Author(s):

Mariannn (Maz) Hardey

Abstract:

The purpose of this article is to examine the effect of different types of self-tracking users (trackers) on the health behaviours of others living in the same household. The study takes an international perspective, examining tracking practises from 13 households based in Europe, the United Kingdom and the United States to determine how trackers contribute to emerging cultural and social factors across life stages. The findings contribute to digital health understandings by shedding light on collective practises formed within frequently intergenerational households. The study emphasises the importance of cross-cultural and intergenerational tracking research to foster collective and symbolic health engagement. The article delves into the intersection of online and offline dynamics to describe the social practice of digital health culture. It sheds new light on structural and agency issues in households sharing self-tracking experiences.

Documentation:

https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076221093131

References:
1.Kristensen, DB, Ruckenstein, M. Co-evolving with self-tracking technologies. New Media Soc 2018; 20: 3624–3640.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
2.Lupton, D . Thinking with care about personal data profiling: a more-than-human approach. Int J Commun Syst 2020; 14: 3165–3183.
Google Scholar
3.Lupton, D . ‘Sharing is caring’: Australian self-trackers’ concepts and practices of personal data sharing and privacy. Front Digital Health 2021; 3.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
4.Pink, S, Fors, V. Being in a mediated world: self-tracking and the mind–body–environment. Cultural Geographies 2017; 24: 375–388.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
5.Nettleton, S, Green, J. Thinking about changing mobility practices: how a social practice approach can help. Sociol Health Illn 2014; 36: 82–94.
Google Scholar | Crossref
6.Giddens, A . The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1984.
Google Scholar
7.Bourdieu, P . Structure, habitus, practices. The logic of practice. Trans. Richard Nice. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1990, 52–65.
Google Scholar
8.Maller, CJ . Understanding health through social practices: performance and materiality in everyday life. Sociol Health Illn 2015; 37: 52–66.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
9.Ajana, B . Digital health and the biopolitics of the quantified self. Digital Health 2017; 3: 5.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
10.Aarhus, R, Ballegaard, SA. Negotiating boundaries: managing disease at home. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2010, pp. 1223–1232.
Google Scholar
11.Benetoli, A, Chen, TF, Aslani, P. Consumer health-related activities on social media: exploratory study. J Med Internet Res 2017; 19: e352.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
12.Lupton, D . ‘It’s made me a lot more aware’: a new materialist analysis of health self-tracking. Media Int Aust 2019; 171: 66–79.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
13.Goodyear, VA, Armour, KM. Young people’s perspectives on and experiences of health-related social media, apps, and wearable health devices. Soc Sci 2018; 7: 37.
Google Scholar | Crossref
14.Régnier, F, Chauvel, L. Digital inequalities in the use of self-tracking diet and fitness apps: interview study on the influence of social, economic, and cultural factors. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018; 6: 18.
Google Scholar | Crossref
15.Jin, D, Halvari, H, Maehle, N, et al. Self-tracking behaviour in physical activity: a systematic review of drivers and outcomes of fitness tracking. Behav Inf Technol 2020: 1–20.
Google Scholar
16.Hardey M. Description of the household tracking study. In: Household self-tracking during a global health crisis. Emerald Publishing Limited, 2022.
Google Scholar | Crossref
17.Hjorth, L, Lupton, D. Digitised caring intimacies: more-than-human intergenerational care in Japan. Int J Cult Stud 2021; 24: 584–602.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
18.Hofstede, G . Cultures and organisations: software of the mind. London: McGraw–Hill, 1991.
Google Scholar
19.Sharon, T, Zandbergen, D. From data fetishism to quantifying selves: self-tracking practices and the other values of data. New Media & Society 2017; 19: 1695–1709.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
20.Beer, D . Metric power. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.
Google Scholar | Crossref
21.Neustaedter, C, Elliot, K, Greenberg, S. Interpersonal awareness in the domestic realm. In: Proceedings of the 18th Australia conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Design: Activities, Artefacts and Environments. 2006, pp. 15–22.
Google Scholar | Crossref
22.Pina, LR, Sien, SW, Ward, T, et al. From personal informatics to family informatics: Understanding family practices around health monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2017 acm conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing. 2017, pp. 2300–2315.
Google Scholar | Crossref
23.Grimes, A, Tan, D, Morris, D. Toward technologies that support family reflections on health. In: Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work. 2009, pp. 311–320.
Google Scholar | Crossref
24.Hardey M. On the body of the consumer: performance-seeking with wearables and health and fitness apps. Sociol Health Illn 2019; 41(6): 991-1004.
Google Scholar | Crossref
25.Will CM, Henwood F, Weiner K, et al. Negotiating the practical ethics of ‘self-tracking’in intimate relationships: looking for care in healthy living. Soc Sci Med 2020; 266: 113301.
Google Scholar | Crossref
26.Loe, M . Doing it my way: old women, technology and wellbeing. Sociol Health Illn 2010; 32: 319–334.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
27.Yamashita, N, Kuzuoka, H, Hirata, K, et al. Changing moods: How manual tracking by family caregivers improves caring and family communication. In: Proceedings of the 2017 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 2017, pp. 158–169.
Google Scholar | Crossref
28.Ferdous, HS, Ploderer, B, Davis, H, et al. TableTalk: integrating personal devices and content for commensal experiences at the family dinner table. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing. 2016, pp. 132–143.
Google Scholar | Crossref
29.Lupton D. Digital companion species and eating data: implications for theorising digital data-human assemblages. Big Data Soc 2016; 3(1): 2053951715619947
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
30.Toner, J . Exploring the dark-side of fitness trackers: normalization, objectification and the anaesthetisation of human experience. Perform Enhanc Health 2018; 6: 75–81.
Google Scholar | Crossref
31.Jørgensen, MS, Nissen, FK, Paay, J, et al. Monitoring children’s physical activity and sleep: a study of surveillance and information disclosure. In: Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction. 2016, pp. 50–58.
Google Scholar
32.Kelly, C . ‘Let’s do some jumping together’: intergenerational participation in the use of remote technology to co-construct social relations over distance. J Early Child Res 2015; 13: 29–46.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
33.Plaza, D, Below, A. Social media as a tool for transnational caregiving within the Caribbean diaspora. Soc Econ Stud 2014; 63: 25–56. Available at: www.jstor.org/ stable/24384098.
Google Scholar
34.Silverman, D . Qualitative research, 5th ed. London: Sage Publications, 2021.
Google Scholar
35.Juckett, LA, Jarrott, SE, Naar, JJ, et al. Implementing intergenerational best practices in community-based settings: a preliminary study. Health Promot Pract 2021: 1524839921994072.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
36.Polak, L, Green, J. Using joint interviews to add analytic value. Qual Health Res 2016; 26: 1638–1648.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
37.Gravlee, CC, Maxwell, CR, Jacobsohn, A, et al. Mode effects in cultural domain analysis: comparing pile sort data collected via internet versus face-to-face interviews. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2018; 21: 165–176.
Google Scholar | Crossref
38.Corbin, J, Strauss, A. Strategies for qualitative data analysis. Basics Qual Res. Tech Proced Dev Grounded Theory 2008; 3: 9781452230153.
Google Scholar
39.Pope, C, Ziebland, S, Mays, N. Analysing qualitative data. Br Med J 2000; 320: 114–116.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
40.Didžiokaitė, G, Saukko, P, Greiffenhagen, C. The mundane experience of everyday calorie trackers: beyond the metaphor of quantified self. New Media Soc 2018; 20: 1470–1487.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
41.Watson, A, Lupton, D, Michael, M. Enacting intimacy and sociality at a distance in the COVID-19 crisis: the sociomaterialities of home-based communication technologies. Media Int Aust 2021; 178: 136–150.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
42.Marengo, D, Longobardi, C, Fabris, MA, et al. Highly-visual social media and internalizing symptoms in adolescence: the mediating role of body image concerns. Comput Human Behav 2018; 82: 63–69.
Google Scholar | Crossref
43.Esmonde, K . ‘From fat and frazzled to fit and happy’: governing the unhealthy employee through quantification and wearable technologies. Qual Res Sport, Exercise Health 2021; 13: 113–127.
Google Scholar | Crossref
44.Gorm, N, Shklovski, I. Episodic use: practices of care in self-tracking. New Media Soc 2019; 21: 2505–2521.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
45.Pantzar, M, Ruckenstein, M. Living the metrics: self-tracking and situated objectivity. Digital Health 2017; 3.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
The SELF Institute