skip to main content
10.1145/3243082.3243120acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswebmediaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

ESPIM System: Interface Evolution to Enable Authoring and Interaction with Multimedia Intervention Programs

Published:16 October 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Collecting data and carrying out interventions with different populations of interest is a common procedure in the professional life of specialists such as psychologists, gerontologists, etc. The ESPIM is a platform designed to enable the authoring of intervention programs by specialists of different domains. The programs authoring is done via a Web interface, and a mobile player is used to display the intervention programs elaborated for the populations of interest of these specialists. This paper reports on the evolution and improvement of the components of this platform. Evaluations conducted with health and education experts point out that the current Web version of the platform is effective for program authoring and is easy to use. Meanwhile, the mobile player has been used by populations of interest of these experts who report on ease of use and engagement with intervention programs. Two real studies using the ESPIM are discussed in this paper and the analyzes conducted in the data collected indicates that most of the participants had a more positive experience with programs when the interaction involves multimedia resources, such as videos, images and audios.

References

  1. James A. Kulik, Chen-lin C. Kulik, and Peter A. Cohen. 1979. A Meta-Analysis of Outcome Studies of Keller's Personalized System of Instruction. American Psychologist 34 (April 1979), 307--318.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Anja Bachmann, Robert Zetzsche, Andrea Schankin, Till Riedel, Michael Beigl, Markus Reichert, Philip Santangelo, and Ulrich Ebner-Priemer. 2015. ESMAC: A Web-Based Configurator for Context-Aware Experience Sampling Apps in Ambulatory Assessment. In Proc. 5th EAI International Conf. on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare (MOBIHEALTH'15). ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering), 15--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Kathy K Baxter, Anna Avrekh, and Bob Evans. 2015. Using experience sampling methodology to collect deep data about your users. In Proc. ACM HCI Extended Abstracts. ACM, 2489--2490. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Niels Van Berkel, Denzil Ferreira, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2017. The Experience Sampling Method on Mobile Devices. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 50, 6 (2017), 93. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Scott Carter and Jennifer Mankoff. 2005. When participants do the capturing: the role of media in diary studies. In Proc. SIGCHI Conf. on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 899--908. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. Csikszentmihalyi and R. Larson. 1987. Validity and reliability of the Experience-Sampling Method. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 175, 9 (Sept. 1987), 526--536.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Stephen Intille, Charles Kukla, and Xiaoyi Ma. 2002. Eliciting user preferences using image-based experience sampling and reflection. In CHI'02 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 738--739. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Fred S. Keller. 1968. "Good-bye, teacher...". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1, 1 (1968), 79--89.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Nicholas D. Lane, Mu Lin, M. Mohammod, x. Yang, H. Lu, G. Cardone, S. Ali, A. Doryab, E. Berke, A. T. Campbell, and Tanzeem Choudhury. 2014. BeWell: Sensing Sleep, Physical Activities and Social Interactions to Promote Wellbeing. Mobile Networks and Applications 19, 3 (June 2014), 345--359. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Amelia Marti, Estibaliz Goyenechea, and J. Alfredo Martínez. 2010. Nutrigenetics: A Tool to Provide Personalized Nutritional Therapy to the Obese. Personalized Nutrition 101 (2010), 21--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Usability engineering. Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Jakob Nielsen and Rolf Molich. 1990. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proc. SIGCHI Conf. on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 249--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Editorial Office. 2017. mHealth is now indexed in PubMed/PMC: a tremendous step forward. mHealth 3 (March 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Kamila R.H. Rodrigues, Caio C. Viel, Isabela Zaine, Bruna C.R. Cunha, Leonardo F. Scalco, and Maria G.C. Pimentel. 2017. Data Collection and Intervention Personalized As Interactive Multimedia Documents. In Proc. 23rd Brazillian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web (WebMedia '17). ACM, USA, 57--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Douglas Schuler and Aki Namioka (Eds.). 1993. Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Liane MR Tarouco, MCJM Fabre, Anita RS Grando, and Mary LP Konrath. 2004. Objetos de Aprendizagem para M-learning. In Florianópolis: SUCESU-Congresso Nacional de Tecnologia da Informação e Comunicação.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Caio C. Viel, Kamila R.H. Rodrigues, Isabela Zaine, Bruna C.R. Cunha, Leonardo F. Scalco, and Maria G.C. Pimentel. 2017. Personalized Ubiquitous Data Collection and Intervention As Interactive Multimedia Documents. In Proc. 2017 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering (DocEng '17). ACM, USA, 223--226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Zhen Yue, Eden Litt, Carrie J Cai, Jeff Stern, Kathy K Baxter, Zhiwei Guan, Nikhil Sharma, and Guangqiang George Zhang. 2014. Photographing information needs: the role of photos in experience sampling method-style research. In Proc. 32nd annual ACM Conf. on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1545--1554. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Isabela Zaine, Kamila R.H. Rodrigues, Bruna C.R. da Cunha, Caio C. Viel, Alex F. Orlando, Olibário J. Machado Neto, Yuri Magagnatto, and Maria das Graças C. Pimentel. 2016. ESPIM: An Ubiquitous Data Collection and Programmed Intervention System using ESM and Mobile Devices. In Proc. 22nd Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web (Webmedia '16). ACM, USA, 13--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. ESPIM System: Interface Evolution to Enable Authoring and Interaction with Multimedia Intervention Programs

    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 Other conferences
      WebMedia '18: Proceedings of the 24th Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web
      October 2018
      437 pages
      ISBN:9781450358675
      DOI:10.1145/3243082

      Copyright © 2018 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: 16 October 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      WebMedia '18 Paper Acceptance Rate37of111submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate270of873submissions,31%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader