skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Exploring the State-of-Receptivity for mHealth Interventions

Published:14 September 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Recent advancements in sensing techniques for mHealth applications have led to successful development and deployments of several mHealth intervention designs, including Just-In-Time Adaptive Interventions (JITAI). JITAIs show great potential because they aim to provide the right type and amount of support, at the right time. Timing the delivery of a JITAI such as the user is receptive and available to engage with the intervention is crucial for a JITAI to succeed. Although previous research has extensively explored the role of context in users' responsiveness towards generic phone notifications, it has not been thoroughly explored for actual mHealth interventions. In this work, we explore the factors affecting users' receptivity towards JITAIs. To this end, we conducted a study with 189 participants, over a period of 6 weeks, where participants received interventions to improve their physical activity levels. The interventions were delivered by a chatbot-based digital coach -Ally - which was available on Android and iOS platforms.

We define several metrics to gauge receptivity towards the interventions, and found that (1) several participant-specific characteristics (age, personality, and device type) show significant associations with the overall participant receptivity over the course of the study, and that (2) several contextual factors (day/time, phone battery, phone interaction, physical activity, and location), show significant associations with the participant receptivity, in-the-moment. Further, we explore the relationship between the effectiveness of the intervention and receptivity towards those interventions; based on our analyses, we speculate that being receptive to interventions helped participants achieve physical activity goals, which in turn motivated participants to be more receptive to future interventions. Finally, we build machine-learning models to detect receptivity, with up to a 77% increase in F1 score over a biased random classifier.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Ionut Andone, Konrad Blaszkiewicz, Mark Eibes, Boris Trendafilov, Christian Montag, and Alexander Markowetz. 2016. How Age and Gender Affect Smartphone Usage. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct (UbiComp '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 9--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2968219.2971451Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Adrienne Andrew, Gaetano Borriello, and James Fogarty. 2007. Toward a Systematic Understanding of Suggestion Tactics in Persuasive Technologies. In Persuasive Technology, Yvonne de Kort, Wijnand IJsselsteijn, Cees Midden, Berry Eggen, and B. J. Fogg (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 259--270.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Apple. 2018. CMMotionActivityManager. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/coremotion/cmmotionactivitymanager. (2018). [Online; accessed 11-February-2019].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Daniel Avrahami and Scott E Hudson. 2006. Responsiveness in instant messaging: predictive models supporting inter-personal communication. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 731--740.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Stephanie Bauer, Judith de Niet, Reinier Timman, and Hans Kordy. 2010. Enhancement of care through self-monitoring and tailored feedback via text messaging and their use in the treatment of childhood overweight. Patient education and counseling 79, 3 (2010), 315--319.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Dror Ben-Zeev, Christopher J Brenner, Mark Begale, Jennifer Duffecy, David C Mohr, and Kim T Mueser. 2014. Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a smartphone intervention for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia bulletin 40, 6 (2014), 1244--1253.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Sunny Consolvo, David W McDonald, Tammy Toscos, Mike Y Chen, Jon Froehlich, Beverly Harrison, Predrag Klasnja, Anthony LaMarca, Louis LeGrand, Ryan Libby, et al. 2008. Activity Sensing in the Wild: A Field Trial of UbiFit Garden. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 1797--1806.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Google Developers. 2018. Activity Recognition API. https://developers.google.com/location-context/activity-recognition. (2018). [Online; accessed 11-February-2019].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Alexandra Ehrenberg, Suzanna Juckes, Katherine M White, and Shari P Walsh. 2008. Personality and self-esteem as predictors of young people's technology use. Cyberpsychology & behavior 11, 6 (2008), 739--741.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Andreas Filler, Tobias Kowatsch, Severin Haug, Fabian Wahle, Thorsten Staake, and Elgar Fleisch. 2015. MobileCoach: A novel open source platform for the design of evidence-based, scalable and low-cost behavioral health interventions: overview and preliminary evaluation in the public health context. In Wireless Telecommunications Symposium (WTS), 2015. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. 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 International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI). ACM, 181--190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 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 International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI). ACM, 103--112.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. David H Gustafson, Fiona M McTavish, Ming-Yuan Chih, Amy K Atwood, Roberta A Johnson, Michael G Boyle, Michael S Levy, Hilary Driscoll, Steven M Chisholm, Lisa Dillenburg, et al. 2014. A smartphone application to support recovery from alcoholism: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry 71, 5 (2014), 566--572.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. 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 (CHI). ACM, 909--918.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Karen Hovsepian, Mustafa Al'Absi, Emre Ertin, Thomas Kamarck, Motohiro Nakajima, and Santosh Kumar. 2015. cStress: Towards a Gold Standard for Continuous Stress Assessment in the Mobile Environment. Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp) (2015), 493--504. https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2807526Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Abby C King, Eric B Hekler, Lauren A Grieco, Sandra J Winter, Jylana L Sheats, Matthew P Buman, Banny Banerjee, Thomas N Robinson, and Jesse Cirimele. 2013. Harnessing different motivational frames via mobile phones to promote daily physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior in aging adults. PloS one 8, 4 (2013), e62613.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Tobias Kowatsch, Dirk Volland, Iris Shih, Dominik Rüegger, Florian Künzler, Filipe Barata, Andreas Filler, Dirk Büchter, Björn Brogle, Katrin Heldt, et al. 2017. Design and Evaluation of a Mobile Chat App for the Open Source Behavioral Health Intervention Platform MobileCoach. In International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems. Springer, 485--489.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Jan-Niklas Kramer, Florian Künzler, Varun Mishra, Bastien Presset, David Kotz, Shawna Smith, Urte Scholz, and Tobias Kowatsch. 2018. Investigating Intervention Components and Exploring States of Receptivity for a Smartphone App to Promote Physical Activity: Study Protocol of the ALLY Micro-Randomized Trial. JMIR Research Protocols, forthcoming (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Florian Künzler, Jan-Niklas Kramer, and Tobias Kowatsch. 2017. Efficacy of mobile context-aware notification management systems: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. In Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob),. IEEE, 131--138.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Afra Mashhadi, Akhil Mathur, and Fahim Kawsar. 2014. The myth of subtle notifications. In Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication. ACM, 111--114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Abhinav Mehrotra, Mirco Musolesi, Robert Hendley, and Veljko Pejovic. 2015. Designing content-driven intelligent notification mechanisms for mobile applications. In Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 813--824.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Abhinav Mehrotra, Veljko Pejovic, Jo Vermeulen, Robert Hendley, and Mirco Musolesi. 2016. My phone and me: understanding people's receptivity to mobile notiications. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 1021--1032.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Varun Mishra, Byron Lowens, Sarah Lord, Kelly Caine, and David Kotz. 2017. Investigating Contextual Cues As Indicators for EMA Delivery. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Smart & Ambient Notification and Attention Management (UbiTtention). ACM, 935--940. https://doi.org/10.1145/3123024.3124571Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Varun Mishra, Gunnar Pope, Sarah Lord, Stephanie Lewia, Byron Lowens, Kelly Caine, Sougata Sen, Ryan Halter, and David Kotz. 2018. The Case for a Commodity Hardware Solution for Stress Detection. In Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing Adjunct (UbiComp'18). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3267305.3267538Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Varun Mishra, Gunnar Pope, Sarah Lord, Stephanie Lewia, Byron Lowens, Kelly Caine, Sougata Sen, Ryan Halter, and David Kotz. 2019. Continuous Detection of Physiological Stress with Commodity Hardware. ACM Transactions on Computing for Healthcare (HEALTH) 1, 1 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3361562Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Raul Montoliu, Jan Blom, and Daniel Gatica-Perez. 2013. Discovering places of interest in everyday life from smartphone data. Multimedia Tools and Applications 62, 1 (01 Jan 2013), 179--207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-011-0982-zGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Leanne G Morrison, Charlie Hargood, Veljko Pejovic, Adam WA Geraghty, Scott Lloyd, Natalie Goodman, Danius T Michaelides, Anna Weston, Mirco Musolesi, Mark J Weal, et al. 2017. The effect of timing and frequency of push notifications on usage of a smartphone-based stress management intervention: An exploratory trial. PloS one 12, 1 (2017), e0169162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Inbal Nahum-Shani, Eric B Hekler, and Donna Spruijt-Metz. 2015. Building health behavior models to guide the development of just-in-time adaptive interventions: A pragmatic framework. Health Psychology 34, S (2015), 1209.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Inbal Nahum-Shani, Shawna N Smith, Bonnie J Spring, Linda M Collins, Katie Witkiewitz, Ambuj Tewari, and Susan A Murphy. 2016. Just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs) in mobile health: key components and design principles for ongoing health behavior support. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 52, 6 (2016), 446--462.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Heather L. O'Brien and Elaine G. Toms. 2008. What is User Engagement? A Conceptual Framework for Defining User Engagement with Technology. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59, 6 (April 2008), 938--955. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.v59:6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Mikio Obuchi, Wataru Sasaki, Tadashi Okoshi, Jin Nakazawa, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2016. Investigating interruptibility at activity breakpoints using smartphone activity recognition API. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct. ACM, 1602--1607.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  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 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 475--486.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Veljko Pejovic and Mirco Musolesi. 2014. InterruptMe: designing intelligent prompting mechanisms for pervasive applications. In Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 897--908.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Martin Pielot, Bruno Cardoso, Kleomenis Katevas, Joan Serrà, Aleksandar Matic, and Nuria Oliver. 2017. Beyond interruptibility: Predicting opportune moments to engage mobile phone users. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 3 (2017), 91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Martin Pielot, Tilman Dingler, Jose San Pedro, and Nuria Oliver. 2015. When attention is not scarce-detecting boredom from mobile phone usage. In Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 825--836.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Beatrice Rammstedt and Oliver P John. 2007. Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of research in Personality 41, 1 (2007), 203--212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. William Riley, Jami Obermayer, and Jersino Jean-Mary. 2008. Internet and mobile phone text messaging intervention for college smokers. Journal of American College Health 57, 2 (2008), 245--248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. 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 just-in-time intervention in the natural environment. In Proceedings of the ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 909--920.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Ginka Toegel and Jean-Louis Barsoux. 2012. How to Become a Better Leader. MIT Sloan Management Review 53, 3 (2012), 51--60.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Tilo Westermann, Ina Wechsung, and Sebastian Möller. 2016. Smartphone Notifications in Context: A Case Study on Receptivity by the Example of an Advertising Service. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2355--2361.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Exploring the State-of-Receptivity for mHealth Interventions

      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

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
        Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 3, Issue 4
        December 2019
        873 pages
        EISSN:2474-9567
        DOI:10.1145/3375704
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2019 Owner/Author

        This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 14 September 2020
        Published in imwut Volume 3, Issue 4

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader