skip to main content
10.1145/2851581.2892438acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Daily & Hourly Adherence: Towards Understanding Activity Tracker Accuracy

Published:07 May 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

We tackle the important problem of understanding the accuracy of activity tracker data. To do this, we introduce the notions of daily and hourly adherence, key aspects of how consistently people wear trackers. We hypothesise that these measures provide a valuable means to address accuracy problems in population level activity tracking data. To test this, we conducted a semester-long study of 237 University students: 88 Information Technology, 149 Medical Science. We illustrate how our adherence measures provide new ways to interpret data and valuable insights that take account of tracker data accuracy. Finally, we discuss broader roles for daily and hourly adherence measures in activity tracker data.

References

  1. Timothy K. Behrens and Mary K. Dinger. 2005. Ambulatory Physical Activity Patterns of College Students. American Journal of Health Education 36, 4 (2005), 221-227. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Dena M Bravata, Crystal Smith-Spangler, Vandana Sundaram, Allison L Gienger, Nancy Lin, Robyn Lewis, Christopher D Stave, Ingram Olkin, and John R Sirard. 2007. Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review. Jama 298, 19 (2007), 2296-2304.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Janet Buckworth. 2012. Exercise Adherence in College Students: Issues and Preliminary Results. Quest 53, 3 (2012), 335-345. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00336297.2001.10491750Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Lisa Cadmus-Bertram, Bess H Marcus, Ruth E Patterson, Barbara A Parker, and Brittany L Morey. 2015. Use of the Fitbit to Measure Adherence to a Physical Activity Intervention Among Overweight or Obese, Postmenopausal Women: Self-Monitoring Trajectory During 16 Weeks. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 3, 4 (2015), e96. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.4229Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Timothy S Church and Steven N Blair. 2009. When will we treat physical activity as a legitimate medical therapy...even though it does not come in a pill? British journal of sports medicine 43, 2 (2009), 80-81. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2008.053850Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. James Clawson, Jessica A Pater, Andrew D Miller, Elizabeth D Mynatt, and Lena Mamykina. 2015. No Longer Wearing : Investigating the Abandonment of Personal Health-Tracking Technologies on Craigslist. Ubicomp 2015 (2015). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Sunny Consolvo. 2012. Designing for Healthy Lifestyles: Design Considerations for Mobile Technologies to Encourage Consumer Health and Wellness. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 6, 3--4 (2012), 167-315. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/1100000040 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Raymond Desharnais, Jacques Bouillon, and Gaston Godin. 1986. Self-efficacy and outcome expectations as determinants of exercise adherence. Psychological Reports 59, 3 (1986), 1155-1159.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Endeavour. 2014. Inside wearables part 2, How the Science of Behavior Change Offers the Secret to Long-Term Engagement. June (2014). http://endeavourpartners.net/white-papers/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. C Ferrara. 2009. The college experience: Physical activity, nutrition, and implications for intervention and future research. Journal of Exercise Physiology 12, 1 (2009), 23-35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. I. Ferreira, K. Van Der Horst, W. Wendel-Vos, S. Kremers, F. J. Van Lenthe, and J. Brug. 2007. Environmental correlates of physical activity in youth - A review and update. Obesity Reviews 8, 2 (2007), 129- 154. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467--789X.2006. 00264.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Michael J Fotheringham, Rebecca L Wonnacott, and Nevile Owen. 2000. Computer use and physical inactivity in young adults: public health perils and potentials of new information technologies. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 22, 4 (2000), 269-275.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Thomas Fritz, Elaine M Huang, Gail C Murphy, and Thomas Zimmermann. 2014. Persuasive technology in the real world: a study of long-term use of activity sensing devices for fitness. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 487-496. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Daniel Harrison, Paul Marshall, Nadia Bianchiberthouze, and Jon Bird. 2015. Activity Tracking Barriers, Workarounds, and Customisation. Ubicomp 2015 (2015), 617. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. William L Haskell, I Lee, Russell R Pate, Kenneth E Powell, Steven N Blair, Barry A Franklin, Caroline A Macera, Gregory W Heath, Paul D Thompson, Adrian Bauman, and Others. 2007. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Medicine and science in sports and exercise 39, 8 (2007), 1423.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Xiaofen Deng Keating, Jianmin Guan, José Castro Piñero, and Dwan Marie Bridges. 2015. A metaanalysis of college students' physical activity behaviors. Journal of American college health : J of ACH 54, 2 (2015), 116-125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JACH. 54.2.116--126Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Amanda Lazar, Joshua Tanenbaum, Christian Koehler, and David H Nguyen. 2015. Why We Use and Abandon Smart Devices. Ubicomp 2015 (2015), 635. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Brian E. Saelens, James F. Sallis, Lawrence D. Frank, Sarah C. Couch, Chuan Zhou, Trina Colburn, Kelli L. Cain, James Chapman, and Karen Glanz. 2012. Obesogenic neighborhood environments, child and parent obesity: The neighborhood impact on kids study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 42, 5 (2012), e57-e64. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2012.02. 008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Patrick C Shih, Kyungsik Han, Erika Shehan Poole, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M Carroll. 2015. Use and adoption challenges of wearable activity trackers. iConference 2015 Proceedings (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Susan B Sisson, James J McClain, and Catrine Tudor-Locke. 2015. Campus walkability, pedometerdetermined steps, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity: a comparison of 2 university campuses. Journal of American college health : J of ACH 56, 5 (2015), 585-592. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JACH.56. 5.585--592Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Catrine Tudor-Locke, Tiago V Barreira, John M Schuna, Emily F Mire, Jean-Philippe Chaput, Mikael Fogelholm, Gang Hu, Rebecca Kuriyan, Anura Kurpad, Estelle V Lambert, and others. 2015. Improving wear time compliance with a 24-hour waist-worn accelerometer protocol in the International Study of Childhood Obesity, Lifestyle and the Environment (ISCOLE). International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 12, 1 (2015), 11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Rayoung Yang, Eunice Shin, Mark W Newman, and Mark S Ackerman. 2015. When fitness trackers don't 'fit': end-user difficulties in the assessment of personal tracking device accuracy. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 623-634. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Daily & Hourly Adherence: Towards Understanding Activity Tracker Accuracy

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI EA '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2016
      3954 pages
      ISBN:9781450340823
      DOI:10.1145/2851581

      Copyright © 2016 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 May 2016

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '16 Paper Acceptance Rate1,000of5,000submissions,20%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader