skip to main content
10.1145/2971648.2971756acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Exploring user experiences of active workstations: a case study of under desk elliptical trainers

Published:12 September 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Prolonged inactivity in office workers is a well-known contributor to various diseases, such as obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular dysfunction. In recent years, active workstations that incorporate physical activities such as walking and cycling into the workplace have gained significant popularity, owing to the accessibility of the workouts they offer. While their efficacy is well documented in medical and physiological literature, research regarding the user experience of such systems has rarely been performed, despite its importance for interactive systems design. As a case study, we focus on active workstations that incorporate under desk elliptical trainers, and conduct controlled experiments regarding work performance and a four week long field deployment to explore user experience with 13 participants. We investigate how such workouts influence work performance, when and why workers work out during working hours, and the general feelings of workers regarding usage. Our experimental results indicate that while work performance is not influenced, the cognitive load of tasks critically influences workout decisions. Active workstations were alternatively used as mood enhancers, footrests, and for fidgeting, and there exist unique social and technical aspects to be addressed, such as noise issues and space constraints. Our results provide significant implications for the design of active workstations and interactive workplaces in general.

References

  1. 1998. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) -- Part 11: Guidance on usability. Technical Report. International Organisation for Standardisation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Taleb A. Alkhajah, Marina M. Reeves, Elizabeth G. Eakin, Elisabeth A.H. Winkler, Neville Owen, and Genevieve N. Healy. 2012. Sit-stand workstations: a pilot intervention to reduce office sitting time. Am. J. Prev. Med. 43, 3 (2012), 298 -- 303.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Jackie Andrade. 2010. What does doodling do? Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 24, 1 (2010), 100--106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Atsunori Ariga and Alejandro Lleras. 2011. Brief and rare mental "breaks" keep you focused: deactivation and reactivation of task goals preempt vigilance decrements. Cognition 118, 3 (2011), 439--443.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Avner Ben-Ner, Darla J. Hamann, Gabriel Koepp, Chimnay U. Manohar, and James Levine. 2014. Treadmill workstations: the effects of walking while working on physical activity and work performance. PLoS One 9, 2 (2014), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Shlomo Berkovsky, Mac Coombe, Jill Freyne, Dipak Bhandari, and Nilufar Baghaei. 2010. Physical activity motivating games: virtual rewards for real activity. In CHI '10. ACM, 243--252. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Gunnar Borg. 1982. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 14, 5 (1982), 377--381.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Andreas Braun, Ingrid Schembri, and Sebastian Frank. 2015. ExerSeat -- sensor-supported exercise system for ergonomic microbreaks. In AmI 2015. Springer, 236--251.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Philip Burnard. 1991. A method of analyzing interview transcripts in qualitative research. Nurse Educ. Today 11, 6 (1991), 461--466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Joan Burton. WHO Healthy Workplace Framework and Model: Background and Supporting Literature and Practices. Technical Report. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/occupational_health/healthy_workplace_framework.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Lucas J. Carr, Kristina Karvinen, Mallory Peavler, Rebecca Smith, and Kayla Cangelosi. 2013. Multicomponent intervention to reduce daily sedentary time: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 3, 10 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Lucas J. Carr, Christoph Leonhard, Sharon Tucker, Nathan Fethke, Roberto Benzo, and Fred Gerr. 2016. Total worker health intervention increases activity of sedentary workers. Am. J. Prev. Med. 50, 1 (2016), 9 -- 17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Lucas J. Carr, Hotaka Maeda, Brandon Luther, Patrick Rider, Sharon J. Tucker, and Christoph Leonhard. 2014. Acceptability and effects of a seated active workstation during sedentary work: a proof of concept study. Int. J. Workplace Health Manag. 7, 1 (2014), 2--15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Sunny Consolvo, Katherine Everitt, Ian Smith, and James A. Landay. 2006. Design requirements for technologies that encourage physical activity. In CHI '06. ACM, 457--466. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Sunny Consolvo, Predrag Klasnja, David W. McDonald, Daniel Avrahami, Jon Froehlich, Louis LeGrand, Ryan Libby, Keith Mosher, and James A. Landay. 2008. Flowers or a robot army?: encouraging awareness & activity with personal, mobile displays. In UbiComp '08. ACM, 54--63. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Sunny Consolvo, Predrag Klasnja, David W. McDonald, and James A. Landay. 2009. Goal-setting considerations for persuasive technologies that encourage physical activity. In Persuasive '09. ACM, Article 8, 8 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Olguin Olguin Daniel, N. Waber Benjamin, Taemie Kim, Akshay Mohan, Koji Ara, and Alex Pentland. 2009. Sensible organizations: technology and methodology for automatically measuring organizational behavior. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. B Cybern. 39, 1 (2009), 43--55. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Sarah A. Douglas, Arthur E. Kirkpatrick, and I. Scott MacKenzie. 1999. Testing pointing device performance and user assessment with the ISO 9241, Part 9 standard. In CHI '99. ACM, 215--222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. James Farley, Evan F. Risko, and Alan Kingstone. 2013. Everyday attention and lecture retention: the effects of time, fidgeting, and mind wandering. Front. Psychol. 4 (2013), 619.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. James Fogarty, Scott E. Hudson, Christopher G. Atkeson, Daniel Avrahami, Jodi Forlizzi, Sara Kiesler, Johnny C. Lee, and Jie Yang. 2005. Predicting human interruptibility with sensors. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 12, 1 (2005), 119--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Jutta Fortmann, Tim C. Stratmann, Susanne Boll, Benjamin Poppinga, and Wilko. Heuten. 2013. Make me move at work! an ambient light display to increase physical activity. In PervasiveHealth '13. IEEE, 274--277. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Derek Foster, Conor Linehan, Ben Kirman, Shaun Lawson, and Gary James. 2010. Motivating physical activity at work: using persuasive social media for competitive step counting. In MindTrek '10. ACM, 111--116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Rachel E. Funk, Megan L. Taylor, Ceith C. Creekmur, Christine M. Ohlinger, Ronald H. Cox, and William P. Berg. 2012. Effect of walking speed on typing performance using an active workstation. Perceptual & Motor Skills 115, 1 (2012), 309--308.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Sarah Gallacher, Jenny O'Connor, Jon Bird, Yvonne Rogers, Licia Capra, Daniel Harrison, and Paul Marshall. 2015. Mood squeezer: lightening up the workplace through playful and lightweight interactions. In CSCW '15. ACM, 891--902. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Gaston Godin. 2011. The Godin-Shephard leisure-time physical activity questionnaire. The Health & Fitness Journal of Canada 4, 1 (2011), 18--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Charlse J. Golden. 1978. The Stroop color and word test: a manual for clinical and experimental uses, Stoelting Company Edition. Chicago, Illinois (1978), 1--32.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Nur Azah Hamzaid, Richard M. Smith, and Glen M. Davis. 2013. Isokinetic cycling and elliptical stepping: a kinematic and muscle activation analysis. Clin. Res. Foot. Ankle. 1, 117 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandra G. Hart. 1986. NASA Task Load Index (TLX). Volume 1.0; Paper and Pencil Package. Technical Report. Human Performance Research Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Alan Hedge and Earnest J. Ray. 2004. Effects of an electronic height-adjustable worksurface on computer worker musculoskeletal discomfort and productivity. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 48, 8 (2004), 1091--1095.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Hamilton A. Hernandez, T.C. Nicholas Graham, Darcy Fehlings, Lauren Switzer, Zi Ye, Quentin Bellay, Md Ameer Hamza, Cheryl Savery, and Tadeusz Stach. 2012. Design of an exergaming station for children with cerebral palsy. In CHI '12. ACM, 2619--2628. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Eric Horvitz, Paul Koch, and Johnson Apacible. 2004. BusyBody: creating and fielding personalized models of the cost of interruption. In CSCW '04. ACM, 507--510. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Nassim Jafarinaimi, Jodi Forlizzi, Amy Hurst, and John Zimmerman. 2005. Breakaway: an ambient display designed to change human behavior. In CHI EA '05. ACM, 1945--1948. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Dinesh John, David Bassett, Dixie Thompson, Jeffrey Fairbrother, and Debora Baldwin. 2009. Effect of using a treadmill workstation on performance of simulated office work tasks. J. Phys. Act. Health 6, 5 (2009), 617--624.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Dinesh John, Dixie L. Thompson, Hollie Raynor, Kenneth Bielak, Bob Rider, and David R. Bassett. 2011. Treadmill workstations: a worksite physical activity intervention in overweight and obese office workers. J. Phys. Act. Health 8, 8 (2011), 1034--1043.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Michael Karlesky and Katherine Isbister. 2013. Designing for the physical margins of digital workspaces: fidget widgets in support of productivity and creativity. In TEI '14. ACM, 13--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Reuben Kirkham, Sebastian Mellor, David Green, Jiun-Shian Lin, Karim Ladha, Cassim Ladha, Daniel Jackson, Patrick Olivier, Peter Wright, and Thomas Ploetz. 2013. The break-time barometer: an exploratory system forworkplace break-time social awareness. In UbiComp '13. ACM, 73--82. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. I-Min Lee, Eric .J Shiroma, Felipe Lobelo, Pekka Puska, Steven N. Blair, and Peter T. Katzmarzyk. 2012. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. The Lancet 380, 9838 (2012), 219--229.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. James J. Lin, Lena Mamykina, Silvia Lindtner, Gregory Delajoux, and Henry B. Strub. 2006. Fish'n'Steps: encouraging physical activity with aniInteractive computer game. In UbiComp '06. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 261--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Akhil Mathur, Marc Van den Broeck, Geert Vanderhulst, Afra Mashhadi, and Fahim Kawsar. 2015. Tiny habits in the giant enterprise: understanding the dynamics of a quantified workplace. In UbiComp '15. ACM, 577--588. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Shelly K. McCrady and James A. Levine. 2009. Sedentariness at work; how much do we really sit? Obesity 17, 11 (2009), 2103--2105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Maike Neuhaus, Elizabeth Eakin, Leon Straker, Neville Owen, David Dunstan, Natasha Reid, and Genevieve Healy. 2014. Reducing occupational sedentary time: a systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence on activity-permissive workstations. Obes. Rev. 15, 10 (2014), 822--838.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Harri Oinas-Kukkonen and Marja Harjumaa. 2009. Persuasive systems design: key issues, process model, and system features. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 24, Article 28 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Tadashi Okoshi, Julian Ramos, Hiroki Nozaki, Jin Nakazawa, Anind K. Dey, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2015. Reducing users' perceived mental effort due to interruptive notifications in multi-device mobile environments. In UbiComp '15. ACM, 475--486. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Taiwoo Park, Uichin Lee, Scott MacKenzie, Miri Moon, Inseok Hwang, and Junehwa Song. 2014. Human factors of speed-based exergame controllers. In CHI '14. ACM, 1865--1874. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Kathrin Probst, David Lindlbauer, Michael Haller, Bernhard Schwartz, and Andreas Schrempf. 2014. A chair as ubiquitous input device: exploring semaphoric chair gestures for focused and peripheral interaction. In CHI '14. ACM, 4097--4106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Kathrin Probst, Florian Perteneder, Jakob Leitner, Michael Haller, Andreas Schrempf, and Josef Glöckl. 2012. Active office: towards an activity-promoting office workplace design. In CHI EA '12. ACM, 2165--2170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. James O. Prochaska and Wayne F. Velicer. 1997. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am. J. Health Promot. 12, 1 (1997), 38--48.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Derek Reilly, Emma Westecott, David Parker, Samuel Perreault, Derek Neil, Nathan Lapierre, Kate Hartman, and Harjot Bal. 2013. Design-driven research for workplace exergames: the limber case study. In Gamification '13. ACM, 123--126. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Eric Ruthruff, Mark Van Selst, James C. Johnston, and Roger Remington. 2006. How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Integration, automatization, or just stage-shortening? Psychol. Res. 70, 2 (2006), 125--142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Richard M. Ryan. 1982. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: an extension of cognitive evaluation theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 43 (1982), 450--461.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Timothy A. Salthouse. 1985. Anticipatory processing in transcription typing. J. Appl. Psychol. 70, 2 (1985), 264--271.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Tamara M. Schult, Ebi R. Awosika, Sandra K. Schmunk, Michael J. Hodgson, Bria L. Heymach, and Celestine Dent Parker. 2013. Sitting on stability balls: biomechanics evaluation in a workplace setting. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 10, 2 (2013), 55--63.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Leon Straker, James Levine, and Amity Campbell. 2009. The effects of walking and cycling computer workstations on keyboard and mouse performance. Hum. Factors 51, 6 (2009), 831--844.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Hitomi Tsujita and Jun Rekimoto. 2011. Smiling makes us happier: enhancing positive mood and communication with smile-encouraging digital appliances. In UbiComp '11. ACM, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Saskia van Dantzig, Gijs Geleijnse, and Aart Tijmen van Halteren. 2013. Toward a persuasive mobile application to reduce sedentary behavior. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 17, 6 (2013), 1237--1246. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Jen Wieczner. 2013. Falling Down on the Job? Workstations Designed to Help You Get Fit May Make You Type Poorly, Even Fall. (2013). http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324539304578263650060635048Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Amanda L. Williams. 2011. Perceived environmental restorativeness and affective responses to indoor vs. outdoor exercise. Master's thesis. The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Emma. G. Wilmot, Charlotte. L. Edwardson, Felix. A. Achana, Melanie. J. Davies, Trish. Gorely, Laura. J. Gray, Kamlesh. Khunti, Thomas. Yates, and Stuart. J. H. Biddle. 2012. Sedentary time in adults and the association with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death: systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia 55, 11 (2012), 2895--2905.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Jacob O. Wobbrock, Susumu Harada, Edward Cutrell, and I. Scott MacKenzie. 2012. FittsStudy. (2012). https://depts.washington.edu/aimgroup/proj/fittsstudy/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Galit Yogev, Jeffrey M. Hausdorff, , and Nir Giladi. 2008. The role of executive function and attention in gait. Mov. Disord. 23, 3 (2008), 329--472.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Exploring user experiences of active workstations: a case study of under desk elliptical trainers

    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
      UbiComp '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing
      September 2016
      1288 pages
      ISBN:9781450344616
      DOI:10.1145/2971648

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 12 September 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      UbiComp '16 Paper Acceptance Rate101of389submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate764of2,912submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader