=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2089/Praface_PPT2018
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2089/Praface_PPT2018.pdf
|volume=Vol-2089
}}
==None==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2089/Praface_PPT2018.pdf
Preface to the Third International Workshop on
Personalizing Persuasive Technologies
Rita Orji
Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS Canada;
rita.orji@dal.ca
1 Introduction
As Persuasive Technologies (PTs) advance in both complexity and application areas,
there is an increasing need to personalize them. Personalizing Persuasive
Technologies (PPT) is the act of tailoring them to the target audience to increase their
relevance, motivational appeal, user experience, and hence their overall effectiveness
at promoting desirable behaviours [1]. Previous research has shown that individual
characteristics such as personality type [2–5], age [6, 7], gender [8, 9], gamer type
[10–13], and culture [14, 15] as well as an individual’s susceptibility to persuasive
attempts [16, 17] can be useful dimensions for tailoring persuasive technologies.
However, there are still many unexplored issues pertaining to designing,
implementing, and evaluating personalized persuasive systems and the efficacy of
personalized persuasive systems in different domains. Therefore, this workshop aimed
to provoke discussions and advance research in this area by bringing together
researchers and practitioners to discuss theoretical and practical considerations for
developing and evaluating PPT.
In April 2017, we had the pleasure to organize the 3rd edition of the PPTs Workshop
in Waterloo, Canada. 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 technologies
research community. A total of 12 papers were accepted and presented at the
workshop. The workshop also witnessed a keynote presentation from Prof. Julita
Vassileva, from the University of Saskatchewan, Canada. Each submission 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 evaluated based on their
scientific quality and relevance to the PPTs workshop.
The accepted contributions covered three broad areas of Personalizing Persuasive
Technologies: Personalization Theories, Tools, and Methods; Personalized
Applications: eHealth, eCommerce, eLearning, Mobility and Social Network; and
Personalized Games and Gamification.
1
2 Personalization Methods, Tools, and Theories
In this area, current research issues of interest include how to achieve personalization
in the context of persuasive technologies; who to personalize for, and whether there is
a need to personalize are. Many submissions to the PPT’18 contributed to this
direction:
Ralph et al. [18], in their paper “Personalizing Virtual Experiences: Metrics for
Persuasive Prototypes”, proposed a hybrid approach for evaluating the persuasiveness
of personalized virtual reality.
Oyibo et al. [19], in their paper “The Susceptibility of Africans to Persuasive
Strategies : A Case Study of Nigeria”, investigated how persuasive technologies could
be tailored to Africans by exploring the susceptibility of Nigerians to the six
persuasive principles by Cialdini – Reciprocity, Scarcity, Authority, Consensus, and
Liking.
Abdullahi et al. [20], in their work titled “The Influence of Cognitive Ability on the
Susceptibility to Persuasive Strategies”, explored how PT can be personalized to
individual users based on their cognitive level.
Similarly, Adaji et al., in their paper “Understanding Low Review Ratings in Online
Communities. A Personality Based Approach”, explored the relation between review
quality, reviewers’ personality and the persuasiveness of reward for reviewers of
various personalities.
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 E-commerce.
Haque et al. [21], in their work “Measuring the Influence of a Persuasive Application
to Promote Physical Activity”, investigated the efficacy of a theory-driven persuasive
application for motivating physical activity in an office environment.
Adaji et al. [22], in their work “Shopper Types and The Influence of Persuasive
Strategies in E-Commerce”, investigated the relationship between the six persuasive
principles by Cialdini – Reciprocity, Scarcity, Authority, Consensus, and Liking and
shopper’s personality type.
Nkwo et al. [23] analysed two popular African eCommerce sites and deconstructed
the personalization approaches employed to attract customers and promote sales
2
among African audience in their work titled “E-Commerce Personalization in Africa :
A Comparative Analysis of Jumia and Konga.”
Orji et al. [24], in their paper “Personalized Persuasion for Promoting Students’
Engagement and Learning”, designed a personalized persuasive system to engage
learners and promote learning among university students using social influence
strategies.
Anagnostopoulou et al. [25], in their paper “How to not be Annoying: Adjusting
Persuasive Interventions Intensity when Nudging for Sustainable Travel Choices”,
proposed an approach for personalizing persuasive technologies by adjusting the
intensity of persuasive messages.
Arya et al. [26], in their work “User Trust Graph : A Model to Measure
Trustworthiness”, explored how to evaluate the trustworthiness of users of tweet
graphs in the context of persuasive recommender systems.
4 Personalized Games and Gamification
Ndulue C. and Orji R [27], in their work “STD PONG : A Personalized Persuasive
Game for Risky Sexual Behaviour Change in Africa”, described the design of a
personalized persuasive game for motivating risky sexual behaviour change among
African youths.
Tondello G. and Nacke L. E. [28], in their paper “Towards Customizing Gameful
Systems by Gameful Design Elements”, described an approach for personalizing
gameful systems by allowing users to select their preferred design element.
References
1. Orji R, Busch M, Reisinger M, et al (2017) Personalizing Persuasive
Technologies : Progress , Challenges , and Opportunities. In: Persuas. Technol.
pp 117–120
2. Halko S, Kientz JA (2010) Personality and Persuasive Technology: An Exploratory
Study on Health-Promoting Mobile Applications. In: Persuas. Technol. Springer,
pp 150–161
3. 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
4. Oyibo K, Orji R, Vassileva J (2017) Investigation of the Influence of Personality
Traits on Cialdini ’ s Persuasive Strategies. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
5. Orji R, Nacke LE, DiMarco C (2017) Towards personality-driven persuasive
health games and gamified systems. In: Proc. SIGCHI Conf. pp 1015–1027
6. Orji R, Mandryk RL, Vassileva J (2015) Gender, Age, and Responsiveness to
Cialdini’s Persuasion Strategies. In: Persuas. Technol. pp 147–159
3
7. Oyibo K, Orji R, Vassileva J (2017) The influence of culture in the effect of age
and gender on social influence in persuasive technology. UMAP 2017 - Adjun
Publ 25th Conf User Model Adapt Pers. doi: 10.1145/3099023.3099071
8. 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
9. Orji RO, Vassileva J, Mandryk RL (2013) Modeling Gender Differences in Healthy
Eating Determinants for Persuasive Intervention Design. In: Berkovsky S, Freyne
J (eds) Persuas. Technol. pp 161–173
10. 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
11. 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
12. 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
13. Orji R, Tondello GF, Nacke LE (2018) Personalizing Persuasive Strategies in
Gameful Systems to Gamification User Types. Proc SIGCHI Conf Hum Factors
Comput Syst - CHI ’18. doi: doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174009
14. Khaled R, Barr P, Noble J, et al (2006) Our place or mine? Exploration into
collectivism-focused persuasive technology design. In: Int. Conf. Persuas.
Technol. Auton. Couns. Psychother. Behav. Chang. pp 72–83
15. 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
16. Kaptein M, De Ruyter B, Markopoulos P, Aarts E (2012) Adaptive Persuasive
Systems: A Study of Tailored Persuasive Text Messages to Reduce Snacking.
ACM Trans Interact Intell Syst 2:1–25. doi: 10.1145/2209310.2209313
17. Kaptein M, Markopoulos P, De Ruyter B, Aarts E (2009) Can you be persuaded?
Individual differences in susceptibility to persuasion. In: Human-computer
Interact. pp 115–118
18. Ralph R, Wynden A, Richardson M, et al Personalizing Virtual Experiences :
Metrics for Persuasive Prototypes. In: Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol. pp 1–7
19. Oyibo K, Orji R, Vassileva J The Susceptibility of Africans to Persuasive
Strategies : A Case Study of Nigeria. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
20. Abdullahi AM, Oyibo K, Orji R The Influence of Cognitive Ability on the
Susceptibility to Persuasive Strategies. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
21. Haque S, Isomursu M, Kangas M, Jämsä T Measuring the Influence of a
Persuasive Application to Promote Physical Activity. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas.
Technol.
22. Adaji I, Oyibo K, Vassileva J Shopper Types and The Influence of Persuasive
Strategies in E-Commerce. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
4
23. Nkwo M, Orji R, Nwokeji J, Ndulue C E-Commerce Personalization in Africa : A
Comparative Analysis of Jumia and Konga. In: Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
pp 1–9
24. Orji FA, Vassileva J, Greer J Personalized Persuasion for Promoting Students ’
Engagement and Learning. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
25. Anagnostopoulou E, Bothos E, Magoutas B, Mentzas G How to not be
Annoying : Adjusting Persuasive Interventions Intensity when Nudging for
Sustainable Travel Choices. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
26. Arya A User Trust Graph : A Model to Measure Trustworthiness. Int. Work.
Pers. Persuas. Technol.
27. Ndulue C, Orji R STD PONG : A Personalized Persuasive Game for Risky Sexual
Behaviour Change in Africa. In: Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol. pp 1–7
28. Tondello GF, Nacke LE Towards Customizing Gameful Systems by Gameful
Design Elements. Int. Work. Pers. Persuas. Technol.
5