<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Accuracy and Reliability of Personal Data Collection: An Autoethnographic Study</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Amon Rapp</string-name>
          <email>amon.rapp@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alessandro Marcengo</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>alessandro.marcengo@telecom</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Federica Cena</string-name>
          <email>cena@di.unito.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Telecom Italia</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Via Reiss Romoli, 274, Torino</addr-line>
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>University of Torino, Computer Science Department</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>C.so Svizzera, 185, Torino</addr-line>
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>italia.it</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Accuracy of self-tracking devices is a key problem when dealing with personal data. Different devices may result in different reported measure, and this may impact on the users' perceived reliability of the devices they used. We conducted an autoethnography to investigate how different devices collect data on specific parameter in order to highlight discrepancies in the measures reported. Results highlight that designers should account for the variability of activities that users may face during their daily practices, as each of them may impact on the device's capability of collecting accurate data. • Human-centered computing➝Human computer interaction.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Personalization;</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>1. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        Personal Informatics systems are currently appealing a large
number of users, spreading beyond the traditional user group of
Quantified Selfers [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]. Quantified selfers have a deep knowledge
of tracking technologies, finding solutions for the possible barriers
that they may encounter during the data collection and
management. However, this is not true for all those people that are
interested and curious toward Personal Informatics, and may try
this kind of technologies for the first time [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>One of the issue that this new user base may encounter is related
to the bewilderment induced by the different possibilities of
tracking the same parameter. Thanks to the spreading of multiple
wearable devices for personal data collection, in fact users can
now rely on different instruments to measure the same parameter.
Each of them has its own physical structure, uses specific
recognition algorithms and is addressed to be worn on certain part
of the body: and all these elements may affect the reported
measures and thus the data collected by the device. The
differences in the data collected that may result from such a
diversity might impact on the user’s perceived accuracy of the
gathered data and on the consequent perceived reliability of the
instrument used.</p>
      <p>We carried out a four-week autoethnographic study to investigate
how different self-tracking tools may lead to different results in
terms of the values of the collected data. The results of the study
reveal that: i) the data collected for a specific target parameter
were different depending on the tools used, and such difference
was primarily due to the position in which these instruments were
worn and the activities performed during the day by the
ethnographer; ii) the discrepancies among the measures reported
by the different tools impacted on their perceived reliability,
pushing the ethnographer to seek strategies to account for the data
collected.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>2. RELATED WORK</title>
      <p>
        Various research has studied how users perceive reliability and
accuracy of self-tracking instruments. Kay et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ] found that
users react negatively to the inaccuracies of their devices, while
Lazar et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ] emphasized that they do care about the accuracy of
the data collected, so that failing to produce accurate information
is one of the main reason for abandoning a specific device.
Consolvo et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] listed seven different types of errors that a
fitness tracker device may produce during its daily use, such as
exchanging one activity or another one, completely failing to
detect an activity, or detecting an activity that was not occurred:
this kind of errors produces frustration in users, directly impacting
on the instrument’s credibility. While Mackinlay [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ] highlighted
that users put to test their devices’ accuracy, but often find
difficulties in calibrating them due to the scarce visibility of their
status. Finally, Yang et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ] outlined the various techniques that
users use to evaluate trackers’ accuracy, emphasizing the different
perceptions that they may have of accuracy and reliability.
3.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>METHOD</title>
      <p>
        We used autoethnography to individuate discrepancies among
diverse trackers and analyze how they may affect the user’s
experience. This method considers the ethnographer’s subjective
experience worth to be analyzed and reported, valuable as that of
the other individuals. The autoethnographer continuously
observes herself to account for the reality she is interested to
explain [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>The second author self-examined the use of four different
wearable devices to compare the data collected and eventually
individuate criticalities due to discrepancies in their accuracy
and/or reliability. The devices were chosen by taking into account
the position in which they are worn, with the goal of exploring the
differences in the gathered measures by them.</p>
      <p>We selected: Withings Activité on the right wrist; Shine Misfits
necklace; Sony SWR30 on the left wrist; GoogleFit application
running background on a Sony Xperia Z3.</p>
      <p>
        The hypothesis was that the recorded data would not be affected
by the influence of the body positioning, all recording
approximately the same data. The self-observation session was
carried out for four weeks. We provide here a brief summary of
the study findings pointing to Marcengo et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] for a more
detailed description.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION</title>
      <p>Sleep data analysis showed interesting problems related with the
personal style of “going to sleep” in relation with the used device.
For instance, the sleep total amount recorded by the Misfit Shine
(necklace) is always higher of about thirty minutes. This point is
due to the fact that the Shine considers the lying position as the
user is already sleeping even if she’s reading a book or watching
her tablet in the bed. So the sleep total amount will always be
increased by the activity performed before falling asleep. The
device with the best accuracy results the one worn on the right
wrist. This makes possible to distinguish the activities performed
with the right hand while lying in the bed as something different
from sleeping (for left-handed user the same principle will work
for the left wrist).</p>
      <p>Also steps showed interesting evidences and relations through life
style and devices. The total steps amount is very biased by the
interaction between the location on the body (if wearable) and the
activities performed by the user. Indeed, considering the data
collected by Withings Activité (on the right wrist) it is clear that if
the user performed a lot of public talking on a specific day
(meetings, showing slides, etc) steps becomes inclined towards
high figures due to the gestures involved. Opposite results become
evident according to different life circumstances. In particular
data became surprisingly low for two conditions. The first one is
when the user walk pushing a stroller. In this case the device does
not log the alternate hanging of the hands and does not see the
activity as walking. The second one occurs if the user carry a
moderately heavy bag (e.g. a small suitcase) depending which
hand holds the bag.</p>
      <p>If the steps are collected by a phone app even more life situation
distortions become evident toward low figures because of all the
occasions when the phone is not on the body (e.g. weekend,
sports, home, etc.). This, in a minor evident manner, is also true
also for wearable devices. On the weekend all data appears
distorted by incomplete or peculiar usage of the device due to
different life activities (i.e. working in the garden, playing with
kids, etc.).</p>
      <p>From these evidences some needs of personalization in the design
of logging devices and apps emerge. Manufacturers need to
consider different designs for different life styles brought by
different types of users with different life patterns (e.g. watching
videos in the bed, walking with a stroller, carrying a bag,
gesturing a lot, etc.). These patterns could be compressed into a
few personas that can lead to different declinations of the same
device or slightly different tracking algorithms on the same
device. This personalization may be transferred directly into the
user experience by collecting specific aspects and habits that
impact on the accuracy of the logging system. In certain case
should be possible also to advise the user about the best body
location to wear the device in relation to her personal lifestyle.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>5. CONCLUSION</title>
      <p>Our study emphasizes the need of considering the idiosyncratic
activities that users carry out during their daily practices in order
to produce more accurate and thus reliable trackers. Activity
recognition algorithms should be tailored to the specific habits of
the single individual as these may be the main culprit for the
inaccurate reporting of the target parameters. Personalization,
thus, should be not only a matter of the services provided by the
new personal informatics technologies, but also a key requirement
for the design and implementation of the modalities for collecting
the data.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>6. REFERENCES</title>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Consolvo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>McDonald</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Toscos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Froehlich</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Harrison</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Klasnja</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>LaMarca</surname>
          </string-name>
          , A.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>LeGrand</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Libby</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Smith</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Landay</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Activity sensing in the wild: a field trial of ubifit garden</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08</source>
          )
          <fpage>1797</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1806</lpage>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ellis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bochner</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>: Autoethnography, personal narrative, and personal reflexivity</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Handbook of qualitative research (2nd. ed.)</source>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Norman</surname>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Denzinand Yvonna S. Lincoln</surname>
          </string-name>
          (eds.). Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA,
          <fpage>733</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>768</lpage>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kay</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Morris</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , schraefel, mc, Kientz,
          <string-name>
            <surname>J. A.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>There's no such thing as gaining a pound: reconsidering the bathroom scale user interface</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing (UbiComp '13)</source>
          ,
          <fpage>401</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>410</lpage>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lazar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Koehler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tanenbaum</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nguyen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <article-title>Why we use and abandon smart devices</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '15)</source>
          . ACM, New York, NY, USA,
          <fpage>635</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>646</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mackinlay</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Phases of Accuracy Diagnosis:(In) visibility of System Status in the Fitbit</article-title>
          .
          <source>Intersect: The Stanford Journal of Science, Technology and Society 6</source>
          ,
          <issue>2</issue>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marcengo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rapp</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Visualization of Human Behavior Data: The Quantified Self</article-title>
          , in Huang L. H.
          <article-title>and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Huang</surname>
          </string-name>
          , W. (Eds.)
          <article-title>Innovative approaches of data visualization and visual analytics</article-title>
          .
          <source>IGI Global</source>
          , Hershey, PA,
          <fpage>236</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>265</lpage>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marcengo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rapp</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cena</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The Falsified Self: Complexities in Personal Data Collection</article-title>
          . To appear
          <source>in Proceedings of HCI International '16</source>
          , Springer,
          <year>2016</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rapp</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cena</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Self-monitoring and Technology: Challenges and Open Issues in Personal Informatics</article-title>
          . In: HCI International.
          <article-title>Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction</article-title>
          .
          <source>Design for All and Accessibility Practice. Lecture Notes in Computer Science</source>
          , Volume
          <volume>8516</volume>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          ,
          <fpage>613</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>622</lpage>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Newman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ackerman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>When fitness trackers don't 'fit': end-user difficulties in the assessment of personal tracking device accuracy</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '15)</source>
          . ACM, New York, NY, USA,
          <fpage>623</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>634</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>