Advertisement

Tools for Studying Behavior and Technology in Natural Settings

  • Stephen S. Intille
  • Emmanuel Munguia Tapia
  • John Rondoni
  • Jennifer Beaudin
  • Chuck Kukla
  • Sitij Agarwal
  • Ling Bao
  • Kent Larson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2864)

Abstract

Three tools for acquiring data about people, their behavior, and their use of technology in natural settings are described: (1) a context-aware experience sampling tool, (2) a ubiquitous sensing system that detects environmental changes, and (3) an image-based experience sampling system. We discuss how these tools provide researchers with a flexible toolkit for collecting data on activity in homes and workplaces, particularly when used in combination. We outline several ongoing studies to illustrate the versatility of these tools. Two of the tools are currently available to other researchers to use.

Keywords

Experience Sampling Natural Setting Ubiquitous Computing Conjoint Analysis Environment Sensor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abowd, G.D.: Personal communication. Director of the Aware- Home Initiative. Georgia Insitute of Technology (November 2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ainsworth, B.E., Haskell, W.L., Whitt, M.C., Irwin, M.L., Swartz, A.M., Strath, S.J., O’Brien Jr., W.L., Bassett, D.R., Schmitz, K.H., Emplaincourt, P.O., Jacobs Jr., D.R., Leon, A.S.: Compendium of physical activities: An update of activity codes and MET intensities. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 32(9 Suppl), S498–504 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alwan, M.: Personal communication. Assistant Professor, University of Virginia (November 2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barger, T., Alwan, M., Kell, S., Turner, B., Wood, S., Naidu, A.: Objective remote assessment of activities of daily living: Analysis of meal preparation patterns. Poster presentation, Medical Automation Research Center. University of Virginia Health System (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barrett, L.F., Barrett, D.J.: An introduction to computerized experience sampling in psychology. Social Science Computer Review 19(2), 175–185 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    CAES. Context-Aware Experience Sampling Website, Access date: January 15 (2003), http://caes.sourceforge.net
  7. 7.
    Castro, P., Mani, M., Mathur, S., Muntz, R.: Managing context for internet video conferences: The multimedia internet recorder and archive. Multimedia and Computer Networks (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coen, M.: Design principles for intelligent environments. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Collier, J., Collier, M.: Visual Anthropology: Photography as a Research Method. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque (1986); rev. and expanded editionGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Consolvo, S., Arnstein, L., Franza, B.R.: User study techniques in the design and evaluation of a ubicomp environment. In: Borriello, G., Holmquist, L.E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, pp. 73–90. Springer, Berlin (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M., Larson, R.: Validity and reliability of the Experience- Sampling Method. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 175(9), 526–536 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hollar, S.: COTS Dust. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hudson, J.M., Christensen, J., Kellogg, W.A., Erickson, T.: ‘I’d Be Overwhelmed, But It’s Just One More Thing to Do: Availability and Interruption in Research Management. In: Proceedings of the Confererence on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hudson, S.E., Fogarty, J., Atkeson, C.G., Avrahami, D., Forlizzi, J., Kiesler, S., Lee, J.C., Yang, J.: Predicting human interruptability with sensors: A Wizard of Oz feasibility study. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors and Computing. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Intille, S.S.: Designing a Home of the Future. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 80–86 (April-June 2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Intille, S.S., Kukla, C., Ma, X.: Eliciting user preferences using image-based experience sampling and reflection. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Human Interface Short Abstracts, pp. 738–739. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Intille, S.S., Rondoni, J., Kukla, C., Anacona, I., Bao, L.: A context-aware experience sampling tool. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems: Extended Abstracts. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kahn, J.M., Katz, R.H., Pister, K.S.J.: Mobile networking for Smart Dust. In: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom 1999) (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kasten, O., Langheinrich, M.: First experiences with Bluetooth in the Smart-Its distributed sensor network. In: Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing and Communications, PACT (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mahajan, V., Wind, J.: New product models: Practice, shortcomings and desired improvements. The Journal of Product Innovation Management 9(2), 128–139 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mainwaring, A., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., Culler, D., Anderson, J.: Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mozer, M.: The Neural Network House: an environment that adapts to its inhabitants. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Intelligent Environments, Technical Report SS-98-02, pp. 110–114. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Robinson, J.P.: The validity and reliability of diaries versus alternative time use measures. In: Juster, F.T., Stafford, F.P. (eds.) Time Goods and Well-Being, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 33–62 (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rodin, J., Langer, E.J.: Long-term effects of a control-relevant intervention with the institutionalized aged. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35(12), 897–902 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schèon, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stone, A.A., Shiffman, S.: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in behavioral medicine. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 16(3), 199–202 (1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Szalai, S.: The Use of Time. In: Daily Activities of Urban and Suburban Populations in Twelve Countries. Mouton, The Hague (1973)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen S. Intille
    • 1
  • Emmanuel Munguia Tapia
    • 1
  • John Rondoni
    • 1
  • Jennifer Beaudin
    • 1
  • Chuck Kukla
    • 1
  • Sitij Agarwal
    • 1
  • Ling Bao
    • 1
  • Kent Larson
    • 1
  1. 1.Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations