Cue Now, Reflect Later: A Study of Delayed Reflection of Diary Events

  • Ming Ki ChongEmail author
  • Jon Whittle
  • Umar Rashid
  • Chee Siang Ang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9298)


Diary studies require participants to record entries at the moment of events, but the process often distracts the participants and disrupts the flow of the events. In this work, we explore the notion of delayed reflection for diary studies. Users quickly denote cues of diary events and only reflect on the cues later when they are not busy. To minimize disruptions, we employed a squeeze gesture that is swift and discreet for denoting cues. We investigated the feasibility of delayed reflection and compared it against a conventional digital diary that requires users to reflect immediately at the time of entry. In a weeklong field study, we asked participants to record their daily experiences with both types of diaries. Our results show that users’ preference is context-dependent. Delayed reflection is favored for use in contexts when interruptions are deemed inappropriate (e.g. in meetings or lectures) or when the users are mobile (e.g. walking). In contrast, the users prefer immediate reflection when they are alone, such as during leisure and downtime.


Diary study Delayed reflection SqueezeDiary 



This work is part of the Digital Brain Switch project and is funded by the EPSRC (EP/K025201/1).


  1. 1.
    Brandt, J., Weiss, N., Klemmer, S.R.: Txt 4 l8r: lowering the burden for diary studies under mobile conditions. In: Proceedings of the CHI EA 2007, pp. 2303–2308, ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carter, S., Mankoff, J.: When participants do the capturing: the role of media in diary studies. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2005, pp. 899–908, ACM (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chong, M.K., Whittle, J., Rashid, U., Ang, S.A.: Squeeze the Moment: denoting diary events by squeezing. In: Proceedings of the UbiComp 2014 Adjunct, pp. 219–222, ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chong, M.K., Whittle, J., Rashid, U., Ang, S.A.: SqueezeDiary: using squeeze gesture as triggers of diary events. In: Proceedings of the MobileHCI 2014, pp. 427–429, ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., and Wilhite, S.: A diary study of task switching and interruptions. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2004, pp. 175–182, ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gouveia, R., Karapanos, E.: Footprint tracker: supporting diary studies with lifelogging. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2013, pp. 2921–2930, ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hodges, S., Williams, L., Berry, E., Izadi, S., Srinivasan, J., Butler, A., Smyth, G., Kapur, N., Wood, K.: Sensecam: a retrospective memory aid. In: Dourish, P., Friday, A. (eds.) UbiComp 2006. LNCS, vol. 4206, pp. 177–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Isaacs, E., Konrad, A., Walendowski, A., Lennig, T., Hollis, V., Whittaker, S.: Echoes from the past: how technology mediated reflection improves well-being. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2013, pp. 1071–1080, ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kalnikaite, V., Sellen, A., Whittaker, S., Kirk, D.: Now let me see where i was: under-standing how lifelogs mediate memory. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2010, pp. 2045–2054, ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Palen, L., and Salzman, M.: Voice-mail diary studies for naturalistic data capture under mobile conditions. In: Proceedings of the CSCW 2002, pp. 87–95, ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rieman, J.: The diary study: A workplace-oriented research tool to guide laboratory efforts. In: INTERCHI 1993, pp. 321–326, ACM (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sellen, A.J., Fogg, A., Aitken, M., Hodges, S., Rother, C., Wood, K.: Do life-logging technologies support memory for the past?: an experimental study using sensecam. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2007, pp. 81–90, ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sellen, A.J., Louie, G., Harris, J.E., Wilkins, A.J.: What brings intentions to mind? an in situ study of prospective memory. Memory 5(4), 483–507 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ming Ki Chong
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jon Whittle
    • 1
  • Umar Rashid
    • 2
  • Chee Siang Ang
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computing and Communications, InfoLab21Lancaster UniversityLancasterUK
  2. 2.School of Engineering and Digital Arts, Jennison BuildingUniversity of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations