=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1833/1_Orji
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1833/1_Orji.pdf
|volume=Vol-1833
}}
==None==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1833/1_Orji.pdf
Preface to the Second International Workshop on
Personalizing Persuasive Technologies
Rita Orji
University of Waterloo, Canada
rita.orji@uwaterloo.ca
1 Introduction
Personalizing Persuasive Technologies (PPTs) is a growing research area which inves-
tigates how interactive systems can be designed to better suit people of various dispo-
sitions, inclinations, and capabilities, and hence increase the efficacy of persuasive
technology to motivate behavior change. Research has found that individual character-
istics such as personality type [21–23], age [20], gender [24, 25], gamer type [17, 26,
27], and culture [28, 29] as well as an individual’s susceptibility to persuasive attempts
[14, 30] can be useful dimensions for tailoring persuasive technologies. Research has
also explored how various psychological processes can be used to explain the persua-
sive effect of tailoring [15, 31, 32].
In April 2017, we had the pleasure to organize the 2nd edition of the PPTs Workshop
in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The workshop offered researchers and practitioners
from interdisciplinary backgrounds a platform to present their work and discuss their
ideas on the opportunities and challenges facing the personalizing persuasive technol-
ogy research community.
The Personalizing Persuasive Technologies Workshop 2017 (PPT'17) was a big success,
with 48 participants (from 15 different countries), 12 paper presentations, and a keynote
presentation from Prof. Judith Masthoff, from the University of Aberdeen. Each submis-
sion went through a thorough peer-review process and was assessed by at least two
reviewers, using the single-blind peer-review approach. The submissions were evalu-
ated based on their scientific quality and relevance to the PPTs workshop.
The accepted contributions covered two broad areas of Personalizing Persuasive
Technologies: Personalization Methods, Tools, and Theories and Personalized Appli-
cations. Contributions in the personalized application can be grouped into three broad
categories: personalized eHealth applications, personalized eCommerce applications,
and personalized games and gamification.
Copyright © by the paper’s authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes.
In: R. Orji, M. Reisinger, M. Busch, E. Mattheiss, A. Dijkstra, M. Kaptein (eds.): Proceedings
of the Personalization in Persuasive Technology Workshop, Persuasive Technology 2017, Am-
sterdam, The Netherlands, 04-04-2017, published at http://ceur-ws.org
ii Preface to the Second International Workshop on Personalizing Persuasive Technologies
2 Personalization Methods, Tools, and Theories
How to achieve personalization in the context of persuasive technologies, who to per-
sonalize for, and whether there is a need to personalize are current research questions
of interest to the PPTs researchers and practitioners. Many submissions to the PPT’17
contributed to this direction:
Kaczmarczyk and Markopoulos, [1] in their paper “An Avatar Creator as a Tool for
Constructing a Personalized Persuasive Profile,” discussed how gamification can be
used as an alternative approach to the personality questionnaires for constructing users’
profiles and predicting their individual susceptibility to different social influence ap-
proaches. The authors discuss why the profile assessed using their proposed approach
(avatar creation) does not completely match the one evaluated using the Susceptibility
to Persuasive Strategies Questionnaire.
Oyibo et al., [2] in their paper “Investigation of the Influence of Personality Traits
on Cialdini’s Persuasive Strategies,” investigated the relationships between personality
traits measured using the Big Five personality traits and the six persuasive principles
by Cialdini – Reciprocity, Scarcity, Authority, Consensus, and Liking. Designers can
use their results to provide personalized solutions precisely targeting specific personal-
ity types.
Rezai et al., [3] in their paper “Investigating Efficacy of Regulatory Fit Theory in
Design of Persuasive Systems That Promote Physical Activity” discussed their applica-
tion of Regulatory Fit Theory in the context of physical activity promotion. In an on-
going study, participants receive persuasive messages tailored or contra-tailored to their
regulatory orientation. The outcome of the study will demonstrate if the proposed per-
sonalization approach is effective.
Doreen et al., [4] in their paper “Personalized Design Process for Persuasive Tech-
nologies,” discussed a user-centered approach to designing personalized persuasive
technologies called Personalized Design Process model (PDP-model). The PDP pro-
cess incorporates discussions with domain experts, end-users, families, and relatives to
PPTs design.
Oyibo et al., [5] in their paper “Investigation of the Persuasiveness of Social Influ-
ence in Persuasive Technology and the Effect of Age and Gender,” examined the effect
of age and gender on the persuasiveness of social influence strategies - Social Learning,
Social Comparison, Competition and Reward. They found that males are more suscep-
tibility to Reward and Competition than females. Similarly, younger people are more
susceptible to Reward and Competition. Their findings suggest that Reward and Com-
petition will be more effective for younger males than the other groups.
Preface to the Second International Workshop on Personalizing Persuasive Technologies
iii
3 Personalized Persuasive Applications: eHealth, eCommerce,
and Other Domains
Many submissions to this workshop explored the domain dependency of the efficacy
of personalized persuasive technologies by analyzing, designing, and evaluating PPT
targeted at various behavior domains including Health and Ecommerce.
Dijkstra and Kooy, [6] in their paper “The Learning model of Smartphone Feedback
Applications in the field of e-health applied to the Step Counter The Learning model of
Smartphone Feedback Applications,” analyzed feedback mechanism in persuasive
health application, their working principles, and their implications for the design of
feedback devices using the Learning Model of Smartphone Feedback Applications.
Azeved et al., [7] in their paper “Towards a Platform for Persuading Older Adults
to Adopt Healthy Behaviours,” introduced an End-User Development platform that al-
lows older adults and their caregivers to tailor Web applications to persuade older adults
to adopt healthy behaviors.
Adaji and Vassileve, [8] in their paper “Tailoring Persuasive Strategies in E-Com-
merce,” explored the effects of different persuasive strategies in e-commerce based on
shopper’s data from Amazon.com. The work underlines the importance of tailoring
persuasive strategies to individual users.
Seitz, [9] in his paper titled “Personalizing Password Policies and Strength Feed-
back,” argues that personalizing password polices and strength meters by focusing on
individual differences rather than on the tasks may improve the user experience of pass-
word-based authentication.
4 Personalized Games and Gamification
Khoshkangini et al., [10] in their paper “Generating Personalized Challenges to En-
hance the Persuasive Power of Gamification,” described a system which uses Proce-
dural Content Generation and Recommender Systems to ensure long-term use of gam-
ified applications by avoiding frustration or boredom. The results of a field case study
in the area of sustainable urban mobility are promising and show that the chosen ap-
proach has a persuasive effect on players.
Jacoby and Coady, [11] in their paper “Generating Personalized Challenges to En-
hance the Persuasive Power of Gamification,” discussed how mixed reality environ-
ments could be used to enable collaborators to share perspectives, e.g. in terms of per-
sonal experiences of history. Their paper raises a question on if and how a personaliza-
tion approach could be helpful in the context of empowering individuals to act on global
issues.
Fountoukidou et al., [12] in their paper “Using tailoring to increase the effectiveness
of a persuasive game-based training for novel technologies,” discussed the theoretical
iv Preface to the Second International Workshop on Personalizing Persuasive Technologies
development and the use of tailored communication in a persuasive game-based train-
ing for the Multimedia Authoring and Management using your Eyes and Mind
(MAMEM) technology to enhance user acceptance.
References
1. Kaczmarczyk M, Markopoulos P (2017) An avatar creator as a tool for constructing a
personalized persuasive profile. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
2. Oyibo K, Orji R, Vassileva J (2017) Investigation of the Influence of Personality Traits on
Cialdini ’ s Persuasive Strategies. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
3. Rezai LS, Chin J, Bassett-Gunter R, Catherine Burns (2017) Investigating Efficacy of
Regulatory Fit Theory in Design of Persuasive Systems That Promote Physical Activity. Int.
Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
4. Dooren MMM Van, Visch VT, Spijkerman R (2017) Personalized Design Process for
Persuasive Technologies. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
5. Oyibo K, Orji R, Vassileva J (2017) Investigation of the Persuasiveness of Social Influence
in Persuasive Technology and the Effect of Age and Gender. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas.
Technol.
6. Dijkstra A, Kooy E (2017) The Learning model of Smartphone Feedback Applications in the
field of e-health applied to the Step Counter The Learning model of Smartphone Feedback
Applications. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
7. Azeved C, Chesta C, Coelho J, et al (2017) Towards a Platform for Persuading Older Adults
to Adopt Healthy Behaviours. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
8. Adaji I, Vassileva J (2017) Tailoring Persuasive Strategies in E-Commerce. Int. Work. Pers.
Persuas. Technol.
9. Seitz T (2017) Personalizing Password Policies and Strength Feedback. Int. Work. Pers.
Persuas. Technol.
10. Khoshkangini R, Valetto G, Marconi A (2017) Generating Personalized Challenges to
Enhance the Persuasive Power of Gamification. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
11. Jacoby D, Coady Y (2017) Perspective Shifts in Mixed Reality : Persuasion through
Collaborative Gaming. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
12. Fountoukidou S, Ham J, Midden C, Matzat U (2017) Using tailoring to increase the
effectiveness of a persuasive game-based training for novel technologies. Int. Work. Pers.
Persuas. Technol.
13. Orji R (2014) Design for Behaviour Change: A Model-driven Approach for Tailoring
Persuasive Technologies. PhD Thesis:1–257.
14. Kaptein M, De Ruyter B, Markopoulos P, Aarts E (2012) Adaptive Persuasive Systems.
ACM Trans Interact Intell Syst 2:1–25. doi: 10.1145/2209310.2209313
15. Dijkstra A (2014) The persuasive effects of personalization through: name mentioning in a
smoking cessation message. User Model User-adapt Interact 24:393–411. doi:
10.1007/s11257-014-9147-x
16. Busch M, Mattheiss E, Hochleitner W, et al (2016) Using Player Type Models for
Personalized Game Design - An Empirical Investigation. Int. J. Interact. Des. Archit.
Accepted f:
17. Orji R, Mandryk RL, Vassileva J, Gerling KM (2013) Tailoring persuasive health games to
gamer type. In: Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. - CHI ’13. ACM Press,
New York, New York, USA, pp 2467–2476
Preface to the Second International Workshop on Personalizing Persuasive Technologies
v
18. Egan D (1988) Individual differences in human-computer interaction. Handb Human-
computer Interact M Helander (ed) Elsevier Sci Publ Amsterdam 543–568.
19. Oinas-kukkonen H, Harjumaa M (2009) Persuasive Systems Design : Key Issues , Process
Model , and System Features Persuasive Systems Design : Key Issues , Process Model , and
System Features. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 24:28.
20. Orji R, Mandryk RL, Vassileva J (2015) Gender, Age, and Responsiveness to Cialdini’s
Persuasion Strategies. In: Persuas. Technol. pp 147–159
21. Halko S, Kientz JA (2010) Personality and Persuasive Technology: An Exploratory Study
on Health-Promoting Mobile Applications. In: Persuas. Technol. Springer, pp 150–161
22. Arteaga SM, Kudeki M, Woodworth A, Kurniawan S (2010) Mobile system to motivate
teenagers’ physical activity. In: Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Interact. Des. Child. ACM, Barcelona,
Spain, pp 1–10
23. Alkış N, Taşkaya Temizel T (2015) The impact of individual differences on influence
strategies. Pers Individ Dif 87:147–152. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.037
24. Orji R, Mandryk RL, Vassileva J (2014) Gender and Persuasive Technology: Examining the
Persuasiveness of Persuasive Strategies by Gender Groups. In: Adjun. Proc. 9th Int. Conf.
Persuas. Technol. pp 48–52
25. Orji RO, Vassileva J, Mandryk RL (2013) Modeling Gender Differences in Healthy Eating
Determinants for Persuasive Intervention Design. Persuas Technol 7822:161–173. doi:
10.1007/978-3-642-37157-8
26. Orji R, Vassileva J, Mandryk RL (2014) Modeling the efficacy of persuasive strategies for
different gamer types in serious games for health. User Model User-adapt Interact 24:453–
498. doi: 10.1007/s11257-014-9149-8
27. Busch M, Mattheiss E, Orji R, et al (2015) Personalization in serious and persuasive games
and gamified interactions. CHI Play 2015 - Proc 2015 Annu Symp Comput Interact Play
811–816. doi: 10.1145/2793107.2810260
28. Khaled R, Barr P, Noble J, et al (2006) Our place or mine? Exploration into Collectivism-
Focused Persuasive Technology Design. Persuas. Technol.
29. Orji R, Mandryk RL (2014) Developing culturally relevant design guidelines for encouraging
healthy eating behavior. Int J Hum Comput Stud 72:207–223. doi:
10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.08.012
30. Kaptein M, Markopoulos P (2009) Can you be persuaded? individual differences in
susceptibility to persuasion. In: INTERACT. pp 115–118
31. Dijkstra A (2008) The Psychology of Tailoring-Ingredients in Computer-Tailored
Persuasion. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 2:765–784. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-
9004.2008.00081.x
32. Hawkins RP, Kreuter M, Resnicow K, et al (2008) Understanding tailoring in communicating
about health. Health Educ Res 23:454–66. doi: 10.1093/her/cyn004
33. Orji R (2016) Preface to the International Workshop on Personalization in Persuasive
Technology : Research Challenges and Opportunities Strategies Personalization in
Persuasive Technology. In: Proc. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol. pp 1–5
34. Personalization in Persuasive Technology Workshop. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1582/.