Happier Together: Integrating a Wellness Application into a Social Network Site

  • Sean A. Munson
  • Debra Lauterbach
  • Mark W. Newman
  • Paul Resnick
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6137)

Abstract

What are the benefits and drawbacks of integrating health and wellness interventions into existing online social network websites? In this paper, we report on a case study of deploying the Three Good Things positive psychology exercise as a Facebook application. Our experience shows that embedding a wellness intervention in an existing social website is a viable option. In particular, we find adherence rates on par with or better than many other Internet-based wellness interventions. We also gained insights about users’ privacy and audience concerns that inform the design of social network-based wellness applications. Participants did not want all of their entries to be shared with all their Facebook friends, both because they did not want others to know some things and because they did not want to clutter others’ newsfeeds. Users found it compelling, however, to interact with their friends around some “Good Things” they had posted.

Keywords

Social software wellness positive psychology design privacy sharing audience 

References

  1. 1.
    Anhøj, J., Jensen, A.H.: Using the Internet for life style changes in diet and physical activity: a feasibility study. J. Med. Internet Res. 6(3), e28 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blank, T.O., Adams-Blodnieks, M.: The who and the what of usage of two cancer online communities. Computers in Human Behavior (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Consolvo, S., et al.: Flowers or a Robot Army? Encouraging Awareness & Activity with Personal, Mobile Displays. In: UbiComp 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grimes, A., Bednar, M., Bolter, J.D., Grinter, R.D.: EatWell: Sharing Nutrition-Related Memories in a Low-Income Community. In: CSCW 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Klemm, P., et al.: Online Cancer Support Groups: A Review of the Research Literature. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing 21(3), 136–142 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leslie, E., Marshall, A.L., Owen, N., Bauman, A.: Engagement and retention of participants in a physical activity website. Prev. Med. 40(1), 54–59 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lin, J.J., Mamykina, L., Lindtner, S., Delajoux, G., Strub, H.B.: Fish’n’Steps: Encouraging Physical Activity with an Interactive Computer Game. In: Dourish, P., Friday, A. (eds.) UbiComp 2006. LNCS, vol. 4206, pp. 261–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mamykina, L., Mynatt, E., Davidson, P., Greenblatt, D.: MAHI: investigation of social scaffolding for reflective thinking in diabetes management. In: CHI 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Richardson, C., Brown, B.B., Foley, S., Dial, K.S., Lowery, J.C.: Feasibility of Adding Enhanced Pedometer Feedback to Nutritional Counseling for Weight Loss. Med. Internet Res. 7(5), e56 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tate, D.F., Jackvony, E.H., Wing, R.R.: Effects of Internet behavioral counseling on weight loss in adults at risk for type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial. JAMA 289(14), 1833–1836 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Positive Psychology Center. University of Pennsylvania, http://www.ppc.sas.upenn.edu/
  12. 12.
    Wellman, B., Wortley, S.: Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology, 558–588 (1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Olsen, E., Kraft, P.: ePsychology: A pilot study on how to enhance social support and adherence in digital interventions by characteristics from social networking sites. In: Persuasive 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Christensen, H., Griffiths, K.M., Farrer, L.: Adherence in Internet Interventions for Anxiety and Depression. J. Med. Internet Res. 11(2), e13 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wangberg, S.C., Bergmo, T.S., Johnsen, J.A.K.: Adherence in Internet-based interventions. Patient Preference and Adherence 2(2007), 1 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C.: The benefits of Facebook ‘friends:’ Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12(4), I (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Consolvo, S., Everitt, K., Smith, I., Landay, J.: Design requirements for technologies that encourage physical activity. In: CHI 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weinberg, N., et al.: Online Help: Cancer Patients Participate in a Computer-Mediated Support Group. Health & Social Work 21(1), 24–29 (1996)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Welbourne, J., Blanchard, A., Boughton, M.D.: Supportive communication, sense of virtual community and health outcomes in online infertility groups. In: Communities and Technologies 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khaled, R., Barr, P., Noble, J., Biddle, R.: Investigating Social Software as Persuasive Technology. In: IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 104–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seligman, M., Steen, T., Park, N., Peterson, C.: Positive Psychology Progress. American Psychologist 60(5), 410–421 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean A. Munson
    • 1
  • Debra Lauterbach
    • 1
  • Mark W. Newman
    • 1
  • Paul Resnick
    • 1
  1. 1.School of InformationUniversity of MichiganAnn Arbor

Personalised recommendations