences in perceived trust with their STTs and reflection practices between the groups. We provide an empirical understanding on advocating for inclusive design strategies that recognize diverse interpretations of STTs and highlight the need to prioritize local values and flexibility in tracking to foster deeper reflection across cultures. Lastly, we discuss our findings in relation to the existing literature and highlight design recommendations for future research.

Exploring Plural Perspectives in Self-Tracking Technologies: Trust and Reflection in Self Tracking Practices

TL;DR

A between-group analysis of 156 and 121 participants from Global North and South through two iterative surveys is conducted, uncover significant differences in perceived trust with their STTs and reflection practices between the groups.

Abstract

Contemporary self-tracking technologies (STTs), such as smartwatches and smartphone apps, allow people to become self-aware through the datafication of their everyday lives. However, concerns are emerging over the global north/Western portrayal of the self in the envisionment of STTs. Given the call to diversify participant samples in HCI knowledge building, we see it timely in understanding the influence of ubiquitous STTs in global south societies. We conduct a between-group analysis of 156 and 121 participants from Global North and South through two iterative surveys, respectively. We uncover significant differences in perceived trust with their STTs and reflection practices between the groups. We provide an empirical understanding on advocating for inclusive design strategies that recognize diverse interpretations of STTs and highlight the need to prioritize local values and flexibility in tracking to foster deeper reflection across cultures. Lastly, we discuss our findings in relation to the existing literature and highlight design recommendations for future research.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 32 sections, 4 figures.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Related Work
  3. Contemporary STTs in HCI
  4. Contemporary Philosophies in Technology and STTs
  5. Trust and Reflection in Inclusive STT Design
  6. Methodology Overview
  7. Survey 1: Perception of trust in Self-Tracking Technologies
  8. Procedure, Participants and Analysis
  9. Findings
  10. Well-Being Practices.
  11. Self-Tracking Practices.
  12. Perceived Trust in STTs.
  13. Survey 2: Reflection Practices with Self-Tracking Technologies
  14. Procedure and Participants
  15. Participants and Analysis
  16. ...and 17 more sections

Figures (4)

  • Figure 1: Density plots showing trust score distributions between the GS and GN. The vertical lines represent the median values (36 and 41) respectively for the GS and GN.
  • Figure 2: The three well-being technologies with explanations which were presented to the participants of SRTF. This visual was used to give participants a reference when thinking about different qualities of well-being technologies (e.g., flexibility).
  • Figure 3: Overview of participants' locations of reflection. Each circle represents a location, which is written next to it. The size of the circle corresponds with how often that location was mentioned. The exact number can be read between the brackets, e.g., 'home (13)'. This indicates that home was mentioned thirteen times.
  • Figure 4: Percentage of responses to the individual Likert questions of the HCTS Survey between GS and GN-participants. The sub-scale are mentioned in brackets to which the statements belong.