Author(s):

  • Arianna Boldi
  • Amon Rapp

Abstract:

The availability of wearable devices recently boosted the popularity of self-tracking technologies. Self-trackers are involved in a complex process of knowledge development, but this cannot be achieved without knowing the body. However, self-tracking devices seem to embrace an abstract and scattered conception of the body, based on unrelated numbers, graphs, and depictions, which may not be integrated into a coherent body image. This may turn into biases and distortions of how we look at our bodies, worsening, rather than improving, our self-knowledge. In this chapter we explore the ways through which the progressive “quantification” introduced by self-tracking technologies is affecting the body. We first explain a series of theoretical constructs concerning the body, which are essential to understand the impact of self-tracking on our bodies, like body schema, body image, and body awareness. Then, we illustrate how individuals’ body image and awareness are affected by the usage of self-tracking technologies in the sports domain. Finally, we point out some lines of future research aimed at providing people with more meaningful representations of their own body, improving their body awareness and even their body image.

Documentation:

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94212-0_9

References:

  1. Marcengo A, Rapp A. Visualization of human behavior data: the quantified self. In: Huang ML, Huang W, editors. Innovative approaches of data visualization and visual analytics. Hershey, PA: IGI Global; 2014. p. 236–65. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4309-3.ch012.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Wolf G. Know thyself: tracking every facet of life, from sleep to mood to Pain, 24/7/365. In: Wired Magazine. 2009. https://www.wired.com/2009/06/lbnp-knowthyself/. Accessed 25 Jan 2020.

  3. Bode M, Kristensen DB. The digital doppelgänger within. A study on self-tracking and the quantified self movement. In: Canniford R, Bajde D, editors. Assembling consumption: researching actors, networks and markets. Oxon: Routledge; 2016. p. 119–35.

    Google Scholar 

  4. van Dijk ET, Westerink JH, Beute, F, IJsselsteijn, WA. In sync: The effect of physiology feedback on the match between heart rate and self-reported stress. 2015. BioMed research international, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/134606.

  5. Rapp A, Cena F. Personal informatics for everyday life: how users without prior self-tracking experience engage with personal data. Int J Human-Comp Stud. 2016;94:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.006.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Rapp A, Marcengo A, Buriano L, Ruffo G, Lai M, Cena F. Designing a personal informatics system for users without experience in self-tracking: a case study. Behav Inform Technol. 2018;37:335–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1436592.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Rapp A, Tirassa M. Know thyself: a theory of the self for personal informatics. Human-Computer Interaction. 2017;32:335–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2017.1285704.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Ihde D. Bodies in technology, vol. 5. University of Minnesota Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rapp A, Tirabeni L. Personal informatics for sport: meaning, body, and social relations in amateur and elite athletes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 2018;25:1–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3196829.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Lupton D. You are your data: self-tracking practices and concepts of data. In: Selke S, editor. Lifelogging. Springer VS: Wiesbaden; 2016. p. 61–79.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Lupton D. Quantifying the body: monitoring and measuring health in the age of mHealth technologies. Crit Public Health. 2013;23:393–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2013.794931.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Ajana B. Governing through biometrics: the biopolitics of identity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2013.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  13. Schüll ND. Data for life: wearable technology and the design of self-care. BioSocieties. 2016;11:317–33. https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2015.47.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Van der Ploeg I. The illegal body: “Eurodac” and the politics of biometric identification. Ethics Inf Technol. 1999;1:295–302. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010064613240.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Morasso P, Casadio M, Mohan V, Rea F, Zenzeri J. Revisiting the body-schema concept in the context of whole-body postural-focal dynamics. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015; https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00083.

  16. Noë A. Action in perception. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Barrett LF, Quigley KS, Bliss-moreau E, Aronson KR. Interoceptive sensitivity and self-reports of emotional experience. 2004;87:684–697. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.684.

  18. Cameron O. Visceral sensory neuroscience. In: Interoception. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sherrington CS. The integrative action of the nervous system. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1947.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Longo MR, Schüür F, Kammers MPM, Tsakiris M, Haggard P. Self-awareness and the body image. Acta Psychol. 2009;132:166–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.02.003.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Gallagher S. How the body shapes the mind. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Bonnier P, Asomatognosia P, L’aschématie B. Rev Neurol. 1905;13:605–9. Epilepsy & Behavior. 2009;16:401-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2009.09.020.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Head H, Holmes G. Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain. 1991;34:102–254. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/34.2-3.102.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  24. Schwoebel J, Coslett HB. Evidence for multiple, distinct representations of the human body. J Cogn Neurosci. 2005;17:543–53. https://doi.org/10.1162/0898929053467587.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Glashouwer KA, Van Der VRML, Adipatria F, Jong PJ, De Vocks S. The role of body image disturbance in the onset, maintenance, and relapse of anorexia nervosa: a systematic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2019;74 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2019.101771.

  26. De Vignemont F, De. Body schema and body image–pros and cons. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48:669–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.09.022.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gibson, JJ. The senses considered as perceptual systems. 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Maturana HR, Varela FJ. Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living. Boston, MA: Reidel Pub. Co.; 1980.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  29. Berthoz A. The vicarious brain, creator of worlds. Harvard University Press; 2017.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  30. Tsakiris M, Haggard P. The rubber hand illusion revisited: Visuotactile integration and self-attribution. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2005;31:80–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.1.80.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sabik NJ, Lupis SB, Geiger AM, Wolf JM. Are body perceptions and perceived appearance judgments by others linked to stress and depressive symptoms? J Appl Biobehav Res. 2019;24 https://doi.org/10.1111/jabr.12131.

  32. Kamps CL, Berman SL. Body image and identity formation: the role of identity distress. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologia. 2011;43:267–77. https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.v43i2.739.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  33. Vartanian LR. When the body defines the self: self-concept clarity, internalization, and body image. J Soc Clin Psychol. 2009;28:94–126. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2009.28.1.94.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  34. Linville PW. Self-complexity and affective extremity: Don’t put all of your eggs in one cognitive basket. Soc Cogn. 1985;3:94–120.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  35. Kling J, Kwakkenbos L, Diedrichs PC, Rumsey N, Frisén A, Brandão MP, Silva AG, Dooley B, Rodgers RF, Fitzgerald A. Systematic review of body image measures. Body Image. 2019;30:170–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.06.006.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tylka TL, Wood-Barcalow NL. The body appreciation Scale-2: item refinement and psychometric evaluation. Body Image. 2015;12:53–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.09.006.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mendelson BK, Mendelson MJ, White DR. Body-esteem scale for adolescents and adults. J Pers Assess. 2001;76:90–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA76016.

    CAS  CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Cooper PJ, Taylor MJ, Cooper Z, Fairburn CG. The development and validation of the body shape questionnaire. Int J Eat Disord. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-108X.

  39. Moss TP, Rosser BA. The moderated relationship of appearance valence on appearance self consciousness: development and testing of new measures of appearance schema components. PLoS One. 2012;7 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050605.

  40. McCreary DR, Sasse DK. An exploration of the drive for muscularity in adolescent boys and girls. J Am Coll Health Assoc. 2000;48:297–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448480009596271.

    CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  41. Fairburn CG, Bèglin SJ. Assessment of eating disorders: interview or self-report questionnaire? Int J Eat Disord. 1994;16:363–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-108X.

    CAS  CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Garner DM. Eating disorder Inventory-3 professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Brown TA, Cash TF, Mikulka PJ. Attitudinal body-image assessment: factor analysis of the body-self relations questionnaire. J Pers Assess. 1990;55:135–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.1990.9674053.

    CAS  CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bailey KA, Gammage KL, van Ingen C. How do you define body image? Exploring conceptual gaps in understandings of body image at an exercise facility. Body Image. 2017;23:69–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.08.003.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Edwards A. The impact of body image on Fitbit use: a comparison across genders. Health Inf Libr J. 2017;34:247–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12188.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  46. Hortensius J, Kars MC, Wierenga WS, Kleefstra N, Bilo HJ, van der Bijl JJ. Perspectives of patients with type 1 or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes on self-monitoring of blood glucose: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:167.

    CrossRef  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Pols J, Willems D, Aanestad M. Making sense with numbers. Unravelling ethico-psychological subjects in practices of self-quantification. Sociol Health Illn. 2019;41:98–115.

    CrossRef  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Hilviu D, Rapp, A. Narrating the Quantified Self. In: Adjunct Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (UbiComp/ISWC’15 Adjunct). 2015. New York: ACM, 1051–1056. https://doi.org/10.1145/2800835.2800959.

  49. Mehling WE, Price C, Daubenmier JJ, Acree M, Bartmess E, Stewart A. The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA). 2012;7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048230.

  50. Ferentzi E, Horváth Á, Köteles F. Do body-related sensations make feel us better? Subjective Well-being is associated only with the subjective aspect of interoception. Psychophysiology. 2019;56 https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13319.

  51. Garfinkel SN, Seth AK, Barrett AB, Suzuki K, Critchley HD. Knowing your own heart: distinguishing interoceptive accuracy from interoceptive awareness. Biol Psychol. 2015;104:65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.11.004.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Farb NAS, Daubenmier J, Price CJ, Gard T, Kerr C, Dunn BD, et al. Interoception, contemplative practice, and health. Front Psychol. 2015;6:886. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00763.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  53. Danner U, Avian A, Macheiner T, Salchinger B, Dalkner N, Fellendorf FT, Birner A, Bengesser SA, Platzer M, Kapfhammer HP, Probst M, Reininghaus EZ. “ABC”–the awareness-body-chart: a new tool assessing body awareness. PLoS One. 2017;12:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186597.

    CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  54. Damasio AR. Mental self: the person within. Nature. 2003;423 https://doi.org/10.1038/423227a.

  55. Pylvänäinen P, Lappalainen R. Change in body image among depressed adult outpatients after a dance movement therapy group treatment. Arts in Psychotherapy. 2018;59:34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2017.10.006.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  56. Valenzuela-Moguillansky C, Reyes-Reyes A, Gaete MI. Exteroceptive and interoceptive body-self awareness in fibromyalgia patients. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:117.

    CrossRef  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Sharon T, Zandbergen D. From data fetishism to quantifying selves: self-tracking practices and the other values of data. New Media Soc. 2017;19:1695–709. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816636090.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  58. Garcia-Cordero I, Esteves S, Mikulan EP, Hesse E, Baglivo FH, Silva W, et al. Attention, in and out: scalp-level and intracranial EEG correlates of interoception and exteroception. Front Neurosci. 2017;11:411. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00411.

    CrossRef  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Astin JA, Shapiro SL, Eisenberg DM, Forys KL. Mind-body medicine: state of the science, implications for practice. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2003;16:131–47.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Ainley V, Tsakiris M. Body conscious? Interoceptive awareness, measured by heartbeat perception, is negatively correlated with self-objectification. PLoS One. 2013;8:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055568.

    CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  61. Silk M, Millington B, Rich E, Bush A. (re-)thinking digital leisure. Leis Stud. 2016;35:712–23.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  62. Berardi F. The soul at work: from alienation to autonomy, trans. Francesca Cadel and Giuseppina Mecchia. New York: Semiotext (e); 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Zhao S. The digital self: through the looking glass of telecopresent others. Symb Interact. 2005;28:387–405.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  64. Cooley CH. Human nature and the social order. Routledge [1902] (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  65. RSPH. Social media and young people’s mental health and wellbeing. 2017. http://www.rsph.org.uk/our-work/policy/social-media-and-young-people-s-mental-health-and-wellbeing.html. Accessed 4 January 2020.

  66. Eikey EV, Reddy MC. “It’s definitely been a journey” a qualitative study on how women with eating disorders use weight loss apps. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 2017. pp. 642–654.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Rapp A, Tirabeni L. Self-tracking while doing sport: comfort, motivation, attention and lifestyle of athletes using personal informatics tools. Int J Human-Comp Stud. 2020;140(102434):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102434.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  68. Esmonde K. Training, tracking, and traversing: digital materiality and the production of bodies and/in space in runners’ fitness tracking practices. Leis Stud. 2019;38:804–17.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  69. Reeder B, David A. Health at hand: a systematic review of smart watch uses for health and wellness. J Biomed Inform. 2016;63:269–76.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Mencarini E, Rapp A, Tirabeni L, Zanacanaro M. Designing wearable Systems for Sport: a review of trends and opportunities in human-computer interaction. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems. 2019;49(4):314–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2019.2919702.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  71. Shin G, Jarrahi M, Fei Y, Karami A, Gafinowitz N, Byun A, Lu X. Wearable activity trackers, accuracy, adoption, acceptance. And health impact: a systematic literature review. J Biomed Inform. 2019;93:103153.

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Rapp A, Cena F, Kay J, Kummerfeld B, Hopfgartner F, Plumbaum T, Larsen JE, Epstein DA, Gouveia R. New frontiers of quantified self 2: going beyond numbers. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct (UbiComp ‘16). New York: ACM; 2016. p. 506–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/2968219.2968331.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  73. Rapp A, Cena F. Self-monitoring and technology: challenges and open issues in personal informatics. In: Proceedings of the HCI International Conference. In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Design for All and Accessibility Practice Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8516. Springer; 2014. p. 613–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07509-9_58.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  74. Rapp A. Gamification for self-tracking: from world of Warcraft to the Design of Personal Informatics Systems. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’18). New York, NY, USA, Paper 80, 15 pages: ACM; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173654.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  75. Wac K. Quality of life technologies. In: Gellman M, editor. Encyclopedia of behavioral medicine. New York, NY, USA: Springer; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6439-6_102013-1.

The SELF Institute