Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 1211–1221 | Cite as

LunchTime: a slow-casual game for long-term dietary behavior change

  • Rita OrjiEmail author
  • Julita Vassileva
  • Regan L. Mandryk
Original Article


Eating out has recently become part of our lifestyle. However, when eating out in restaurants, many people find it difficult to make meal choices consistent with their health goals. Bad eating choices and habits are in part responsible for the alarming increase in the prevalence of chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, and high blood pressure, which burden the health care system. Therefore, there is a need for an intervention that educates the public on how to make healthy choices while eating away from home. In this paper, we propose a goal-based slow-casual game approach that addresses this need. This approach acknowledges different groups of users with varying health goals and adopts slow technology to promote learning and reflection. We model two recognized determinants of well-being into dietary interventions and provide feedback accordingly. To demonstrate the suitability of our approach for long-term sustained learning, reflection, and attitude and/or behavior change, we develop and evaluate LunchTime—a goal-based slow-casual game that educates players on how to make healthier meal choices. The result from the evaluation shows that LunchTime facilitates learning and reflection and promotes positive dietary attitude change.


Persuasive game Behavior change Slow technology Casual games Design Food Health Human factors Nutrition Diet Goal-based Theory Attitude change 



The first author of this paper is being sponsored by Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship. Many thanks to the reviewers for their insightful comments and to the participants in the evaluation of this work.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Maddock J (2004) The relationship between obesity and the prevalence of fast food restaurants: state-level analysis. Am J Health Promot 19:137–143Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Toscos T, Faber A, An S, Gandhi MP (2006) Chick clique: persuasive technology to motivate teenage girls to exercise. In: CHI ‘06 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 1873–1878Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Consolvo S, Everitt K, Smith I, Landay JA (2006) Design requirements for technologies that encourage physical activity. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI’06, p 457Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fogg BJ (2003) Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. Morgan Kaufmann Pub, Los AltosGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spencer L, Wharton C, Moyle S, Adams T (2007) The transtheoretical model as applied to dietary behaviour and outcomes. Nutr Res Rev 20(1):46–73Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grimes A, Kantroo V, Grinter RE (2010) Let’s play!: mobile health games for adults. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM 2010 international conference on Ubiquitous computing, pp 241–250Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fogg BJ (2009) A behavior model for persuasive design. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Consolvo S, McDonald DW, Landay JA (2009) Theory-driven design strategies for technologies that support behavior change in everyday life. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 405–414Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC (1992) In search of how people change: applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol 47(9):1102–1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Locke EA, Latham GP (2002) Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am Psychol 57(9):705–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Skinner BF (1953) Science and human behavior. Macmillan, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bandura A (1973) Aggression: a social learning theory analysis. Prentice-Hall Pub, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Freeland-Graves J, Nitzke S (2002) Position of the American dietetic association: total diet approach to communicating food and nutrition information. J Am Diet Assoc 102(1):100–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brug J, Conner M, Harre N, Kremers S, McKellar S, Whitelaw S (2005) The transtheoretical model and stages of change: a critique. Health Educ Res 20(2):244–258Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ordonez L, Schweitzer ME, Galinsky A, Bazerman M (2009) Goals gone wild: how goals systematically harm individuals and organizations. Acad Manag Perspect 23(1):6Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cameron J, Pierce WD (1994) Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: a meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 64(3):363–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Colineau N, Paris C (2010) Can beneficial habits be induced through reflection? Accessed December, 2011
  19. 19.
    Schermerhorn JR (2005) Management. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Landcare Research (2002) Using participatory and learning-based approaches for environmental management to help achieve constructive behavior change. Accessed December, 2011
  21. 21.
    Jeffery CR (1990) Criminology. Prentice Hall, NJGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nweze EN (2009) Community nutrition: planning health promotion and disease prevention. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, SudburyGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grimes A, Tan D, Morris D (2009) Toward technologies that support family reflections on health. In: Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on supporting group work, pp 311–320Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fujiki Y, Kazakos K, Puri C, Buddharaju P, Pavlidis I, Levine J (2008) NEAT-o-games: blending physical activity and fun in the daily routine. Comput Entertain 6(2):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hoysniemi J (2006) International survey on the dance dance revolution game. ACM Comput Entertain 4(2):3–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xu J, Chen P-y, Uglow S, Scott A, Montague E (2011) A case study of the design and evaluation of a persuasive healthy lifestyle assistance technology: challenges and design guidelines. Univers Access Hum 6768:464–471Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taylor EW (2000) Analyzing research on transformative learning theory. In: Mezirow J (ed) Learning as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 29–310Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bogost I, Partner F, Games P (2007) Persuasive games on mobile devices. Accessed December, 2011
  29. 29.
    Khaled R (2008) Culturally-relevant persuasive technology. Pt design. Victoria University of Wellington. Accessed on June, 2011
  30. 30.
    Stokes B (2005) Video games have changed: time to consider “serious games.” Dev Educ J. Accessed December, 2011
  31. 31.
    Game Food Pyramid, USA: Playnormous Accessed December, 2010
  32. 32. Accessed January, 2012
  33. 33.
    Trigger Happy. Dallas, Texas, USA: BlockDot Inc. Accessed December, 2010
  34. 34.
    Kuittinen J, Kultima A, Niemelä J, Paavilainen J (2007) Casual games discussion. In: Proceedings of the 2007 conference on future play—future play’07, p 105Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hallna L, Redstro J (2001) Slow technology—designing for reflection. Pers Ubiq Comput 5:201–212Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Freedman MR, King J, Kennedy E (2001) Population diets: a scientific review. Obes Res 9:1S–40SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Orji R, Vassileva J, Mandryk RL (2012) Towards a data-driven approach to intervention design: a predictive path model of healthy eating determinants. In: 7th international conference on persuasive technology, Persuasive 2012, vol 7284, pp 203–214Google Scholar
  38. 38.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rita Orji
    • 1
    Email author
  • Julita Vassileva
    • 1
  • Regan L. Mandryk
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations