E.M. de Korte
Please Note
8 records found
1
In her thesis, Elsbeth de Korte explores the potential of persuasive technology to improve health and wellbeing at work. Persuasive technology is designed to change attitudes or behaviors of users through persuasion and social influence and without coercion. With apps, sensors and data, behavior, physical and mental activity and bodily functions can be monitored. Smart algorithms are used to provide active feedback to the user, to help them to achieve their goals. Persuasive technology shows real potential to drive improvements in working life, to reduce health risks or to better manage risk factors. However, can we trust persuasive technology? On which theories, models or standards do they base their feedback and recommendations? Are they effective? Who is actually profiting from persuasive technology? These questions need to be answered to explore how, where and for whom persuasive technology can be meaningfully implemented.
...
In her thesis, Elsbeth de Korte explores the potential of persuasive technology to improve health and wellbeing at work. Persuasive technology is designed to change attitudes or behaviors of users through persuasion and social influence and without coercion. With apps, sensors and data, behavior, physical and mental activity and bodily functions can be monitored. Smart algorithms are used to provide active feedback to the user, to help them to achieve their goals. Persuasive technology shows real potential to drive improvements in working life, to reduce health risks or to better manage risk factors. However, can we trust persuasive technology? On which theories, models or standards do they base their feedback and recommendations? Are they effective? Who is actually profiting from persuasive technology? These questions need to be answered to explore how, where and for whom persuasive technology can be meaningfully implemented.
Personalized support for well-being at work
An overview of the SWELL project
Recent advances in wearable sensor technology and smartphones enable simple and affordable collection of personal analytics. This paper reflects on the lessons learned in the SWELL project that addressed the design of user-centered ICT applications for self-management of vitality in the domain of knowledge workers. These workers often have a sedentary lifestyle and are susceptible to mental health effects due to a high workload. We present the sense–reason–act framework that is the basis of the SWELL approach and we provide an overview of the individual studies carried out in SWELL. In this paper, we revisit our work on reasoning: interpreting raw heterogeneous sensor data, and acting: providing personalized feedback to support behavioural change. We conclude that simple affordable sensors can be used to classify user behaviour and heath status in a physically non-intrusive way. The interpreted data can be used to inform personalized feedback strategies. Further longitudinal studies can now be initiated to assess the effectiveness of m-Health interventions using the SWELL methods.
Evaluating an mHealth App for Health and Well-Being at Work
Mixed-Method Qualitative Study
Objective: The objectives of this study were to gain insight into (1) the opinions and experiences of employees and experts on drivers and barriers using an mHealth app in the working context and (2) the added value of three different qualitative methods that are available to evaluate mHealth apps in a working context: interviews with employees, focus groups with employees, and a focus group with experts.
Methods: Employees of a high-tech company and experts were asked to use an mHealth app for at least 3 weeks before participating in a qualitative evaluation. Twenty-two employees participated in interviews, 15 employees participated in three focus groups, and 6 experts participated in one focus group. Two researchers independently coded, categorized, and analyzed all quotes yielded from these evaluation methods with a codebook using constructs from user satisfaction and technology acceptance theories.
Results: Interviewing employees yielded 785 quotes, focus groups with employees yielded 266 quotes, and the focus group with experts yielded 132 quotes. Overall, participants muted enthusiasm about the app. Combined results from the three evaluation methods showed drivers and barriers for technology, user characteristics, context, privacy, and autonomy. A comparison between the three qualitative methods showed that issues revealed by experts only slightly overlapped with those expressed by employees. In addition, it was seen that the type of evaluation yielded different results.
Conclusions: Findings from this study provide the following recommendations for organizations that are planning to provide mHealth apps to their workers and for developers of mHealth apps: (1) system performance influences adoption and adherence, (2) relevancy and benefits of the mHealth app should be clear to the user and should address users’ characteristics, (3) app should take into account the work context, and (4) employees should be alerted to their right to privacy and use of personal data. Furthermore, a qualitative evaluation of mHealth apps in a work setting might benefit from combining more than one method. Factors to consider when selecting a qualitative research method are the design, development stage, and implementation of the app; the working context in which it is being used; employees’ mental models; practicability; resources; and skills required of experts and users. ...
Objective: The objectives of this study were to gain insight into (1) the opinions and experiences of employees and experts on drivers and barriers using an mHealth app in the working context and (2) the added value of three different qualitative methods that are available to evaluate mHealth apps in a working context: interviews with employees, focus groups with employees, and a focus group with experts.
Methods: Employees of a high-tech company and experts were asked to use an mHealth app for at least 3 weeks before participating in a qualitative evaluation. Twenty-two employees participated in interviews, 15 employees participated in three focus groups, and 6 experts participated in one focus group. Two researchers independently coded, categorized, and analyzed all quotes yielded from these evaluation methods with a codebook using constructs from user satisfaction and technology acceptance theories.
Results: Interviewing employees yielded 785 quotes, focus groups with employees yielded 266 quotes, and the focus group with experts yielded 132 quotes. Overall, participants muted enthusiasm about the app. Combined results from the three evaluation methods showed drivers and barriers for technology, user characteristics, context, privacy, and autonomy. A comparison between the three qualitative methods showed that issues revealed by experts only slightly overlapped with those expressed by employees. In addition, it was seen that the type of evaluation yielded different results.
Conclusions: Findings from this study provide the following recommendations for organizations that are planning to provide mHealth apps to their workers and for developers of mHealth apps: (1) system performance influences adoption and adherence, (2) relevancy and benefits of the mHealth app should be clear to the user and should address users’ characteristics, (3) app should take into account the work context, and (4) employees should be alerted to their right to privacy and use of personal data. Furthermore, a qualitative evaluation of mHealth apps in a work setting might benefit from combining more than one method. Factors to consider when selecting a qualitative research method are the design, development stage, and implementation of the app; the working context in which it is being used; employees’ mental models; practicability; resources; and skills required of experts and users.
Personal environmental control
Effects of pre-set conditions for heating and lighting on personal settings, task performance and comfort experience
The effects of pre-set environmental conditions of temperature and lighting on the preferred personal settings, comfort experience and task performance of office workers were investigated in an individually controlled workstation. Twenty subjects performed standardized tasks at a prototype workstation with individually controlled radiant heating and lighting in a climate room. In a repeated measures design, their adjustments to pre-set values were evaluated: low and high radiant heating power, low and high direct illuminance, low and high indirect illuminance. Results showed that preferred personal settings are dependent on the initial, pre-set values of radiant heating power and illuminance. Higher pre-set values result in higher adjusted operative temperatures and higher illuminances on desk, although the differences for heating were too small to show a convincing effect. After adjustment, visual comfort was higher, but it was not dependent of the pre-set values. For thermal comfort no differences were found. Individual task performance was not negatively affected. Providing personal environmental control and the way these concepts and interfaces are designed, play a significant role in user behavior and preferences. The design and control of individually controlled workstations as well as the interaction with the general level of the office environment should be carefully considered in order to obtain maximum comfort and energy efficiency.