Are Trackers Social Actors? The Role of Self-tracking on Self-evaluation

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11433)


Despite the increased usage and potential benefits of self-tracking technologies for pursuing healthy lifestyles, the relationship that users have with these personal devices has remained under-studied. The current paper presents a field study to explore the perceived role of self-tracking devices as social actors. Participants received a pedometer which they carried on their person for one day. Users’ access to numerical feedback and the feeling of being tracked were manipulated, and users were interviewed afterwards regarding their experiences and their perceived social relationship to the tracker. Results of a thematic analysis indicated that in general, the feeling of being tracked led to higher self-awareness regarding participants’ walking activity. In particular, having access to agent feedback gave rise to more frequent self-evaluative reports towards one’s performance as well as a closer relationship between the device and its user. The results extend the CASA (Computers As Social Actors) paradigm by demonstrating that the capturing (and feeding back) of data can make a device be perceived as a social actor and be described in relational terms, even in the absence of clear social cues.


Self-tracking Social actor Self-evaluation 



We would like to thank Heleen Rutjes for her help as independent coder in order to assess inter-coder reliability. This work is part of the project “Mobile Support Systems for Behavior Change”, supported by Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NOW). For more information see


  1. 1.
    Asimakopoulos, S., Asimakopoulos, G., Spillers, F.: Motivation and user engagement in fitness tracking: heuristics for mobile healthcare wearables. Informatics 4(1), 5 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barfield, J.P., Rowe, D.A., Michael, T.J.: Interinstrument consistency of the Yamax Digi-Walker pedometer in elementary school-aged children. Meas. Phys. Educ. Exerc. Sci. 8(2), 109–116 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bravata, D.M., et al.: Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 298(19), 2296–2304 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burke, L.E., Swigart, V., Warziski Turk, M., Derro, N., Ewing, L.J.: Experiences of self-monitoring: successes and struggles during treatment for weight loss. Qual. Health Res. 19(6), 815–828 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Etkin, J.: The hidden cost of personal quantification. J. Consum. Res. 42(6), 967–984 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guay, F., Vallerand, R.J., Blanchard, C.: On the assessment of situational intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: the situational motivation scale (SIMS). Motiv. Emot. 24(3), 175–213 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jakicic, J.M., et al.: Effect of wearable technology combined with a lifestyle intervention on long-term weight loss: the IDEA randomized clinical trial. JAMA 316(11), 1161–1171 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karapanos, E., Gouveia, R., Hassenzahl, M., Forlizzi, J.: Wellbeing in the making: peoples’ experiences with wearable activity trackers. Psychol. Well-Being 6, 4 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kersten-van Dijk, E.T., Westerink, J.H.D.M., Beute, F., IJsselsteijn, W.A.: Personal informatics, self-insight, and behavior change: a critical review of current literature. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 32(5–6), 268–296 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kersten-van Dijk, E., IJsselsteijn, W.A.: Design beyond the numbers: sharing, comparing, storytelling and the need for a quantified us. Interact. Des. Archit. J. 29, 121–135 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kowalski, R.M., Leary, M.R.: Strategic self-presentation and the avoidance of aversive events: antecedents and consequences of self-enhancement and self-depreciation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 26(4), 322–336 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kristensen, D.B., Ruckenstein, M.: Co-evolving with self-tracking technologies. New Media Soc., 1–17 (2018)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nahum-Shani, I., et al.: Just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs) in mobile health: key components and design principles for ongoing health behavior support. Ann. Behav. Med. 52(6), 446–462 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nass, C., Moon, Y.: Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. J. Soc. Issues 56(1), 81–103 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B.J., Reeves, B., Dryer, D.C.: Can computer personalities be human personalities? Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2(43), 223–239 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nass, C., Steuer, J., Tauber, E.R.: Computers are social actors. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 72–78 (1994)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Orji, R., Lomotey, R., Oyibo, K., Orji, F., Blustein, J., Shahid, S.: Tracking feels oppressive and “punishy”: exploring the costs and benefits of self-monitoring for health and wellness. Digital Health 4 (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pink, S., Fors, V.: Being in a mediated world: self-tracking and the mind–body–environment. Cult. Geogr. 24(3), 375–388 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pink, S., Sumartojo, S., Lupton, D., Heyes La Bond, C.: Mundane data: the routines, contingencies and accomplishments of digital living. Big Data Soc. 4(1) (2017)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Short, J., Williams, E., Christie, B.: The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley, London (1976)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kersten-van Dijk, E.T., Beute, F., Westerink, J.H.D.M., IJsselsteijn, W.A.: Unintended effects of self-tracking. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wilde, B.E., Sidman, C.L., Corbin, C.B.: A 10,000-step count as a physical activity target for sedentary women. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 72(4), 411–414 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zajonc, R.B.: Social facilitation. Science 149(3681), 269–274 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Philips ResearchEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations