?	
 ?Eat	
 ?This	
 ?Book:	
 ?	
 ?Human-??centered	
 ?research	
 ?and	
 ?software	
 ?design	
 ?	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?an	
 ?ambient	
 ?technology	
 ?display	
 ?for	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?ebooks	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Dan	
 ?Becker	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?A	
 ?thesis	
 ?	
 ?submitted	
 ?in	
 ?partial	
 ?fulfillment	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?	
 ?requirements	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?degree	
 ?of	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Master	
 ?of	
 ?Science	
 ?in	
 ?Computer	
 ?Science	
 ?&	
 ?Software	
 ?Engineering	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?University	
 ?of	
 ?Washington	
 ?	
 ?2013	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Committee:	
 ?	
 ?David	
 ?Socha	
 ?	
 ?Joe	
 ?McCarthy	
 ?	
 ?Carol	
 ?Zander	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Program	
 ?Authorized	
 ?to	
 ?Offer	
 ?Degree:	
 ?	
 ?Computing	
 ?Software	
 ?&	
 ?Systems	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ?	
 ??	
 ?Copyright	
 ?2013	
 ?Dan	
 ?Becker	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? University	
 ?of	
 ?Washington	
 ?	
 ?Abstract	
 ?	
 ?Eat	
 ?This	
 ?Book:	
 ?User-??centered	
 ?research	
 ?and	
 ?software	
 ?design	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?examine	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?an	
 ?ambient	
 ?technology	
 ?display	
 ?for	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?ebooks	
 ?	
 ?Dan	
 ?Becker	
 ?	
 ?Chair	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?Supervisory	
 ?Committee:	
 ?David	
 ?Socha,	
 ?PhD	
 ?Computing	
 ?Software	
 ?&	
 ?Systems	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
There	
 ?are	
 ?widespread	
 ?concerns	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?and	
 ?technologies	
 ?are	
 ?affecting	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?habits.	
 ?Clay	
 ?Johnson	
 ?(2012)	
 ?proposes	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ??information	
 ?diet?	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?this	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?health	
 ?issue,	
 ?to	
 ?which	
 ?insights	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?diet	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?usefully	
 ?applied.	
 ?This	
 ?thesis	
 ?describes	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?user-??centered	
 ?design	
 ?investigation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Qualitative	
 ?research	
 ?interviews	
 ?with	
 ?10	
 ?subjects	
 ?provide	
 ?evidence	
 ?about	
 ?both	
 ?the	
 ?validity	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?limits	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?The	
 ?general	
 ?utility	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?phase	
 ?of	
 ?design	
 ?is	
 ?also	
 ?discussed.	
 ?Insights	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?diets	
 ?are	
 ?considered	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?gain	
 ?more	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Numerous	
 ?functional	
 ?gaps,	
 ?missing	
 ?affordances,	
 ?and	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs	
 ?that	
 ?face	
 ?today?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumers	
 ?are	
 ?identified.	
 ?Change	
 ?strategies	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?are	
 ?also	
 ?identified.	
 ?A	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?stashing	
 ?is	
 ?derived	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?interviews.	
 ?Qualities	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?which	
 ?are	
 ?missing	
 ?from	
 ?ebooks	
 ?are	
 ?identified,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?impact	
 ?of	
 ?those	
 ?missing	
 ?qualities	
 ?on	
 ?stashing	
 ?functionality	
 ?is	
 ?examined.	
 ?An	
 ?ambient	
 ?display	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?digital	
 ??to-??be-??read?	
 ?shelf	
 ?which	
 ?delivers	
 ?previously-??unavailable	
 ?stashing	
 ?functionality	
 ?for	
 ?readers	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?is	
 ?explored	
 ?through	
 ?design-??based	
 ?research	
 ?with	
 ?prototypes.	
 ?Numerous	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?for	
 ?such	
 ?slow	
 ?technology	
 ?solutions	
 ?are	
 ?identified.	
 ?Prototype	
 ?code	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ?open-??source	
 ?project	
 ?on	
 ?GitHub.	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ?Acknowledgments	
 ?I	
 ?am	
 ?grateful	
 ?to	
 ?many	
 ?people	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?guidance,	
 ?assistance,	
 ?and	
 ?support	
 ?they	
 ?gave	
 ?me	
 ?in	
 ?conducting	
 ?this	
 ?research.	
 ?At	
 ?the	
 ?outset	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?work	
 ?I	
 ?imagined	
 ?that	
 ?a	
 ?thesis	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?solitary	
 ?undertaking,	
 ?but	
 ?that	
 ?was	
 ?far	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?case	
 ?for	
 ?me.	
 ?	
 ?First,	
 ?I	
 ?thank	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?participated	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?prototyping	
 ?research.	
 ?Without	
 ?your	
 ?participation,	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?possible!	
 ?I	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?express	
 ?my	
 ?gratitude	
 ?to	
 ?my	
 ?thesis	
 ?advisor	
 ?David	
 ?Socha,	
 ?PhD,	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?extensive	
 ?guidance	
 ?and	
 ?collaboration	
 ?he	
 ?provided	
 ?throughout	
 ?the	
 ?process.	
 ?From	
 ?keeping	
 ?my	
 ?early	
 ?exploratory	
 ?research	
 ?on	
 ?focus,	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?way	
 ?through	
 ?research	
 ?design	
 ?and	
 ?making	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?evidence	
 ?and	
 ?insights,	
 ?to	
 ?academic	
 ?communication,	
 ?David	
 ?provided	
 ?outstanding	
 ?advice	
 ?and	
 ?support,	
 ?making	
 ?this	
 ?experience	
 ?a	
 ?true	
 ?capstone	
 ?for	
 ?my	
 ?graduate	
 ?education.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?am	
 ?grateful	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?members	
 ?of	
 ?my	
 ?thesis	
 ?committee	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?CSS	
 ?department,	
 ?Joe	
 ?McCarthy,	
 ?PhD,	
 ?and	
 ?Carol	
 ?Zander,	
 ?PhD,	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?insightful	
 ?feedback	
 ?and	
 ?suggestions,	
 ?which	
 ?improved	
 ?this	
 ?thesis	
 ?significantly.	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?thank	
 ?Joe	
 ?for	
 ?several	
 ?wide-??ranging	
 ?discussions,	
 ?which	
 ?provided	
 ?valuable	
 ?and	
 ?interesting	
 ?leads.	
 ?I	
 ?wish	
 ?to	
 ?thank	
 ?Megan	
 ?Jewell,	
 ?CSS	
 ?graduate	
 ?advisor	
 ?for	
 ?encouraging	
 ?me	
 ?to	
 ?pursue	
 ?independent	
 ?research,	
 ?following	
 ?my	
 ?own	
 ?interests	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?for	
 ?helping	
 ?me	
 ?navigate	
 ?through	
 ?the	
 ?entire	
 ?graduate	
 ?program	
 ?and	
 ?thesis	
 ?process.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?thank	
 ?my	
 ?classmates:	
 ?Yulana	
 ?Shestak	
 ?and	
 ?Ren	
 ?Wu	
 ?collaborated	
 ?with	
 ?me	
 ?in	
 ?human-??centered	
 ?research	
 ?on	
 ?problems	
 ?of	
 ?readers.	
 ?David	
 ?Langer	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?built	
 ?on	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?in	
 ?creating	
 ?the	
 ?Windows	
 ?Phone	
 ?application	
 ??Phix	
 ?the	
 ?Bookfinder.?	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?thesis	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?continuation	
 ?of	
 ?exploring	
 ?the	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?I	
 ?began	
 ?with	
 ?them.	
 ?I	
 ?am	
 ?also	
 ?grateful	
 ?to	
 ?several	
 ?experts	
 ?I	
 ?consulted	
 ?with	
 ?for	
 ?background	
 ?and	
 ?advice.	
 ?Skip	
 ?Walter	
 ?co-??taught	
 ?with	
 ?David	
 ?the	
 ?Human-??Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?class	
 ?where	
 ?I	
 ?first	
 ?began	
 ?exploring	
 ?problems	
 ?for	
 ?readers,	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?generously	
 ?discussed	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?with	
 ?me,	
 ?suggesting	
 ?several	
 ?valuable	
 ?perspectives	
 ?and	
 ?avenues	
 ?of	
 ?exploration.	
 ?Lark	
 ?Griffin	
 ?Preyapongpisan,	
 ?MFA,	
 ?provided	
 ?me	
 ?with	
 ?insights	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?history	
 ?of	
 ?books,	
 ?the	
 ?art	
 ?of	
 ?bookbinding,	
 ?and	
 ?our	
 ?relationship	
 ?with	
 ?books	
 ?as	
 ?physical	
 ?objects,	
 ?which	
 ?informed	
 ?considerations	
 ?of	
 ?missing	
 ?qualities	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?Margaret	
 ?Doherty	
 ?Spain?s	
 ?expertise	
 ?in	
 ?interior	
 ?design	
 ?shared	
 ?considerations	
 ?for	
 ?important	
 ?physical	
 ?design	
 ?qualities	
 ?of	
 ?living	
 ?spaces	
 ?for	
 ?both	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media.	
 ?Alex	
 ?Petrescu,	
 ?architect	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?online	
 ?service	
 ?CanIStreamIt.com,	
 ?discussed	
 ?real-??world	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?consumer-??facing	
 ?service	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?cope	
 ?with	
 ?proliferating	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?sources.	
 ?Last,	
 ?but	
 ?certainly	
 ?not	
 ?least,	
 ?I	
 ?thank	
 ?my	
 ?family.	
 ?My	
 ?brother	
 ?Ben	
 ?and	
 ?father	
 ?Mark,	
 ?both	
 ?expert	
 ?software	
 ?developers,	
 ?provided	
 ?both	
 ?encouragement	
 ?and	
 ?advice	
 ?on	
 ?numerous	
 ?technical	
 ?issues	
 ?throughout	
 ?my	
 ?graduate	
 ?career.	
 ?My	
 ?mother	
 ?Deborah,	
 ?a	
 ?veteran	
 ?of	
 ?educational	
 ?software	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?retired	
 ?school	
 ?librarian	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?specialist,	
 ?provided	
 ?expert	
 ?insights	
 ?and	
 ?perspective,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?enabling	
 ?me	
 ?to	
 ?spend	
 ?many	
 ?hours	
 ?working	
 ?by	
 ?caring	
 ?for	
 ?my	
 ?sons.	
 ?Her	
 ?example	
 ?getting	
 ?a	
 ?graduate	
 ?degree	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?boy	
 ?certainly	
 ?inspired	
 ?my	
 ?own	
 ?work.	
 ?My	
 ?sons	
 ?Zeb	
 ?and	
 ?Isaac	
 ?were	
 ?wonderful	
 ?both	
 ?in	
 ?understanding	
 ?when	
 ?papa	
 ?couldn?t	
 ?play,	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?in	
 ?being	
 ?genuinely	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?doing.	
 ?And	
 ?finally,	
 ?I	
 ?thank	
 ?my	
 ?lovely	
 ?partner	
 ?Melissa,	
 ?who	
 ?has	
 ?inspired,	
 ?accompanied,	
 ?and	
 ?supported	
 ?me	
 ?on	
 ?every	
 ?step	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?many	
 ?other	
 ?journeys	
 ?that	
 ?make	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?wonderful	
 ?life	
 ?we	
 ?share	
 ?together.	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ?Contents	
 ?
1	
 ? Introduction	
 ?.......................................................................................................................	
 ?1	
 ?
2	
 ? Background	
 ?.........................................................................................................................	
 ?3	
 ?
2.1	
 ? In	
 ?pursuit	
 ?of	
 ?happiness:	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?and	
 ?technology	
 ?................................	
 ?3	
 ?
2.2	
 ? Human-??centered	
 ?design	
 ?.......................................................................................................	
 ?4	
 ?
2.3	
 ? Use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?design	
 ?...................................................................................................	
 ?5	
 ?2.3.1	
 ? Using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?users	
 ?understand	
 ?software	
 ?.........................................................	
 ?5	
 ?2.3.2	
 ? Using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?designers	
 ?understand	
 ?problems	
 ?..............................................	
 ?6	
 ?
2.4	
 ? The	
 ?Information	
 ?Diet:	
 ?applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?............................	
 ?8	
 ?
2.5	
 ? What	
 ?do	
 ?we	
 ?know	
 ?about	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?informs	
 ?media?	
 ?..................................................	
 ?10	
 ?2.5.1	
 ? Producers	
 ?exploit	
 ?taste	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?profitability	
 ?.............................................................	
 ?10	
 ?2.5.2	
 ? Appetite	
 ?and	
 ?satiety	
 ?responds	
 ?to	
 ?variety	
 ?............................................................................	
 ?11	
 ?2.5.3	
 ? Consuming	
 ?without	
 ?thinking	
 ?....................................................................................................	
 ?11	
 ?
2.6	
 ? Information	
 ?vs.	
 ?media:	
 ?experience,	
 ?form,	
 ?and	
 ?content	
 ?...........................................	
 ?12	
 ?
2.7	
 ? Health	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?............................................................................	
 ?12	
 ?
2.8	
 ? The	
 ?changing	
 ?media	
 ?landscape	
 ?.......................................................................................	
 ?13	
 ?
3	
 ? Interview	
 ?Research:	
 ?Food,	
 ?Media,	
 ?and	
 ?Metaphor	
 ?...............................................	
 ?16	
 ?
3.1	
 ? Method	
 ?.....................................................................................................................................	
 ?16	
 ?
3.2	
 ? RQs1:	
 ?Metaphor	
 ?fit	
 ?...............................................................................................................	
 ?18	
 ?
3.3	
 ? RQs2:	
 ?Recent	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?technology	
 ?and	
 ?consumption	
 ?..........................................	
 ?20	
 ?3.3.1	
 ? Consuming	
 ?eBooks	
 ?vs.	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?......................................................................................	
 ?21	
 ?3.3.2	
 ? Consuming	
 ?video	
 ?...........................................................................................................................	
 ?25	
 ?
3.4	
 ? RQs3:	
 ?What	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?want?	
 ?............................................................................................	
 ?26	
 ?3.4.1	
 ? Read	
 ?more	
 ?books	
 ?...........................................................................................................................	
 ?27	
 ?3.4.2	
 ? Satisfy	
 ?current	
 ?hunger	
 ?.................................................................................................................	
 ?28	
 ?3.4.3	
 ? Avoid	
 ?bad	
 ?tastes	
 ?.............................................................................................................................	
 ?29	
 ?3.4.4	
 ? Feed	
 ?children	
 ?well	
 ?.........................................................................................................................	
 ?29	
 ?
3.5	
 ? RQs4:	
 ?Our	
 ?changing	
 ?diets	
 ?..................................................................................................	
 ?30	
 ?3.5.1	
 ? Short-??term	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?appetite	
 ?...............................................................................................	
 ?30	
 ?3.5.2	
 ? Making	
 ?long-??term	
 ?changes:	
 ?intentional	
 ?vs.	
 ?exogenous	
 ?.................................................	
 ?32	
 ?3.5.2.1	
 ? Exogenous	
 ?changes	
 ?affect	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?tastes	
 ?and	
 ?habits	
 ?.....................................	
 ?32	
 ?3.5.2.2	
 ? Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?using	
 ?diaries	
 ?and	
 ?self-??tracking	
 ?...............................................................	
 ?33	
 ?3.5.2.3	
 ? Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?removal	
 ?............................................................................................................	
 ?33	
 ?3.5.2.4	
 ? Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?substitution	
 ?....................................................................................................	
 ?34	
 ?3.5.2.5	
 ? Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?accessibility	
 ?........................................................................	
 ?34	
 ?
3.6	
 ? Conclusion	
 ?..............................................................................................................................	
 ?36	
 ?
4	
 ? Stashes	
 ?&	
 ?Stashing	
 ?.........................................................................................................	
 ?37	
 ?
4.1	
 ? Background	
 ?............................................................................................................................	
 ?38	
 ?4.1.1	
 ? Two	
 ?system	
 ?thinking:	
 ?now	
 ?me	
 ?vs.	
 ?future	
 ?me	
 ?.....................................................................	
 ?38	
 ?4.1.2	
 ? Satisficing	
 ?..........................................................................................................................................	
 ?40	
 ?4.1.3	
 ? Availability	
 ?&	
 ?priming	
 ?..................................................................................................................	
 ?40	
 ?4.1.4	
 ? The	
 ?path	
 ?of	
 ?least	
 ?resistance	
 ?.......................................................................................................	
 ?41	
 ?
4.2	
 ? A	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?..............................................................................................................	
 ?41	
 ?4.2.1	
 ? Context	
 ?...............................................................................................................................................	
 ?43	
 ?4.2.2	
 ? Priming	
 ?...............................................................................................................................................	
 ?43	
 ?4.2.3	
 ? Identity	
 ?claims	
 ?................................................................................................................................	
 ?44	
 ?4.2.4	
 ? Capacity	
 ?and	
 ?Weeding	
 ?.................................................................................................................	
 ?44	
 ?
	
 ?4.3	
 ? Conclusion	
 ?..............................................................................................................................	
 ?45	
 ?
5	
 ? Design	
 ?Research:	
 ?Digital	
 ?To-??Be-??Read	
 ?Pile	
 ?Prototyping	
 ?....................................	
 ?46	
 ?
5.1	
 ? Background	
 ?............................................................................................................................	
 ?47	
 ?5.1.1	
 ? Persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?.................................................................................................................	
 ?47	
 ?5.1.2	
 ? Ambient	
 ?computing	
 ?......................................................................................................................	
 ?49	
 ?5.1.3	
 ? Encouraging	
 ?book	
 ?selection	
 ?in	
 ?libraries	
 ?and	
 ?bookstores	
 ?.............................................	
 ?50	
 ?5.1.4	
 ? Existing	
 ?reading	
 ?support	
 ?solutions	
 ?........................................................................................	
 ?52	
 ?
5.2	
 ? Method	
 ?.....................................................................................................................................	
 ?53	
 ?5.2.1	
 ? Interactive	
 ?Design	
 ?Research	
 ?Sessions	
 ?..................................................................................	
 ?53	
 ?5.2.2	
 ? Personal	
 ?Long-??Term	
 ?Design	
 ?Research	
 ?.................................................................................	
 ?54	
 ?5.2.3	
 ? Tracking	
 ?and	
 ?iterating	
 ?on	
 ?feedback	
 ?.......................................................................................	
 ?54	
 ?5.2.4	
 ? Exploring	
 ?TBR	
 ?presentation	
 ?.....................................................................................................	
 ?55	
 ?5.2.4.1	
 ? Spines	
 ?vs.	
 ?covers	
 ?&	
 ?single	
 ?vs.	
 ?multiple	
 ?...........................................................................................	
 ?55	
 ?5.2.4.2	
 ? Bookshelves,	
 ?bedside	
 ?tables,	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?centers	
 ?......................................................................	
 ?56	
 ?5.2.4.3	
 ? Supporting	
 ?endpoint	
 ?diversity	
 ?(device	
 ?type	
 ?and	
 ?display	
 ?size)	
 ?...........................................	
 ?57	
 ?5.2.5	
 ? Exploring	
 ?TBR	
 ?interaction	
 ?.........................................................................................................	
 ?58	
 ?
5.3	
 ? Summary	
 ?of	
 ?Insights	
 ?............................................................................................................	
 ?58	
 ?
5.4	
 ? Results	
 ?&	
 ?Discussion	
 ?of	
 ?Insights	
 ?from	
 ?Interactive	
 ?Design	
 ?Research	
 ?Sessions	
 ?.	
 ?60	
 ?5.4.1	
 ? Privacy	
 ?................................................................................................................................................	
 ?60	
 ?5.4.2	
 ? Spinal	
 ?affordances	
 ?.........................................................................................................................	
 ?60	
 ?5.4.3	
 ? Multiplicity	
 ?.......................................................................................................................................	
 ?61	
 ?5.4.4	
 ? Subsets	
 ?/	
 ?selection	
 ?/	
 ?inventory	
 ?view	
 ?....................................................................................	
 ?61	
 ?5.4.5	
 ? Television-??specific	
 ?issues	
 ?...........................................................................................................	
 ?62	
 ?5.4.6	
 ? Size	
 ?&	
 ?Scalability	
 ?............................................................................................................................	
 ?63	
 ?5.4.7	
 ? Populating	
 ?.........................................................................................................................................	
 ?65	
 ?5.4.8	
 ? Sense-??making	
 ?and	
 ?organization	
 ?..............................................................................................	
 ?67	
 ?5.4.9	
 ? Weeding	
 ?.............................................................................................................................................	
 ?67	
 ?5.4.10	
 ? Energy	
 ?efficiency	
 ?.........................................................................................................................	
 ?68	
 ?5.4.11	
 ? TBR	
 ?as	
 ?screensaver	
 ?....................................................................................................................	
 ?68	
 ?
5.5	
 ? Results	
 ?&	
 ?Discussion	
 ?of	
 ?Insights	
 ?from	
 ?Personal	
 ?Long-??Term	
 ?Experience	
 ?..........	
 ?69	
 ?5.5.1	
 ? Priming	
 ?...............................................................................................................................................	
 ?69	
 ?5.5.2	
 ? Attention-??drawing	
 ?vs.	
 ?Ambient	
 ?...............................................................................................	
 ?70	
 ?5.5.3	
 ? Correspondence	
 ?.............................................................................................................................	
 ?71	
 ?5.5.4	
 ? Content	
 ?polymorphism	
 ?...............................................................................................................	
 ?71	
 ?5.5.5	
 ? Mobility	
 ?..............................................................................................................................................	
 ?71	
 ?5.5.6	
 ? Ubiquitous	
 ?access	
 ?..........................................................................................................................	
 ?72	
 ?
5.6	
 ? Conclusion:	
 ?Summary	
 ?of	
 ?TBR	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?..............................................	
 ?72	
 ?
6	
 ? Conclusion	
 ?........................................................................................................................	
 ?73	
 ?
7	
 ? References	
 ?........................................................................................................................	
 ?75	
 ?
8	
 ? Appendix	
 ?A:	
 ?Detailed	
 ?Interview	
 ?Data	
 ?......................................................................	
 ?83	
 ?
8.1	
 ? Interview	
 ?Questions	
 ?&	
 ?Topic	
 ?Prompts	
 ?..........................................................................	
 ?83	
 ?
8.2	
 ? Food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?....................................................................................................................	
 ?85	
 ?
8.3	
 ? Non-??food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?...........................................................................................................	
 ?87	
 ?
8.4	
 ? Information	
 ?Diet	
 ?Categories	
 ?.............................................................................................	
 ?88	
 ?
8.5	
 ? Media	
 ?Sources	
 ?........................................................................................................................	
 ?90	
 ?
9	
 ? Appendix	
 ?B:	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?Technology	
 ?Strategies	
 ?..................................................	
 ?93	
 ?
10	
 ?Appendix	
 ?C:	
 ?Features	
 ?&	
 ?Gaps	
 ?of	
 ?Existing	
 ?Reading	
 ?tools	
 ?...................................	
 ?96	
 ?
	
 ?11	
 ?Appendix	
 ?D:	
 ?Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?for	
 ?Media	
 ?Consumption	
 ?............................	
 ?99	
 ?
11.1	
 ? Background	
 ?.........................................................................................................................	
 ?99	
 ?
11.2	
 ? Survey	
 ?of	
 ?existing	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?tools	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?.......	
 ?101	
 ?
11.3	
 ? Design	
 ?considerations	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?....	
 ?103	
 ?11.3.1	
 ? Preparation	
 ?..................................................................................................................................	
 ?104	
 ?11.3.2	
 ? Collection	
 ?......................................................................................................................................	
 ?104	
 ?11.3.3	
 ? Integration	
 ?...................................................................................................................................	
 ?105	
 ?11.3.4	
 ? Reflection	
 ?......................................................................................................................................	
 ?105	
 ?11.3.5	
 ? Action	
 ?.............................................................................................................................................	
 ?105	
 ?
11.4	
 ? Conclusion	
 ?.........................................................................................................................	
 ?105	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 1	
 ?
And	
 ?he	
 ?said	
 ?to	
 ?me:	
 ?Son	
 ?of	
 ?man,	
 ?eat	
 ?all	
 ?that	
 ?thou	
 ?shalt	
 ?find:	
 ?eat	
 ?this	
 ?book,	
 ?
and	
 ?go	
 ?speak	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?children	
 ?of	
 ?Israel.	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?opened	
 ?my	
 ?mouth,	
 ?and	
 ?he	
 ?
caused	
 ?me	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?that	
 ?book.	
 ?And	
 ?he	
 ?said	
 ?to	
 ?me:	
 ?Son	
 ?of	
 ?man,	
 ?thy	
 ?belly	
 ?shall	
 ?
eat,	
 ?and	
 ?thy	
 ?bowels	
 ?shall	
 ?be	
 ?filled	
 ?with	
 ?this	
 ?book,	
 ?which	
 ?I	
 ?give	
 ?thee.	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?
did	
 ?eat	
 ?it:	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?sweet	
 ?as	
 ?honey	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?mouth. ?	
 ?Ezekiel	
 ?3:1-??3	
 ?(Douay-??Rheims	
 ?Bible) 
1 Introduction	
 ?As	
 ?a	
 ?consequence	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?technology	
 ?developments,	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?more	
 ?ways	
 ?of	
 ?accessing	
 ?a	
 ?greater	
 ?volume	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?than	
 ?at	
 ?any	
 ?previous	
 ?point	
 ?in	
 ?human	
 ?history.	
 ?More	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?being	
 ?created	
 ?and	
 ?shared	
 ?than	
 ?ever	
 ?before;	
 ?more	
 ?media	
 ?technologies	
 ?exist;	
 ?prices	
 ?fall	
 ?while	
 ?markets	
 ?expand;	
 ?the	
 ?widening	
 ?reach	
 ?of	
 ?technologies	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?cellular	
 ?networks	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?is	
 ?expanding	
 ?information-??based	
 ?connectedness	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?greater	
 ?portion	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?world?s	
 ?population.	
 ?In	
 ?short,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?in	
 ?an	
 ?age	
 ?of	
 ?unprecedented	
 ?information	
 ?abundance.	
 ?Barring	
 ?societal	
 ?collapse,	
 ?this	
 ?trend	
 ?seems	
 ?poised	
 ?to	
 ?continue	
 ?for	
 ?some	
 ?time.	
 ?Yet	
 ?this	
 ?abundance	
 ?and	
 ?its	
 ?new	
 ?ways	
 ?of	
 ?reaching	
 ?us	
 ?mixes	
 ?benefits	
 ?with	
 ?drawbacks.	
 ?More	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?always	
 ?better;	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?new	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?always	
 ?superior	
 ?to	
 ?what	
 ?came	
 ?before.	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?widespread	
 ?concerns	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?changes	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?information	
 ?habits	
 ?which	
 ?have	
 ?accompanied	
 ?the	
 ?adoption	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?technologies,	
 ?with	
 ?impacts	
 ?ranging	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?personal	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?interpersonal	
 ?and	
 ?ultimately	
 ?to	
 ?society	
 ?at	
 ?large.	
 ?	
 ?Clay	
 ?Johnson	
 ?(2012)	
 ?uses	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?conceptualize	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ??Information	
 ?Diet.?	
 ?He	
 ?uses	
 ?this	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?powerful	
 ?analysis	
 ?and	
 ?critique	
 ?of	
 ?public	
 ?policy	
 ?problems	
 ?that	
 ?he	
 ?links	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?information	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Johnson	
 ?reflected	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?situation	
 ?and	
 ?drew	
 ?parallels	
 ?between	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?those	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media,	
 ?and	
 ?suggests	
 ?guidelines	
 ?rooted	
 ?in	
 ?another	
 ?dietary	
 ?tradition,	
 ?veganism,	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?prescription.	
 ?But	
 ?are	
 ?the	
 ?problems	
 ?Johnson	
 ?identifies	
 ?the	
 ?ones	
 ?that	
 ?really	
 ?concern	
 ?people?	
 ?And	
 ?is	
 ?his	
 ?prescription	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?need?	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?research	
 ?focuses	
 ?on	
 ?how	
 ?technology	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?better	
 ?manage	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?address	
 ?their	
 ?concerns.	
 ?Thomas	
 ?Sander	
 ?(2009)	
 ?posits	
 ?that	
 ??information	
 ?technology	
 ?is	
 ?uniquely	
 ?positioned	
 ?for	
 ?assisting	
 ?individuals	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?flourishing	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?effective,	
 ?scalable,	
 ?and	
 ?ethically	
 ?responsible.	
 ?Following	
 ?the	
 ?tradition	
 ?of	
 ?successful,	
 ?galvanizing	
 ?notions	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?and	
 ?Positive	
 ?Health,	
 ?I	
 ?propose	
 ?to	
 ?call	
 ?the	
 ?study	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?technology	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?perspective	
 ?of	
 ?human	
 ?flourishing	
 ?Positive	
 ?Computing.?	
 ?(p309).	
 ?This	
 ?research	
 ?follows	
 ?that	
 ?approach.	
 ?This	
 ?paper	
 ?explores	
 ?the	
 ?thesis	
 ?that	
 ?applying	
 ?this	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?diet	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?could	
 ?help	
 ?better	
 ?understand	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?solutions	
 ?for	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?Through	
 ?an	
 ?iterative	
 ?research	
 ?process,	
 ?I	
 ?explored	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?key	
 ?research	
 ?questions:	
 ?1) Does	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?fit	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?
	
 ? 2	
 ?
2) How	
 ?useful	
 ?is	
 ?applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?How	
 ?will	
 ?applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?practices	
 ?and	
 ?problems?	
 ?What	
 ?solutions	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?generated	
 ?for	
 ?those	
 ?problems	
 ?by	
 ?applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor?	
 ?3) What	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?role	
 ?of	
 ?stashes	
 ?and	
 ?stashing	
 ?for	
 ?managing	
 ?one?s	
 ?information	
 ?diet?	
 ?4) How	
 ?would	
 ?a	
 ?stashing	
 ?solution	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ??	
 ?a	
 ?virtual	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?pile	
 ??	
 ?change	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?manage	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?Section	
 ?2	
 ?reviews	
 ?background	
 ?literature.	
 ?Sections	
 ?3-??5	
 ?cover	
 ?the	
 ?primary	
 ?research	
 ?questions	
 ?in	
 ?separate	
 ?sections,	
 ?each	
 ?of	
 ?which	
 ?contains	
 ?additional	
 ?background	
 ?specific	
 ?to	
 ?each	
 ?question.	
 ?Section	
 ?3	
 ?investigates	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor?s	
 ?fit	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?utility,	
 ?which	
 ?I	
 ?investigated	
 ?by	
 ?conducting	
 ?qualitative	
 ?research	
 ?interviews	
 ?with	
 ?10	
 ?subjects.	
 ?These	
 ?interviews	
 ?also	
 ?provided	
 ?insights	
 ?into	
 ?people?s	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?techniques	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?changes	
 ?to	
 ?consumption.	
 ?The	
 ?interviews	
 ?also	
 ?asked	
 ?how	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?technology	
 ?have	
 ?affected	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Notably,	
 ?all	
 ?subjects	
 ?described	
 ?qualities	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?greatly	
 ?missed	
 ?in	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?Section	
 ?4	
 ?discusses	
 ??stashing,?	
 ?a	
 ?practice	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?was	
 ?uncovered	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?and	
 ?found	
 ?to	
 ?also	
 ?exist	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ??	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?books	
 ?are	
 ?often	
 ?stashed	
 ?in	
 ??to	
 ?be	
 ?read	
 ?piles.?	
 ?I	
 ?propose	
 ?a	
 ?model	
 ?for	
 ?stashing,	
 ?and	
 ?point	
 ?out	
 ?how	
 ?the	
 ?missing	
 ?qualities	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?may	
 ?interfere	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?functionality	
 ?stashes	
 ?provide	
 ?to	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?	
 ?Section	
 ?5	
 ?describes	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?design-??based	
 ?research	
 ?with	
 ?prototypes	
 ?that	
 ?use	
 ?persuasive,	
 ?ambient	
 ?technology	
 ?to	
 ?implement	
 ?stashes	
 ?intended	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?problems	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?reading	
 ?and	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?Figure	
 ?1	
 ?provides	
 ?a	
 ?graphical	
 ?overview	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?visually	
 ?oriented.	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?1.	
 ?A	
 ?graphic	
 ?overview	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?program	
 ?described	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?thesis.	
 ?
	
 ? 3	
 ?
2 Background	
 ?The	
 ?background	
 ?review	
 ?begins	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?starting	
 ?motivation	
 ?for	
 ?this	
 ?research:	
 ?the	
 ?positive	
 ?psychology	
 ?movement?s	
 ?focus	
 ?on	
 ?supporting	
 ?human	
 ?flourishing,	
 ?and	
 ?this	
 ?notion?s	
 ?adoption	
 ?by	
 ?technology	
 ?researchers.	
 ?Next,	
 ?I	
 ?review	
 ?background	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?general	
 ?approach	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?research,	
 ?covering	
 ?human-??centered	
 ?design?s	
 ?orientation	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?informed	
 ?by	
 ?people?s	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?meaning	
 ?and	
 ?value,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?potential	
 ?avenue	
 ?for	
 ?accessing	
 ?people?s	
 ?understanding.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?review	
 ?continues	
 ?with	
 ?discussion	
 ?of	
 ?Clay	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?Information	
 ?Diet	
 ?metaphor,	
 ?reviewing	
 ?his	
 ?claims	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?correspondence	
 ?between	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media.	
 ?	
 ?Next,	
 ?information	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?health	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?demonstrates	
 ?that	
 ?controlling	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?has	
 ?impact	
 ?beyond	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?and	
 ?entertainment.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Finally,	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?landscape	
 ?that	
 ?have	
 ?accompanied	
 ?technological	
 ?developments	
 ?are	
 ?reviewed	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?context	
 ?for	
 ?new	
 ?challenges	
 ?facing	
 ?media	
 ?consumers.	
 ?
2.1 In	
 ?pursuit	
 ?of	
 ?happiness:	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?and	
 ?technology	
 ?A	
 ?key	
 ?motivator	
 ?for	
 ?this	
 ?thesis	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?my	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?investigate	
 ?how	
 ?technology	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?improve	
 ?people?s	
 ?lives.	
 ?As	
 ?we	
 ?shall	
 ?see,	
 ?the	
 ?field	
 ?of	
 ?positive	
 ?psychology	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?studying	
 ?what	
 ?it	
 ?means	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?life,	
 ?and	
 ?these	
 ?findings	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?expanded	
 ?by	
 ?computer	
 ?scientists	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?researchers	
 ?who	
 ?seek	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?in	
 ?what	
 ?ways	
 ?technology	
 ?can	
 ?support	
 ?these	
 ?goals.	
 ?At	
 ?the	
 ?start	
 ?of	
 ?his	
 ?term	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?head	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?American	
 ?Psychological	
 ?Association	
 ?in	
 ?1998,	
 ?Martin	
 ?Seligman	
 ?faced	
 ?the	
 ?realization	
 ?that	
 ?psychology	
 ?spent	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?time	
 ?understanding	
 ?mental	
 ?disorders,	
 ?but	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?to	
 ?say	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?normal	
 ?life	
 ?more	
 ?fulfilling.	
 ?	
 ?Borrowing	
 ?a	
 ?term	
 ?from	
 ?Abraham	
 ?Maslow,	
 ?he	
 ?encouraged	
 ?research	
 ?in	
 ?pursuit	
 ?of	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology.	
 ?Mihaly	
 ?Csikszentmihalyi	
 ?,	
 ?who	
 ?pioneered	
 ?studies	
 ?of	
 ??flow?	
 ?and	
 ?optimal	
 ?experience,	
 ?joined	
 ?Seligman	
 ?in	
 ?writing	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology:	
 ?An	
 ?
Introduction	
 ?(Seligman	
 ?&	
 ?Csikszentmihalyi,	
 ?2000)	
 ?and	
 ?encouraging	
 ?other	
 ?researchers	
 ?to	
 ?conduct	
 ?empirical	
 ?studies	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?subject.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?considering	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology?s	
 ?aims,	
 ?Scollon	
 ?and	
 ?King	
 ?(2009)	
 ?refer	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?two	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?happiness	
 ?defined	
 ?by	
 ?Aristotle.	
 ?Hedonistic	
 ?happiness	
 ?is	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?maximizing	
 ?pleasurable	
 ?sensations,	
 ?and	
 ?minimizing	
 ?painful	
 ?ones.	
 ?Eudaimonic	
 ?happiness	
 ?is	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?broader	
 ?sense	
 ?and	
 ?comes	
 ?from	
 ?living	
 ?in	
 ?accord	
 ?with	
 ?one?s	
 ?authentic	
 ?self.	
 ?This	
 ?perspective	
 ?focuses	
 ?on	
 ?living	
 ?with	
 ?meaning	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?outcomes	
 ?achieved	
 ?from	
 ?actions,	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?just	
 ?the	
 ?sensations	
 ?of	
 ?experience.	
 ?Seligman	
 ?also	
 ?identified	
 ?the	
 ?importance	
 ?of	
 ?interpersonal	
 ?or	
 ?social	
 ?happiness	
 ?as	
 ?what	
 ?he	
 ?called	
 ?a	
 ?third	
 ?pillar	
 ?of	
 ?happiness.	
 ?This	
 ?positive	
 ?approach	
 ?inspired	
 ?researchers	
 ?outside	
 ?of	
 ?psychology.	
 ?Tomas	
 ?Sander	
 ?(2009)	
 ?coined	
 ?the	
 ?term	
 ?Positive	
 ?Computing	
 ?to	
 ?refer	
 ?to	
 ??the	
 ?study	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?technology	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?perspective	
 ?of	
 ?human	
 ?flourishing.?	
 ?Sander	
 ?explicitly	
 ?draws	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?goals	
 ?and	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?identified	
 ?by	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?research,	
 ?and	
 ?posits	
 ?that	
 ??information	
 ?technology	
 ?is	
 ?uniquely	
 ?positioned	
 ?for	
 ?assisting	
 ?individuals	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?flourishing	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?effective,	
 ?scalable,	
 ?and	
 ?ethically	
 ?responsible.?	
 ?It	
 ?is	
 ?in	
 ?response	
 ?to	
 ?Sander?s	
 ?call	
 ?to	
 ?action	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?
	
 ? 4	
 ?
research	
 ?focuses	
 ?on	
 ?how	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?use	
 ?technology	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?their	
 ?overall	
 ?happiness	
 ?and	
 ?flourishing.	
 ?	
 ?Riva	
 ?et	
 ?al	
 ?(Riva,	
 ?Ba?os,	
 ?Botella,	
 ?Wiederhold,	
 ?&	
 ?Gaggioli,	
 ?2012)	
 ?built	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?characteristics	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?experience	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?personal	
 ?well-??being	
 ?to	
 ?develop	
 ?a	
 ?framework	
 ?for	
 ?positive	
 ?technology	
 ?(summarized	
 ?in	
 ?Table	
 ?1).	
 ?There	
 ?is	
 ?opportunity	
 ?to	
 ?engage	
 ?and	
 ?support	
 ?all	
 ?three	
 ?categories	
 ?of	
 ?positive	
 ?experience	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Some	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?driven	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?positive	
 ?experiences	
 ?it	
 ?yields;	
 ?some	
 ?is	
 ?done	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?support	
 ?the	
 ?positive	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?self-??image	
 ?and	
 ?self-??actualization.	
 ?And	
 ?as	
 ?modern	
 ?life	
 ?involves	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?we	
 ?find	
 ?great	
 ?opportunities	
 ?for	
 ?social	
 ?connectedness	
 ?by	
 ?discussing	
 ?media	
 ?with	
 ?our	
 ?friends,	
 ?and	
 ?seeking	
 ?out	
 ?social	
 ?discussions	
 ?around	
 ?particular	
 ?media	
 ?with	
 ?like-??minded	
 ?fans.	
 ?
Category	
 ?of	
 ?Positive	
 ?Experience	
 ? Application	
 ?of	
 ?Positive	
 ?Technology	
 ?
Hedonistic	
 ? Using	
 ?technology	
 ?to	
 ?foster	
 ?positive	
 ?emotions	
 ?and	
 ?experiences	
 ?
Eudaimonic	
 ? Using	
 ?technology	
 ?to	
 ?promote	
 ?engagement	
 ?and	
 ?self-??empowerment	
 ?
Interpersonal	
 ?/	
 ?Social	
 ? Using	
 ?technology	
 ?to	
 ?promote	
 ?social	
 ?integration	
 ?and	
 ?connectedness	
 ?
Table	
 ?1.	
 ?Riva	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(2012)	
 ?propose	
 ?designing	
 ?positive	
 ?technologies	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?the	
 ?three	
 ?categories	
 ?of	
 ?positive	
 ?
experience	
 ?identified	
 ?by	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology.	
 ?Zimmerman	
 ?(2009)	
 ?proposes	
 ?a	
 ?philosophical	
 ?stance	
 ?for	
 ?experience	
 ?design	
 ?he	
 ?calls	
 ?designing	
 ?
for	
 ?the	
 ?self:	
 ??design	
 ?of	
 ?products	
 ?that	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?move	
 ?closer	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?idealized	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?self	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?role	
 ?through	
 ?their	
 ?interaction	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?product	
 ?(products	
 ?that	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?become	
 ?the	
 ?person	
 ?they	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?be).?	
 ?One	
 ?pattern	
 ?he	
 ?identifies	
 ?is	
 ??making	
 ?long	
 ?term	
 ?goals	
 ?more	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?people?s	
 ?lives.?	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?section	
 ?5.1.1,	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?return	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?subject	
 ?of	
 ?positive	
 ?computing	
 ?and	
 ?discuss	
 ?in	
 ?further	
 ?detail	
 ?research	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?by	
 ?which	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?can	
 ?bring	
 ?about	
 ?those	
 ?behavior	
 ?changes	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?desire.	
 ?	
 ?But	
 ?next,	
 ?I	
 ?turn	
 ?to	
 ?Human-??Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?processes,	
 ?which	
 ?help	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?what	
 ?people	
 ?desire	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?place.	
 ?	
 ?
2.2 Human-??centered	
 ?design	
 ?Human-??Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?(HCD,	
 ?aka	
 ?User-??Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?or	
 ?UCD)	
 ?is	
 ?rooted	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?premises	
 ?that:	
 ?	
 ?1) people	
 ?are	
 ?experts	
 ?on	
 ?themselves,	
 ?and	
 ?	
 ?2) engaging	
 ?potential	
 ?users	
 ?of	
 ?solutions	
 ?deeply	
 ?and	
 ?frequently	
 ?during	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?process	
 ?results	
 ?in	
 ?better	
 ?outcomes	
 ?The	
 ?design	
 ?firm	
 ?IDEO	
 ?defines	
 ?Human-??Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?as	
 ?follows	
 ?(IDEO,	
 ?2009):	
 ?
Human-??Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?(HCD)	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?process	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?techniques	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?create	
 ?new	
 ?
solutions	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?world.	
 ?Solutions	
 ?include	
 ?products,	
 ?services,	
 ?environments,	
 ?
organizations,	
 ?and	
 ?modes	
 ?of	
 ?interaction.	
 ?
	
 ? 5	
 ?
The	
 ?reason	
 ?this	
 ?process	
 ?is	
 ?called	
 ??human-??centered?	
 ?is	
 ?because	
 ?it	
 ?starts	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?
we	
 ?are	
 ?designing	
 ?for.	
 ?The	
 ?HCD	
 ?process	
 ?begins	
 ?by	
 ?examining	
 ?the	
 ?needs,	
 ?dreams,	
 ?and	
 ?
behaviors	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?we	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?affect	
 ?with	
 ?our	
 ?solutions.	
 ?
We	
 ?seek	
 ?to	
 ?listen	
 ?to	
 ?and	
 ?understand	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?want.	
 ?We	
 ?call	
 ?this	
 ?the	
 ?Desirability	
 ?lens.	
 ?
We	
 ?view	
 ?the	
 ?world	
 ?through	
 ?this	
 ?lens	
 ?throughout	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?process.	
 ?Therefore,	
 ?	
 ?solutions	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?made	
 ?more	
 ?effective	
 ?and	
 ?compelling	
 ?by	
 ?engaging	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?would	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?system	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?their	
 ?values	
 ?and	
 ?needs,	
 ?and	
 ?involving	
 ?them	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?process	
 ?throughout	
 ?to	
 ?gain	
 ?evidence	
 ?and	
 ?insight	
 ?as	
 ?early	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?process	
 ?as	
 ?possible.	
 ?This	
 ?minimizes	
 ?effort	
 ?wasted	
 ?in	
 ?building	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?off	
 ?the	
 ?mark,	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?drives	
 ?creations	
 ?of	
 ?solutions	
 ?that	
 ?provide	
 ?superior	
 ?user	
 ?experiences	
 ?(UX),	
 ?which	
 ?leads	
 ?to	
 ?increased	
 ?solution	
 ?adoption	
 ?and	
 ?effectiveness.	
 ?	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?Slywotzky	
 ?(2011)	
 ?suggests	
 ?examining	
 ?the	
 ?hassles	
 ?people	
 ?face	
 ?in	
 ??existing	
 ?products,	
 ?services,	
 ?and	
 ?systems	
 ?that	
 ?cause	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?waste	
 ?time,	
 ?energy,	
 ?and	
 ?money?	
 ?which	
 ?cause	
 ??headaches,	
 ?disappointments	
 ?and	
 ?frustrations.?	
 ?Finding	
 ?and	
 ?eliminating	
 ?these	
 ?hassles	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?design	
 ?strategy	
 ?for	
 ?creating	
 ?disruptive	
 ?solutions	
 ?which	
 ?people	
 ?will	
 ?seek	
 ?out	
 ?and	
 ?adopt	
 ?in	
 ?favor	
 ?of	
 ?incumbent	
 ?solutions	
 ?which	
 ?still	
 ?suffer	
 ?from	
 ?those	
 ?hassles.	
 ?Throughout	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?I	
 ?sought	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?from	
 ?people	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?methods.	
 ?Specific	
 ?methods	
 ?were	
 ?individual	
 ?interviews	
 ?and	
 ?using	
 ?prototypes	
 ?as	
 ?tools	
 ?to	
 ?gather	
 ?further	
 ?feedback	
 ?and	
 ?more	
 ?concrete	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?ways	
 ?to	
 ?meet	
 ?them.	
 ?Additional	
 ?background	
 ?on	
 ?specific	
 ?methods	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?different	
 ?phases	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?is	
 ?provided	
 ?in	
 ?each	
 ?research	
 ?section.	
 ?
2.3 Use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?design	
 ?Metaphor	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?enhance	
 ?understanding.	
 ?In	
 ?design,	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?two	
 ?directions	
 ?where	
 ?understanding	
 ?is	
 ?needed.	
 ?Most	
 ?often,	
 ?people	
 ?think	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?software	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?the	
 ?users	
 ?understand	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?software.	
 ?But	
 ?metaphor	
 ?can	
 ?also	
 ?play	
 ?a	
 ?useful	
 ?role	
 ?in	
 ?helping	
 ?designers	
 ?understand	
 ?the	
 ?problem	
 ?domain.	
 ?My	
 ?research	
 ?explores	
 ?this	
 ?latter	
 ?aspect.	
 ?	
 ?
2.3.1 Using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?users	
 ?understand	
 ?software	
 ?Designers	
 ?and	
 ?researchers	
 ?have	
 ?often	
 ?discussed	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?solutions	
 ?by	
 ?having	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?embody	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?users	
 ?can	
 ?more	
 ?easily	
 ?understand	
 ?what	
 ?it	
 ?does	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?operate	
 ?it	
 ?(Norman,	
 ?2002).	
 ?The	
 ?canonical	
 ?example	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?desktop	
 ?metaphor	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?personal	
 ?computer	
 ?graphical	
 ?user	
 ?interfaces.	
 ?Many	
 ?other	
 ?examples	
 ?exist:	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?tabbed	
 ?notebook	
 ?binder	
 ?to	
 ?organize	
 ?information	
 ?was	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?Tabworks	
 ?(Moll-??Carrillo,	
 ?Salomon,	
 ?Marsh,	
 ?Fulton	
 ?Suri,	
 ?&	
 ?Spreenberg,	
 ?1995)	
 ?and	
 ?was	
 ?later	
 ?adopted	
 ?by	
 ?other	
 ?software	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Microsoft?s	
 ?OneNote.	
 ?	
 ?A	
 ?related	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?software	
 ?design,	
 ?which	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?the	
 ?subject	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?discussion	
 ?in	
 ?User	
 ?Experience	
 ?(UX)	
 ?and	
 ?Human	
 ?Computer	
 ?Interaction	
 ?(HCI)	
 ?communities	
 ?in	
 ?recent	
 ?years,	
 ?is	
 ?skeuomorphism.	
 ?See	
 ?for	
 ?example	
 ?(Hobbs,	
 ?2012)	
 ?and	
 ?(Greif,	
 ?2013).	
 ?Skeuomorphism	
 ?goes	
 ?beyond	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?real	
 ?world	
 ?object	
 ?that	
 ?performs	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?function	
 ?in	
 ?its	
 ?design;	
 ?it	
 ?also	
 ?includes	
 ?graphic	
 ?elements,	
 ?even	
 ?including	
 ?non-??functional	
 ?ornamentation,	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?its	
 ?appearance	
 ?a	
 ?literal	
 ?imitation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor?s	
 ?source.	
 ?Figure	
 ?2	
 ?shows	
 ?two	
 ?different	
 ?carpenter?s	
 ?level	
 ?applications;	
 ?the	
 ?one	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?left	
 ?is	
 ?highly	
 ?skeuomorphic.	
 ?The	
 ?one	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?right	
 ?provides	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?functionality,	
 ?but	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?degree	
 ?of	
 ?resemblance	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?real-??world	
 ?product.	
 ?
	
 ? 6	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?2.	
 ?The	
 ?two	
 ?mobile	
 ?applications	
 ?shown	
 ?here	
 ?perform	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?function	
 ?with	
 ?visual	
 ?designs	
 ?that	
 ?contain	
 ?
higher	
 ?(Stanley	
 ?Level,	
 ?left)	
 ?and	
 ?lower	
 ?(Levelbot,	
 ?right)	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?skeuomorphism	
 ?(resemblance	
 ?to	
 ?physical	
 ?objects	
 ?that	
 ?
perform	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?function).	
 ?One	
 ?concern	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?solutions	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?depends	
 ?upon	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?understanding	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor;	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?know	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor?s	
 ?source,	
 ?then	
 ?they	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?recognize	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?supposed	
 ?to	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?solution.	
 ?Shen	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(Shen,	
 ?Woolley,	
 ?&	
 ?Prior,	
 ?2006)	
 ?point	
 ?out	
 ?that	
 ?many	
 ?metaphors	
 ?are	
 ?culturally	
 ?specific	
 ?and	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?work	
 ?well	
 ?across	
 ?all	
 ?cultures,	
 ?so	
 ?designers	
 ?should	
 ?take	
 ?care	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?diverse	
 ?audience	
 ?backgrounds	
 ?when	
 ?designing	
 ?solutions	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?	
 ?Kay	
 ?(1990)	
 ?cautions	
 ?that	
 ??metaphor	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?poor	
 ?metaphor	
 ?for	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?needed?	
 ?and	
 ?warns	
 ?that	
 ?taking	
 ?metaphors	
 ?too	
 ?far	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?harmful	
 ?if,	
 ?in	
 ?seeking	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?faithful	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor,	
 ?they	
 ?bring	
 ?limitations	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?which	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?present.	
 ?	
 ?But	
 ?in	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?applying	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?by	
 ?embodying	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?solution	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?users	
 ?can	
 ?understand	
 ?the	
 ?solution,	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?another	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?HCD,	
 ?and	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?focus	
 ?on	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?research.	
 ?
2.3.2 Using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?designers	
 ?understand	
 ?problems	
 ?Metaphors	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?phase	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?the	
 ?designers	
 ?gain	
 ?insights	
 ?into	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?gaps	
 ?which	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?design	
 ?can	
 ?address.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Madsen	
 ?(1994)	
 ?describes	
 ?several	
 ?cases	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?phase	
 ?by	
 ?having	
 ?users	
 ?generate	
 ?or	
 ?respond	
 ?to	
 ?alternative	
 ?metaphors	
 ?and	
 ?asking	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?their	
 ?domain	
 ?in	
 ?light	
 ?of	
 ?those	
 ?metaphors.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?library	
 ?system	
 ?project,	
 ??the	
 ?staff	
 ?was	
 ?challenged	
 ?by	
 ?three	
 ?different	
 ?metaphorical	
 ?views	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?a	
 ?library	
 ?is	
 ?or	
 ?could	
 ?be.	
 ?The	
 ?three	
 ?metaphors	
 ?were	
 ??the	
 ?warehouse,?	
 ??the	
 ?store,?	
 ?and	
 ??the	
 ?meeting	
 ?place??	
 ?(p58).	
 ?In	
 ?another	
 ?case,	
 ?stakeholders	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?production	
 ?planning	
 ?system	
 ?were	
 ?asked	
 ?to	
 ?brainstorm	
 ?possible	
 ?metaphors	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?process,	
 ?and	
 ?came	
 ?up	
 ?with	
 ?many	
 ?alternatives	
 ?including	
 ?a	
 ?travel	
 ?agency,	
 ?a	
 ?bakery,	
 ?a	
 ?soccer	
 ?match,	
 ?and	
 ?raising	
 ?cattle.	
 ?Note	
 ?that	
 ?both	
 ?of	
 ?Madsen?s	
 ?examples	
 ?assume	
 ?many	
 ?metaphors	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?generated,	
 ?whether	
 ?brainstormed	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?users	
 ?or	
 ?suggested	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?researchers,	
 ?before	
 ?ultimately	
 ?selecting	
 ?one	
 ?or	
 ?more.	
 ?Madsen	
 ?ends	
 ?by	
 ?deriving	
 ?several	
 ?guidelines	
 ?for	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?research,	
 ?which	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?summarized	
 ?in	
 ?Table	
 ?2.	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?apply	
 ?several	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?strategies,	
 ?especially	
 ?in	
 ?identifying	
 ?metaphors	
 ?for	
 ?use	
 ?in	
 ?research.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 7	
 ?
Generating	
 ?metaphors	
 ?for	
 ?use	
 ?in	
 ?
research	
 ?
Evaluating	
 ?metaphors	
 ?for	
 ?
selection	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?basis	
 ?for	
 ?design	
 ?
Developing	
 ?the	
 ?selected	
 ?
metaphor	
 ?for	
 ?use	
 ?in	
 ?design	
 ?
Listen	
 ?to	
 ?how	
 ?users	
 ?understand	
 ?
existing	
 ?systems	
 ?
Build	
 ?on	
 ?already-??existing	
 ?
metaphors	
 ?
Use	
 ?predecessor	
 ?artifacts	
 ?as	
 ?
metaphors	
 ?
Look	
 ?for	
 ?real-??world	
 ?events	
 ?
exhibiting	
 ?key	
 ?aspects	
 ?
	
 ?
Choose	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?rich	
 ?
structure	
 ?
Evaluate	
 ?the	
 ?applicability	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?
structure	
 ?
Choose	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?suited	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?
audience	
 ?
Choose	
 ?metaphors	
 ?with	
 ?well-??
understood	
 ?literal	
 ?meanings	
 ?
Choose	
 ?metaphors	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?
conceptual	
 ?distance	
 ?between	
 ?the	
 ?
source	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?metaphorical	
 ?
meaning	
 ?
Have	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?one	
 ?concept	
 ?
bridging	
 ?the	
 ?source	
 ?domain	
 ?and	
 ?
the	
 ?target	
 ?domain	
 ?
Do	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?explicitly	
 ?
incorporate	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?
final	
 ?design	
 ?
	
 ?
Elaborate	
 ?the	
 ?triggering	
 ?concept	
 ?
Look	
 ?for	
 ?new	
 ?meanings	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?
concept	
 ?
Restructure	
 ?the	
 ?perception	
 ?of	
 ?
reality	
 ?
Elaborate	
 ?assumptions	
 ?
Tell	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor?s	
 ?story	
 ?
Identify	
 ?the	
 ?unused	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?
metaphor	
 ?
Generate	
 ?conflicting	
 ?accounts	
 ?
based	
 ?on	
 ?different	
 ?metaphors	
 ?
	
 ?
Table	
 ?2.	
 ?Madsen	
 ?(1994)	
 ?proposes	
 ?guidelines	
 ?for	
 ?applying	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?different	
 ?phases	
 ?of	
 ?research	
 ?and	
 ?design.	
 ?Lakoff	
 ?and	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?Metaphors	
 ?We	
 ?Live	
 ?By	
 ?(1980)	
 ?discussed	
 ?how	
 ?deeply	
 ?embedded	
 ?metaphors	
 ?are	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?language	
 ?and	
 ?culture.	
 ?Their	
 ?work	
 ?points	
 ?the	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?existing	
 ?metaphors	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?already	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?talk	
 ?about	
 ?certain	
 ?topics,	
 ?and	
 ?suggests	
 ?that	
 ?identifying	
 ?and	
 ?exploring	
 ?the	
 ?metaphors	
 ?people	
 ?already	
 ?use	
 ?will	
 ?provide	
 ?far	
 ?more	
 ?power	
 ?and	
 ?insight	
 ?than	
 ?metaphors	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?spontaneously	
 ?or	
 ?arbitrarily	
 ?generated,	
 ?precisely	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?existing	
 ?metaphor	
 ?has	
 ?already	
 ?deeply	
 ?affected	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?share	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?conceive	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?it	
 ?describes.	
 ?	
 ?With	
 ?awareness	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?on	
 ?shaping	
 ?people?s	
 ?understanding,	
 ?Carpenter	
 ?(2008)	
 ?explains	
 ?how	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?both	
 ?beneficial	
 ?and	
 ?inimical	
 ?to	
 ?gaining	
 ?understanding	
 ?in	
 ?qualitative	
 ?research.	
 ?Fittingly,	
 ?Carpenter	
 ?uses	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?his	
 ?explanation:	
 ?illumination	
 ?for	
 ?understanding.	
 ?Table	
 ?3	
 ?summarizes	
 ?the	
 ?benefits	
 ?and	
 ?potential	
 ?drawbacks	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?	
 ?With	
 ?this	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?potential	
 ?benefits,	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?see	
 ?how	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?for	
 ?this	
 ?investigation	
 ?is	
 ?appropriate	
 ?for	
 ?several	
 ?reasons.	
 ?First,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?all	
 ?media	
 ?consumers,	
 ?so	
 ?the	
 ?process	
 ?is	
 ?extremely	
 ?familiar	
 ?to	
 ?us;	
 ?adopting	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?viewpoint	
 ?through	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?may	
 ?help	
 ?us	
 ?perceive	
 ?things	
 ?we	
 ?normally	
 ?pay	
 ?no	
 ?attention	
 ?to.	
 ?Second,	
 ?evoking	
 ?emotion	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?very	
 ?helpful	
 ?for	
 ?identifying	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?people	
 ?and	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?may	
 ?have	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs.	
 ?And	
 ?third,	
 ?we	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?solutions	
 ?that	
 ?work	
 ?in	
 ?food	
 ?so	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?apply	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?media.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 8	
 ?
Shedding	
 ?Light	
 ?(benefits	
 ?to	
 ?understanding)	
 ? Casting	
 ?Shadows	
 ?(potential	
 ?problems)	
 ?
Assist	
 ?understanding	
 ?a	
 ?familiar	
 ?process	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?
light	
 ?
Evoke	
 ?emotion	
 ?
Suggest	
 ?appropriate	
 ?interventions	
 ?
Providing	
 ?structure	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?
	
 ?
Mixing	
 ?metaphors	
 ?	
 ?
Not	
 ?following	
 ?through	
 ?or	
 ?abandoning	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?
Metaphors	
 ?that	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?fit	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?
Oversimplifying	
 ?or	
 ?overshadowing	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?
Projecting	
 ?polarizing	
 ?ideologies	
 ?
Misinterpreting	
 ?cultural	
 ?metaphors	
 ?
Table	
 ?3.	
 ?Carpenter	
 ?(2008)	
 ?identifies	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?can	
 ?help	
 ?and	
 ?harm	
 ?understanding	
 ?in	
 ?qualitative	
 ?
research.	
 ?Casakin	
 ?(2007,	
 ?2011)	
 ?and	
 ?Hey	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(Hey,	
 ?Linsey,	
 ?Agogino,	
 ?&	
 ?Wood,	
 ?2008)	
 ?contend	
 ?that	
 ?not	
 ?much	
 ?research	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?done	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?efficacy	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?design.	
 ?Casakin	
 ?studied	
 ?the	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?architectural	
 ?design	
 ?process	
 ?and	
 ?found	
 ?evidence	
 ?that	
 ?metaphors	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?particularly	
 ?helpful	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?early	
 ?stages	
 ?of	
 ?design,	
 ?specifically	
 ?for	
 ?developing	
 ?an	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?problems	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?solved.	
 ?Hey	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?describe	
 ?how	
 ?metaphor	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?design:	
 ?both	
 ?in	
 ?reframing	
 ?and	
 ?describing	
 ?a	
 ?problem,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?in	
 ?finding	
 ?solutions	
 ?to	
 ?that	
 ?problem.	
 ?So	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?precedence	
 ?for	
 ?using	
 ?metaphor	
 ?in	
 ?research	
 ?and	
 ?design,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?seems	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?well-??suited	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?current	
 ?topic	
 ?of	
 ?inquiry.	
 ?Section	
 ?3.1	
 ?describes	
 ?the	
 ?methodological	
 ?approach	
 ?applied	
 ?to	
 ?investigate	
 ?these	
 ?topics	
 ?through	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?Let	
 ?us	
 ?now	
 ?turn	
 ?back	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?that	
 ?triggered	
 ?this	
 ?line	
 ?of	
 ?inquiry:	
 ?Clay	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ??information	
 ?diet.?	
 ?
2.4 The	
 ?Information	
 ?Diet:	
 ?applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?	
 ?Clay	
 ?Johnson	
 ?(2012)	
 ?coined	
 ?the	
 ?term	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?(ID)	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?reframe	
 ?our	
 ?struggles	
 ?with	
 ?information	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?health	
 ?problem,	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?a	
 ?problem	
 ?of	
 ?productivity	
 ?and	
 ?efficiency.	
 ?He	
 ?also	
 ?advocates	
 ?treating	
 ?our	
 ?information	
 ?consumption	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?food	
 ?diet,	
 ?making	
 ?conscious	
 ?choices	
 ?that	
 ?include	
 ?consideration	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?physiological	
 ?outcomes	
 ?and	
 ?ethical	
 ?results.	
 ?	
 ?Johnson	
 ?draws	
 ?parallels	
 ?between	
 ?what	
 ?has	
 ?happened	
 ?with	
 ?modern	
 ?industrialized	
 ?food	
 ?systems	
 ?and	
 ?information	
 ?systems.	
 ?He	
 ?relays	
 ?a	
 ?familiar	
 ?narrative	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?modern	
 ?food	
 ?system	
 ?(see	
 ?also	
 ?Hauter,	
 ?2012;	
 ?Moss,	
 ?2013;	
 ?and	
 ?Schlosser,	
 ?2001).	
 ?This	
 ?narrative	
 ?claims	
 ?that	
 ?with	
 ?an	
 ?industrial	
 ?emphasis	
 ?on	
 ?profitability	
 ?and	
 ?efficiency,	
 ?food	
 ?becomes	
 ?standardized,	
 ?processed,	
 ?and	
 ?increasingly	
 ?engineered	
 ?to	
 ?exploit	
 ?human	
 ?characteristics	
 ?that	
 ?evolved	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?context	
 ?of	
 ?scarcity,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?preference	
 ?for	
 ?salts	
 ?and	
 ?fats.	
 ?People?s	
 ?diet	
 ?habits	
 ?have	
 ?also	
 ?changed,	
 ?driven	
 ?by	
 ?both	
 ?societal	
 ?changes	
 ?and	
 ?advertising:	
 ?things	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?once	
 ?occasional	
 ?treats	
 ?are	
 ?now	
 ?mainstays	
 ?of	
 ?some	
 ?people?s	
 ?diets,	
 ?and	
 ?serving	
 ?sizes	
 ?have	
 ?also	
 ?shot	
 ?upwards.	
 ?The	
 ?net	
 ?result	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?epidemic	
 ?levels	
 ?of	
 ?diet-??related	
 ?health	
 ?problems.	
 ?	
 ?Johnson	
 ?claims	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?strategies	
 ?of	
 ?optimizing	
 ?content	
 ?for	
 ?maximum	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?profitability	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?adopted	
 ?by	
 ?many	
 ?modern	
 ?media	
 ?producers,	
 ?who	
 ?are	
 ?increasingly	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?larger	
 ?corporations	
 ?which	
 ?expect	
 ?maximized	
 ?profit	
 ?and	
 ?efficiency.	
 ?This	
 ?drives	
 ?creation	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?consumed	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?lowest	
 ?cost	
 ?of	
 ?production.	
 ?A	
 ?name	
 ?often	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?prolific	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?modern	
 ?media	
 ?producers	
 ?is	
 ?
content	
 ?farms;	
 ?the	
 ?farming	
 ?reference	
 ?here	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?industrialized	
 ?version	
 ?of	
 ?modern	
 ?agriculture,	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?romantic	
 ?image	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?small	
 ?family	
 ?farm.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 9	
 ?
So,	
 ?the	
 ?argument	
 ?goes,	
 ?we	
 ?see	
 ?the	
 ?proliferation	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?choices	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?attractive	
 ?and	
 ?require	
 ?little	
 ?engagement	
 ?to	
 ?consume,	
 ?though	
 ?they	
 ?provide	
 ?little	
 ?of	
 ?lasting	
 ?worth	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?consumer.	
 ?This	
 ?content	
 ?traffics	
 ?in	
 ?affirmation	
 ?and	
 ?reinforcement	
 ?of	
 ?beliefs	
 ??	
 ?as	
 ?Johnson	
 ?puts	
 ?it,	
 ??who	
 ?wants	
 ?to	
 ?hear	
 ?the	
 ?truth	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?can	
 ?hear	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?right??	
 ?(p8)	
 ??	
 ?sensationalism,	
 ?prurience,	
 ?and	
 ?fear.	
 ?Johnson	
 ?draws	
 ?a	
 ?sharp	
 ?contrast	
 ?between	
 ?that	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?and	
 ?information	
 ?which	
 ?has	
 ?higher	
 ??nutritional	
 ?value?	
 ?but	
 ?which	
 ?takes	
 ?more	
 ?time	
 ?and	
 ?money	
 ?to	
 ?produce,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?investigative	
 ?journalism.	
 ?This	
 ?information	
 ?also	
 ?takes	
 ?more	
 ?effort	
 ?to	
 ?consume,	
 ?as	
 ?it	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?simply	
 ?reinforce	
 ?existing	
 ?notions	
 ?or	
 ?provide	
 ?immediate	
 ?stimulation,	
 ?and	
 ?may	
 ?raise	
 ?awareness	
 ?of	
 ?problems	
 ?that	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?addressed.	
 ?	
 ?There	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?obvious	
 ?parallel	
 ?here	
 ?between	
 ?highly	
 ?processed	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?appealing	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?surface,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?takes	
 ?less	
 ?energy	
 ?to	
 ?digest,	
 ?and	
 ?yields	
 ?less	
 ?nutrients	
 ?than	
 ?healthier	
 ?foods;	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?is	
 ?true	
 ?with	
 ?modern	
 ??junk	
 ?food?	
 ?media	
 ?like	
 ?celebrity	
 ?gossip	
 ?and	
 ?reality	
 ?shows.	
 ?	
 ?Johnson	
 ?brings	
 ?another	
 ?concept	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?by	
 ?proposing	
 ?a	
 ?prescriptive	
 ?information	
 ?diet.	
 ?This	
 ??info-??veganism?	
 ?diet	
 ?adopts	
 ?vegan	
 ?principles	
 ?and	
 ?tactics:	
 ?
? Avoid	
 ?highly	
 ?processed	
 ?information	
 ??	
 ?favor	
 ?original	
 ?sources	
 ?and	
 ?on-??the	
 ?ground	
 ?reports	
 ?over	
 ?punditry.	
 ?
? Take	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?your	
 ?consumption	
 ?technology	
 ?so	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?responding	
 ?and	
 ?reacting	
 ?to	
 ?information	
 ?coming	
 ?at	
 ?you,	
 ?but	
 ?instead	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?information	
 ?to	
 ?seek	
 ?out	
 ?and	
 ?consume.	
 ?
? Consider	
 ?the	
 ?impacts	
 ?of	
 ?your	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices	
 ?on	
 ?your	
 ?health	
 ?and	
 ?on	
 ?society	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?whole	
 ??	
 ?if	
 ?we	
 ?keep	
 ?choosing	
 ?unhealthy	
 ?information,	
 ?then	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?what	
 ?producers	
 ?will	
 ?provide.	
 ?
? Consume	
 ?locally	
 ??	
 ?focus	
 ?on	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?happening	
 ?geographically	
 ?close	
 ?to	
 ?you	
 ?and	
 ?your	
 ?local	
 ?community,	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?happening	
 ?to	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?are	
 ?socially	
 ?close	
 ?to	
 ?you.	
 ?	
 ?Johnson	
 ?thinks	
 ?that	
 ?people?s	
 ?beliefs	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?changed	
 ?by	
 ?changing	
 ?the	
 ?kind	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?they	
 ?consume,	
 ?engaging	
 ?their	
 ?critical	
 ?faculties	
 ?more;	
 ?and	
 ?that	
 ?society	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?whole	
 ?can	
 ?make	
 ?better	
 ?decisions	
 ?if	
 ?we	
 ?all	
 ?improve	
 ?our	
 ?information	
 ?habits.	
 ?Pariser	
 ?(2011)	
 ?likewise	
 ?warns	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?in	
 ?danger	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?trapped	
 ?in	
 ??the	
 ?filter	
 ?bubble?	
 ?by	
 ?self-??selecting	
 ?into	
 ?isolated	
 ?groups	
 ?who	
 ?choose	
 ?a	
 ?biased	
 ?media	
 ?diet,	
 ?rejecting	
 ?sources	
 ?which	
 ?conflict	
 ?with	
 ?our	
 ?views.	
 ?	
 ?But	
 ?it	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?the	
 ?case	
 ?that	
 ?changing	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?we	
 ?consume	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?sufficient	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?our	
 ?beliefs.	
 ?A	
 ?recent	
 ?study	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?of	
 ?polarization	
 ?(Dandekar,	
 ?Goel,	
 ?&	
 ?Lee,	
 ?2013)	
 ?shows	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?problem	
 ?may	
 ?go	
 ?deeper	
 ?than	
 ?simply	
 ?what	
 ?information	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?(or	
 ?choose	
 ?to	
 ?expose	
 ?ourselves	
 ?to).	
 ?Even	
 ?when	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?information,	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?biased	
 ?assimilation	
 ?-??	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?take	
 ?from	
 ?it	
 ?depends	
 ?heavily	
 ?on	
 ?our	
 ?existing	
 ?beliefs	
 ?and	
 ?we	
 ?tend	
 ?to	
 ?give	
 ?more	
 ?weight	
 ?to	
 ?that	
 ?which	
 ?supports.	
 ?	
 ?Also,	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?focus	
 ?on	
 ?information	
 ?does	
 ?seem	
 ?to	
 ?miss	
 ?out	
 ?on	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?value	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?get	
 ?from	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?We	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?eat	
 ?purely	
 ?for	
 ?nutrients,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?only	
 ?to	
 ?gain	
 ?information	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?choose	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?media.	
 ?But	
 ?here,	
 ?too,	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?draw	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?for	
 ?an	
 ?idea	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?missing	
 ?from	
 ?this	
 ?conception	
 ??	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?explore	
 ?this	
 ?further	
 ?in	
 ?section	
 ?2.6.	
 ?Additionally,	
 ?while	
 ?Johnson	
 ?proposes	
 ?a	
 ?prescriptive	
 ?diet,	
 ?he	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?much	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?way	
 ?of	
 ?practical	
 ?advice	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?adhere	
 ?to	
 ?that	
 ?diet.	
 ?It?s	
 ?one	
 ?thing	
 ?to	
 ?know	
 ?that	
 ?you	
 ?should	
 ?
	
 ? 10	
 ?
reduce	
 ?your	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?one	
 ?category	
 ?and	
 ?increase	
 ?another,	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?form	
 ?the	
 ?intention	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?so,	
 ?but	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?in	
 ?actually	
 ?carrying	
 ?through	
 ?on	
 ?these	
 ?good	
 ?intentions	
 ?that	
 ?many	
 ?people	
 ?get	
 ?stuck.	
 ?Here	
 ?too,	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?examine	
 ?what	
 ?people	
 ?do	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?see	
 ?how	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?to	
 ?problems	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?On	
 ?the	
 ?whole,	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?identification	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?metaphor	
 ?quite	
 ?compelling.	
 ?The	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?for	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?one	
 ?such	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?deeply	
 ?embedded	
 ?in	
 ?Western	
 ?culture.	
 ?The	
 ?Tree	
 ?of	
 ?Knowledge	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?Garden	
 ?of	
 ?Eden,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?command	
 ?to	
 ?Ezekiel	
 ?to	
 ??eat	
 ?this	
 ?book?	
 ?(quoted	
 ?above)	
 ?are	
 ?but	
 ?two	
 ?early	
 ?instances.	
 ?Lakoff	
 ?and	
 ?Johnson	
 ?identified	
 ?many	
 ?other	
 ?modern	
 ?examples,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ??He	
 ?devoured	
 ?that	
 ?book,?	
 ??This	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?meaty	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?paper,?	
 ?and	
 ??All	
 ?this	
 ?paper	
 ?has	
 ?in	
 ?it	
 ?are	
 ?raw	
 ?facts,	
 ?half-??baked	
 ?ideas,	
 ?and	
 ?warmed-??over	
 ?theories.?	
 ?	
 ?We	
 ?also	
 ?talk	
 ?about	
 ?people?s	
 ?subjective	
 ?media	
 ?preferences	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?matter	
 ?of	
 ?taste.	
 ?We	
 ?consume	
 ?both	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?information,	
 ?and	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?products	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?consume.	
 ?Eating	
 ?food	
 ?provides	
 ?us	
 ?with	
 ?calories	
 ?and	
 ?nutrients,	
 ?while	
 ?consuming	
 ?media	
 ?provides	
 ?us	
 ?with	
 ?information.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?wondered	
 ?if	
 ?this	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?leveraged	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?better	
 ?understand	
 ?people?s	
 ?problems	
 ?with	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?thus	
 ?inform	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?solutions	
 ?that	
 ?will	
 ?meet	
 ?their	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?support	
 ?their	
 ?values.	
 ?In	
 ?Section	
 ?3,	
 ?I	
 ?explore	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?further	
 ?with	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?	
 ?
2.5 What	
 ?do	
 ?we	
 ?know	
 ?about	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?informs	
 ?media?	
 ?In	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?expand	
 ?the	
 ?investigation	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?metaphor	
 ?for	
 ?media,	
 ?I	
 ?review	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?know	
 ?about	
 ?food	
 ?consumption	
 ?that	
 ?may	
 ?inform	
 ?and	
 ?inspire	
 ?designs	
 ?of	
 ?solutions	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?manage	
 ?information	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
2.5.1 Producers	
 ?exploit	
 ?taste	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?profitability	
 ?Many	
 ?critics	
 ?(Hauter,	
 ?2012;	
 ?Petrini,	
 ?2003;	
 ?Portinari,	
 ?1989;	
 ?Schlosser,	
 ?2001)	
 ?have	
 ?described	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?we	
 ?consume	
 ?is	
 ?increasingly	
 ?processed	
 ?and	
 ?produced	
 ?with	
 ?lack	
 ?of	
 ?concern	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?health	
 ?effects	
 ?on	
 ?its	
 ?consumers.	
 ?Johnson	
 ?argues	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?pattern	
 ?is	
 ?being	
 ?followed	
 ?in	
 ?media,	
 ?to	
 ?much	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?effect.	
 ?Moss	
 ?(2013)	
 ?reports	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?subject	
 ?with	
 ?unprecedented	
 ?cooperation	
 ?and	
 ?detail	
 ?from	
 ?sources	
 ?inside	
 ?the	
 ?industry,	
 ?relating	
 ?how	
 ?and	
 ?why	
 ?producers	
 ?of	
 ?processed	
 ?foods	
 ?have	
 ?gone	
 ?about	
 ?explicitly	
 ?engineering	
 ?their	
 ?products	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?maximally	
 ?efficient	
 ?in	
 ?prompting	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?them,	
 ?particularly	
 ?by	
 ?manipulating	
 ?the	
 ?amounts	
 ?of	
 ?sugar,	
 ?salt	
 ?and	
 ?fat	
 ?they	
 ?contain.	
 ?These	
 ?three	
 ?food	
 ?categories	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?abundance	
 ?through	
 ?much	
 ?of	
 ?human	
 ?evolution,	
 ?yet	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?needed	
 ?in	
 ?some	
 ?amount	
 ?for	
 ?survival,	
 ?so	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?evolved	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?them	
 ?extremely	
 ?appetizing	
 ?so	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?consumed	
 ?when	
 ?available.	
 ?But	
 ?now	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?an	
 ?abundance	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?much	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?world?s	
 ?population,	
 ?and	
 ?in	
 ?fact	
 ?these	
 ?ingredients	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?produced	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?inexpensively	
 ?than	
 ?more	
 ?nutritious	
 ?options,	
 ?our	
 ?food	
 ?itself	
 ?is	
 ?becoming	
 ?unhealthy	
 ?for	
 ?us	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?us	
 ?eat	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?it.	
 ?Worse,	
 ?as	
 ?we	
 ?consume	
 ?more	
 ?processed	
 ?food,	
 ?we	
 ?find	
 ?that	
 ?alternatives	
 ?which	
 ?have	
 ?not	
 ?been	
 ??pumped	
 ?up?	
 ?taste	
 ?less	
 ?appealing.	
 ?	
 ?Johnson	
 ?claims	
 ?this	
 ?same	
 ?vicious	
 ?cycle	
 ?is	
 ?affecting	
 ?modern	
 ?media	
 ?consumers	
 ?and	
 ?producers	
 ?as	
 ?well.	
 ?It	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?cheap	
 ?to	
 ?produce	
 ?content	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?appealing	
 ?to	
 ?prurient	
 ?interests.	
 ?And	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?producers	
 ?do	
 ?know	
 ?exactly	
 ?what	
 ?appeals.	
 ?As	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?behavior	
 ?is	
 ?digitally	
 ?mediated,	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?tracked	
 ?than	
 ?before.	
 ?Once,	
 ?publishers	
 ?knew	
 ?which	
 ?books	
 ?sold,	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?who	
 ?purchased	
 ?them.	
 ?Now	
 ?they	
 ?can	
 ?see	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?our	
 ?consumption	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?granular	
 ?level	
 ?than	
 ?before	
 ??	
 ?not	
 ?just	
 ?knowing	
 ?what	
 ?TV	
 ?show	
 ?is	
 ?getting	
 ?better	
 ?ratings,	
 ?but	
 ?knowing	
 ?which	
 ?30-??second	
 ?segments	
 ?are	
 ?fast-??forwarded	
 ?through	
 ?by	
 ?which	
 ?viewers,	
 ?and	
 ?which	
 ?viewers	
 ?change	
 ?channels	
 ?at	
 ?that	
 ?point.	
 ?So	
 ?
	
 ? 11	
 ?
the	
 ?media	
 ?equivalents	
 ?of	
 ?salt,	
 ?fat	
 ?and	
 ?sugar	
 ?are	
 ?being	
 ?identified	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?personal	
 ?level,	
 ?and	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?increasingly	
 ?being	
 ?fed	
 ?a	
 ?media	
 ?diet	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?just	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?find	
 ?most	
 ?appealing	
 ??	
 ?though	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?consuming	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?term,	
 ?or	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?relative	
 ?amounts	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?would	
 ?like.	
 ?	
 ?
2.5.2 Appetite	
 ?and	
 ?satiety	
 ?responds	
 ?to	
 ?variety	
 ?Taste-??specific	
 ?satiety	
 ?(Havermans,	
 ?Janssen,	
 ?Giesen,	
 ?Roefs,	
 ?&	
 ?Jansen,	
 ?2009)	
 ?is	
 ?another	
 ?concept	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?will	
 ?see	
 ?applying	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Havermans	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?reference	
 ?a	
 ?distinction	
 ?between	
 ?food	
 ?liking	
 ?and	
 ?food	
 ?wanting.	
 ?Food	
 ?liking	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?degree	
 ?to	
 ?which	
 ?people	
 ?find	
 ?certain	
 ?foods	
 ?pleasurable	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?in	
 ?general,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?tends	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?rarely.	
 ?Food	
 ?wanting	
 ?(people?s	
 ?appetite	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?a	
 ?food)	
 ?which	
 ?varies	
 ?considerably	
 ?over	
 ?short	
 ?periods,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?while	
 ?eating	
 ?a	
 ?meal.	
 ?People	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?full	
 ?of	
 ?one	
 ?kind	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?not	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?any	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?it,	
 ?but	
 ?able	
 ?and	
 ?willing	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?more	
 ?if	
 ?a	
 ?different	
 ?kind	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?or	
 ?flavor	
 ?is	
 ?available.	
 ?	
 ?Their	
 ?liking	
 ?or	
 ?taste	
 ?for	
 ?that	
 ?food	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?change	
 ?as	
 ?they	
 ?eat	
 ?it,	
 ?but	
 ?their	
 ?appetite	
 ?for	
 ?it	
 ?does.	
 ?In	
 ?Sections	
 ?3.5	
 ?and	
 ?4.2	
 ?I	
 ?discuss	
 ?how	
 ?food-??liking	
 ?as	
 ?long-??term,	
 ?relatively	
 ?stable	
 ?tastes	
 ?and	
 ?food-??wanting	
 ?as	
 ?short-??term,	
 ?frequently	
 ?changing	
 ?appetites,	
 ?both	
 ?apply	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?habits.	
 ?
2.5.3 Consuming	
 ?without	
 ?thinking	
 ?Brian	
 ?Wansink?s	
 ?research	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?Cornell	
 ?University	
 ?Food	
 ?and	
 ?Brand	
 ?Lab,	
 ?summarized	
 ?in	
 ?his	
 ?book	
 ?Mindless	
 ?Eating	
 ?(2006),	
 ?shows	
 ?that	
 ?much	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?food	
 ?consumption	
 ?behavior	
 ?is	
 ?unconscious.	
 ?Diets	
 ?that	
 ?rely	
 ?on	
 ?conscious	
 ?intent	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?behavior	
 ?are	
 ?less	
 ?effective,	
 ?especially	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?term.	
 ?A	
 ?more	
 ?effective	
 ?approach	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?circumstances	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?the	
 ?preferred	
 ?choices	
 ?and	
 ?quantities	
 ?easier	
 ?to	
 ?select,	
 ?even	
 ?when	
 ?on	
 ??autopilot.?	
 ?The	
 ?following	
 ?are	
 ?examples	
 ?of	
 ?factors	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?found	
 ?to	
 ?affect	
 ?consumption:	
 ?
? The	
 ??See-??Food	
 ?diet.?	
 ?Named	
 ?because	
 ?you	
 ?eat	
 ?what	
 ?you	
 ?see.	
 ?Making	
 ?something	
 ?more	
 ?or	
 ?less	
 ?visible	
 ?to	
 ?moderate	
 ?its	
 ?consumption	
 ??	
 ?candies	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?clear	
 ?jar	
 ?vs.	
 ?an	
 ?opaque	
 ?one,	
 ?or	
 ?plates	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?covered	
 ?in	
 ?clear	
 ?plastic	
 ?wrap	
 ?vs.	
 ?aluminum	
 ?foil	
 ?	
 ?
? Variety.	
 ?Having	
 ?multiple	
 ?flavors	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?from	
 ?increases	
 ?consumption;	
 ?when	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?tired	
 ?of	
 ?one	
 ?flavor,	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?switch	
 ?to	
 ?another	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?taste-??specific	
 ?satiety	
 ?
? Availability.	
 ?Seeing	
 ?foods	
 ?presented	
 ?in	
 ?large	
 ?volume	
 ?increases	
 ?consumption.	
 ?We	
 ?take	
 ?more	
 ?peanut	
 ?butter	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?five-??pound	
 ?jar	
 ?than	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?1-??pound	
 ?jar;	
 ?we	
 ?take	
 ?a	
 ?bigger	
 ?serving	
 ?of	
 ?snacks	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?gallon	
 ?bowl	
 ?than	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?half-??gallon	
 ?bowl.	
 ?
? Stock.	
 ?If	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?large	
 ?volume	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?cupboards	
 ?(for	
 ?example,	
 ?we	
 ?just	
 ?made	
 ?a	
 ?bulk	
 ?purchase	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?warehouse	
 ?club)	
 ?we	
 ?will	
 ?increase	
 ?our	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?it	
 ?until	
 ?our	
 ?personal	
 ?inventory	
 ?of	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?down	
 ?to	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?consider	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?normal	
 ?levels.	
 ?
? Accessibility.	
 ?We	
 ?eat	
 ?more	
 ?candies	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?container	
 ?a	
 ?few	
 ?steps	
 ?away	
 ?vs.	
 ?across	
 ?the	
 ?room.	
 ?
? Attention.	
 ?Eating	
 ?while	
 ?watching	
 ?TV	
 ?distracts	
 ?you	
 ?from	
 ?paying	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?what	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?eating	
 ?and	
 ?your	
 ?internal	
 ?satiety	
 ?signals	
 ?which	
 ?leads	
 ?you	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?more	
 ?than	
 ?you	
 ?would	
 ?otherwise.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?draw	
 ?on	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?in	
 ?developing	
 ?prototypes	
 ?(see	
 ?Section	
 ?5).	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 12	
 ?
2.6 Information	
 ?vs.	
 ?media:	
 ?experience,	
 ?form,	
 ?and	
 ?content	
 ?While	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor	
 ?emphasizes	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?content	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?I	
 ?must	
 ?also	
 ?acknowledge	
 ?the	
 ?importance	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?medium	
 ?by	
 ?which	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?conveyed,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?importance	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?experiences	
 ?of	
 ?consumption.	
 ?The	
 ?people	
 ?I	
 ?interviewed	
 ?suggested	
 ?that	
 ?perhaps	
 ?a	
 ?better	
 ?analogy	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?component	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?diet	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?nutritional	
 ?component	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?food	
 ?diet;	
 ?they	
 ?told	
 ?me	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?than	
 ?just	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?and	
 ?nutrients	
 ?it	
 ?yields.	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?explores	
 ?some	
 ?background	
 ?research	
 ?to	
 ?expand	
 ?on	
 ?those	
 ?distinctions.	
 ?	
 ?K?ng,	
 ?Picard	
 ?and	
 ?Towse	
 ?(K?ng,	
 ?Picard,	
 ?&	
 ?Towse,	
 ?2008)	
 ?define	
 ?media	
 ?as	
 ??technologies	
 ?(print,	
 ?radio,	
 ?television,	
 ?sound	
 ?recording	
 ?and	
 ?such	
 ?like)	
 ?through	
 ?which	
 ?content	
 ?created	
 ?for	
 ?groups	
 ?of	
 ?consumers	
 ?is	
 ?moved	
 ?and	
 ?organized.?	
 ?Media	
 ?includes	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?emails,	
 ?text	
 ?messages,	
 ?and	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ?that	
 ?carry	
 ?exchanges	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?intended	
 ?for	
 ?small	
 ?groups	
 ?or	
 ?even	
 ?individuals.	
 ?As	
 ?McLuhan?s	
 ??the	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?message?	
 ?(1964)	
 ?points	
 ?out,	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?as	
 ?important	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?content	
 ?it	
 ?conveys	
 ?(Federman,	
 ?2004).	
 ?Therefore,	
 ?the	
 ?term	
 ?media	
 ?here	
 ?refers	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?combination	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?technologies	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?content	
 ?they	
 ?convey.	
 ?	
 ?We	
 ?place	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?importance	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?aesthetic	
 ?and	
 ?emotional	
 ?experiences	
 ?of	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?both	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media,	
 ?beyond	
 ?the	
 ?value	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?nutrition	
 ?or	
 ?information	
 ?we	
 ?receive.	
 ?As	
 ?the	
 ?Slow	
 ?Food	
 ?manifesto	
 ?(Portinari,	
 ?1989)	
 ?points	
 ?out,	
 ?we	
 ?value	
 ?the	
 ??suitable	
 ?doses	
 ?of	
 ?guaranteed	
 ?sensual	
 ?pleasure	
 ?and	
 ?slow,	
 ?long-??lasting	
 ?enjoyment?	
 ?we	
 ?get	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?sensory,	
 ?social,	
 ?and	
 ?emotional	
 ?experiences	
 ?of	
 ?consuming	
 ?food;	
 ?this	
 ?goes	
 ?well	
 ?beyond	
 ?merely	
 ?meeting	
 ?our	
 ?survival	
 ?requirements	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?efficient	
 ?manner	
 ?(Petrini,	
 ?2003).	
 ?	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?we	
 ?value	
 ?the	
 ?activities	
 ?and	
 ?experiences	
 ?around	
 ?media,	
 ?even	
 ?when	
 ?it	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?provide	
 ?needed	
 ?information.	
 ?These	
 ?include	
 ?collecting,	
 ?preparing,	
 ?sharing,	
 ?and	
 ?discussing,	
 ?in	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?consumption	
 ?itself.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?value	
 ?we	
 ?get	
 ?from	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?includes	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?media?s	
 ?form	
 ?and	
 ?its	
 ?content,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?extracting	
 ?information	
 ?and	
 ?meaning	
 ?from	
 ?it.	
 ?Therefore,	
 ?having	
 ?been	
 ?informed	
 ?by	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?Information	
 ?Diet	
 ?concept	
 ?to	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?lens	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?apply	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?habits,	
 ?I	
 ?expanded	
 ?the	
 ?consideration	
 ?to	
 ?include	
 ?the	
 ?entirety	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?experience.	
 ?	
 ?
2.7 Health	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?What	
 ?we	
 ?eat	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?key	
 ?factor	
 ?affecting	
 ?many	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?health,	
 ?including	
 ?life	
 ?expectancy,	
 ?growth,	
 ?disease,	
 ?complexion,	
 ?mood,	
 ?onset	
 ?of	
 ?puberty,	
 ?weight,	
 ?metabolism,	
 ?and	
 ?energy	
 ?levels	
 ?(as	
 ?reviewed	
 ?in	
 ?Dauncey,	
 ?2009;	
 ?Marcus	
 ?&	
 ?Kalarchian,	
 ?2003).	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?our	
 ?IDs	
 ?have	
 ?effects	
 ?beyond	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?content.	
 ?So	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?has	
 ?impact	
 ?on	
 ?our	
 ?lives	
 ?far	
 ?beyond	
 ?the	
 ?moment	
 ?of	
 ?consumption,	
 ?and	
 ?giving	
 ?people	
 ?better	
 ?control	
 ?over	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?can	
 ?yield	
 ?real-??world	
 ?benefits	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?health	
 ?and	
 ?wellness.	
 ?Some	
 ?examples	
 ?include:	
 ?
? Media	
 ?habits	
 ?can	
 ?affect	
 ?sleep,	
 ?which	
 ?impacts	
 ?health	
 ?(Bauer	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?2012;	
 ?Garrison	
 ?&	
 ?Christakis,	
 ?2012)	
 ?	
 ?
? Media	
 ?habits	
 ?can	
 ?affect	
 ?physical	
 ?fitness;	
 ?time	
 ?spent	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?couch	
 ?watching	
 ?TV	
 ?or	
 ?playing	
 ?videogames	
 ?decreases	
 ?physical	
 ?activity	
 ?and	
 ?exercise.	
 ?(Todd	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?2008)	
 ?	
 ?
? Consumption	
 ?of	
 ?violence-??filled	
 ?media	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?linked	
 ?to	
 ?increased	
 ?aggression	
 ?and	
 ?decreased	
 ?pro-??social	
 ?behavior	
 ?(Anderson,	
 ?Bushman,	
 ?&	
 ?Anderson,	
 ?2001;	
 ?Huesmann,	
 ?
	
 ? 13	
 ?
2007)	
 ?though	
 ?other	
 ?meta-??analyses	
 ?challenge	
 ?these	
 ?conclusions	
 ?(Ferguson	
 ?&	
 ?Kilburn,	
 ?2009).	
 ?	
 ?
? Media	
 ?messages	
 ?that	
 ?convey	
 ?societal	
 ?pressures	
 ?around	
 ?body	
 ?image	
 ?are	
 ?a	
 ?significant	
 ?factor	
 ?in	
 ?causing	
 ?and	
 ?sustaining	
 ?eating	
 ?disorders;	
 ?increased	
 ?exposure	
 ?to	
 ?such	
 ?messages	
 ?is	
 ?causally	
 ?correlated	
 ?with	
 ?increased	
 ?disorders	
 ?(Thompson	
 ?&	
 ?Heinberg,	
 ?1999).	
 ?The	
 ?same	
 ?research	
 ?shows	
 ?that	
 ?different	
 ?media	
 ?messages	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?effectively	
 ?used	
 ?as	
 ?interventions	
 ?to	
 ?counteract	
 ?those	
 ?influences.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?American	
 ?Academy	
 ?of	
 ?Pediatrics	
 ?(2011)	
 ?cites	
 ?dozens	
 ?of	
 ?such	
 ?studies	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?varied	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?physical,	
 ?mental,	
 ?and	
 ?emotional	
 ?health	
 ?issues	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?recommendations	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?Academy	
 ?now	
 ?makes	
 ?about	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?for	
 ?children,	
 ?as	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?long	
 ?done	
 ?for	
 ?nutrition	
 ?and	
 ?exercise.	
 ?	
 ?Overall,	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?ample	
 ?evidence	
 ?that	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits	
 ?can	
 ?have	
 ?real-??world	
 ?health	
 ?impacts.	
 ?	
 ?
2.8 The	
 ?changing	
 ?media	
 ?landscape	
 ?Information	
 ?technology	
 ?has	
 ?developed	
 ?rapidly	
 ?in	
 ?recent	
 ?decades,	
 ?and	
 ?these	
 ?developments	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?accompanied	
 ?by	
 ?many	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?landscape	
 ?and	
 ?our	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits.	
 ?In	
 ?this	
 ?section	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?survey	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?changes	
 ?which	
 ?pose	
 ?serious	
 ?challenges	
 ?for	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?satisfied	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?media	
 ?habits.	
 ?	
 ?Some	
 ?critics	
 ?(N.	
 ?Carr,	
 ?2010;	
 ?Rosen,	
 ?Cheever,	
 ?&	
 ?Carrier,	
 ?2012)	
 ?warn	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?distracting	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?new	
 ?media	
 ?which	
 ?provide	
 ?frequent	
 ?quick	
 ?rewards	
 ?for	
 ?rapidly	
 ?flitting	
 ?between	
 ?different	
 ?media	
 ?activities.	
 ?They	
 ?argue	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?impact	
 ?of	
 ?engaging	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?behavior	
 ?causes	
 ?severe	
 ?detriments	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?think	
 ?deeply	
 ?and	
 ?concentrate	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?subject	
 ?for	
 ?an	
 ?extended	
 ?period,	
 ?and	
 ?our	
 ?capacity	
 ?to	
 ?pay	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?social	
 ?interactions	
 ?and	
 ??off-??line?	
 ?experiences.	
 ?This	
 ?concern	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?impact	
 ?of	
 ?new	
 ?media	
 ?technology	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?human	
 ?experience	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?new	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?age.	
 ?It	
 ?seems	
 ?every	
 ?introduction	
 ?of	
 ?new	
 ?media	
 ?technologies	
 ?brings	
 ?similar	
 ?concerns.	
 ?Such	
 ?warnings	
 ?accompanied	
 ?the	
 ?mass	
 ?adoptions	
 ?of	
 ?first	
 ?radio	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?television	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?twentieth	
 ?century	
 ?(Gladstone	
 ?&	
 ?Neufeld,	
 ?2011).	
 ?They	
 ?also	
 ?accompanied	
 ?the	
 ?spread	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?printing	
 ?press	
 ?centuries	
 ?earlier	
 ?(Birkerts,	
 ?1994).	
 ?In	
 ?fact,	
 ?the	
 ?earliest	
 ?known	
 ?expression	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?same	
 ?concern	
 ?about	
 ?technology	
 ?ruining	
 ?the	
 ?human	
 ?intellect	
 ?came	
 ?many	
 ?millennia	
 ?ago:	
 ?Plato?s	
 ?Phaedrus	
 ?recounts	
 ?Socrates	
 ?expounding	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?deleterious	
 ?effects	
 ?on	
 ?understanding	
 ?and	
 ?thinking	
 ?from	
 ?written	
 ?language,	
 ?finding	
 ?it	
 ?severely	
 ?deficient	
 ?in	
 ?comparison	
 ?to	
 ?speech	
 ?and	
 ?memory	
 ?(Wolf,	
 ?2008).	
 ?(Ironically,	
 ?we	
 ?would	
 ?almost	
 ?certainly	
 ?not	
 ?know	
 ?about	
 ?this	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?for	
 ?Plato	
 ?having	
 ?written	
 ?down	
 ?Socrates?	
 ?words.)	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?notable	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?modern	
 ?media	
 ?landscape	
 ?is	
 ?increased	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?and	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?more	
 ?information	
 ?from	
 ?more	
 ?sources	
 ?by	
 ?more	
 ?people.	
 ?But	
 ?it	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?a	
 ?long	
 ?time	
 ?since	
 ?humanity	
 ?first	
 ?passed	
 ?the	
 ?point	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?amount	
 ?of	
 ?knowledge	
 ?available	
 ?was	
 ?far	
 ?greater	
 ?than	
 ?any	
 ?one	
 ?individual	
 ?could	
 ?consume	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?lifetime.	
 ?Wurman	
 ?(2001)	
 ?argues	
 ?our	
 ?novel	
 ?modern	
 ?problem	
 ?is	
 ?less	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?overload	
 ?(too	
 ?much	
 ?information	
 ?being	
 ?available)	
 ?than	
 ?what	
 ?he	
 ?termed	
 ?information	
 ?anxiety:	
 ?the	
 ?concern	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?missing	
 ?out	
 ?on	
 ?information	
 ?we	
 ?should	
 ?have.	
 ?One	
 ?piece	
 ?of	
 ?evidence	
 ?supporting	
 ?Wurman?s	
 ?contention	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?fact	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?word	
 ?FOMO	
 ?(an	
 ?acronym	
 ?for	
 ??Fear	
 ?Of	
 ?Missing	
 ?Out?)	
 ?was	
 ?chosen	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?word	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?day	
 ?for	
 ?April	
 ?14,	
 ?2011	
 ?by	
 ?UrbanDictionary.com,	
 ?which	
 ?tracks	
 ?and	
 ?defines	
 ?popular	
 ?slang	
 ?terms	
 ?(?Urban	
 ?Dictionary:	
 ?FOMO,?	
 ?2011).	
 ?Consumer	
 ?behavior	
 ?is	
 ?increasing	
 ?moving	
 ?towards	
 ?digital	
 ?versions	
 ?across	
 ?all	
 ?formats	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?(Nielsen	
 ?Company,	
 ?2012a).	
 ?The	
 ?most	
 ?recent	
 ?format	
 ?to	
 ?begin	
 ?the	
 ?digital	
 ?transition	
 ?in	
 ?
	
 ? 14	
 ?
earnest	
 ?is	
 ?books.	
 ?Figure	
 ?3	
 ?depicts	
 ?the	
 ?rise	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?in	
 ?sales	
 ?and	
 ?consumer	
 ?adoption.	
 ?Ebooks	
 ?accounted	
 ?for	
 ?less	
 ?than	
 ?1%	
 ?of	
 ?US	
 ?book	
 ?publishers?	
 ?revenues	
 ?as	
 ?recently	
 ?as	
 ?2006,	
 ?but	
 ?are	
 ?now	
 ?over	
 ?20%	
 ?(Association	
 ?of	
 ?American	
 ?Publishers,	
 ?2013).	
 ?Over	
 ?26%	
 ?of	
 ?Americans	
 ?have	
 ?read	
 ?an	
 ?ebook	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?past	
 ?year	
 ?(Rainie,	
 ?2012).	
 ?Since	
 ?2011,	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?customers	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?buying	
 ?more	
 ?Kindle	
 ?books	
 ?than	
 ?print	
 ?books	
 ?(Amazon.com,	
 ?2011).	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ?
Figure	
 ?3.	
 ?Consumers	
 ?have	
 ?rapidly	
 ?increased	
 ?purchases	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?in	
 ?recent	
 ?years	
 ?(left,	
 ?Association	
 ?of	
 ?American	
 ?
Publishers,	
 ?2013)	
 ?as	
 ?ownership	
 ?of	
 ?tablet	
 ?computers	
 ?and	
 ?dedicated	
 ?e-??readers	
 ?for	
 ?reading	
 ?ebooks	
 ?increases	
 ?(right,	
 ?
Raine,	
 ?2012)	
 ?Other	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?technology	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?ecosystem	
 ?from	
 ?this	
 ?digital	
 ?transition	
 ?contribute	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?central	
 ?problem	
 ?of	
 ?modern	
 ?consumption:	
 ?being	
 ?aware	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?greater	
 ?volume	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?than	
 ?we	
 ?could,	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?we	
 ?did	
 ?nothing	
 ?else.	
 ?
? Social	
 ?recommendations.	
 ?People	
 ?have	
 ?long	
 ?made	
 ?personalized	
 ?media	
 ?recommendations	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?individuals,	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?recommender?s	
 ?reflection	
 ?upon	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?person?s	
 ?tastes	
 ?and	
 ?interests.	
 ?The	
 ?current	
 ?media	
 ?ecosystem	
 ?also	
 ?encourages	
 ?broadcasting	
 ?reflexive	
 ?recommendations	
 ?by	
 ?prompting	
 ?consumers	
 ?upon	
 ?completion	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?rating	
 ??	
 ?often	
 ?as	
 ?simple	
 ?as	
 ?1	
 ?to	
 ?5	
 ?stars	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?sharing	
 ?it	
 ?over	
 ?social	
 ?networks.	
 ?In	
 ?this	
 ?mode,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?receivers	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?ratings	
 ?who	
 ?must	
 ?decide	
 ?whether	
 ?or	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?item	
 ?is	
 ?something	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?enjoy.	
 ?
? Aggregated	
 ?ratings	
 ?&	
 ?reviews.	
 ?In	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?reviews	
 ?by	
 ?professional	
 ?critics,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?now	
 ?common	
 ?for	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?consult	
 ?reviews	
 ?from	
 ?other	
 ?consumers.	
 ?Sites	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Metacritic	
 ?and	
 ?Rotten	
 ?Tomatoes	
 ?summarize	
 ?critic	
 ?and	
 ?audience	
 ?ratings	
 ?into	
 ?simple	
 ?metrics;	
 ?Amazon.com	
 ?displays	
 ?a	
 ?ratings	
 ?histogram	
 ?to	
 ?show	
 ?the	
 ?distribution	
 ?of	
 ?ratings.	
 ?	
 ?
? Recommender	
 ?systems.	
 ?These	
 ?systems	
 ?use	
 ?sophisticated	
 ?analysis	
 ?techniques	
 ?to	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?predict	
 ?what	
 ?specific	
 ?items	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?individual	
 ?will	
 ?prefer	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?ratings	
 ?assigned	
 ?by	
 ?other	
 ?viewers	
 ?who	
 ?are	
 ?similar	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?(Konstan	
 ?&	
 ?Riedl,	
 ?2012;	
 ?Sill,	
 ?2010).	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
? Monitored	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Media	
 ?producers	
 ?now	
 ?have	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?detailed	
 ?information	
 ?available	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?consumed	
 ?than	
 ?before.	
 ?Digital	
 ?video	
 ?providers	
 ?like	
 ?Netflix	
 ?and	
 ?TiVo	
 ?can	
 ?determine	
 ?which	
 ?specific	
 ?segments	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?show	
 ?were	
 ?skipped	
 ?and	
 ?which	
 ?were	
 ?viewed	
 ?repeatedly.	
 ?Ebook	
 ?platforms	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?Kindle	
 ?and	
 ?Barnes	
 ?and	
 ?Noble?s	
 ?Nook	
 ?can	
 ?report	
 ?similarly	
 ?detailed	
 ?data	
 ?about	
 ?book	
 ?reading	
 ?(Alter,	
 ?2012).	
 ?Media	
 ?producers	
 ?are	
 ?using	
 ?this	
 ?information	
 ?to	
 ?create	
 ?content	
 ?that	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?even	
 ?more	
 ?appealing	
 ?to	
 ?consumers	
 ?(D.	
 ?Carr,	
 ?2013).	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?factors	
 ?above	
 ?that	
 ?contribute	
 ?to	
 ?people	
 ?finding	
 ?more	
 ?appealing	
 ?media	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?consume,	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?also	
 ?changes	
 ?happening	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?digital	
 ?nature	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?which	
 ?affect	
 ?long-??standing	
 ?media-??related	
 ?activities:	
 ?
	
 ? 15	
 ?
? Stashes.	
 ?As	
 ?squirrels	
 ?save	
 ?acorns	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?future,	
 ?media	
 ?consumers	
 ?set	
 ?aside	
 ?or	
 ?stash	
 ?found	
 ?media	
 ?for	
 ?future	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Petroski?s	
 ?research	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?history	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?bookshelf	
 ?(1999)	
 ?shows	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?technique	
 ?dates	
 ?back	
 ?centuries	
 ?with	
 ?physical	
 ?writings.	
 ?Most	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?sources	
 ?have	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?built-??in	
 ?mechanism	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?this,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?wishlists	
 ?and	
 ?Netflix?	
 ?queue.	
 ?It	
 ?is	
 ?common	
 ?for	
 ?researchers	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?papers	
 ?of	
 ?interest	
 ?via	
 ?online	
 ?searching,	
 ?then	
 ?to	
 ?save	
 ?or	
 ?print	
 ?a	
 ?copy,	
 ?but	
 ?never	
 ?ultimately	
 ?read	
 ?it	
 ?(Rowlands	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?2008).	
 ?This	
 ?evidence	
 ?suggests	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?some	
 ?reward	
 ?from	
 ?searching,	
 ?finding	
 ?and	
 ?stashing	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?independent	
 ?of	
 ?whether	
 ?consumption	
 ?ultimately	
 ?occurs.	
 ?But	
 ?do	
 ?these	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?stashes	
 ?work	
 ?differently	
 ?than	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?media?	
 ?
? Displays	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?People	
 ?display	
 ?media	
 ?to	
 ?communicate	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?seen	
 ?by	
 ?others	
 ?and	
 ?themselves	
 ?(MacAdams,	
 ?1997;	
 ?Swann,	
 ?1983).	
 ?We	
 ?collect	
 ?this	
 ?evidence	
 ??	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?by	
 ?perusing	
 ?someone?s	
 ?bookshelves	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?use	
 ?it	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?us	
 ?understand	
 ?people	
 ?(Gosling,	
 ?2008).	
 ?We	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?visit	
 ?someone	
 ?in	
 ?person	
 ?to	
 ?browse	
 ?their	
 ?bookshelves,	
 ?but	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ?and	
 ?ecommerce	
 ?companies	
 ?encourage	
 ?us	
 ?to	
 ?share	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?much	
 ?wider	
 ?audience.	
 ?Yet	
 ?these	
 ?online	
 ?sharing	
 ?methods	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?as	
 ?present	
 ?when	
 ?people	
 ?do	
 ?visit	
 ?us.	
 ?
? Difficulty	
 ?adapting	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?loss	
 ?of	
 ?physicality	
 ?of	
 ?digital	
 ?media.	
 ?As	
 ?books,	
 ?music,	
 ?photographs	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?media	
 ?are	
 ?increasingly	
 ?experienced	
 ?as	
 ?digital	
 ?information	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?physical	
 ?objects,	
 ?people?s	
 ?relationship	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?has	
 ?changed,	
 ?and	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?still	
 ?wrestling	
 ?with	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?adapt	
 ?to	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?available	
 ?affordances	
 ?(Golsteijn,	
 ?Van	
 ?den	
 ?Hoven,	
 ?Frohlich,	
 ?&	
 ?Sellen,	
 ?2012;	
 ?Magaudda,	
 ?2011;	
 ?Odom,	
 ?Sellen,	
 ?Harper,	
 ?&	
 ?Thereska,	
 ?2012).	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section	
 ?I	
 ?share	
 ?people?s	
 ?reports	
 ?of	
 ?how	
 ?these	
 ?trends	
 ?contribute	
 ?to	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?modern	
 ?media	
 ?consumption:	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?awareness	
 ?than	
 ?ever	
 ?of	
 ?appealing	
 ?things	
 ?to	
 ?consume,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?them	
 ?has	
 ?not	
 ?increased.	
 ?At	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?time,	
 ?some	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?are	
 ?becoming	
 ?more	
 ?compelling	
 ?and	
 ?harder	
 ?to	
 ?resist	
 ?while	
 ?others	
 ?have	
 ?not.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 16	
 ?
3 Interview	
 ?Research:	
 ?Food,	
 ?Media,	
 ?and	
 ?Metaphor	
 ?While	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?arguments	
 ?(that	
 ?our	
 ?information	
 ?diet,	
 ?like	
 ?our	
 ?food	
 ?diet,	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?affected	
 ?by	
 ?changes	
 ?that	
 ?benefit	
 ?the	
 ?producers	
 ?while	
 ?harming	
 ?consumers;	
 ?and	
 ?that	
 ?techniques	
 ?to	
 ?respond	
 ?to	
 ?these	
 ?changes	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?adapted	
 ?from	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media)	
 ?seemed	
 ?intuitively	
 ?on-??target,	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?investigate	
 ?further.	
 ?The	
 ?key	
 ?research	
 ?questions	
 ?(RQs)	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?here	
 ?were	
 ?about	
 ?4	
 ?topics:	
 ?
? RQs1:	
 ?Does	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?fit	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media?	
 ?How	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphors	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media?	
 ?Do	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?other	
 ?metaphors	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?
? RQs2:	
 ?How	
 ?have	
 ?recent	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?technologies	
 ?affected	
 ?media	
 ?
consumption?	
 ?	
 ?
? RQs3:	
 ?What	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?have	
 ?regarding	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?What	
 ?problems	
 ?exist?	
 ?What	
 ?changes	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?make,	
 ?and	
 ?why	
 ?do	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?them?	
 ?	
 ?
? RQs4:	
 ?How	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?make	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?consumption?	
 ?Could	
 ?techniques	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?inform	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?new	
 ?tools	
 ?or	
 ?systems	
 ?to	
 ?improve	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?experiences	
 ?and	
 ?improve	
 ?their	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?achieve	
 ?the	
 ?outcomes	
 ?they	
 ?desire?	
 ?	
 ?
3.1 Method	
 ?To	
 ?investigate	
 ?these	
 ?questions,	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?qualitative	
 ?interviews	
 ?(Turner,	
 ?2010)	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?well-??suited	
 ?to	
 ?exploring	
 ?the	
 ?subjects?	
 ?understanding	
 ?and	
 ?experiences	
 ?(King	
 ?&	
 ?Horrocks,	
 ?2010).	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?gaining	
 ?insights	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?help	
 ?me	
 ?understand	
 ?what	
 ?was	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?people,	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?found	
 ?difficulties,	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?it	
 ?might	
 ?be	
 ?possible	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?their	
 ?needs.	
 ?As	
 ?Rohrer	
 ?(2008)	
 ?says:	
 ?
?Due	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?nature	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?differences,	
 ?qualitative	
 ?methods	
 ?are	
 ?much	
 ?better	
 ?suited	
 ?for	
 ?
answering	
 ?question	
 ?about	
 ?why	
 ?or	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?fix	
 ?a	
 ?problem,	
 ?whereas	
 ?quantitative	
 ?methods	
 ?
do	
 ?a	
 ?much	
 ?better	
 ?job	
 ?answering	
 ?how	
 ?many	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?type	
 ?of	
 ?questions.?	
 ?Ten	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?were	
 ?informally	
 ?recruited	
 ?through	
 ?personal	
 ?contact	
 ?during	
 ?daily	
 ?activities	
 ?among	
 ?adults	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?Seattle	
 ?area.	
 ?No	
 ?specific	
 ?recruitment	
 ?criteria	
 ?were	
 ?used.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?ranged	
 ?from	
 ?approximately	
 ?35	
 ?to	
 ?65	
 ?years	
 ?old.	
 ?Seven	
 ?have	
 ?children	
 ?of	
 ?elementary	
 ?or	
 ?middle	
 ?school	
 ?age;	
 ?one	
 ?more	
 ?has	
 ?grandchildren	
 ?of	
 ?that	
 ?age.	
 ?All	
 ?subjects	
 ?were	
 ?female,	
 ?middle-??class,	
 ?and	
 ?college-??educated.	
 ?All	
 ?subjects	
 ?said	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?comfortable	
 ?using	
 ?technologies	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?computers	
 ?and	
 ?smartphones.	
 ?	
 ?Interviews	
 ?were	
 ?conducted	
 ?in	
 ?person,	
 ?one-??on-??one,	
 ?during	
 ?October	
 ?and	
 ?November	
 ?2012.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?were	
 ?told	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?30-??60	
 ?minutes	
 ?long;	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?hour	
 ?mark	
 ?was	
 ?reached	
 ?subjects	
 ?were	
 ?told	
 ?and	
 ?asked	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?stop	
 ?or	
 ?continue.	
 ?Interviews	
 ?were	
 ?audio-??recorded	
 ?and	
 ?supplemented	
 ?with	
 ?handwritten	
 ?notes.	
 ?The	
 ?recordings	
 ?were	
 ?reviewed	
 ?later	
 ?to	
 ?transcribe	
 ?specific	
 ?quotes	
 ?and	
 ?review	
 ?other	
 ?information.	
 ?	
 ?Each	
 ?interview	
 ?began	
 ?by	
 ?introducing	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?to	
 ?examine	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?The	
 ?interview	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?blend	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?guided	
 ?interview,	
 ?to	
 ?ensure	
 ?that	
 ?certain	
 ?topics	
 ?were	
 ?covered,	
 ?and	
 ?open-??ended	
 ?ethnographic	
 ?interviewing	
 ?(Blomberg	
 ?&	
 ?Burrell,	
 ?2012).	
 ?
	
 ? 17	
 ?
Table	
 ?10	
 ?in	
 ?Appendix	
 ?A	
 ?contains	
 ?the	
 ?topic	
 ?prompts	
 ?and	
 ?questions,	
 ?which	
 ?I	
 ?referred	
 ?to	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?sure	
 ?all	
 ?subjects	
 ?were	
 ?covered.	
 ?Following	
 ?the	
 ?practice	
 ?of	
 ?guided	
 ?interviews,	
 ?not	
 ?every	
 ?question	
 ?was	
 ?asked	
 ?of	
 ?every	
 ?subject;	
 ?if	
 ?a	
 ?topic	
 ?had	
 ?already	
 ?been	
 ?thoroughly	
 ?discussed	
 ?earlier	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interview,	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?ask	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?repeat	
 ?themselves.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?specifically	
 ?probed	
 ?the	
 ?validity	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?whether	
 ?they	
 ?felt	
 ?it	
 ?made	
 ?sense	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?form	
 ?of	
 ?diet,	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?react	
 ?to	
 ?that	
 ?framing,	
 ?especially	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?help	
 ?unlock	
 ?additional	
 ?insights	
 ?about	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?media	
 ?habits.	
 ?To	
 ?guard	
 ?against	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?accepting	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?social	
 ?obligation,	
 ?questions	
 ?were	
 ?phrased	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?either	
 ?acceptance	
 ?or	
 ?rejection,	
 ?and	
 ?subjects	
 ?were	
 ?asked	
 ?to	
 ?explore	
 ?both	
 ?accepting	
 ?and	
 ?rejecting	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor;	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?by	
 ?discussing	
 ?how	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?fit,	
 ?in	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?how	
 ?it	
 ?did.	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?contents	
 ?of	
 ?peoples?	
 ?current	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?whether	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?common	
 ?media	
 ?equivalents	
 ?to	
 ??food	
 ?groups?	
 ?or	
 ??nutrients?	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?had	
 ?in	
 ?common	
 ?and	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?solutions.	
 ?	
 ?To	
 ?identify	
 ?common	
 ?changes	
 ?and	
 ?approaches	
 ?that	
 ?might	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?accomplish	
 ?those	
 ?changes,	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?people	
 ?how	
 ?satisfied	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?share	
 ?changes	
 ?(if	
 ?any)	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?make.	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?about	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?whether	
 ?changes	
 ?that	
 ?happened	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?past,	
 ?or	
 ?were	
 ?current	
 ?or	
 ?desired	
 ?future	
 ?changes.	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?what	
 ?prompted	
 ?the	
 ?change,	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?hoped	
 ?to	
 ?gain	
 ?from	
 ?it,	
 ?and	
 ?whether	
 ?it	
 ?did	
 ?do	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?hoped	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?do.	
 ?	
 ?To	
 ?identify	
 ?promising	
 ?approaches	
 ?to	
 ?supporting	
 ?desired	
 ?changes,	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?what	
 ?techniques	
 ?(if	
 ?any)	
 ?were	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?implement	
 ?the	
 ?change,	
 ?whether	
 ?or	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?change	
 ?was	
 ?successful,	
 ?and	
 ?success	
 ?factors.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?asked	
 ?about	
 ?approaches	
 ?people	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?changes	
 ?outside	
 ?of	
 ?media,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food,	
 ?or	
 ?any	
 ?other	
 ?areas	
 ?they	
 ?identified,	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?approaches	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?changes	
 ?that	
 ?worked	
 ?for	
 ?them.	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?several	
 ?validity	
 ?issues	
 ?to	
 ?discuss.	
 ?External	
 ?validity	
 ?concerns	
 ?are	
 ?caused	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?small	
 ?sample	
 ?size	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?homogeneity	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?population.	
 ?Both	
 ?provide	
 ?significant	
 ?concerns	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?experiences	
 ?and	
 ?understandings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?global	
 ?population	
 ?are	
 ?reflected	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?findings	
 ?from	
 ?these	
 ?interviews.	
 ?Referring	
 ?to	
 ?Carpenter?s	
 ?(2008)	
 ?warnings	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?non-??universal	
 ?nature	
 ?of	
 ?metaphors,	
 ?we	
 ?must	
 ?particularly	
 ?consider	
 ?the	
 ?all-??female	
 ?subject	
 ?population,	
 ?given	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?much	
 ?discussion	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?messages	
 ?and	
 ?attitudes	
 ?about	
 ?food	
 ?for	
 ?males	
 ?and	
 ?females	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?society	
 ?(see	
 ?for	
 ?example	
 ?Wardle,	
 ?Haase,	
 ?&	
 ?Steptoe,	
 ?2004).	
 ?	
 ?It	
 ?is	
 ?also	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?note	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?qualitative	
 ?research	
 ?methods	
 ?used	
 ?here	
 ?have	
 ?significant	
 ?implications	
 ?for	
 ?generalizability	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?findings.	
 ?The	
 ?purpose	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?to	
 ?measure	
 ?the	
 ?frequency	
 ?or	
 ?prevalence	
 ?of	
 ?various	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?extended	
 ?to	
 ?draw	
 ?statistically	
 ?significant	
 ?conclusions	
 ?about	
 ?a	
 ?larger	
 ?population;	
 ?other	
 ?research	
 ?methods	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?needed	
 ?for	
 ?that	
 ?purpose.	
 ?Instead,	
 ?the	
 ?goal	
 ?was	
 ?to	
 ?gain	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?needs	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?provided	
 ?insights	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?design	
 ?solutions	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?fit	
 ?into	
 ?and	
 ?support	
 ?people?s	
 ?desires.	
 ?As	
 ?we	
 ?will	
 ?see	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section,	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?approach	
 ?did	
 ?	
 ?yield	
 ?several	
 ?useful	
 ?findings.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Detailed	
 ?data	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?is	
 ?in	
 ?Appendix	
 ?A:	
 ?Detailed	
 ?Interview	
 ?Data.	
 ?	
 ?Below	
 ?I	
 ?discuss	
 ?the	
 ?findings	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?questions,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?few	
 ?other	
 ?findings	
 ?that	
 ?emerged	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?inquiry.	
 ?All	
 ?quotes	
 ?from	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?are	
 ?labeled	
 ?and	
 ?numbered;	
 ?i.e.	
 ?a	
 ?quote	
 ?from	
 ?subject	
 ?3?s	
 ?interview	
 ?is	
 ?labeled	
 ?S3.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 18	
 ?
3.2 RQs1:	
 ?Metaphor	
 ?fit	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?addresses	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?questions	
 ?on	
 ?metaphor:	
 ?
? Does	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?fit?	
 ?How	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphors	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media?	
 ?Do	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?other	
 ?metaphors	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor	
 ?resonated	
 ?with	
 ?subjects	
 ?and	
 ?helped	
 ?them	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?All	
 ?but	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?went	
 ?beyond	
 ?the	
 ?60	
 ?minute	
 ?mark	
 ?(even	
 ?though	
 ?the	
 ?researcher	
 ?pointed	
 ?out	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ?and	
 ?told	
 ?the	
 ?subject	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?stopped)	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?had	
 ?not	
 ?exhausted	
 ?their	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?explore	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?light	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?	
 ?Subjects	
 ?were	
 ?readily	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?many	
 ?parallels	
 ?between	
 ?media	
 ?and	
 ?food	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?diet	
 ?metaphor;	
 ?they	
 ?also	
 ?articulated	
 ?many	
 ?food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?describing	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?habits.	
 ?Overall,	
 ?twenty	
 ?different	
 ?food/media	
 ?metaphors	
 ?were	
 ?used.	
 ?Of	
 ?those,	
 ?over	
 ?half	
 ?were	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?more	
 ?than	
 ?one	
 ?subject.	
 ?	
 ?Table	
 ?4	
 ?shows	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?non-??food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?used,	
 ?along	
 ?with	
 ?how	
 ?many	
 ?subjects	
 ?used	
 ?each	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?Table	
 ?11	
 ?and	
 ?Table	
 ?12	
 ?in	
 ?Appendix	
 ?A	
 ?provide	
 ?additional	
 ?description	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?metaphors.	
 ?	
 ?
Food	
 ?Metaphor	
 ? Count	
 ?
	
 ?
Non-??food	
 ?
Metaphors	
 ?
Count	
 ?
dieting	
 ? 4	
 ?
	
 ?
addiction	
 ? 2	
 ?
nutrition	
 ? 4	
 ?
	
 ?
cigarettes	
 ? 1	
 ?
breakfast	
 ? 3	
 ?
	
 ?
sleep	
 ? 1	
 ?
junk	
 ?food	
 ? 3	
 ?
	
 ?
financial	
 ?budget	
 ? 1	
 ?
candy	
 ?/	
 ?dessert	
 ? 3	
 ?
	
 ?
friends	
 ? 1	
 ?
potato	
 ?chips	
 ? 3	
 ?
	
 ?
poison	
 ? 1	
 ?
satiation	
 ? 2	
 ?
	
 ?
garbage	
 ? 1	
 ?
balanced	
 ?diet	
 ? 2	
 ?
	
 ?
tools	
 ? 1	
 ?
spinach	
 ?/	
 ?salad	
 ? 2	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
bad	
 ?tasting	
 ?food	
 ? 2	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
appetite	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
bingeing	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
choosing	
 ?restaurant	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
digestion	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
meaty	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
sour	
 ?taste	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
tastes/flavors	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
eating	
 ?smart	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
grazing	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
flitting	
 ? 1	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ? 	
 ?
Table	
 ?4.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?used	
 ?more	
 ?food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?(left)	
 ?than	
 ?non-??food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?(right).	
 ?The	
 ?count	
 ?indicates	
 ?how	
 ?many	
 ?
unique	
 ?subjects	
 ?used	
 ?each	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?The	
 ?interviews	
 ?uncovered	
 ?many	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?concepts	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?bring	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?activities	
 ?and	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?experiences.	
 ?
	
 ? 19	
 ?
Examples	
 ?include	
 ?the	
 ?need	
 ?for	
 ?balanced	
 ?and	
 ?varied	
 ?diets,	
 ?junk	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?tasty	
 ?but	
 ?has	
 ?little	
 ?nutritional	
 ?value,	
 ?and	
 ?taste-??specific	
 ?satiety.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?considered	
 ?overall	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?as	
 ?similar	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?food	
 ?diet	
 ?that	
 ?needs	
 ?balance:	
 ?
?It?s	
 ?like	
 ?balancing	
 ?out	
 ?your	
 ?diet.	
 ?Everybody	
 ?needs	
 ?a	
 ?salad	
 ?now	
 ?and	
 ?again,	
 ?and	
 ?you	
 ?need	
 ?
to	
 ?balance.	
 ?I	
 ?feel	
 ?like	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?just	
 ?did	
 ?junk	
 ?media	
 ?it?d	
 ?make	
 ?me	
 ?sick.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?feed	
 ?the	
 ?
various	
 ?parts	
 ?of	
 ?me.	
 ?[Pause.]	
 ?Wow,	
 ?this	
 ?diet	
 ?thing	
 ?is	
 ?really	
 ?coming	
 ?together	
 ?for	
 ?me	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?
metaphor	
 ?here!?	
 ??	
 ?S5	
 ?Appetite,	
 ?hunger,	
 ?and	
 ?thirst	
 ?were	
 ?all	
 ?invoked	
 ?to	
 ?describe	
 ?the	
 ?desire	
 ?for	
 ?certain	
 ?information	
 ?and	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?motivation	
 ?for	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices:	
 ?
?I	
 ?decide	
 ?[what	
 ?media	
 ?to	
 ?consume]	
 ?almost	
 ?how	
 ?you	
 ?decide	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?eat.	
 ?What	
 ?am	
 ?I	
 ?
hungry	
 ?for?	
 ?Sometimes	
 ?it?s	
 ?one	
 ?thing,	
 ?sometimes	
 ?it?s	
 ?another.?	
 ??	
 ?S5	
 ?
?It?s	
 ?not	
 ?just	
 ?casual	
 ?cruising	
 ?for	
 ?curiosity	
 ?about	
 ?what?s	
 ?going	
 ?on	
 ?-??	
 ?it?s	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?
urgency,	
 ?I	
 ?really	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?know	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?happening	
 ?to	
 ?my	
 ?family	
 ?and	
 ?friends.?	
 ??	
 ?S1,	
 ?
describing	
 ?what	
 ?she	
 ?called	
 ?her	
 ??thirst?	
 ?for	
 ?breaking	
 ?news	
 ?about	
 ?events	
 ?that	
 ?might	
 ?affect	
 ?
people	
 ?she	
 ?cares	
 ?about,	
 ?like	
 ?natural	
 ?disasters.	
 ?As	
 ?Johnson	
 ?suggested,	
 ?unhealthy	
 ?food	
 ?like	
 ?potato	
 ?chips,	
 ?candy,	
 ?and	
 ?desserts	
 ?often	
 ?referred	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?was	
 ?appealing	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?short	
 ?term	
 ?but	
 ?didn?t	
 ?provide	
 ?lasting	
 ?value:	
 ?
?Invariably	
 ?with	
 ?smut	
 ?novels,	
 ?those	
 ?are	
 ?so	
 ?fast,	
 ?it?s	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ??Oh,	
 ?I?ll	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?candy	
 ?bar?	
 ?
and	
 ?then	
 ?I?m	
 ?done	
 ?with	
 ?it.??S9	
 ?
?I?ll	
 ?get	
 ?sidetracked	
 ?from	
 ?news	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?by	
 ?stories	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?kind	
 ?of,	
 ?for	
 ?me,	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?
information	
 ?diet,	
 ?like	
 ?candy?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?
?If	
 ?I	
 ?felt	
 ?like	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?PerezHilton.com	
 ?[a	
 ?celebrity	
 ?gossip	
 ?website]	
 ?too	
 ?many	
 ?times,	
 ?
I?d	
 ?be	
 ?saying	
 ?to	
 ?myself,	
 ??No,	
 ?you	
 ?cannot	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?candy	
 ?bar	
 ?again!??	
 ??S5	
 ?Aspects	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?food	
 ?appetite	
 ?were	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?explain	
 ?media	
 ?habits,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?taste-??specific	
 ?satiety:	
 ?
?I	
 ?stop	
 ?with	
 ?my	
 ?morning	
 ?news	
 ?routine	
 ?because	
 ?there?s	
 ?only	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?rich,	
 ?meaty	
 ?new	
 ?
news	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?world	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?consume	
 ?before	
 ?I	
 ?start	
 ?feeling	
 ?ill.	
 ?There?s	
 ?only	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?
information	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?absorb	
 ?-??	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?fat	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?eat	
 ?-??	
 ?before	
 ?my	
 ?brain	
 ?says	
 ??ok,	
 ?you?re	
 ?done?.	
 ?
If	
 ?it?s	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?weekend,	
 ?I	
 ?might	
 ?be	
 ?full	
 ?of	
 ?news	
 ?and	
 ?switch	
 ?to	
 ?entertainment?	
 ??S3	
 ?Some	
 ?subjects	
 ?did	
 ?identify	
 ?areas	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?ID	
 ?metaphor	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?fit	
 ?well	
 ?for	
 ?them:	
 ?	
 ?
?You	
 ?get	
 ?different	
 ?things	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?depending	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?you?re	
 ?reading	
 ?it	
 ?for,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?
nutritional	
 ?value	
 ?of	
 ?spinach	
 ?doesn?t	
 ?change	
 ?if	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?paying	
 ?close	
 ?attention	
 ?while	
 ?eating	
 ?
it	
 ?or	
 ?not.?	
 ??	
 ?S1	
 ?
?[The	
 ?metaphor]	
 ?makes	
 ?sense	
 ?intellectually	
 ?when	
 ?you	
 ?mention	
 ?it,	
 ?but	
 ?feels	
 ?kind	
 ?of	
 ?
abstract	
 ?though	
 ??	
 ?it	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?immediately	
 ?resonate.?	
 ??	
 ?S7	
 ?In	
 ?some	
 ?cases,	
 ?they	
 ?proposed	
 ?alternative	
 ?metaphors.	
 ?Some	
 ?of	
 ?those	
 ?non-??food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?interpreted	
 ?as	
 ?possibly	
 ?applying	
 ?to	
 ?food	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?addiction).	
 ?But	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?who	
 ?proposed	
 ?them	
 ?were	
 ?explicitly	
 ?rejecting	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?saying	
 ?that	
 ?these	
 ?alternate	
 ?metaphors	
 ?were	
 ?better	
 ?fits	
 ?for	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?some	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?Without	
 ?exception,	
 ?even	
 ?these	
 ?subjects	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?reject	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?overall;	
 ?instead,	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?identifying	
 ?exceptions,	
 ?specific	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?fit	
 ?well	
 ?for	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 20	
 ?
?Most	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?TV	
 ?programming	
 ?available	
 ?on	
 ?cable	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?worth	
 ?consuming.	
 ?It?s	
 ?not	
 ?food	
 ?at	
 ?
all,	
 ?it?s	
 ?just	
 ?garbage.?	
 ??	
 ?S8	
 ?
?I?d	
 ?love	
 ?to	
 ?sleep	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?time,	
 ?but	
 ?I	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?moderate	
 ?it.	
 ?You	
 ?do	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?sleep	
 ?some,	
 ?
though.	
 ?Info	
 ?is	
 ?similar:	
 ?I	
 ?need	
 ?some,	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?even	
 ?more,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?
moderate	
 ?it.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?Finally,	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?word	
 ??information?	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?phrase	
 ??information	
 ?diet?	
 ?was	
 ?somewhat	
 ?problematic	
 ?for	
 ?subjects,	
 ?even	
 ?though	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?approve	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?food/media	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?The	
 ?specific	
 ?problem	
 ?was	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?	
 ?generally	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?regard	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?as	
 ?purely	
 ?informational.	
 ??Information?	
 ?was	
 ?taken	
 ?by	
 ?subjects	
 ?to	
 ?mean	
 ?objective	
 ?facts,	
 ?as	
 ?opposed	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?theory	
 ?view	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?as	
 ?any	
 ?data,	
 ?irrespective	
 ?of	
 ?meaning.	
 ?But	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?consuming	
 ?media	
 ?was	
 ?often	
 ?valued	
 ?for	
 ?its	
 ?own	
 ?sake,	
 ?independent	
 ?of	
 ?whether	
 ?any	
 ?factual	
 ?information	
 ?was	
 ?conveyed:	
 ?	
 ?
?When	
 ?you	
 ?say	
 ?information,	
 ?I	
 ?think	
 ?news?.I	
 ?like	
 ?my	
 ?entertainment	
 ?light	
 ?and	
 ?fluffy.	
 ?I	
 ?
choose	
 ?entertainment	
 ?that	
 ?doesn?t	
 ?provide	
 ?information.	
 ?Sometimes	
 ?entertainment	
 ?does	
 ?
provide	
 ?some	
 ?information,	
 ?but	
 ?it?s	
 ?not	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?tend	
 ?to	
 ?seek	
 ?out.?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?In	
 ?summary,	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?I	
 ?interviewed	
 ?suggested	
 ?that	
 ?perhaps	
 ?a	
 ?better	
 ?analogy	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?component	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?diet	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?nutritional	
 ?component	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?food	
 ?diet;	
 ?they	
 ?told	
 ?me	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?than	
 ?just	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?and	
 ?nutrients	
 ?it	
 ?yields.	
 ?While	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?one	
 ?important	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?like	
 ?nutrition	
 ?in	
 ?food:	
 ?an	
 ?important	
 ?factor	
 ?in	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?consume,	
 ?but	
 ?hardly	
 ?the	
 ?only	
 ?one.	
 ?The	
 ?interview	
 ?data	
 ?provides	
 ?evidence	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?interviewed	
 ?do	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?language	
 ?and	
 ?ideas	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?think	
 ?about	
 ?their	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?and	
 ?information.	
 ?While	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ?focus	
 ?on	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?narrower	
 ?than	
 ?most	
 ?people?s	
 ?concerns,	
 ?his	
 ?underlying	
 ?insight	
 ?that	
 ?applying	
 ?food	
 ?thinking	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?can	
 ?provide	
 ?insights	
 ?appears	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?on-??target.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?coming	
 ?sections,	
 ?we	
 ?will	
 ?see	
 ?how	
 ?strategies	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?But	
 ?first,	
 ?I	
 ?discuss	
 ?what	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?told	
 ?us	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?technology	
 ?changes	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?affecting	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?habits.	
 ?
3.3 RQs2:	
 ?Recent	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?technology	
 ?and	
 ?consumption	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?addresses	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?question:	
 ?
? How	
 ?have	
 ?recent	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?technologies	
 ?affected	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?	
 ?As	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?people	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits	
 ?have	
 ?changed,	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?clear	
 ?that	
 ?digitization	
 ?of	
 ?human	
 ?activities	
 ?has	
 ?significant	
 ?implications.	
 ?People	
 ?reported	
 ?that	
 ?adopting	
 ?new	
 ?media	
 ?technologies	
 ?changes	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?expect,	
 ?in	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?more	
 ?obvious	
 ?benefits	
 ?(and	
 ?drawbacks)	
 ?the	
 ?technology	
 ?delivered.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?example	
 ?which	
 ?prompted	
 ?strong	
 ?feelings	
 ?was	
 ?the	
 ?constant	
 ?connectedness	
 ?brought	
 ?by	
 ?mobile	
 ?computing.	
 ?People	
 ?appreciate	
 ?the	
 ?capabilities	
 ?it	
 ?provides,	
 ?but	
 ?it	
 ?disturbs	
 ?them	
 ?how	
 ?dependent	
 ?on	
 ?it	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?become,	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?tempting	
 ?to	
 ?pull	
 ?out	
 ?the	
 ?phone	
 ?even	
 ?when	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?middle	
 ?of	
 ?other	
 ?activities.	
 ?
	
 ? 21	
 ?
?My	
 ?iPhone	
 ?is	
 ?always	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?hand	
 ?or	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?pocket.	
 ?If	
 ?I	
 ?forget	
 ?it	
 ?at	
 ?home	
 ?on	
 ?my	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?
work,	
 ?I?ll	
 ?turn	
 ?around	
 ?and	
 ?get	
 ?it,	
 ?because	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?without	
 ?it.	
 ?I	
 ?never	
 ?would	
 ?
have	
 ?done	
 ?that	
 ?with	
 ?my	
 ?previous	
 ?phone.?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?
?I?d	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?without	
 ?my	
 ?phone	
 ?-??	
 ?leave	
 ?it	
 ?at	
 ?home.	
 ?It	
 ?feels	
 ?unhealthy	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?
need	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?it	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?time?.	
 ?Having	
 ?the	
 ?iPhone	
 ?has	
 ?completely	
 ?changed	
 ?how	
 ?I	
 ?work.	
 ??	
 ?I	
 ?
can	
 ?work	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?time.	
 ?You	
 ?think	
 ?about	
 ?this	
 ?stuff	
 ?saving	
 ?you	
 ?time,	
 ?but	
 ?it	
 ?gives	
 ?you	
 ?the	
 ?
capability	
 ?to	
 ?work	
 ?more.	
 ?It	
 ?doesn?t	
 ?give	
 ?you	
 ?free	
 ?time.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?Another	
 ?examples	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?news	
 ?sources,	
 ?which	
 ?has	
 ?largely	
 ?moved	
 ?from	
 ?print	
 ?newspapers	
 ?and	
 ?magazines	
 ?to	
 ?online	
 ?reading:	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?the	
 ?local	
 ?newspaper,	
 ?now	
 ?I	
 ?hardly	
 ?ever	
 ?do.	
 ?There?s	
 ?greater	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?
different	
 ?kinds	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?online.	
 ?The	
 ?local	
 ?paper?s	
 ?quality	
 ?dropped,	
 ?it	
 ?wasn?t	
 ?worth	
 ?
reading	
 ?anymore.?	
 ??	
 ?S7	
 ?	
 ?
?[Print	
 ?magazines]	
 ?could	
 ?totally	
 ?go	
 ?away	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?wouldn?t	
 ?even	
 ?notice.	
 ?Most	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?
information	
 ?they	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?give	
 ?me	
 ?is	
 ?now	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?somewhere.	
 ?If	
 ?It	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?cooking	
 ?
magazine,	
 ?or	
 ?Entertainment	
 ?Weekly	
 ?-??	
 ?you	
 ?can	
 ?easily	
 ?find	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?crap	
 ?online.	
 ?And	
 ?all	
 ?
the	
 ?magazines	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?worth	
 ?reading	
 ?are	
 ?now	
 ?online	
 ?themselves.?	
 ??S9	
 ?Even	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?read	
 ?the	
 ?print	
 ?edition	
 ?supplement	
 ?it	
 ?with	
 ?online:	
 ?
?If	
 ?I?m	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?something	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?Sunday	
 ?paper,	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?then	
 ?go	
 ?online	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?
the	
 ?comments,	
 ?which	
 ?are	
 ?fascinating,	
 ?because	
 ?now	
 ?that	
 ?its	
 ?online,	
 ?you	
 ?can	
 ?genuinely	
 ?see	
 ?
a	
 ?conversation	
 ?with	
 ?people	
 ?and	
 ?often	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?responds,	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?something,	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?old	
 ?
days,	
 ?you	
 ?didn?t	
 ?have.	
 ?You	
 ?might	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?letter	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?editor	
 ?or	
 ?two,	
 ?but	
 ?you	
 ?wouldn?t	
 ?
have	
 ?40	
 ?different	
 ?comments.	
 ?So	
 ?if	
 ?you	
 ?think	
 ?someone	
 ?makes	
 ?a	
 ?really	
 ?nice	
 ?comment,	
 ?you	
 ?
get	
 ?to	
 ?vote	
 ?and	
 ?promote	
 ?that	
 ?comment	
 ?-??	
 ?I	
 ?really	
 ?like	
 ?that.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?that	
 ?I?m	
 ?passionate	
 ?
about,	
 ?it?s	
 ?really	
 ?nice	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?people	
 ?push	
 ?back	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?authors	
 ?respond.?	
 ??S1	
 ?Both	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?media	
 ?transitions	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?covered	
 ?extensively	
 ?by	
 ?others	
 ?(see	
 ?for	
 ?example	
 ?N.	
 ?Carr,	
 ?2010;	
 ?Gladstone	
 ?&	
 ?Neufeld,	
 ?2011;	
 ?Menzies	
 ?&	
 ?Newson,	
 ?2007;	
 ?Powers,	
 ?2010;	
 ?Rosen	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?2012).	
 ?	
 ?Two	
 ?other	
 ?areas	
 ?where	
 ?media	
 ?changes	
 ?are	
 ?causing	
 ?changes,	
 ?which	
 ?were	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?many	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects,	
 ?are	
 ?those	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?books	
 ?and	
 ?watching	
 ?movies	
 ?and	
 ?television	
 ?shows.	
 ?First,	
 ?the	
 ?emergence	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?prompts	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?complain	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?ebooks	
 ?is	
 ?lacking	
 ?several	
 ?valued	
 ?affordances	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?those	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?This	
 ?may	
 ?provide	
 ?clues	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?the	
 ?subjects?	
 ?oft-??stated	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more.	
 ?Second,	
 ?as	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?choosing	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?television	
 ?and	
 ?movies	
 ?streamed	
 ?over	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?by	
 ?broadcast,	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?finding	
 ?this	
 ?method	
 ?of	
 ?viewing	
 ?affects	
 ?their	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?expect.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?next	
 ?two	
 ?subsections	
 ?cover	
 ?these	
 ?two	
 ?topics.	
 ?
3.3.1 Consuming	
 ?eBooks	
 ?vs.	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?Even	
 ?though	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?specifically	
 ?ask	
 ?about	
 ?this	
 ?topic,	
 ?all	
 ?but	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?volunteered	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?preferred	
 ?reading	
 ?books	
 ?on	
 ?paper	
 ?to	
 ?reading	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?Despite	
 ?this,	
 ?most	
 ?subjects	
 ??	
 ?even	
 ?those	
 ?with	
 ?strong	
 ?preferences	
 ?for	
 ?some	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ??	
 ?have	
 ?begun	
 ?to	
 ?adopt	
 ?ebooks	
 ?for	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?reading.	
 ?As	
 ?I	
 ?related	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?2.8,	
 ?ebook	
 ?adoption	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?increasing	
 ?rapidly	
 ?in	
 ?recent	
 ?years.	
 ?
	
 ? 22	
 ?
Half	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?attributed	
 ?their	
 ?preference	
 ?for	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?nature.	
 ?One	
 ?self-??identified	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ??Luddite?	
 ?when	
 ?discussing	
 ?this,	
 ?and	
 ?another	
 ?prefaced	
 ?their	
 ?preference	
 ?by	
 ?saying,	
 ??I?m	
 ?not	
 ?technical.?	
 ?But	
 ?as	
 ?we	
 ?discussed	
 ?further,	
 ?it	
 ?became	
 ?clear	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?issue	
 ?was	
 ?neither	
 ?ineptitude	
 ?nor	
 ?a	
 ?rejection	
 ?of	
 ?technology	
 ?in	
 ?general	
 ?or	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ??	
 ?these	
 ?same	
 ?people	
 ?used	
 ?computers,	
 ?smartphones,	
 ?tablets,	
 ?media	
 ?centers,	
 ?and	
 ?consoles	
 ?for	
 ?many	
 ?other	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?The	
 ?problem	
 ?for	
 ?them	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?ebooks	
 ?are	
 ?lacking	
 ?some	
 ?affordances	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?(Table	
 ?5	
 ?summarizes	
 ?these).	
 ?These	
 ?same	
 ?affordances	
 ?were	
 ?also	
 ?mentioned	
 ?as	
 ?missed	
 ?even	
 ?by	
 ?those	
 ?who	
 ?read	
 ?ebooks	
 ?frequently,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?this	
 ?subject:	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?think	
 ?with	
 ?books	
 ?it?s	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?comfort	
 ?thing	
 ?half	
 ?the	
 ?time.	
 ?You?re	
 ?surrounding	
 ?yourself	
 ?
with	
 ?books,	
 ?the	
 ?smell	
 ?of	
 ?them,	
 ?the	
 ?feel	
 ?of	
 ?them,	
 ?the	
 ?mustiness.?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?Only	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?interviewed	
 ?said	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?an	
 ?outright	
 ?preference	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?over	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?For	
 ?that	
 ?person,	
 ?the	
 ?benefits	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?(such	
 ?as	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?purchase	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?and	
 ?begin	
 ?reading	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?seconds,	
 ?having	
 ?all	
 ?their	
 ?books	
 ?available	
 ?wherever	
 ?they	
 ?were,	
 ?digital	
 ?highlighting,	
 ?and	
 ?searching)	
 ?outweighed	
 ?the	
 ?missing	
 ?affordances	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?	
 ?For	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?rest,	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?still	
 ?have	
 ?advantages	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?yet	
 ?willing	
 ?to	
 ?entirely	
 ?give	
 ?up.	
 ?Understanding	
 ?these	
 ?missing	
 ?affordances	
 ?may	
 ?provide	
 ?insights	
 ?into	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?ebooks	
 ?and	
 ?ereaders	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?improved	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?their	
 ?adoption	
 ?and	
 ?acceptance.	
 ?Some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?affordances	
 ?affect	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?reading.	
 ?The	
 ?changing	
 ?thickness	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?stack	
 ?of	
 ?pages	
 ?behind	
 ?and	
 ?ahead	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?current	
 ?page	
 ?as	
 ?one	
 ?progresses	
 ?provides	
 ?a	
 ?tactile	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ??location?	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?book.	
 ?The	
 ?tactile	
 ?sensation	
 ?of	
 ?different	
 ?books?	
 ?covers	
 ?and	
 ?bindings	
 ?can	
 ?become	
 ?such	
 ?a	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?that	
 ?a	
 ?reader	
 ?can	
 ?distinguish	
 ?a	
 ?volume	
 ?by	
 ?feel	
 ?alone.	
 ?And	
 ?ink	
 ?on	
 ?paper	
 ?provides	
 ?excellent	
 ?legibility,	
 ?with	
 ?clarity	
 ?and	
 ?contrast	
 ?not	
 ?yet	
 ?met	
 ?by	
 ?other	
 ?display	
 ?technologies:	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?have	
 ?the	
 ?[Kindle]	
 ?app	
 ?on	
 ?my	
 ?phone,	
 ?and	
 ?80%	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?is	
 ?on	
 ?my	
 ?phone,	
 ?but	
 ?it?s	
 ?
probably	
 ?really	
 ?bad	
 ?for	
 ?my	
 ?eyes.	
 ?It?s	
 ?just	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?easier	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?things	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?and	
 ?access	
 ?
them	
 ?quickly.?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?Intriguingly,	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?missing	
 ?affordances	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?missed	
 ?while	
 ?reading	
 ?the	
 ?book,	
 ?but	
 ?before	
 ?and	
 ?afterwards.	
 ?These	
 ?complaints	
 ?indicate	
 ?that	
 ?important	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?books	
 ?occur	
 ?when	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?actually	
 ?reading.	
 ?	
 ?Several	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?aspects	
 ?are	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?visibility	
 ?of	
 ?books.	
 ?A	
 ?reader	
 ?who	
 ?is	
 ?deciding	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?will	
 ?often	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?and	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?and	
 ?flaps,	
 ?or	
 ?flip	
 ?through	
 ?the	
 ?pages	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?quick	
 ?sampling	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?inside.	
 ?	
 ?Subjects	
 ?explained	
 ?that	
 ?while	
 ?rich	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?ebooks	
 ?is	
 ?readily	
 ?available	
 ?on	
 ?ecommerce	
 ?sites	
 ?while	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?considering	
 ?whether	
 ?to	
 ?purchase	
 ?them,	
 ?once	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?acquired,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?harder	
 ?to	
 ?access	
 ?that	
 ?information.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?especially	
 ?challenging	
 ?when	
 ?deciding	
 ?what	
 ?ebook	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?next.	
 ?Unlike	
 ?a	
 ?physical	
 ?book,	
 ?you	
 ?can?t	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?type	
 ?of	
 ?book	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?appearance	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?cover,	
 ?and	
 ?you	
 ?can?t	
 ?easily	
 ?read	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?and	
 ?flaps	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?summary	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book,	
 ?an	
 ?author	
 ?bio,	
 ?and	
 ?endorsement	
 ?blurbs;	
 ?all	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?title	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?author.	
 ?Even	
 ?once	
 ?opened,	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?readily	
 ?available	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?page	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?text.	
 ?The	
 ?front	
 ?cover	
 ?image	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?available,	
 ?but	
 ?most	
 ?ereaders	
 ?don?t	
 ?display	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?when	
 ?you	
 ?first	
 ?open	
 ?an	
 ?ebook,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?often	
 ?consult	
 ?when	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?included	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?ebook	
 ?at	
 ?all.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?subject	
 ?who	
 ?pirates	
 ?ebooks	
 ?in	
 ?bulk,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?reads	
 ?them	
 ?later,	
 ?says:	
 ?
	
 ? 23	
 ?
?I	
 ?have	
 ?this	
 ?habit	
 ?of	
 ?getting	
 ?10	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?reading	
 ?5	
 ?of	
 ?them,	
 ?and	
 ?getting	
 ?another	
 ?
10,	
 ?and	
 ?reading	
 ?5.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?all	
 ?these	
 ?ebooks	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?know	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?are.?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?We	
 ?also	
 ?use	
 ?books?	
 ?visibility	
 ?to	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?other	
 ?people?s	
 ?reading:	
 ?peering	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?in	
 ?someone?s	
 ?hands	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?reading,	
 ?or	
 ?looking	
 ?at	
 ?their	
 ?bookshelves	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?read.	
 ?This	
 ?serves	
 ?two	
 ?functions:	
 ?it	
 ?helps	
 ?us	
 ?discover	
 ?books	
 ?we	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?reading	
 ?ourselves,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?also	
 ?helps	
 ?us	
 ?learn	
 ?something	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?person.	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?display	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?tell	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?about	
 ?ourselves	
 ?(more	
 ?on	
 ?this	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?4.2.3).	
 ?The	
 ?physical	
 ?nature	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?allows	
 ?us	
 ?to	
 ?organize	
 ?them,	
 ?often	
 ?picking	
 ?them	
 ?up	
 ?and	
 ?reading	
 ?parts	
 ?of	
 ?them,	
 ?or	
 ?recalling	
 ?associated	
 ?ideas	
 ?and	
 ?events;	
 ?some	
 ?readers	
 ?highly	
 ?value	
 ?this	
 ?way	
 ?of	
 ?interacting	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?books:	
 ?
?I	
 ?love	
 ?to	
 ?rearrange	
 ?my	
 ?library.	
 ?It	
 ?helps	
 ?me	
 ?think	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?differently	
 ?and	
 ?
appreciate	
 ?them	
 ?more.?	
 ??	
 ?S7	
 ?Table	
 ?5	
 ?contains	
 ?a	
 ?complete	
 ?summary	
 ?of	
 ?qualities	
 ?that	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?possess	
 ?which	
 ?ebooks	
 ?lack,	
 ?as	
 ?identified	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?	
 ?
Paper	
 ?book	
 ?affordance	
 ? What	
 ?the	
 ?affordance	
 ?makes	
 ?possible	
 ?for	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?
Front	
 ?cover	
 ? Shows	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?what	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?reading	
 ?	
 ?
Graphic	
 ?design	
 ?can	
 ?convey	
 ?the	
 ?genre	
 ?or	
 ?style	
 ?to	
 ?expect	
 ?
When	
 ?you	
 ?have	
 ?started	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?but	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?actively	
 ?reading	
 ?it,	
 ?the	
 ?sight	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?reminds	
 ?you	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?available	
 ?book	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?still	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?
process	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?and	
 ?prompts	
 ?you	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?it	
 ?
Physical	
 ?bookmarks	
 ? When	
 ?you	
 ?have	
 ?started	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?but	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?actively	
 ?reading	
 ?it,	
 ?the	
 ?
bookmark	
 ?poking	
 ?out	
 ?is	
 ?visible	
 ?and	
 ?reminds	
 ?you	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?
still	
 ?in	
 ?progress	
 ?reading,	
 ?and	
 ?shows	
 ?you	
 ?exactly	
 ?how	
 ?far	
 ?through	
 ?the	
 ?
book	
 ?you	
 ?are.	
 ?
Back	
 ?cover	
 ?/	
 ?dust	
 ?jacket	
 ?	
 ? Provides	
 ?author	
 ?bios,	
 ?book	
 ?summaries,	
 ?and	
 ?endorsements.	
 ?These	
 ?are	
 ?
used	
 ?in	
 ?two	
 ?distinct	
 ?stages	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?reading	
 ?process:	
 ?
1) Acquisition:	
 ?to	
 ?determine	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?is	
 ?one	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?
in	
 ?the	
 ?future.	
 ?This	
 ?need	
 ?is	
 ?addressed	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?with	
 ?
information	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?vendor?s	
 ?store	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?descriptions,	
 ?reviews,	
 ?
and	
 ?customer	
 ?ratings	
 ??	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?richer	
 ?information	
 ?than	
 ?is	
 ?
possible	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?limited	
 ?capacity	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?cover.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
2) Selecting	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?to	
 ?read:	
 ?When	
 ?deciding	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?next	
 ?
among	
 ?available	
 ?books,	
 ?evaluating	
 ?whether	
 ?a	
 ?particular	
 ?ebook	
 ?
is	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?fit	
 ?for	
 ?current	
 ?context	
 ?&	
 ?desires,	
 ?this	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?
not	
 ?readily	
 ?available	
 ?at	
 ?all.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
Thickness	
 ? Shows	
 ?overall	
 ?length	
 ?of	
 ?book	
 ?
While	
 ?reading,	
 ?the	
 ?thickness	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?pages	
 ?on	
 ?either	
 ?side	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?page	
 ?you	
 ?
are	
 ?reading	
 ?provides	
 ?tactile	
 ?feedback	
 ?on	
 ?location	
 ?in	
 ?book	
 ?and	
 ?progress.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 24	
 ?
Paper	
 ?book	
 ?affordance	
 ? What	
 ?the	
 ?affordance	
 ?makes	
 ?possible	
 ?for	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?
Can	
 ?be	
 ?identified	
 ?by	
 ?cover	
 ?or	
 ?
spine	
 ?while	
 ?shelved	
 ?or	
 ?piled	
 ?in	
 ?
a	
 ?visible	
 ?spot	
 ?
Reminds	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?read	
 ?
Serves	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?reminder	
 ?to	
 ?self	
 ?/	
 ?display	
 ?to	
 ?others	
 ?of	
 ?your	
 ?interests	
 ?
Can	
 ?be	
 ?kept	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?location	
 ?where	
 ?it	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?
Visibility	
 ?	
 ? Physical	
 ?books	
 ?on	
 ?shelves	
 ?are	
 ?visible	
 ?to	
 ?anyone	
 ?who	
 ?enters	
 ?the	
 ?space.	
 ?	
 ?
Books	
 ?on	
 ?shelves	
 ?are	
 ?regarded	
 ?as	
 ?visually	
 ?attractive.	
 ?One	
 ?subject,	
 ?an	
 ?
interior	
 ?designer,	
 ?told	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?client	
 ?who	
 ?purchased	
 ?dozens	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?simply	
 ?
for	
 ?display	
 ?purposes	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?liked	
 ?their	
 ?appearance,	
 ?with	
 ?no	
 ?intent	
 ?
to	
 ?read	
 ?them	
 ??	
 ?without	
 ?even	
 ?any	
 ?knowledge	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?were	
 ?
about.	
 ?
Examining	
 ?someone?s	
 ?book	
 ?collection	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?more	
 ?about	
 ?them	
 ?and	
 ?
their	
 ?interests	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?common	
 ?activity.	
 ?	
 ?
While	
 ?some	
 ?online	
 ?services	
 ?enable	
 ?sharing	
 ?of	
 ?books,	
 ?these	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?
widely	
 ?adopted,	
 ?nor	
 ?are	
 ?they	
 ?automatically	
 ?visible	
 ?to	
 ?anyone	
 ?who	
 ?visits.	
 ?	
 ?
Organizable	
 ? Physical	
 ?books	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?organized	
 ?physically	
 ?by	
 ?any	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?schemes.	
 ?
Organizing	
 ?one?s	
 ?books	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?valued	
 ?activity,	
 ?another	
 ?way	
 ?of	
 ?engaging	
 ?
with	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?
People	
 ?use	
 ?idiosyncratic	
 ?organization	
 ?schemes	
 ?which	
 ?reflect	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?
understanding	
 ?and	
 ?categories.	
 ?	
 ?
To-??Be-??Read	
 ?piles	
 ?and	
 ?shelves	
 ? Readers	
 ?often	
 ?keep	
 ?books	
 ?which	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?acquired	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?yet	
 ?read	
 ?in	
 ?
specific	
 ?locations.	
 ?	
 ?
Tactile	
 ?feel	
 ?of	
 ?binding,	
 ?cover,	
 ?
and	
 ?pages	
 ??	
 ?texture,	
 ?friction	
 ?
Provides	
 ?tactile	
 ?differentiation	
 ?between	
 ?books.	
 ?Readers	
 ?reported	
 ?that	
 ?
they	
 ?can	
 ?often	
 ?distinguish	
 ?between	
 ?several	
 ?books	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?actively	
 ?
reading	
 ?by	
 ?touch	
 ?alone.	
 ?
Can	
 ?be	
 ?loaned	
 ?or	
 ?given	
 ?to	
 ?
friends	
 ?
Sharing	
 ?books	
 ?with	
 ?friends	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?important	
 ?social	
 ?activity	
 ?for	
 ?many	
 ?
people	
 ?which	
 ?ebooks	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?support	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?As	
 ?
implemented	
 ?by	
 ?Amazon	
 ?and	
 ?Barnes	
 ?&	
 ?Noble,	
 ?the	
 ?two	
 ?most	
 ?popular	
 ?
commercial	
 ?ebook	
 ?ecosystems,	
 ?ebooks	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?loaned	
 ?if	
 ?publishers	
 ?give	
 ?
permission	
 ?for	
 ?each	
 ?title.	
 ?Such	
 ?ebook	
 ?loans	
 ?are	
 ?limited,	
 ?both	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?
number	
 ?of	
 ?times	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?loaned	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?duration	
 ?of	
 ?each	
 ?loan.	
 ?
Finally,	
 ?loaning	
 ?ebooks	
 ?requires	
 ?that	
 ?both	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?ebook	
 ?
ecosystem.	
 ?	
 ?
Legibility	
 ?/	
 ?eyestrain	
 ? Reading	
 ? on	
 ? LCD	
 ? displays	
 ? (such	
 ? as	
 ? smartphones)	
 ? were	
 ? reported	
 ? as	
 ?
causing	
 ?more	
 ? eyestrain	
 ? than	
 ? reading	
 ? paper	
 ? books,	
 ?while	
 ? e-??ink	
 ? displays	
 ?
were	
 ?considered	
 ?roughly	
 ?equivalent	
 ?to	
 ?paper	
 ?in	
 ?that	
 ?regard.	
 ?
Smell	
 ? The	
 ?smell	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?was	
 ?mentioned	
 ?as	
 ?something	
 ?important	
 ?missing	
 ?from	
 ?
ebooks.	
 ?Perhaps	
 ?the	
 ?involvement	
 ?of	
 ?smell	
 ?in	
 ?memory	
 ?is	
 ?involved,	
 ?and	
 ?
future	
 ?generations	
 ?who	
 ?grow	
 ?up	
 ?without	
 ?having	
 ?the	
 ?smell	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?
books	
 ?enmeshed	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?memories	
 ?won?t	
 ?miss	
 ?it.	
 ?
	
 ? 25	
 ?
Table	
 ?5.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?identified	
 ?several	
 ?affordances	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?books	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?missing	
 ?or	
 ?inadequately	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?
ebooks.	
 ?The	
 ?fact	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?complain	
 ?about	
 ?these	
 ?missing	
 ?affordances	
 ?indicates	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?should	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?what	
 ?role	
 ?these	
 ?affordances	
 ?play	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?activities	
 ?they	
 ?support	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?areas	
 ?where	
 ?we	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?improve	
 ?the	
 ?reading	
 ?experience	
 ?even	
 ?as	
 ?ebooks	
 ?become	
 ?more	
 ?popular.	
 ?I	
 ?delve	
 ?into	
 ?this	
 ?further	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?phases	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?research,	
 ?particularly	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?4.2.4.	
 ?	
 ?For	
 ?those	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?exploring	
 ?new	
 ?possibilities	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?which	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?possible	
 ?with	
 ?paper	
 ?books,	
 ?I	
 ?suggest	
 ?Peter	
 ?Meyers?	
 ?Breaking	
 ?the	
 ?Page	
 ?(Meyers,	
 ?2011)	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?Text	
 ?2.0	
 ?project	
 ?(http://text20.net).	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
3.3.2 Consuming	
 ?video	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?increasing	
 ?ability	
 ?of	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?stream	
 ?or	
 ?download	
 ?an	
 ?increasing	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?television	
 ?programs	
 ?and	
 ?movies	
 ?over	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?for	
 ?viewing	
 ?on	
 ?devices	
 ?ranging	
 ?from	
 ?traditional	
 ?television	
 ?sets	
 ?to	
 ?computers,	
 ?tablets	
 ?and	
 ?smartphones	
 ?is	
 ?driving	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits.	
 ?Another	
 ?area	
 ?where	
 ?on-??demand	
 ?is	
 ?cutting	
 ?into	
 ?broadcasting?s	
 ?share	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?in	
 ?radio:	
 ?podcasts	
 ?are	
 ?an	
 ?increasingly	
 ?popular	
 ?way	
 ?of	
 ?listening	
 ?to	
 ?content	
 ?that	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?only	
 ?available	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?live	
 ?broadcast.	
 ?I	
 ?focus	
 ?the	
 ?discussion	
 ?on	
 ?movies	
 ?and	
 ?television	
 ?because	
 ?more	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?have	
 ?those	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?as	
 ?major	
 ?components	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?diets	
 ?than	
 ?radio	
 ?and	
 ?podcasts,	
 ?and	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?spent	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?time	
 ?discussing	
 ?the	
 ?impact	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?changes	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?TV	
 ?and	
 ?movie	
 ?viewing	
 ?habits.	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?increasing	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?video	
 ?content	
 ?over	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?has	
 ?driven	
 ?a	
 ?practice	
 ?called	
 ?
cable-??cutting:	
 ?dropping	
 ?broadcast	
 ?cable	
 ?television	
 ?subscriptions	
 ?and	
 ?shifting	
 ?to	
 ?on-??demand	
 ?viewing.	
 ?According	
 ?to	
 ?ongoing	
 ?studies	
 ?by	
 ?organizations	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?Pew	
 ?Research	
 ?Center	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?Nielsen	
 ?corporation	
 ?(Fox	
 ?&	
 ?Duggan,	
 ?2012;	
 ?Nielsen	
 ?Company,	
 ?2012b,	
 ?2013)	
 ?cable-??cutting	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?growing	
 ?trend	
 ?among	
 ?American	
 ?TV	
 ?viewers.	
 ?This	
 ?was	
 ?reflected	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?population:	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?who	
 ?had	
 ?cable	
 ?mentioned	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?considered	
 ?it,	
 ?and	
 ?4	
 ?of	
 ?them	
 ?have	
 ?done	
 ?so.	
 ?	
 ?Every	
 ?subject	
 ?who	
 ?had	
 ?or	
 ?was	
 ?considering	
 ?cable-??cutting	
 ?checked	
 ?beforehand	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?out	
 ?what	
 ?shows	
 ?would	
 ?and	
 ?wouldn?t	
 ?be	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?from	
 ?other	
 ?sources.	
 ?They	
 ?typically	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?currently	
 ?watched	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?available	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?sports)	
 ?or	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?wait	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?it	
 ?(TV	
 ?shows	
 ?whose	
 ?episodes	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?purchase	
 ?until	
 ?a	
 ?year	
 ?or	
 ?more	
 ?after	
 ?the	
 ?original	
 ?air	
 ?date).	
 ?They	
 ?considered	
 ?these	
 ?changes	
 ?carefully	
 ?and	
 ?didn?t	
 ?make	
 ?the	
 ?change	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?found	
 ?they?d	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?give	
 ?up	
 ?favorite	
 ?items:	
 ?
?Dislike	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?cable	
 ?company	
 ?was	
 ?our	
 ?initial	
 ?motivation.	
 ?We	
 ?didn?t	
 ?like	
 ?paying	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?
money	
 ?for	
 ?relatively	
 ?little	
 ?value.	
 ?We	
 ?weren?t	
 ?really	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?our	
 ?information	
 ?
consumption,	
 ?we	
 ?were	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?avoid	
 ?patronizing	
 ?Comcast.?	
 ??	
 ?S7	
 ?This	
 ?consideration	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?content	
 ?availability	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?example	
 ?of	
 ?anticipated	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?technology.	
 ?Yet	
 ?the	
 ?cable-??cutters	
 ?reported	
 ?being	
 ?surprised	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?extent	
 ?to	
 ?which	
 ?other	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?viewing	
 ?habits	
 ?were	
 ?impacted	
 ?by	
 ?changing	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?broadcast	
 ?model	
 ?to	
 ?an	
 ?on-??demand	
 ?model.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?key	
 ?difference	
 ?was	
 ?the	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?intentionally	
 ?choose	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?once	
 ?turning	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?TV	
 ?and	
 ??seeing	
 ?what?s	
 ?on?	
 ?was	
 ?no	
 ?longer	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?them.	
 ?The	
 ?lack	
 ?of	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?just	
 ?see	
 ??what?s	
 ?on	
 ?TV?	
 ?or	
 ?channel	
 ?surf	
 ?forced	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?more	
 ?intentional	
 ?decisions	
 ?about	
 ?
	
 ? 26	
 ?
what	
 ?to	
 ?consume,	
 ?and	
 ?this	
 ?was	
 ?reported	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?positive	
 ?change	
 ?by	
 ?every	
 ?subject	
 ?who	
 ?had	
 ?cut	
 ?cable:	
 ?
?I	
 ?was	
 ?surprised	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?aimless	
 ?channel	
 ?surfing	
 ?went	
 ?away.?	
 ??	
 ?S3	
 ?
	
 ?[After	
 ?cutting	
 ?cable]	
 ??When	
 ?I	
 ?sat	
 ?down	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?TV,	
 ?the	
 ?only	
 ?thing	
 ?I?d	
 ?watch	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?
Mad	
 ?Men.	
 ?Then	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?finished	
 ?it,	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?like	
 ??what	
 ?am	
 ?I	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?watch??	
 ?I	
 ?sit	
 ?down	
 ?at	
 ?
the	
 ?computer	
 ?and	
 ?ask	
 ?myself	
 ??what?s	
 ?good??	
 ?[Before	
 ?cutting	
 ?cable]	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?turned	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?TV	
 ?I	
 ?
didn?t	
 ?ask	
 ?myself	
 ?what?s	
 ?good,	
 ?I?d	
 ?just	
 ?happen	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?something	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?sit	
 ?there	
 ?and	
 ?
watch	
 ?it.?	
 ??S5	
 ?Being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?view	
 ?television	
 ?at	
 ?any	
 ?time	
 ?can	
 ?also	
 ?affect	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?other	
 ?media	
 ?types:	
 ?
?Now	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?increased	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?good	
 ?TV	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?by	
 ?streaming,	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?listen	
 ?to	
 ?
music	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?anymore.?	
 ??S4.	
 ?On-??demand	
 ?viewing	
 ?has	
 ?also	
 ?changed	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?consume	
 ?television	
 ?series;	
 ?several	
 ?people	
 ?reported	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?now	
 ?watch	
 ?entire	
 ?seasons	
 ?or	
 ?even	
 ?complete	
 ?series	
 ?over	
 ?a	
 ?short	
 ?period	
 ?of	
 ?time.	
 ?In	
 ?another	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor	
 ?by	
 ?subjects,	
 ?this	
 ?was	
 ?sometimes	
 ?called	
 ??bingeing.?	
 ?People	
 ?also	
 ?are	
 ?more	
 ?reluctant	
 ?to	
 ?start	
 ?watching	
 ?a	
 ?TV	
 ?series	
 ?while	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?being	
 ?broadcast,	
 ?saying	
 ?things	
 ?like	
 ??I?ll	
 ?wait	
 ?until	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?stream	
 ?the	
 ?whole	
 ?season	
 ?at	
 ?once.?	
 ?	
 ?Media	
 ?producers	
 ?are	
 ?responding	
 ?to	
 ?this	
 ?in	
 ?different	
 ?ways:	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?one	
 ?hand,	
 ?releasing	
 ?entire	
 ?seasons	
 ?at	
 ?once	
 ?(as	
 ?with	
 ?Netflix?s	
 ?in-??house	
 ?production	
 ?House	
 ?of	
 ?Cards)	
 ?and	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?hand,	
 ?shifting	
 ?towards	
 ?content	
 ?where	
 ?timeliness	
 ?and	
 ?interactive	
 ?and	
 ?social	
 ?participation	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?inherent	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?experience,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?reality	
 ?shows	
 ?like	
 ?American	
 ?Idol.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?As	
 ?this	
 ?technology	
 ?change	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?adopted,	
 ?people	
 ?appreciate	
 ?the	
 ?increased	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?viewing	
 ?consumption	
 ?it	
 ?provides,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?reduction	
 ?in	
 ?mindless	
 ?consumption.	
 ?In	
 ?upcoming	
 ?sections,	
 ?I	
 ?discuss	
 ?how	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?support	
 ?people	
 ?in	
 ?consuming	
 ?those	
 ?things	
 ?they	
 ?really	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?consume.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section,	
 ?I	
 ?turn	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?problems,	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs,	
 ?and	
 ?unsatisfied	
 ?desires	
 ?people	
 ?experience	
 ?with	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?
3.4 RQs3:	
 ?What	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?want?	
 ?One	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?primary	
 ?goals	
 ?of	
 ?conducting	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?was	
 ?to	
 ?gain	
 ?insights	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?help	
 ?when	
 ?designing	
 ?solutions	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?valuable	
 ?for	
 ?people.	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?out	
 ?what	
 ?problems	
 ?people	
 ?really	
 ?faced,	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?assuming	
 ?I	
 ?already	
 ?knew	
 ?what	
 ?problem	
 ?needed	
 ?solving.	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?addresses	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?research	
 ?questions:	
 ?
? What	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?have	
 ?regarding	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?What	
 ?problems	
 ?exist?	
 ?What	
 ?changes	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?make,	
 ?and	
 ?why	
 ?do	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?them?	
 ?	
 ?By	
 ?conducting	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?and	
 ?listening	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?describe	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?cope	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?I	
 ?collected	
 ?data	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?understand	
 ?these	
 ?issues.	
 ?Section	
 ?3.4.1	
 ?describes	
 ?their	
 ?most	
 ?commonly	
 ?mentioned	
 ?desire	
 ?(to	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?books).	
 ?Section	
 ?3.4.2	
 ?discusses	
 ?problems	
 ?dealing	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?selection	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?available.	
 ?Section	
 ?3.4.3	
 ?discusses	
 ?problems	
 ?of	
 ??bad	
 ?tastes?	
 ?and	
 ?Section	
 ?3.4.4	
 ?covers	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs	
 ?of	
 ?parents	
 ?who	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?better	
 ?manage	
 ?their	
 ?children?s	
 ?media	
 ?diets.	
 ?
	
 ? 27	
 ?
3.4.1 Read	
 ?more	
 ?books	
 ?Reading	
 ?more	
 ?books	
 ?was	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?change	
 ?people	
 ?talked	
 ?about	
 ?most.	
 ?Books	
 ?were	
 ?also	
 ?the	
 ?only	
 ?category	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?every	
 ?subject	
 ?mentioned	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?diets.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?reason	
 ?given	
 ?for	
 ?not	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?as	
 ?desired	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?amount	
 ?of	
 ?time	
 ?reading	
 ?takes.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?subject	
 ?recalled	
 ?that	
 ?during	
 ?pregnancy	
 ?she	
 ?was	
 ?required	
 ?to	
 ?rest	
 ?more,	
 ?so	
 ?had	
 ?time	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?novels.	
 ?But	
 ?now	
 ?it	
 ??feels	
 ?like	
 ?an	
 ?indulgence?	
 ?to	
 ?spend	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ?it	
 ?takes	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?given	
 ?the	
 ??busy-??ness	
 ?of	
 ?life.?	
 ?Another	
 ?said:	
 ?
?Books	
 ?are	
 ?my	
 ?choice	
 ?of	
 ?entertainment	
 ?-??	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?the	
 ?capacity	
 ?to	
 ?fill	
 ?my	
 ?brain	
 ?with	
 ?
something	
 ?besides	
 ?everything	
 ?else	
 ?that?s	
 ?going	
 ?on	
 ?during	
 ?the	
 ?day.	
 ?I	
 ?imagine	
 ?that?s	
 ?what	
 ?
will	
 ?happen	
 ?when	
 ?[my	
 ?younger	
 ?child]	
 ?starts	
 ?preschool	
 ?-??	
 ?I?ll	
 ?eat	
 ?books	
 ?again?.I	
 ?wish	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?
time	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?every	
 ?day?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?Another	
 ?echoed	
 ?Nicholas	
 ?Carr?s	
 ?(2010)	
 ?concern	
 ?that	
 ?Internet	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?affecting	
 ?the	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?concentrate	
 ?and	
 ?thus	
 ?read:	
 ?
?I?d	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?bring	
 ?back	
 ?my	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?sit	
 ?down	
 ?and	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?paper	
 ?book	
 ??	
 ?a	
 ?longer	
 ?attention	
 ?
span.	
 ?Right	
 ?now	
 ?[that?s]	
 ?just	
 ?aspirational.	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?love	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?feel	
 ?like	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?trouble	
 ?with	
 ?
my	
 ?attention	
 ?span,	
 ?but	
 ?it?s	
 ?not	
 ?bothering	
 ?me	
 ?enough	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?something	
 ?about	
 ?
it.?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?Other	
 ?people	
 ?embrace	
 ?the	
 ?fragmented	
 ?attention	
 ?Carr	
 ?warns	
 ?about,	
 ?and	
 ?use	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to,	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?while	
 ?also	
 ?consuming	
 ?other	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?media:	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?a	
 ?movie	
 ?with	
 ?[my	
 ?partner]	
 ?but	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?this	
 ?book,	
 ?so	
 ?I	
 ?do	
 ?both	
 ?
at	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?time.?	
 ?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?As	
 ?we	
 ?will	
 ?see	
 ?in	
 ?section	
 ?4,	
 ?people?s	
 ?explanations	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?behavior	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?accurate;	
 ?one	
 ?reason	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?decision	
 ?making	
 ?process	
 ?is	
 ?inaccessible	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?conscious	
 ?thought	
 ?processes.	
 ?So	
 ?while	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?accept	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?do	
 ?in	
 ?fact	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?books,	
 ?we	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?more	
 ?cautious	
 ?about	
 ?accepting	
 ?that	
 ?their	
 ?explanations	
 ?for	
 ?why	
 ?they	
 ?don?t	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?books	
 ?are	
 ?accurate.	
 ?It	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?possible	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?achieve	
 ?their	
 ?desires	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?without	
 ?adding	
 ?additional	
 ?hours	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?day.	
 ?This	
 ?unmet	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?books	
 ?is	
 ?itself	
 ?involved	
 ?in	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?problems	
 ?people	
 ?have	
 ?with	
 ?books	
 ??	
 ?namely,	
 ?what	
 ?happens	
 ?when	
 ?desirable	
 ?books	
 ?are	
 ?acquired	
 ?but	
 ?subsequently	
 ?not	
 ?read.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?section	
 ?2.8	
 ?I	
 ?reviewed	
 ?many	
 ?new	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?now	
 ?have	
 ?for	
 ?finding	
 ?out	
 ?about	
 ?books	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?consume.	
 ?Interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?told	
 ?us	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?imbalance	
 ?in	
 ?rates	
 ?between	
 ?discovery	
 ?and	
 ?acquisition	
 ?vs.	
 ?reading	
 ?ends	
 ?up	
 ?causing	
 ?problems	
 ?when	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?keep	
 ?up	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?reading	
 ?desires:	
 ?the	
 ?unread	
 ?books	
 ?pile	
 ?up	
 ?and	
 ?cause	
 ?clutter	
 ?that	
 ?both	
 ?is	
 ?physically	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?way	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?causes	
 ?a	
 ?feeling	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?overwhelmed:	
 ?
?We	
 ?need	
 ?a	
 ?bookshelf.	
 ?They?re	
 ?taking	
 ?over	
 ?every	
 ?work	
 ?surface	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?house	
 ?and	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?
to	
 ?do	
 ?something	
 ?about	
 ?that.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?
?I?m	
 ?feeling	
 ?overwhelmed	
 ?by	
 ?stuff	
 ??not	
 ?just	
 ?books,	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?kids?	
 ?toys,	
 ?etc.	
 ?That	
 ?drives	
 ?use	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?library,	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?[we	
 ?borrow]	
 ?don?t	
 ?stay	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?house.?	
 ??S6	
 ?
	
 ? 28	
 ?
	
 ??I	
 ?have	
 ?this	
 ?habit	
 ?of	
 ?getting	
 ?10	
 ?books,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?reading	
 ?5	
 ?of	
 ?them,	
 ?and	
 ?getting	
 ?another	
 ?
10,	
 ?and	
 ?reading	
 ?5.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?all	
 ?these	
 ?books	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?know	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?are.?	
 ?Interviewer:	
 ?So	
 ?
those	
 ?leftover	
 ?ones	
 ?-??	
 ?do	
 ?they	
 ?just	
 ?stay	
 ?leftover?	
 ??Yeah.	
 ?It?s	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?like	
 ?hoarding.	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?
pile	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?-??	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?got	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?point	
 ?of	
 ??Ok,	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?ridiculous,	
 ?I?ve	
 ?got	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?rid	
 ?
of	
 ?some	
 ?stuff.?	
 ?I?ll	
 ?get	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?things	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?already	
 ?read	
 ?them	
 ?or	
 ?if	
 ?I?m	
 ?not	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?them.	
 ?
And	
 ?I	
 ?got	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?whole	
 ?bunch	
 ?of	
 ?stuff	
 ?where	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?just	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?like,	
 ?ok:	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?back	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?-??	
 ?are	
 ?you	
 ?really	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?it?	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?got	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?ones	
 ?I	
 ?decided	
 ?I	
 ?wasn?t	
 ?
going	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?after	
 ?all.	
 ?And	
 ?even	
 ?then	
 ?I	
 ?still	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?full	
 ?bookshelf	
 ?of	
 ?books,	
 ?most	
 ?of	
 ?them	
 ?I	
 ?
still	
 ?haven?t	
 ?read.	
 ?It?s	
 ?terrible.?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?	
 ?While	
 ?accumulating	
 ?unread	
 ?ebooks	
 ?doesn?t	
 ?cause	
 ?physical	
 ?living	
 ?spaces	
 ?to	
 ?become	
 ?cluttered,	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?property	
 ?of	
 ?taking	
 ?up	
 ?space	
 ?provides	
 ?a	
 ?prompt	
 ?that	
 ?signals	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?take	
 ?action	
 ?to	
 ?deal	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?surplus.	
 ?In	
 ?section	
 ?5,	
 ?I	
 ?investigate	
 ?ways	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?ebooks	
 ?with	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?beneficial	
 ?properties	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?physical	
 ?collection	
 ?of	
 ?books.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
3.4.2 Satisfy	
 ?current	
 ?hunger	
 ?Next,	
 ?we	
 ?turn	
 ?to	
 ?another	
 ?problem	
 ?people	
 ?face:	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?at	
 ?any	
 ?given	
 ?moment.	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?go	
 ?in	
 ?[when	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?next]	
 ?looking	
 ?for	
 ?[a	
 ?particular	
 ?genre	
 ?such	
 ?as]	
 ?
fiction	
 ?vs.	
 ?biography.	
 ?I?ll	
 ?look	
 ?for	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?appeals	
 ?to	
 ?me??	
 ??S10	
 ?
	
 ??Usually	
 ?it?s	
 ?not	
 ??Do	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?or	
 ?watch	
 ?TV?	
 ?Do	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?play	
 ?a	
 ?game	
 ?or	
 ?see	
 ?
a	
 ?movie??	
 ?It?s	
 ??What	
 ?game	
 ?do	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?play??	
 ?or	
 ??I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?book,	
 ?what	
 ?book	
 ?do	
 ?I	
 ?
want	
 ?to	
 ?read??	
 ?Maybe	
 ?that?s	
 ?a	
 ?function	
 ?of	
 ?	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?around	
 ?at	
 ?different	
 ?
states	
 ?of	
 ?completion,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?choose	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?and	
 ?experience.?	
 ??S9	
 ?People	
 ?find	
 ?this	
 ?surplus	
 ?of	
 ?desirable	
 ?options	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?problem.	
 ?
?I	
 ?feel	
 ?like	
 ?it?s	
 ?too	
 ?much.	
 ?At	
 ?our	
 ?fingertips	
 ?is	
 ?too	
 ?much.	
 ?We	
 ?have	
 ?infinite	
 ?entertainment,	
 ?
we	
 ?have	
 ?infinite	
 ?information,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?think	
 ?it	
 ?makes	
 ?us	
 ?better	
 ?people,	
 ?or	
 ?happier.	
 ??	
 ??
S3	
 ?
?Before	
 ?Netflix,	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?possible	
 ?for	
 ?there	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?nothing	
 ?on;	
 ?that	
 ?doesn?t	
 ?happen	
 ?
anymore.?	
 ??	
 ?S4	
 ?
?The	
 ?problem	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?sorting	
 ?through	
 ?[the	
 ?list	
 ?I	
 ?keep	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read]	
 ?and	
 ?
figuring	
 ?out	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?[now]	
 ?than	
 ?accessing	
 ?them.?	
 ??	
 ?S8	
 ?
?I	
 ?get	
 ?so	
 ?many	
 ?recommendations	
 ?from	
 ?colleagues,	
 ?I	
 ?wish	
 ?I	
 ?could	
 ?skim	
 ?quickly	
 ?to	
 ?keep	
 ?up	
 ?
with	
 ?it	
 ?all.	
 ?But	
 ?I	
 ?feel	
 ?like	
 ?I	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?each	
 ?one	
 ?in	
 ?depth,	
 ?so	
 ?I	
 ?end	
 ?up	
 ?not	
 ?investigating	
 ?
most	
 ?of	
 ?them.?	
 ??	
 ?S5	
 ?
?There	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?30	
 ?headlines,	
 ?I	
 ?may	
 ?go	
 ?and	
 ?research	
 ?one	
 ?more	
 ?deeply.	
 ?I?m	
 ?not	
 ?just	
 ?eating	
 ?
everything	
 ?because	
 ?it?s	
 ?there;	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?pick	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?more	
 ?about.?	
 ??	
 ?S2	
 ?
?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?movies	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?see.	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?never	
 ?got	
 ?to	
 ?any	
 ?of	
 ?them.?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?Section	
 ?4.1	
 ?reviews	
 ?literature	
 ?on	
 ?decision-??making	
 ?that	
 ?helps	
 ?to	
 ?explain	
 ?why	
 ?having	
 ?to	
 ?invest	
 ?effort	
 ?in	
 ?choosing	
 ?between	
 ?many	
 ?positive	
 ?options	
 ?can	
 ?actually	
 ?reduce	
 ?satisfaction.	
 ?
	
 ? 29	
 ?
3.4.3 Avoid	
 ?bad	
 ?tastes	
 ?A	
 ?related	
 ?problem	
 ?of	
 ?undesired	
 ?content	
 ?was	
 ?mentioned	
 ?with	
 ?special	
 ?vehemence:	
 ?content	
 ?whose	
 ?intrusion	
 ?into	
 ?consciousness	
 ?causes	
 ?strongly	
 ?negative	
 ?emotional	
 ?responses.	
 ?Consuming	
 ?undesirable	
 ?content	
 ?sometimes	
 ?caused	
 ?strong	
 ?reactions.	
 ?These	
 ?reactions	
 ?were	
 ?visceral,	
 ?like	
 ?an	
 ?unexpected	
 ?mouthful	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?disgusting	
 ?taste:	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ??What	
 ?stops	
 ?me	
 ?is	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?get	
 ?stories	
 ?as	
 ?I?m	
 ?reading,	
 ?what	
 ?stops	
 ?me	
 ?and	
 ?makes	
 ?me	
 ?turn	
 ?
off	
 ?is	
 ?when	
 ?there?s	
 ?a	
 ?story	
 ?that?s	
 ?devastating.	
 ?Like	
 ?as	
 ?I?m	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?look	
 ?up	
 ?what	
 ?Mitt	
 ?
Romney	
 ?said	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?campaign	
 ?rally,	
 ?I	
 ?see	
 ??3	
 ?children	
 ?beg	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?lives	
 ?as	
 ?mother	
 ?kills	
 ?them?	
 ?
and	
 ?then	
 ?I?m	
 ?like,	
 ??Aagh!	
 ?I	
 ?can?t	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?this	
 ?stuff,	
 ?it?s	
 ?too	
 ?much!?	
 ?So	
 ?then	
 ?my	
 ?information	
 ?
diet	
 ?gets	
 ?tainted	
 ?by	
 ?horror.	
 ?I	
 ?wish	
 ?there	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?filter	
 ?that.	
 ?That?s	
 ?the	
 ?sour.	
 ?That?s	
 ?
the	
 ?orange	
 ?juice	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?milk	
 ?-??	
 ?it	
 ?totally	
 ?sours	
 ?it.?	
 ??S5	
 ?
?I	
 ?wish	
 ?it	
 ?didn?t	
 ?occupy	
 ?a	
 ?portion	
 ?of	
 ?my	
 ?brain.	
 ?I	
 ?hate	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?know	
 ?anything	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?
Kardashians.?	
 ??	
 ?S5	
 ?
?[After	
 ?having	
 ?kids]	
 ?I	
 ?couldn?t	
 ?read	
 ?anything	
 ?dark,	
 ?depressing,	
 ?intense,	
 ?where	
 ?bad	
 ?things	
 ?
happened.	
 ?I	
 ?didn?t	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?bad	
 ?news	
 ?-??	
 ?nothing	
 ?that	
 ?made	
 ?me	
 ?feel	
 ?bad.	
 ?Things	
 ?hit	
 ?
you	
 ?harder	
 ?when	
 ?you	
 ?have	
 ?little	
 ?kids.	
 ?It	
 ?isn?t	
 ?the	
 ?kind	
 ?of	
 ?story	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?
head.?	
 ??	
 ?S8	
 ?To	
 ?avoid	
 ?this	
 ?problem,	
 ?people	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?accomplish	
 ?several	
 ?steps.	
 ?They	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?the	
 ?link	
 ?between	
 ?the	
 ?content	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?emotional	
 ?reaction.	
 ?They	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?determine	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?getting	
 ?the	
 ?problematic	
 ?content	
 ?from.	
 ?Finally,	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?their	
 ?behavior	
 ?to	
 ?avoid	
 ?the	
 ?source:	
 ?	
 ?
My	
 ?browser	
 ?home	
 ?page	
 ?was	
 ?set	
 ?to	
 ?MSNBC,	
 ?but	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?wrong	
 ?type	
 ?
of	
 ?information,	
 ?like	
 ?those	
 ?stupid	
 ??test	
 ?your	
 ?relationship?	
 ?quizzes	
 ?they	
 ?have.	
 ?And	
 ?then	
 ?I?d	
 ?
get	
 ?all	
 ?upset	
 ?about	
 ?my	
 ?relationship;	
 ?it	
 ?made	
 ?me	
 ?question	
 ?things	
 ?that	
 ?weren?t	
 ?a	
 ?problem.	
 ?I	
 ?
changed	
 ?my	
 ?home	
 ?page	
 ?and	
 ?now	
 ?there?s	
 ?no	
 ?problem.?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?
A	
 ?year	
 ?ago	
 ?I	
 ?cut	
 ?down	
 ?drastically	
 ?on	
 ?how	
 ?many	
 ?politics	
 ?sites	
 ?I	
 ?went	
 ?to	
 ?because	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?too	
 ?
stressful.	
 ?It	
 ?was	
 ?creating	
 ?free-??floating	
 ?existential	
 ?angst	
 ?-??	
 ?everything	
 ?is	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?bad	
 ?
forever,	
 ?everyone?s	
 ?terrible.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?cut	
 ?down	
 ?the	
 ?number,	
 ?and	
 ?went	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?ones	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?less	
 ?
opinion	
 ?and	
 ?more	
 ?newsy.	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?to	
 ?Daily	
 ?Kos	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?made	
 ?me	
 ?too	
 ?angry,	
 ?and	
 ?
I	
 ?don?t	
 ?need	
 ?that	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?life.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?took	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?that	
 ?and	
 ?found	
 ?other	
 ?things	
 ?-??	
 ?I	
 ?
read	
 ?local	
 ?news	
 ?blogs	
 ?about	
 ?things	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?happening	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?neighborhood.	
 ?I	
 ?
substituted	
 ?angst	
 ?for	
 ?happy	
 ?local	
 ?things.	
 ?That	
 ?was	
 ?an	
 ?excellent	
 ?decision	
 ?to	
 ?cut	
 ?down	
 ?on	
 ?
that	
 ?craziness.	
 ??	
 ?S3	
 ?In	
 ?both	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?examples,	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?describe	
 ?using	
 ?strategies	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?their	
 ?behavior.	
 ?Strategies	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?changes	
 ?to	
 ?diets	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?investigated	
 ?further	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?3.5.2.	
 ?
3.4.4 Feed	
 ?children	
 ?well	
 ?Three	
 ?parents	
 ?specifically	
 ?mentioned	
 ?concern	
 ?for	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?monitor	
 ?and	
 ?manage	
 ?their	
 ?children?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Parents	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?restrict	
 ?their	
 ?kids	
 ?consumption	
 ?to	
 ?material	
 ?appropriate	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?intellectual	
 ?and	
 ?emotional	
 ?developmental	
 ?levels	
 ??	
 ?especially	
 ?when	
 ?accessing	
 ?the	
 ?Internet,	
 ?where	
 ?nearly	
 ?any	
 ?content	
 ?imaginable	
 ?is	
 ?just	
 ?a	
 ?click	
 ?away:	
 ?
?Needing	
 ?to	
 ?know	
 ?what	
 ?kids	
 ?are	
 ?up	
 ?to	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?takes	
 ?effort,	
 ?and	
 ?lots	
 ?of	
 ?parents	
 ?
don?t	
 ?have	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ??	
 ?or	
 ?the	
 ?ability.?	
 ??S3	
 ?
	
 ? 30	
 ?
Parents	
 ?are	
 ?concerned	
 ?with	
 ?insulating	
 ?their	
 ?children	
 ?from	
 ?negative	
 ?messages	
 ?and	
 ?values,	
 ?	
 ?keeping	
 ?them	
 ?from	
 ?over-??consuming	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?provide	
 ?much	
 ?value.	
 ?They	
 ?want	
 ?their	
 ?children	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?provided	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?healthy	
 ?diet,	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?develop	
 ?healthy	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits:	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ??One	
 ?of	
 ?my	
 ?children	
 ?was	
 ?obsessed	
 ?with	
 ?videogames	
 ?and	
 ?television,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?
interfering	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?rest	
 ?of	
 ?his	
 ?life.	
 ?So	
 ?we	
 ?took	
 ?it	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?his	
 ?diet	
 ?completely	
 ?for	
 ?several	
 ?
months.	
 ?Then	
 ?we	
 ?allowed	
 ?him	
 ?to	
 ?start	
 ?earning	
 ?back	
 ?a	
 ?moderate	
 ?amount	
 ?with	
 ?good	
 ?
behavior,	
 ?but	
 ?he	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?earn	
 ?it.?	
 ??S2	
 ?
?I	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?reserve	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?budget	
 ?for	
 ?my	
 ?daughter	
 ?because	
 ?she	
 ?wants	
 ?to	
 ?hold	
 ?that	
 ?book	
 ?in	
 ?
her	
 ?hand	
 ?and	
 ?keep	
 ?it	
 ?and	
 ?have	
 ?it	
 ?be	
 ?hers	
 ?and	
 ?read	
 ?it	
 ?over	
 ?and	
 ?over.	
 ?I	
 ?know	
 ?that?s	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?
last	
 ?longer	
 ?than	
 ?me	
 ?buying	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?and	
 ?reading	
 ?it	
 ?once	
 ?and	
 ?donating	
 ?it.?	
 ?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?Another	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?family	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?exposing	
 ?children	
 ?to	
 ?parents?	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?and	
 ?interests:	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ??The	
 ?whole	
 ?family	
 ?shares	
 ?one	
 ?account	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?across	
 ?all	
 ?devices	
 ??	
 ?which	
 ?means	
 ?
everyone	
 ?sees	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?everyone	
 ?else?s	
 ?books,	
 ?regardless	
 ?of	
 ?whether	
 ?they?re	
 ?interesting	
 ?to	
 ?
them.?	
 ??	
 ?S2	
 ?
?In	
 ?the	
 ?house	
 ?I	
 ?grew	
 ?up	
 ?in,	
 ?we?re	
 ?all	
 ?readers,	
 ?so	
 ?you	
 ?would	
 ?sit	
 ?down	
 ?and	
 ?there?s	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?
nearby	
 ?that	
 ?you?d	
 ?be	
 ?like	
 ??well,	
 ?that?s	
 ?interesting!	
 ?where?d	
 ?that	
 ?come	
 ?from??	
 ?And	
 ?you?d	
 ?
read	
 ?that	
 ?because	
 ?somebody	
 ?would	
 ?leave	
 ?it	
 ?lying	
 ?around.?	
 ?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?Parents	
 ?also	
 ?have	
 ?challenges	
 ?in	
 ?finding	
 ?content	
 ?appropriate	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?context	
 ?of	
 ?consumption,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?audience	
 ?or	
 ?who	
 ?is	
 ?present	
 ?and	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?content,	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?primary	
 ?audience.	
 ?Parents	
 ?mentioned	
 ?the	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?media	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?entire	
 ?family	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?together,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?read-??aloud	
 ?books	
 ?and	
 ?family	
 ?movies.	
 ?And	
 ?parents	
 ?had	
 ?challenges	
 ?with	
 ?not	
 ?wanting	
 ?to	
 ?expose	
 ?their	
 ?children	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ??adult?	
 ?portions	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section,	
 ?I	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?several	
 ?other	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?context	
 ?moderates	
 ?our	
 ?appetite	
 ?for	
 ?different	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?
3.5 RQs4:	
 ?Our	
 ?changing	
 ?diets	
 ?I	
 ?asked	
 ?these	
 ?research	
 ?questions	
 ?about	
 ?making	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?diets:	
 ?
? How	
 ?do	
 ?people	
 ?make	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?consumption?	
 ?Could	
 ?techniques	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?inform	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?new	
 ?tools	
 ?or	
 ?systems	
 ?to	
 ?improve	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?experiences	
 ?and	
 ?improve	
 ?their	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?achieve	
 ?the	
 ?outcomes	
 ?they	
 ?desire?	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?interviews,	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?struck	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?differences	
 ?between	
 ?short-??term	
 ?and	
 ?long-??term	
 ?changes	
 ?people	
 ?described.	
 ?In	
 ?Section	
 ?3.5.1,	
 ?I	
 ?discuss	
 ?the	
 ?ways	
 ?context	
 ?and	
 ?appetite	
 ?shapes	
 ?our	
 ?diet	
 ?and	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?short	
 ?term.	
 ?In	
 ?Section	
 ?3.5.2	
 ?I	
 ?discuss	
 ?how	
 ?our	
 ?preferences	
 ?or	
 ?tastes	
 ?change	
 ?over	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?term.	
 ?
3.5.1 Short-??term	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?appetite	
 ?Because	
 ?our	
 ?appetite	
 ?at	
 ?any	
 ?moment	
 ?is	
 ?contextual,	
 ?even	
 ?when	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?content	
 ?choices	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?choosing	
 ?between	
 ?are	
 ?ones	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?desirable	
 ?to	
 ?us	
 ?in	
 ?general	
 ??	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?if	
 ?we	
 ?
	
 ? 31	
 ?
selected	
 ?them	
 ?ourselves	
 ??	
 ?we	
 ?may	
 ?see	
 ?many	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?right	
 ?
now.	
 ?And	
 ?we	
 ?may	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?hard	
 ?time	
 ?judging	
 ?what	
 ?exactly	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ??hungry?	
 ?for.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?provided	
 ?many	
 ?examples	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?contextual	
 ?nature	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?appetites.	
 ?
?When	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?entertain	
 ?myself	
 ?by	
 ?playing	
 ?a	
 ?game,	
 ?picking	
 ?between	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?games,	
 ?
choosing	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?gameplay	
 ?perspective	
 ?-??	
 ?that?s	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?be,	
 ??Oh,	
 ?do	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?
have	
 ?a	
 ?story	
 ?experience,	
 ?or	
 ?do	
 ?I	
 ?just	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?in	
 ?there	
 ?and	
 ?shoot	
 ?some	
 ?stuff	
 ?to	
 ?vent	
 ?
some	
 ?anger,	
 ?or	
 ?feed	
 ?the	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?me	
 ?that	
 ?just	
 ?wants	
 ?to	
 ?kill	
 ?things	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?their	
 ?gold	
 ?and	
 ?go	
 ?
shopping??	
 ?They	
 ?all	
 ?feed	
 ?different	
 ?parts	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?soul.?	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?Context	
 ?can	
 ?intensify	
 ?negative	
 ?reactions	
 ?as	
 ?well:	
 ?
?Our	
 ?free	
 ?time,	
 ?our	
 ?energy,	
 ?is	
 ?precious.	
 ?We?re	
 ?pretty	
 ?hesitant	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?out.	
 ?When	
 ?our	
 ?first	
 ?
child	
 ?was	
 ?an	
 ?infant,	
 ?we	
 ?went	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?Punch	
 ?Drunk	
 ?Love.	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?hated	
 ?it.	
 ?And	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?
reasons	
 ?I	
 ?hated	
 ?it	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?was	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?couldn?t	
 ?believe	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?precious	
 ?nights	
 ?
out	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?spending	
 ?it	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?movie	
 ?I	
 ?didn?t	
 ?like.	
 ?That	
 ?took	
 ?it	
 ?from	
 ??meh,	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?like	
 ?this	
 ?
movie?	
 ?to	
 ??I	
 ?HATE	
 ?this	
 ?movie!?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?Depending	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?you	
 ?just	
 ?consumed,	
 ?taste-??specific	
 ?satiation	
 ?(discussed	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?2.5.2)	
 ?applies	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?food.	
 ?My	
 ?kids	
 ?say	
 ??my	
 ?dinner	
 ?stomach	
 ?is	
 ?full,	
 ?but	
 ?there?s	
 ?plenty	
 ?of	
 ?room	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?dessert	
 ?stomach.?	
 ?
?I	
 ?stop	
 ?with	
 ?my	
 ?morning	
 ?news	
 ?routine	
 ?because	
 ?there?s	
 ?only	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?rich,	
 ?meaty	
 ?new	
 ?
news	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?world	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?consume	
 ?before	
 ?I	
 ?start	
 ?feeling	
 ?ill.	
 ?There?s	
 ?only	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?
information	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?absorb	
 ?-??	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?fat	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?eat	
 ?-??	
 ?before	
 ?my	
 ?brain	
 ?says	
 ??ok,	
 ?you?re	
 ?done?.	
 ?
If	
 ?it?s	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?weekend,	
 ?I	
 ?might	
 ?be	
 ?full	
 ?of	
 ?news	
 ?and	
 ?switch	
 ?to	
 ?entertainment?	
 ??S3	
 ?When	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?sick,	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?different	
 ?desires	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
When	
 ?you?re	
 ?sick,	
 ?it?s	
 ?really	
 ?nice	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?something	
 ?mindless	
 ?on	
 ?TV	
 ?or	
 ?poke	
 ?
around	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?because	
 ?your	
 ?brain	
 ?is	
 ?just	
 ?not	
 ?functioning.?	
 ??S4	
 ?
?Last	
 ?year	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?pneumonia,	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?sit	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?couch	
 ?and	
 ?wasn?t	
 ?allowed	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?
up.	
 ?I	
 ?watched	
 ?that	
 ?movie	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?blue	
 ?people	
 ?[Interviewer:	
 ?Avatar?]	
 ?Yes!	
 ?It	
 ?was	
 ?so	
 ?
surreal	
 ?and	
 ?colorful.	
 ?I	
 ?saw	
 ?it	
 ?through	
 ?this	
 ?lens	
 ?of	
 ?fever	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?kitten	
 ?purring	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?lungs.	
 ?It	
 ?
was	
 ?cool,	
 ?but	
 ?it?s	
 ?not	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?idea	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?pneumonia	
 ?just	
 ?to	
 ?experience	
 ?a	
 ?movie	
 ?better.?	
 ?
?S10	
 ?Emotional	
 ?state	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?important	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?context.	
 ?One	
 ?person	
 ?spoke	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?familiar	
 ?movies	
 ?and	
 ?reruns	
 ?of	
 ?television	
 ?shows	
 ?when	
 ?sad	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?equivalent	
 ?of	
 ??comfort	
 ?food.?	
 ?Another	
 ?used	
 ?media	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?safe	
 ?outlet	
 ?for	
 ?aggressive	
 ?feelings:	
 ?
?If	
 ?I?m	
 ?really	
 ?angry	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?world,	
 ?I?ll	
 ?read	
 ?my	
 ?vampire	
 ?stories	
 ?where	
 ?people	
 ?get	
 ?killed	
 ?in	
 ?
violent	
 ?and	
 ?horrible	
 ?ways,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?kill	
 ?people.	
 ?It	
 ?keeps	
 ?me	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?prison!?	
 ?
?	
 ?S2	
 ?So	
 ?our	
 ?appetites	
 ?can	
 ?change	
 ?frequently	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?context.	
 ?Being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?factor	
 ?our	
 ?current	
 ?appetite	
 ?into	
 ?our	
 ?choices	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?selections	
 ?more	
 ?relevant	
 ?might	
 ?go	
 ?a	
 ?long	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?easing	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?selection	
 ?challenges.	
 ?	
 ?But	
 ?these	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?only	
 ?changes	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Other	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits	
 ?take	
 ?place	
 ?over	
 ?longer	
 ?times	
 ?and	
 ?in	
 ?response	
 ?to	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?lives.	
 ?
	
 ? 32	
 ?
3.5.2 Making	
 ?long-??term	
 ?changes:	
 ?intentional	
 ?vs.	
 ?exogenous	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?struck	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?two	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?changes	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?subjects?	
 ?information	
 ?diets,	
 ?with	
 ?contrasting	
 ?characteristics:	
 ?	
 ?1) Intentional	
 ?media	
 ?changes.	
 ?People	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?changes,	
 ?but	
 ?relying	
 ?on	
 ?willpower	
 ?alone	
 ?to	
 ?implement	
 ?an	
 ?intention	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?was	
 ?usually	
 ?not	
 ?sufficient.	
 ?Changes	
 ?were	
 ?more	
 ?successful	
 ?when	
 ?people	
 ?employed	
 ?additional	
 ?tactics	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?behavior	
 ?or	
 ?suppress	
 ?the	
 ?undesired	
 ?behavior.	
 ?2) Exogenous	
 ?media	
 ?changes.	
 ?Other	
 ?events	
 ?in	
 ?people?s	
 ?lives	
 ?often	
 ?do	
 ?cause	
 ?large	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?without	
 ?requiring	
 ?much	
 ?additional	
 ?effort	
 ??	
 ?in	
 ?some	
 ?ways,	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?diet	
 ?change	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?coincidental	
 ?side-??effect	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?change.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?distinguish	
 ?these	
 ?causes	
 ?by	
 ?calling	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?category	
 ?intentional	
 ?media	
 ?changes,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?second	
 ?coincidental	
 ?or	
 ?exogenous	
 ?(having	
 ?a	
 ?cause	
 ?from	
 ?outside)	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?unintentional.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?latter	
 ?category	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?intentional	
 ??	
 ?people	
 ?often	
 ?do	
 ?intentionally	
 ?make	
 ?the	
 ?sorts	
 ?of	
 ?life	
 ?changes	
 ?discussed	
 ?here.	
 ?The	
 ?motivation	
 ?behind	
 ?those	
 ?changes	
 ?was	
 ?something	
 ?other	
 ?than,	
 ?or	
 ?outside	
 ?of,	
 ?effecting	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?following	
 ?subsections	
 ?contain	
 ?discussion	
 ?of	
 ?circumstances	
 ?that	
 ?lead	
 ?to	
 ?exogenous	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?subjects,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?several	
 ?techniques	
 ?subjects	
 ?described	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?intentional	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?both	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
3.5.2.1 Exogenous	
 ?changes	
 ?affect	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?tastes	
 ?and	
 ?habits	
 ?Subjects	
 ?reported	
 ?that	
 ?their	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits	
 ?changed,	
 ?often	
 ?in	
 ?unexpected	
 ?ways,	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?result	
 ?of	
 ?other	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?life.	
 ?These	
 ?changes	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?difficult	
 ?to	
 ?accomplish	
 ?or	
 ?sustain,	
 ?regardless	
 ?of	
 ?whether	
 ?or	
 ?not	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?seen	
 ?as	
 ?desirable.	
 ?	
 ?Since	
 ?7	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?10	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?have	
 ?young	
 ?children,	
 ?parenting	
 ?was	
 ?mentioned	
 ?often:	
 ?	
 ?
?Having	
 ?young	
 ?kids	
 ?-??	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?little,	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?less;	
 ?now	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?older,	
 ?I?m	
 ?back	
 ?to	
 ?
reading	
 ?more.?	
 ??	
 ?S8	
 ?
?As	
 ?kids	
 ?get	
 ?older	
 ?and	
 ?are	
 ?more	
 ?independent	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?more	
 ?control	
 ?over	
 ?my	
 ?time.	
 ?When	
 ?
the	
 ?kids	
 ?are	
 ?in	
 ?school,	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?more	
 ?control	
 ?over	
 ?how	
 ?I	
 ?spend	
 ?my	
 ?time.?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?Other	
 ?examples	
 ?of	
 ?life	
 ?events	
 ?that	
 ?drive	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?were	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?education	
 ?(entering	
 ?and	
 ?leaving	
 ?college	
 ?and	
 ?graduate	
 ?school),	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?employment,	
 ?and	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?commuting	
 ?methods	
 ?and	
 ?lengths.	
 ?	
 ?People	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?technology	
 ?they	
 ?used	
 ?affects	
 ?their	
 ?consumption:	
 ?
?I	
 ?have	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?tendency	
 ?to	
 ?skim	
 ?stuff	
 ?when	
 ?it?s	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?screen	
 ?than	
 ?I	
 ?do	
 ?when	
 ?it?s	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?
printed	
 ?sheet	
 ?of	
 ?paper.	
 ?It?s	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?easier	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?distracted	
 ?online.	
 ?I?m	
 ?not	
 ?sure	
 ?why	
 ?that	
 ?is,	
 ?
why	
 ?I	
 ?get	
 ?more	
 ?focus	
 ?when	
 ?its	
 ?printed.	
 ?There?s	
 ?no	
 ?hyperlinks,	
 ?there?s	
 ?no	
 ?stupid	
 ?ad	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?
corner	
 ?with	
 ?dancing	
 ?people.	
 ?Even	
 ?though	
 ?I	
 ?grew	
 ?up	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?old	
 ?TRS-??80s,	
 ?computers	
 ?have	
 ?
always	
 ?been	
 ?for	
 ?fun,	
 ?it?s	
 ?only	
 ?recently	
 ?that	
 ?they?ve	
 ?become	
 ?workhorses	
 ?and	
 ?research	
 ?
tools.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?still	
 ?tend	
 ?to	
 ?want	
 ?something	
 ?printed	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?information.?	
 ??S4	
 ?Adopting	
 ?new	
 ?technology	
 ?changes	
 ?media	
 ?habits:	
 ?
	
 ? 33	
 ?
?Technology	
 ?absolutely	
 ?changes	
 ?my	
 ?information	
 ?diet.	
 ?When	
 ?I	
 ?got	
 ?a	
 ?computer	
 ?at	
 ?home;	
 ?
when	
 ?I	
 ?got	
 ?a	
 ?laptop;	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?went	
 ?from	
 ?dialup	
 ?to	
 ?broadband;	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?got	
 ?an	
 ?iPad	
 ??	
 ?each	
 ?
time,	
 ?it	
 ?gets	
 ?more	
 ?and	
 ?more	
 ?connected,	
 ?and	
 ?easier	
 ?and	
 ?easier,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?use	
 ?more	
 ?and	
 ?more	
 ?
sites.?	
 ??	
 ?S1	
 ?All	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?exogenously-??driven	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?whether	
 ?from	
 ?technology	
 ?or	
 ?life	
 ?events,	
 ?were	
 ?accomplished	
 ?without	
 ?much	
 ?conscious	
 ?effort.	
 ?People	
 ?might	
 ?have	
 ?missed	
 ?things	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?give	
 ?up	
 ?on,	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?didn?t	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?struggle	
 ?to	
 ?give	
 ?them	
 ?up.	
 ?On	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?hand,	
 ?changes	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?tried	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?intentionally	
 ?often	
 ?were	
 ?difficult	
 ?to	
 ?accomplish.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?several	
 ?sections,	
 ?I	
 ?review	
 ?several	
 ?approaches	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?successfully	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food,	
 ?and	
 ?see	
 ?if	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?apply	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?
3.5.2.2 Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?using	
 ?diaries	
 ?and	
 ?self-??tracking	
 ?One	
 ?subject	
 ?reported	
 ?using	
 ?food	
 ?diaries	
 ?to	
 ?record	
 ?what	
 ?she	
 ?ate	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?whether	
 ?health	
 ?problems	
 ?were	
 ?being	
 ?caused	
 ?by	
 ?food	
 ?allergies.	
 ?Diaries	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?consumption	
 ?self-??tracking	
 ?are	
 ?also	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?many	
 ?food	
 ?diets,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Weight	
 ?Watchers.	
 ?	
 ?But	
 ?subjects	
 ?said	
 ?they	
 ?didn?t	
 ?think	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?helpful	
 ?for	
 ?changing	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?diets.	
 ?One	
 ?problem	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?as	
 ?soon	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?behavior	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?maintained,	
 ?that?s	
 ?a	
 ?motivation	
 ?to	
 ?stop	
 ?tracking.	
 ?
?There?s	
 ?a	
 ?discipline	
 ?switch	
 ?-??	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?stay	
 ?on	
 ?for	
 ?months	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?time.	
 ?Tracking	
 ?can	
 ?help.	
 ?But	
 ?
as	
 ?soon	
 ?as	
 ?I	
 ?go	
 ?off	
 ?my	
 ?goal,	
 ?I	
 ?stop	
 ?tracking.	
 ?I	
 ?might	
 ?record	
 ?breakfast	
 ?and	
 ?lunch,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?
record	
 ?nothing	
 ?for	
 ?dinner-??	
 ?because	
 ?dinner	
 ?didn?t	
 ?follow	
 ?the	
 ?diet.?	
 ??	
 ?S1	
 ?Another	
 ?complaint	
 ?with	
 ?tracking	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?requires	
 ?paying	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?negative	
 ?behavior:	
 ?
?When	
 ?a	
 ?habit	
 ?feels	
 ?destructive,	
 ?negative,	
 ?that?s	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?stop	
 ?it	
 ?or	
 ?cut	
 ?back	
 ?on	
 ?it.	
 ?	
 ?
Doing	
 ?a	
 ?behavior	
 ?diary	
 ?is	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?wouldn?t	
 ?work	
 ?for	
 ?me;	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?feel	
 ?like	
 ?
spending	
 ?too	
 ?much	
 ?time	
 ?on	
 ?negative	
 ?behavior.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?Self-??tracking	
 ?is	
 ?discussed	
 ?further	
 ?in	
 ?Appendix	
 ?D:	
 ?Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?for	
 ?Media	
 ?Consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
3.5.2.3 Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?removal	
 ?Another	
 ?successful	
 ?tactic	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?intentional	
 ?consumption	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?remove	
 ?the	
 ?temptation	
 ?entirely,	
 ?by	
 ?not	
 ?having	
 ?it	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?consumption	
 ?at	
 ?all:	
 ?
?There?s	
 ?a	
 ?saying	
 ?that	
 ?dieting	
 ?starts	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?grocery	
 ?store:	
 ?if	
 ?you	
 ?don?t	
 ?bring	
 ?it	
 ?home,	
 ?then	
 ?
you	
 ?don?t	
 ?eat	
 ?it.	
 ??	
 ??S6	
 ?This	
 ?removal	
 ?approach	
 ?works	
 ?for	
 ?media,	
 ?too:	
 ?
?I?m	
 ?really	
 ?happy	
 ?that	
 ?I?ve	
 ?broken	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?of	
 ?habits,	
 ?like	
 ?needing	
 ?to	
 ?know	
 ?what	
 ?happens	
 ?on	
 ?
a	
 ?TV	
 ?show.	
 ?I	
 ?lived	
 ?without	
 ?a	
 ?TV	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?while.	
 ?My	
 ?roommate	
 ?moved	
 ?out	
 ?and	
 ?took	
 ?the	
 ?TV	
 ?
with	
 ?her,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?consciously	
 ?chose	
 ?not	
 ?to	
 ?replace	
 ?it.	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?it	
 ?on	
 ?purpose,	
 ?and	
 ?got	
 ?a	
 ?dog,	
 ?to	
 ?
get	
 ?up	
 ?off	
 ?my	
 ?butt	
 ?and	
 ?stop	
 ?eating	
 ?potato	
 ?chips.	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?healthier	
 ?habits.	
 ?I	
 ?knew	
 ?I	
 ?
needed	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?more	
 ?physical	
 ?and	
 ?social.	
 ?It?s	
 ?easier	
 ?to	
 ?sit	
 ?at	
 ?home	
 ?and	
 ?tell	
 ?myself	
 ?I	
 ?didn?t	
 ?
	
 ? 34	
 ?
need	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?anywhere.	
 ?I?ve	
 ?always	
 ?gone	
 ?cold	
 ?turkey	
 ?and	
 ?gone	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?opposite	
 ?extreme	
 ?-??	
 ?
then	
 ?I	
 ?can	
 ?let	
 ?a	
 ?little	
 ?bit	
 ?more	
 ?back	
 ?in.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?It	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?noted	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?example	
 ?predated	
 ?the	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?access	
 ?television	
 ?and	
 ?movies	
 ?over	
 ?the	
 ?Internet.	
 ?One	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?difficulties	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?removal	
 ?strategy	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?connected	
 ?world	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?such	
 ?a	
 ?huge	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?us	
 ?anywhere,	
 ?anytime,	
 ?on	
 ?any	
 ?device.	
 ?Employing	
 ?the	
 ?removal	
 ?strategy	
 ?either	
 ?takes	
 ?willpower	
 ?(?I	
 ?just	
 ?won?t	
 ?go	
 ?to	
 ?that	
 ?website?)	
 ?or	
 ?giving	
 ?up	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?capabilities	
 ??	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?getting	
 ?a	
 ?feature	
 ?phone	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?smartphone.	
 ?	
 ?Some	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?dedicated	
 ?ereader	
 ?devices	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?variation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?removal	
 ?strategy:	
 ?these	
 ?devices	
 ?are	
 ?optimized	
 ?for	
 ?displaying	
 ?text.	
 ?Unlike	
 ?tablet	
 ?computers	
 ?and	
 ?smartphones,	
 ?these	
 ?ereaders	
 ?cannot	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?video	
 ?content,	
 ?and	
 ?they	
 ?can	
 ?only	
 ?barely	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?web	
 ?surfing	
 ?and	
 ?games.	
 ?
3.5.2.4 Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?substitution	
 ?People	
 ?sometimes	
 ?use	
 ?substitution	
 ?to	
 ?replace	
 ?an	
 ?undesired	
 ?option	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?designated	
 ?substitute:	
 ?
?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?to	
 ?Daily	
 ?Kos	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?made	
 ?me	
 ?too	
 ?angry,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?need	
 ?that	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?
life.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?took	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?that	
 ?and	
 ?found	
 ?other	
 ?things:	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?local	
 ?news	
 ?blogs	
 ?
about	
 ?things	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?happening	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?neighborhood.	
 ?I	
 ?substituted	
 ?happy	
 ?local	
 ?things	
 ?
for	
 ?angst.?	
 ??S3	
 ?
?My	
 ?browser	
 ?home	
 ?page	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?MSNBC,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?wrong	
 ?type	
 ?of	
 ?
information?So	
 ?I	
 ?changed	
 ?my	
 ?home	
 ?page	
 ?to	
 ?NYTimes.com,	
 ?and	
 ?now	
 ?there?s	
 ?not	
 ?a	
 ?
problem.?	
 ??S6	
 ?Next,	
 ?another	
 ?common	
 ?approach	
 ?is	
 ?described:	
 ?manipulating	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?accessibility.	
 ?
3.5.2.5 Intentional	
 ?changes:	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?accessibility	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food,	
 ?modifying	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?ease	
 ?of	
 ?access	
 ?is	
 ?yet	
 ?another	
 ?tactic	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?desired	
 ?choices:	
 ?
?When	
 ?the	
 ?kids	
 ?are	
 ?playing	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?yard,	
 ?I	
 ?just	
 ?put	
 ?out	
 ?a	
 ?big	
 ?cooler	
 ?full	
 ?of	
 ?water	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?slice	
 ?
up	
 ?a	
 ?whole	
 ?bunch	
 ?of	
 ?fruit	
 ?and	
 ?put	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?there.	
 ?And	
 ?the	
 ?kids	
 ?just	
 ?drink	
 ?it	
 ?all	
 ?day	
 ?long.	
 ?
Nobody	
 ?comes	
 ?and	
 ?asks	
 ?me	
 ?for	
 ?soda.?	
 ??	
 ?S5	
 ?Yet	
 ?another	
 ?subject	
 ?described	
 ?reducing	
 ?their	
 ?soda	
 ?consumption	
 ?at	
 ?work	
 ?by	
 ?keeping	
 ?a	
 ?container	
 ?of	
 ?water	
 ?at	
 ?their	
 ?desk,	
 ?making	
 ?it	
 ?more	
 ?accessible	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?soda	
 ?available	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?break	
 ?room.	
 ?Another	
 ?subject	
 ?encouraged	
 ?their	
 ?family	
 ?to	
 ?eat	
 ?healthier	
 ?by	
 ?creating	
 ?visible	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?healthy	
 ?food	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?a	
 ?bowl	
 ?of	
 ?fruit	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?kitchen	
 ?table)	
 ?while	
 ?less	
 ?healthy	
 ?options	
 ?were	
 ?relegated	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?closed	
 ?cabinet.	
 ?Figure	
 ?4	
 ?depicts	
 ?a	
 ?fruit	
 ?bowl	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?highly	
 ?visible	
 ?and	
 ?accessible	
 ??stash?	
 ?of	
 ?food,	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?refrigerator	
 ?whose	
 ?contents	
 ?are	
 ?hidden.	
 ?
	
 ? 35	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
Figure	
 ?4.	
 ?A	
 ?fruit	
 ?bowl	
 ?placed	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?kitchen	
 ?table	
 ?(left)	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?high	
 ?degree	
 ?of	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?accessibility.	
 ?	
 ?
A	
 ?refrigerator?s	
 ?contents	
 ?are	
 ?both	
 ?invisible	
 ?and	
 ?inaccessible	
 ?(center)	
 ?until	
 ?the	
 ?door	
 ?is	
 ?opened	
 ?(left).	
 ?
Pictures	
 ?taken	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?recreating	
 ?examples	
 ?described	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?One	
 ?family	
 ?removed	
 ?the	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?receive	
 ?broadcasts	
 ?on	
 ?their	
 ?television;	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?only	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?watch	
 ?DVD?s.	
 ?The	
 ?family	
 ?can	
 ?access	
 ?Internet	
 ?video,	
 ?but	
 ?only	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?computer	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?office,	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?seating	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?as	
 ?comfortable	
 ?as	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?living	
 ?room	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?as	
 ?large.	
 ?People	
 ?also	
 ?reported	
 ?using	
 ?placement	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?prominent	
 ?locations	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?their	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Nine	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?ten	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?mentioned	
 ?keeping	
 ?books	
 ?they	
 ?intended	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?in	
 ?specific	
 ?locations	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?on	
 ?bookshelves	
 ?in	
 ?living	
 ?rooms	
 ?and	
 ?offices.	
 ?(Figure	
 ?5	
 ?shows	
 ?two	
 ?examples	
 ?on	
 ?bedside	
 ?tables).	
 ?These	
 ?were	
 ?referred	
 ?to	
 ?by	
 ?names	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ??to-??be-??read	
 ?piles?	
 ?and	
 ??to-??be-??read	
 ?shelves.?	
 ??Bathroom	
 ?reading?	
 ?is	
 ?another	
 ?example.	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?5.	
 ?People	
 ?frequently	
 ?stash	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?in	
 ?piles	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?seen	
 ?when	
 ?not	
 ?being	
 ?
read;	
 ?at	
 ?present,	
 ?there?s	
 ?no	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?this	
 ?with	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?Pictures	
 ?provided	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?by	
 ?research	
 ?subjects.	
 ?Even	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?interior	
 ?design	
 ?can	
 ?significantly	
 ?change	
 ?media	
 ?consumption:	
 ?
?I	
 ?moved	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?home	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?TV	
 ?is	
 ?visible	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?kitchen;	
 ?now	
 ?I	
 ?watch	
 ?TV	
 ?while	
 ?
cooking	
 ?and	
 ?eating,	
 ?which	
 ?I	
 ?never	
 ?did	
 ?before.?	
 ??S4	
 ?Other	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?items	
 ?included	
 ?DVD?s	
 ?from	
 ?Netflix	
 ?kept	
 ?next	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TV,	
 ?and	
 ?magazines	
 ?and	
 ?catalogs	
 ?stacked	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?mail	
 ?table.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?groupings,	
 ?subjects	
 ?also	
 ?described	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?digital	
 ?collections	
 ?of	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?consumed	
 ?later.	
 ?These	
 ?include	
 ?ereaders,	
 ?digital	
 ?video	
 ?recorders?	
 ?
	
 ? 36	
 ?
listing	
 ?of	
 ?shows,	
 ?Netflix	
 ?Instant	
 ?Queues	
 ?of	
 ?streaming	
 ?video,	
 ?and	
 ?Amazon.com	
 ?wishlists.	
 ?However,	
 ?these	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?persistently	
 ?visible,	
 ?and	
 ?this	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?problems	
 ?people	
 ?have	
 ?with	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?digital	
 ?media.	
 ?I	
 ?expand	
 ?on	
 ?these	
 ?collections,	
 ?or	
 ?stashes,	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?4.	
 ?	
 ?
3.6 Conclusion	
 ?Here	
 ?are	
 ?the	
 ?key	
 ?insights	
 ?and	
 ?findings	
 ?from	
 ?these	
 ?interviews:	
 ?1. The	
 ?most	
 ?common	
 ?desired	
 ?change	
 ?was	
 ?more	
 ?book	
 ?reading.	
 ?Reading	
 ?is	
 ?seen	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ??healthier	
 ?food?	
 ?and	
 ?people	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ??eat	
 ?better.?	
 ?2. Ebooks	
 ?are	
 ?missing	
 ?many	
 ?qualities	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?paper	
 ?predecessors.	
 ?This	
 ?isn?t	
 ?a	
 ?surprise?	
 ?but	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?interesting	
 ?that	
 ?so	
 ?many	
 ?subjects	
 ?without	
 ?prompting	
 ?referred	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?missing	
 ?qualities.	
 ?That?s	
 ?a	
 ?clue	
 ?that	
 ?these	
 ?things	
 ?really	
 ?matter	
 ?to	
 ?readers	
 ??	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?these	
 ?readers	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?there?s	
 ?ample	
 ?opportunity	
 ?to	
 ?keep	
 ?addressing	
 ?them.	
 ?3. People	
 ?have	
 ?less	
 ?success	
 ?changing	
 ?their	
 ?food	
 ?diets	
 ?with	
 ?willpower	
 ?alone	
 ?than	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?use	
 ?any	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?strategies.	
 ?Successful	
 ?strategies	
 ?include	
 ?manipulating	
 ?visibility,	
 ?availability,	
 ?substitution,	
 ?and	
 ?removal.	
 ?4. We	
 ?found	
 ?examples	
 ?of	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?food	
 ?diet	
 ?change	
 ?strategies	
 ?already	
 ?being	
 ?used	
 ?successfully	
 ?to	
 ?manage	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?5. Stashing	
 ?incorporates	
 ?both	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?availability	
 ?strategies.	
 ?Stashing	
 ?is	
 ?already	
 ?used	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?book	
 ?habits,	
 ?but	
 ?it	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?improved.	
 ?While	
 ?the	
 ?generalizability	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?findings	
 ?is	
 ?limited	
 ?due	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?method	
 ?and	
 ?population,	
 ?as	
 ?discussed	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?3.1,	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?still	
 ?build	
 ?on	
 ?them.	
 ?I	
 ?examine	
 ?stashes	
 ?in	
 ?more	
 ?detail	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?4.	
 ?Then	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5,	
 ?I	
 ?explore	
 ?ways	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?achieve	
 ?more	
 ?reading	
 ?by	
 ?providing	
 ?better	
 ?stashes	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?
	
 ? 37	
 ?
4 Stashes	
 ?&	
 ?Stashing	
 ?After	
 ?hearing	
 ?how	
 ?stashing	
 ?plays	
 ?a	
 ?role	
 ?in	
 ?managing	
 ?food	
 ?consumption,	
 ?and	
 ?seeing	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?already	
 ?had	
 ?some	
 ?use	
 ?in	
 ?media,	
 ?I	
 ?suspected	
 ?that	
 ?stashing	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?further	
 ?leveraged	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?of	
 ?helping	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?better	
 ?manage	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?People	
 ?intentionally	
 ?collect	
 ?and	
 ?store	
 ?items	
 ?for	
 ?future	
 ?consumption.	
 ?I	
 ?refer	
 ?to	
 ?this	
 ?activity	
 ?as	
 ?
stashing	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?collections	
 ?as	
 ?stashes.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?provided	
 ?several	
 ?examples	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?stashes	
 ?to	
 ?control	
 ?food	
 ?diets.	
 ?	
 ?Subjects	
 ?also	
 ?described	
 ?using	
 ?numerous	
 ?media	
 ?stashes.	
 ?Book	
 ?stashes	
 ?were	
 ?most	
 ?common,	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?nine	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?ten.	
 ?Some	
 ?used	
 ?different	
 ?book	
 ?stashes	
 ?for	
 ?different	
 ?categories	
 ?of	
 ?books.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?conceptual	
 ?boundary	
 ?between	
 ?digital	
 ?sources	
 ?and	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?in	
 ?particular	
 ?is	
 ?ambiguous	
 ?and	
 ?difficult	
 ?for	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?navigate;	
 ?some	
 ?sources	
 ?contain	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?stashes	
 ?(such	
 ?as	
 ?wishlists	
 ?and	
 ?libraries)	
 ?and	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?those	
 ?have	
 ?further	
 ?organization	
 ?available	
 ?within	
 ?them	
 ?(multiple	
 ?wishlists,	
 ?shelves,	
 ?playlists,	
 ?etc.).	
 ?Some	
 ?stashes	
 ?are	
 ?separate	
 ?from	
 ?sources,	
 ?or	
 ?only	
 ?loosely	
 ?linked.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?as	
 ?pictured	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?6,	
 ?some	
 ?online	
 ?stashes	
 ?provide	
 ?separate	
 ?links	
 ?a	
 ?user	
 ?can	
 ?click	
 ?on	
 ?to	
 ?search	
 ?for	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?sources,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?stashes	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?deeper	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?source?s	
 ?data,	
 ?for	
 ?example	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?look	
 ?up	
 ?prices	
 ?from	
 ?each	
 ?source	
 ?and	
 ?display	
 ?it	
 ?directly.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?often	
 ?a	
 ?function	
 ?of	
 ?restrictions	
 ?placed	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?sources	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?allowed	
 ?uses	
 ?of	
 ?data	
 ?from	
 ?that	
 ?source	
 ?for	
 ?business	
 ?reasons.	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?6.	
 ?Some	
 ?online	
 ?book	
 ?stashes,	
 ?like	
 ?FictFact.com	
 ?(pictured	
 ?here)	
 ?provide	
 ?links	
 ?to	
 ?several	
 ?different	
 ?possible	
 ?
sources,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?has	
 ?to	
 ?follow	
 ?each	
 ?link	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?whether	
 ?the	
 ?title	
 ?is	
 ?actually	
 ?available.	
 ?Another	
 ?example	
 ?of	
 ?deep	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?sources	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?lacking	
 ?in	
 ?many	
 ?stashes	
 ?is	
 ?showing	
 ?the	
 ?actual	
 ?availability	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?title	
 ?in	
 ?various	
 ?libraries	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?separate	
 ?stash.	
 ?Instead	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?must	
 ?follow	
 ?each	
 ?link	
 ?and	
 ?check	
 ?each	
 ?source	
 ?independently.	
 ?	
 ?A	
 ?comparison	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?functionality	
 ?of	
 ?various	
 ?book	
 ?reading	
 ?tools	
 ?and	
 ?stashes	
 ?is	
 ?provided	
 ?in	
 ?Appendix	
 ?C:	
 ?Features	
 ?&	
 ?Gaps	
 ?of	
 ?Existing	
 ?Reading	
 ?tools.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?stashing	
 ?better	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?could	
 ?gain	
 ?insight	
 ?into	
 ?applying	
 ?it	
 ?effectively,	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?4.1	
 ?I	
 ?describe	
 ?additional	
 ?background	
 ?research	
 ?on	
 ?decision-??making	
 ?to	
 ?gain	
 ?insights	
 ?into	
 ?how	
 ?using	
 ?stashes	
 ?might	
 ?influence	
 ?decisions.	
 ?In	
 ?Section	
 ?4.2	
 ?I	
 ?develop	
 ?and	
 ?describe	
 ?a	
 ?model	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?how	
 ?stashing	
 ?activities	
 ?fit	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?larger	
 ?picture	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?activities	
 ?in	
 ?general.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 38	
 ?
4.1 Background	
 ?In	
 ?Section	
 ?2.1	
 ?I	
 ?first	
 ?discussed	
 ?the	
 ?decade-??old	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?movement	
 ?and	
 ?its	
 ?focus	
 ?on	
 ?human	
 ?flourishing	
 ?and	
 ?happiness.	
 ?But	
 ?that	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?time	
 ?that	
 ?happiness	
 ?and	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?studied.	
 ?There	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?rich	
 ?history	
 ?of	
 ?studying	
 ?happiness	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?context	
 ?of	
 ?decision-??making:	
 ?how	
 ?do	
 ?we	
 ?make	
 ?choices	
 ?that	
 ?satisfy	
 ?us?	
 ?And	
 ?why	
 ?can?t	
 ?people	
 ?explain	
 ?the	
 ?reasons	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?choices?	
 ?
4.1.1 Two	
 ?system	
 ?thinking:	
 ?now	
 ?me	
 ?vs.	
 ?future	
 ?me	
 ?
	
 ??I?ll	
 ?look	
 ?for	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?appeals	
 ?to	
 ?me	
 ?before	
 ?I	
 ?look	
 ?for	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ??should?	
 ?
read...	
 ?Books	
 ?I	
 ?should	
 ?read	
 ?are	
 ?things	
 ?that	
 ?have	
 ?real	
 ?depth,	
 ?that	
 ?I?m	
 ?glad	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?it	
 ?
when	
 ?I?m	
 ?done,	
 ?because	
 ?it	
 ?makes	
 ?me	
 ?think	
 ?for	
 ?days.	
 ?Although	
 ?right	
 ?after	
 ?I	
 ?finish	
 ?reading	
 ?
it,	
 ?it?s	
 ?not	
 ?always	
 ?so	
 ?nice.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?Several	
 ?researchers	
 ?examining	
 ?our	
 ?decision	
 ?making	
 ?habits	
 ?have	
 ?proposed	
 ?variations	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?idea	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?seem	
 ?to	
 ?treat	
 ?our	
 ?future	
 ?or	
 ?past	
 ?selves	
 ?as	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?different	
 ?individuals,	
 ?whose	
 ?experiences	
 ?we	
 ?value	
 ?differently,	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?person	
 ?at	
 ?two	
 ?different	
 ?points	
 ?in	
 ?time.	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?reviews	
 ?two	
 ?examples.	
 ?This	
 ?discontinuity	
 ?of	
 ?identity	
 ?between	
 ?the	
 ?choosing	
 ?self	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?evaluating	
 ?self	
 ?helps	
 ?to	
 ?explain	
 ?why	
 ?we	
 ?make	
 ?decisions	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?happy	
 ?with	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?run.	
 ?Imagine	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?choice	
 ?between	
 ?watching	
 ?an	
 ?entertaining	
 ?but	
 ?shallow	
 ?blockbuster	
 ?movie	
 ?starring	
 ?a	
 ?favorite	
 ?actor,	
 ?or	
 ?reading	
 ?a	
 ?well-??reviewed	
 ?book	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?subject	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?interested	
 ?in.	
 ?Perhaps	
 ?you	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?happier	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?run	
 ?if	
 ?you	
 ?read	
 ?the	
 ?book.	
 ?But	
 ?those	
 ?benefits	
 ?will	
 ?go	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ??future	
 ?you.?	
 ?On	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?hand,	
 ?watching	
 ?the	
 ?movie	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?more	
 ?entertaining	
 ?to	
 ??present	
 ?you.?	
 ?	
 ?Of	
 ?course,	
 ?we	
 ?don?t	
 ?literally	
 ?think	
 ?that	
 ?our	
 ?future	
 ?and	
 ?past	
 ?selves	
 ?are	
 ?really	
 ?different	
 ?people.	
 ?But	
 ?this	
 ?weighting	
 ?towards	
 ?the	
 ?present	
 ?and	
 ?discounting	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?future	
 ?helps	
 ?explain	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?decision	
 ?making	
 ?processes.	
 ?One	
 ?example	
 ?of	
 ?research	
 ?that	
 ?exposes	
 ?the	
 ?difficulty	
 ?of	
 ?valuing	
 ?one?s	
 ?future	
 ?self	
 ?are	
 ?the	
 ??Oreo	
 ?experiments?	
 ?(Mischel	
 ?&	
 ?Ebbesen,	
 ?1970).	
 ?In	
 ?these	
 ?studies,	
 ?young	
 ?children	
 ?were	
 ?presented	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?choice:	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?small	
 ?treat	
 ?immediately,	
 ?or	
 ?resist	
 ?eating	
 ?the	
 ?treat	
 ?for	
 ?15	
 ?minutes	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?larger,	
 ?better	
 ?treat.	
 ?These	
 ?experiments	
 ?suggested	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?children	
 ?were	
 ?making	
 ?tradeoffs	
 ?between	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?experience	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?present,	
 ?and	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?future.	
 ?The	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?put	
 ?off	
 ?something	
 ?pleasant,	
 ?but	
 ??future	
 ?me?	
 ?would	
 ?receive	
 ?a	
 ?greater	
 ?benefit.	
 ?All	
 ?the	
 ?children	
 ?understood	
 ?on	
 ?an	
 ?intellectual	
 ?level	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?reward	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?better	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?future.	
 ?The	
 ?children	
 ?who	
 ?were	
 ?better	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?hold	
 ?off	
 ?and	
 ?collect	
 ?the	
 ?bigger	
 ?payoff	
 ?later	
 ?employed	
 ?various	
 ?strategies	
 ?to	
 ?guard	
 ?against	
 ?the	
 ?desire	
 ?of	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?to	
 ?receive	
 ?the	
 ?treat	
 ?immediately.	
 ?The	
 ?most	
 ?successful	
 ?strategies	
 ?were	
 ?those	
 ?which	
 ?reduced	
 ?the	
 ?unpleasantness	
 ?experienced	
 ?by	
 ??now	
 ?me,?	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?distracting	
 ?themselves	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?treat	
 ?with	
 ?another	
 ?activity,	
 ?or	
 ?even	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?sleep.	
 ??Brute	
 ?force	
 ?willpower?	
 ?strategies	
 ?which	
 ?focused	
 ?on	
 ?explicitly	
 ?resisting	
 ?the	
 ?temptation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?immediate	
 ?treat	
 ?were	
 ?less	
 ?effective.	
 ?So	
 ?even	
 ?the	
 ?children	
 ?who	
 ?successfully	
 ?got	
 ?the	
 ?better	
 ?benefit	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?future	
 ?selves	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?so	
 ?by	
 ?distracting	
 ?their	
 ?present	
 ?selves.	
 ?	
 ?Kahneman	
 ?(2011)	
 ?notes	
 ?a	
 ?related,	
 ?but	
 ?different,	
 ?time-??based	
 ?difference	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?conception	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?self	
 ?that	
 ?affects	
 ?our	
 ?decision-??making,	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?arrow	
 ?of	
 ?time	
 ?pointing	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?past,	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?remembering	
 ?self?s	
 ?memory	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?experience,	
 ?back	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?itself	
 ?(Figure	
 ?7).	
 ?The	
 ?experiencing	
 ?self	
 ?who	
 ?actually	
 ?had	
 ?that	
 ?experience	
 ?only	
 ?exists	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?present,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?
	
 ? 39	
 ?
remembering	
 ?self	
 ?is	
 ?who	
 ?reflects	
 ?on	
 ?it	
 ?and	
 ?makes	
 ?meaning	
 ?of	
 ?it,	
 ?including	
 ?deciding	
 ?whether	
 ?or	
 ?not	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?experience.	
 ?	
 ?Kahneman	
 ?presents	
 ?evidence	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?end	
 ?up	
 ?valuing	
 ?their	
 ?memory	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?experience	
 ?more	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?itself.	
 ?In	
 ?one	
 ?experiment,	
 ?people	
 ?were	
 ?asked	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?pay	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?wonderful	
 ?vacation,	
 ?if	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?end	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?vacation	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?given	
 ?a	
 ?magic	
 ?potion	
 ?that	
 ?left	
 ?them	
 ?with	
 ?no	
 ?memories	
 ?of	
 ?it.	
 ?Flipping	
 ?the	
 ??no	
 ?memory?	
 ?scenario	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?positive	
 ?experience	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?negative	
 ?one,	
 ?people	
 ?were	
 ?also	
 ?asked	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?feel	
 ?about	
 ?undergoing	
 ?an	
 ?extremely	
 ?painful	
 ?dental	
 ?procedure	
 ?without	
 ?anesthesia,	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?no	
 ?memory	
 ?of	
 ?it	
 ?afterwards.	
 ?In	
 ?both	
 ?cases,	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?decided	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?remembering	
 ?self	
 ?trumped	
 ?the	
 ?experiencing	
 ?self:	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?wouldn?t	
 ?remember	
 ?it,	
 ?then	
 ?there	
 ?was	
 ?no	
 ?benefit	
 ?to	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?positive	
 ?experience,	
 ?and	
 ?no	
 ?reason	
 ?to	
 ?avoid	
 ?a	
 ?negative	
 ?experience.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?other	
 ?experiments,	
 ?Kahneman	
 ?showed	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?effect	
 ?pertains	
 ?even	
 ?when	
 ?moving	
 ?from	
 ?somewhat	
 ?unrealistic	
 ?thought	
 ?experiments	
 ?to	
 ?real	
 ?scenarios	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?colonoscopies	
 ?or	
 ?keeping	
 ?their	
 ?hands	
 ?in	
 ?ice	
 ?water	
 ?for	
 ?several	
 ?minutes.	
 ?By	
 ?exploiting	
 ?memory	
 ?effects	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?peak-??end	
 ?rule	
 ?(which	
 ?says	
 ?the	
 ?quality	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?peak	
 ?and	
 ?end	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?experience	
 ?determine	
 ?the	
 ?judgment	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?entire	
 ?experience?s	
 ?quality),	
 ?he	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?went	
 ?through	
 ?two	
 ?versions	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?unpleasant	
 ?experience	
 ?and	
 ?are	
 ?asked	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?prefer	
 ?to	
 ?repeat,	
 ?will	
 ?prefer	
 ?experiences	
 ?they	
 ?remembered	
 ?as	
 ?better,	
 ?even	
 ?though	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?objectively	
 ?worse	
 ?to	
 ?experience	
 ?and	
 ?were	
 ?reported	
 ?as	
 ?such	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?moment.	
 ?	
 ?Comparing	
 ?these	
 ?two	
 ?disjoints	
 ?in	
 ?identity	
 ?in	
 ?time	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?relation	
 ?to	
 ?decision-??making	
 ?and	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?(Figure	
 ?7),	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?see	
 ?the	
 ?difficulty:	
 ?
? The	
 ?decision	
 ?about	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?is	
 ?made	
 ?by	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?on	
 ?behalf	
 ?of	
 ??future	
 ?me,?	
 ?but	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?hard	
 ?time	
 ?valuing	
 ??future	
 ?me?s?	
 ?experience	
 ?over	
 ?its	
 ?own	
 ?experience.	
 ?
? Our	
 ?ultimate	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?depends	
 ?on	
 ?how	
 ?well	
 ?that	
 ?future	
 ?me	
 ?reflects	
 ?back	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?once	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?over	
 ?and	
 ?future	
 ?me	
 ?becomes	
 ?the	
 ?remembering	
 ?self.	
 ?It?s	
 ?largely	
 ?irrelevant	
 ?what	
 ?now	
 ?me	
 ??	
 ?the	
 ?experiencing	
 ?self	
 ??	
 ?thought	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?time.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?7.	
 ??Now	
 ?me?	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?hard	
 ?time	
 ?considering	
 ??future	
 ?me?	
 ?when	
 ?making	
 ?decisions	
 ?(Mischel	
 ?&	
 ?Ebbesen,	
 ?1970).	
 ?
But	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ??remembering	
 ?self?s?	
 ?opinion	
 ?when	
 ?looking	
 ?back	
 ?on	
 ?experiences	
 ?that	
 ?counts	
 ?most	
 ?in	
 ?evaluating	
 ?
decisions	
 ?and	
 ?answering	
 ?questions	
 ?like	
 ??overall,	
 ?how	
 ?happy	
 ?are	
 ?you	
 ?with	
 ?your	
 ?life??	
 ?(Kahneman,	
 ?2011).	
 ?Now,	
 ?Kahneman	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?arguing	
 ?that	
 ?our	
 ?experience	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?moment	
 ?is	
 ?unimportant.	
 ?In	
 ?fact,	
 ?he	
 ?points	
 ?out	
 ?how	
 ?odd	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?spend	
 ?only	
 ?a	
 ?small	
 ?fraction	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?time	
 ?thinking	
 ?back	
 ?on	
 ?memories,	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?duration	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?experiences	
 ?that	
 ?formed	
 ?those	
 ?memories,	
 ?yet	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?our	
 ?memories	
 ?which	
 ?we	
 ?turn	
 ?to	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?assess	
 ?our	
 ?overall	
 ?happiness.	
 ?
Past Present Future
Remembering selfExperiencing self
Now me Future me
	
 ? 40	
 ?
Instead,	
 ?he	
 ?is	
 ?pointing	
 ?out	
 ?that	
 ?these	
 ?two	
 ?selves	
 ?have	
 ?very	
 ?different	
 ?ways	
 ?of	
 ?evaluating	
 ?happiness,	
 ?and	
 ?while	
 ?we	
 ?spend	
 ?most	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?conscious	
 ?time	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?experiencing	
 ?self,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?remembering	
 ?self	
 ?we	
 ?call	
 ?upon	
 ?when	
 ?making	
 ?decisions	
 ?and	
 ?reflecting.	
 ?One	
 ?conclusion	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?careful	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?which	
 ?self	
 ?is	
 ?talking	
 ?when	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?interpreting	
 ?people?s	
 ?reports	
 ?of	
 ?happiness	
 ?and	
 ?satisfaction.	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?helps	
 ?to	
 ?explain	
 ?why	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?decisions	
 ?are	
 ?made	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?cannot	
 ?articulate.	
 ?Even	
 ?better,	
 ?researchers	
 ?have	
 ?found	
 ?insights	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?that	
 ?affect	
 ?our	
 ?decision-??making.	
 ?The	
 ?next	
 ?3	
 ?subsections	
 ?will	
 ?examine	
 ?several	
 ?of	
 ?them	
 ?which	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?applicable	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?
4.1.2 Satisficing	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ??expected	
 ?utility	
 ?theory?	
 ?of	
 ?classic	
 ?economics	
 ?posited	
 ?people	
 ?make	
 ?decisions	
 ?rationally,	
 ?by	
 ?considering	
 ?all	
 ?options	
 ?and	
 ?selecting	
 ?the	
 ?one	
 ?that	
 ?will	
 ?give	
 ?the	
 ?optimal	
 ?outcome.	
 ?But	
 ?Simon	
 ?(1956)	
 ?observed	
 ?that	
 ?we	
 ?often	
 ?use	
 ?a	
 ?strategy	
 ?of	
 ?satisficing1	
 ?(quickly	
 ?choosing	
 ?something	
 ?good	
 ?enough),	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?optimizing	
 ?(evaluating	
 ?all	
 ?possible	
 ?choices	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?the	
 ?best	
 ?one).	
 ?	
 ?Klein	
 ?(1998)	
 ?studied	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?make	
 ?decisions	
 ?about	
 ?actions	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?circumstances,	
 ?especially	
 ?what	
 ?he	
 ?called	
 ??naturalistic	
 ?decision	
 ?making.?	
 ?This	
 ?was	
 ?in	
 ?contrast	
 ?to	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?highly	
 ?artificial	
 ?decision	
 ?scenarios	
 ?that	
 ?many	
 ?previous	
 ?studies	
 ?had	
 ?conducted,	
 ?which	
 ?he	
 ?criticized	
 ?as	
 ?forcing	
 ?people	
 ?into	
 ?making	
 ?rational	
 ?comparisons	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?limited	
 ?amount	
 ?of	
 ?data	
 ?presented	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?collection	
 ?of	
 ?explicit	
 ?facts.	
 ?He	
 ?was	
 ?concerned	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?decision	
 ?process	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?these	
 ?scenarios	
 ?was	
 ?qualitatively	
 ?different	
 ?from	
 ?how	
 ?we	
 ?make	
 ?decisions	
 ?in	
 ?situations	
 ?where	
 ?information	
 ?is	
 ?implicit,	
 ?incomplete,	
 ?and	
 ?ambiguous,	
 ?goals	
 ?are	
 ?unclear,	
 ?and	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?no	
 ?obvious	
 ?process	
 ?that	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?followed.	
 ?Klein	
 ?also	
 ?found	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?satisficing	
 ?strategy,	
 ?where	
 ?people	
 ?quickly	
 ?selected	
 ?a	
 ?possible	
 ?answer,	
 ?tested	
 ?it	
 ?briefly	
 ??	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?by	
 ?imagining	
 ?proceeding	
 ?with	
 ?it,	
 ?and	
 ?perhaps	
 ?comparing	
 ?against	
 ?the	
 ?imagined	
 ?outcome	
 ?of	
 ?one	
 ?other	
 ?option	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?proceeded.	
 ?	
 ?Schwartz	
 ?(2004)	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?tend	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?happier	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?outcomes	
 ?of	
 ?satisficed	
 ?decisions.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?because	
 ?optimized	
 ?decisions	
 ?require	
 ?more	
 ?effort.	
 ?So	
 ?the	
 ?results	
 ?from	
 ?decisions	
 ?where	
 ?an	
 ?optimization	
 ?strategy	
 ?was	
 ?used	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?better	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?justify	
 ?the	
 ?additional	
 ?effort,	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?satisficing	
 ?strategy	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?they	
 ?usually	
 ?are	
 ?not,	
 ?because	
 ?our	
 ?satisficing	
 ?decision-??making	
 ?is	
 ?usually	
 ?quite	
 ?accurate.	
 ?So	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?see	
 ?one	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?stashing	
 ?can	
 ?increase	
 ?our	
 ?satisfaction:	
 ?by	
 ?reducing	
 ?decision-??making	
 ?effort.	
 ?	
 ?
4.1.3 Availability	
 ?&	
 ?priming	
 ?If	
 ?people	
 ?only	
 ?consider	
 ?a	
 ?few	
 ?options	
 ?when	
 ?making	
 ?most	
 ?decisions,	
 ?why	
 ?are	
 ?some	
 ?options	
 ?considered	
 ?before	
 ?others?	
 ?To	
 ?answer	
 ?this,	
 ?I	
 ?examine	
 ?two	
 ?related	
 ?cognitive	
 ?mechanisms:	
 ?availability	
 ?and	
 ?priming.	
 ?	
 ?Tversky	
 ?and	
 ?Kahneman	
 ?(Kahneman,	
 ?Slovic,	
 ?&	
 ?Tversky,	
 ?1982;	
 ?Tversky	
 ?&	
 ?Kahneman,	
 ?1974)	
 ?proposed	
 ?the	
 ?availability	
 ?heuristic	
 ?to	
 ?explain	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?make	
 ?certain	
 ?kinds	
 ?of	
 ?decisions.	
 ?In	
 ?short,	
 ?information	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?relatively	
 ?easy	
 ?to	
 ?recall	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?likely	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?recalled.	
 ?Encountering	
 ?that	
 ?information	
 ?more	
 ?frequently	
 ?increases	
 ?its	
 ?availability.	
 ?So	
 ?when	
 ?we	
 ?can	
 ?think	
 ?of	
 ?something	
 ?more	
 ?easily,	
 ?we	
 ?think	
 ?its	
 ?probability	
 ?of	
 ?occurring	
 ?is	
 ?higher.	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?if	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?1	
 ?The	
 ?word	
 ?satisfice	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?combination	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?words	
 ??satisfy?	
 ?and	
 ??suffice.?	
 ?
	
 ? 41	
 ?
asked	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?an	
 ?option,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?more	
 ?likely	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?the	
 ?one	
 ?that	
 ?comes	
 ?to	
 ?mind	
 ?more	
 ?easily;	
 ?the	
 ?ease	
 ?of	
 ?recall	
 ?is	
 ?interpreted	
 ?as	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?option	
 ?more	
 ?appealing.	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?closely	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?mechanism	
 ?of	
 ?priming:	
 ?making	
 ?certain	
 ?options	
 ?more	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?consideration	
 ?through	
 ?visibility	
 ?or	
 ?other	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?awareness	
 ?(Soon,	
 ?Brass,	
 ?Heinze,	
 ?&	
 ?Haynes,	
 ?2008).	
 ?This	
 ?suggests	
 ?that	
 ?stashes	
 ?influence	
 ?our	
 ?consumption	
 ?not	
 ?just	
 ?through	
 ?ease	
 ?of	
 ?access,	
 ?but	
 ?also	
 ?by	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?options	
 ?more	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?us	
 ?through	
 ?priming.	
 ?	
 ?
4.1.4 The	
 ?path	
 ?of	
 ?least	
 ?resistance	
 ?Thaler	
 ?&	
 ?Sunstein	
 ?(2008)	
 ?suggest	
 ?adopting	
 ?a	
 ?choice	
 ?architecture	
 ??	
 ?a	
 ?strategy	
 ?of	
 ?framing	
 ?decisions	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?easier	
 ?to	
 ?select	
 ?the	
 ?outcome	
 ?that	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?better	
 ?for	
 ?us	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?run.	
 ?They	
 ?suggest	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?effective	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?the	
 ?tendency	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?choices	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?present	
 ?desires	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?future	
 ?outcomes.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?example	
 ?is	
 ?in	
 ?leveraging	
 ?the	
 ?tendency	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?accept	
 ?default	
 ?options.	
 ?Making	
 ?desirable	
 ?behavior	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?making	
 ?contributions	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?retirement	
 ?plan	
 ?through	
 ?a	
 ?paycheck	
 ?deduction)	
 ?the	
 ?default	
 ?choice,	
 ?and	
 ?requiring	
 ?an	
 ?explicit	
 ?action	
 ?to	
 ?opt-??out,	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?successful	
 ?strategy	
 ?at	
 ?improving	
 ?outcomes.	
 ?This	
 ?approach	
 ?was	
 ?also	
 ?demonstrated	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?effective	
 ?in	
 ?supporting	
 ?healthier	
 ?meal	
 ?choices.	
 ?(Other	
 ?examples	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?choice	
 ?architecture	
 ?are	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?strategies	
 ?of	
 ?tunneling	
 ?and	
 ?reducing,	
 ?see	
 ?Appendix	
 ?B:	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?Technology	
 ?Strategies.)	
 ?	
 ?
4.2 A	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?Given	
 ?the	
 ?importance	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?subjects,	
 ?I	
 ?derived	
 ?a	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?behavior	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?better	
 ?understand	
 ?where	
 ?tools	
 ?could	
 ?better	
 ?support	
 ?healthy	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?(Figure	
 ?8).	
 ?This	
 ?model	
 ?incorporates	
 ?many	
 ?insights	
 ?about	
 ?gaps	
 ?in	
 ?tool	
 ?support	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?
	
 ? 42	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ? 8.	
 ? Along	
 ? with	
 ? changing	
 ? contextual	
 ? factors	
 ? and	
 ? stable	
 ? personal	
 ? concerns,	
 ? the	
 ? visibility	
 ? of	
 ? our	
 ? stashes	
 ?
influences	
 ? our	
 ? media	
 ? consumption.	
 ? In	
 ? this	
 ? diagram,	
 ? the	
 ? thin	
 ? black	
 ? lines	
 ? indicate	
 ? activity	
 ? flow;	
 ? wide	
 ? grey	
 ? lines	
 ?
indicate	
 ?influences.	
 ?Various	
 ?qualities	
 ?are	
 ?indicated	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?labels	
 ?hanging	
 ?off	
 ?the	
 ?stash;	
 ?each	
 ?quality	
 ?supports	
 ?one	
 ?or	
 ?
more	
 ?additional	
 ?function	
 ?performed	
 ?by	
 ?stashes.	
 ?One	
 ?entry	
 ?point	
 ?in	
 ?our	
 ?model	
 ?is	
 ?when	
 ?people	
 ?form	
 ?an	
 ?intention	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?media.	
 ?At	
 ?this	
 ?point,	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?choice	
 ?to	
 ?either	
 ?search	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?in	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?stashes,	
 ?or	
 ?search	
 ?the	
 ?universe	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?While	
 ?searching,	
 ?they	
 ?may	
 ?find	
 ?something	
 ?and	
 ?consume	
 ?it,	
 ?add	
 ?more	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?stashes,	
 ?or	
 ?stop	
 ?looking.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?choice	
 ?between	
 ?finding	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?wants	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?versus	
 ?stashing	
 ?something	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ??future	
 ?me.?	
 ?In	
 ?addition,	
 ?a	
 ?person	
 ?may	
 ?spend	
 ?some	
 ?time	
 ?making	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?stashes,	
 ?organizing	
 ?them	
 ?and	
 ?weeding	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?no	
 ?longer	
 ?are	
 ?wanted,	
 ?and	
 ?so	
 ?on.	
 ?	
 ?Another	
 ?entry	
 ?point	
 ?is	
 ?prompted	
 ?by	
 ?simply	
 ?paying	
 ?some	
 ?amount	
 ?of	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?stash.	
 ?This	
 ?might	
 ?lead	
 ?to	
 ?nothing	
 ?more	
 ?than	
 ?low-??level	
 ?priming	
 ?through	
 ?awareness,	
 ?but	
 ?sometimes	
 ?people	
 ?pay	
 ?deeper	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?stashes	
 ?and	
 ?become	
 ?engaged	
 ?in	
 ?activities	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?organizing,	
 ?sense-??making,	
 ?and	
 ?weeding	
 ?(removing	
 ?books,	
 ?for	
 ?example	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?no	
 ?longer	
 ?seem	
 ?appealing,	
 ?or	
 ?are	
 ?overdue	
 ?library	
 ?books).	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?sections	
 ?I	
 ?examine	
 ?how	
 ?stashes	
 ?are	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?several	
 ?topics	
 ?discussed	
 ?previously:	
 ?context,	
 ?priming,	
 ?and	
 ?identity	
 ?claims.	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?refer	
 ?back	
 ?to	
 ?several	
 ?media	
 ?problems	
 ?identified	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?3,	
 ?and	
 ?show	
 ?how	
 ?stashing	
 ?is	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?them.	
 ?
Organizability
Capacity
Visibility
Priming
Desire for 
Media
Search 
Universe of 
Media
Satisfice
Availability
Stable Personal Concerns: 
Tastes, Preferences, Goals, Roles
Fluid Personal Context & 
Appetites: Mood, Energy Level, 
Setting, Time, Priorities
Like it?
Consume
Later 
Now
Find 
Candidate
Self
Social
Yes
No
Select Item 
from Stash
Stash
Sense-
making
Consuming 
& Weeding
Identity-
making
	
 ? 43	
 ?
4.2.1 Context	
 ?The	
 ?process	
 ?of	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?media	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?is	
 ?highly	
 ?influenced	
 ?by	
 ?context,	
 ?as	
 ?shown	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?8:	
 ?1. Fluid	
 ?personal	
 ?context,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?appetite,	
 ?mood,	
 ?setting,	
 ?and	
 ?time	
 ?of	
 ?day.	
 ?These	
 ?change	
 ?frequently.	
 ?	
 ?2. Stable	
 ?personal	
 ?concerns	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?long-??term	
 ?goals,	
 ?roles,	
 ?personality,	
 ?and	
 ?tastes.	
 ?These	
 ?change	
 ?infrequently.	
 ?	
 ?3. Pre-??existing	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?	
 ?Note	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?personal	
 ?concerns	
 ?and	
 ?context	
 ?are	
 ?largely	
 ?invisible	
 ?to	
 ?most	
 ?stashing	
 ?systems.	
 ?What	
 ?would	
 ?it	
 ?mean	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?stashing	
 ?system	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?could	
 ?know	
 ?your	
 ?mood,	
 ?who	
 ?is	
 ?with	
 ?you,	
 ?and	
 ?so	
 ?on?	
 ?Clearly,	
 ?knowing	
 ?more	
 ?about	
 ?these	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?context	
 ?would	
 ?help	
 ?provide	
 ?more	
 ?refined	
 ?choices.	
 ?Some	
 ?different	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?filtering	
 ?which	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?helpful	
 ?to	
 ?meet	
 ?various	
 ?appetites	
 ?is	
 ?expanded	
 ?on	
 ?in	
 ?Table	
 ?6.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?area	
 ?for	
 ?future	
 ?research.	
 ?	
 ?
Missing	
 ?capability	
 ? Discussion	
 ?
Filtering	
 ?for	
 ?context	
 ? Several	
 ?different	
 ?kinds	
 ?of	
 ?context	
 ?affect	
 ?what	
 ?choices	
 ?are	
 ?relevant:	
 ?-?? time	
 ?(of	
 ?day,	
 ?day	
 ?of	
 ?week,	
 ?season)	
 ?-?? social	
 ??	
 ?who	
 ?is	
 ?present	
 ?-?? mood	
 ?
Filtering	
 ?for	
 ?experience	
 ? Sometimes	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?looking	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?type	
 ?of	
 ?experience,	
 ?not	
 ?a	
 ?particular	
 ?
type	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?A	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?laugh	
 ?might	
 ?be	
 ?met	
 ?equally	
 ?well	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?right	
 ?
funny	
 ?video	
 ?game,	
 ?standup	
 ?comedy	
 ?show,	
 ?cartoon,	
 ?or	
 ?movie.	
 ?
Filtering	
 ?for	
 ?category	
 ?or	
 ?
genre	
 ?
Sometimes	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?looking	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?category	
 ?of	
 ?item,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?
science	
 ?fiction	
 ?book	
 ?to	
 ?read.	
 ?	
 ?
Table	
 ?6.	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?different	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?stashes	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?filtered	
 ?to	
 ?dynamically	
 ?weed	
 ?out	
 ?choices	
 ?not	
 ?applicable	
 ?to	
 ?
the	
 ?media	
 ?user?s	
 ?current	
 ?context.	
 ?One	
 ?opportunity	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?largely	
 ?missing	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?current	
 ?stashing	
 ?systems	
 ?for	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?cross-??link	
 ?stashes	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?more	
 ?coherent	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?manage	
 ?and	
 ?search	
 ?the	
 ?aggregate	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?stashes,	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?forced	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?this	
 ?within	
 ?each	
 ?stash	
 ?individually.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?another	
 ?area	
 ?for	
 ?future	
 ?research.	
 ?
4.2.2 Priming	
 ?Stashes	
 ??prime?	
 ?our	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices.	
 ?A	
 ?person	
 ?stashes	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?believe	
 ?will	
 ?satisfy	
 ?their	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?future.	
 ?It	
 ?appears	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?more	
 ?visible	
 ?a	
 ?stash	
 ?is,	
 ?the	
 ?more	
 ?that	
 ?stash	
 ?primes	
 ?a	
 ?person?s	
 ?choice	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?consume;	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?using	
 ?visibility	
 ?to	
 ?moderate	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?effective.	
 ?As	
 ?shown	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?8,	
 ?the	
 ?visibility	
 ?leads	
 ?to	
 ?priming,	
 ?which	
 ?increases	
 ?the	
 ?availability	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?primed	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?being	
 ?recalled.	
 ?Following	
 ?the	
 ?availability	
 ?heuristic,	
 ?these	
 ?more-??easily	
 ?recalled	
 ?items	
 ?are	
 ?selected	
 ?more	
 ?often.	
 ?And	
 ?following	
 ?what	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?learned	
 ?about	
 ?satisficing,	
 ?people?s	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?with	
 ?decisions	
 ?that	
 ?required	
 ?less	
 ?effort	
 ?is	
 ?higher,	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?pleasure	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?outcome	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?pay	
 ?off	
 ?less	
 ?decision	
 ?effort	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?turn	
 ?a	
 ?figurative	
 ?profit.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 44	
 ?
4.2.3 Identity	
 ?claims	
 ?We	
 ?do	
 ?more	
 ?with	
 ?our	
 ?stashes	
 ?than	
 ?add	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?and	
 ?seek	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?from	
 ?them.	
 ?We	
 ?also	
 ?use	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?identity	
 ?claims	
 ??	
 ?telling	
 ?the	
 ?story	
 ?of	
 ?who	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?and	
 ?who	
 ?we	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?be,	
 ?to	
 ?ourselves	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?as	
 ?to	
 ?others	
 ?(MacAdams,	
 ?1997).	
 ?And	
 ?when	
 ?we	
 ?encounter	
 ?others?	
 ?media	
 ?collections,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?drawn	
 ?to	
 ??snoop?	
 ?because	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?rich	
 ?insights	
 ?such	
 ?examination	
 ?provides	
 ?(Gosling,	
 ?2008).	
 ?Once	
 ?again,	
 ?it	
 ?appears	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?ability	
 ?of	
 ?stashes	
 ?to	
 ?communicate	
 ?identity	
 ?to	
 ?ourselves	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?others	
 ?depends	
 ?on	
 ?visibility.	
 ?	
 ?
4.2.4 Capacity	
 ?and	
 ?Weeding	
 ?People	
 ?are	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?many	
 ?things	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?future,	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?trouble	
 ?actually	
 ?getting	
 ?around	
 ?to	
 ?consuming	
 ?them:	
 ?
?I	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?movies	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?see.	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?never	
 ?got	
 ?to	
 ?any	
 ?of	
 ?them.?	
 ??	
 ?S6	
 ?
?I	
 ?might	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?list	
 ?going	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read,	
 ?but	
 ?then	
 ?getting	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?bookstore	
 ?or	
 ?a	
 ?
library	
 ?becomes	
 ?a	
 ?challenge	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?end	
 ?up	
 ?not	
 ?getting	
 ?a	
 ?book.	
 ?But	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?an	
 ?ongoing	
 ?list	
 ?
in	
 ?my	
 ?head	
 ?or	
 ?written	
 ?down,	
 ?then	
 ?I	
 ?just	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?phone	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?it!	
 ?It?s	
 ?done!	
 ?Boom!	
 ?
The	
 ?problem	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?sorting	
 ?through	
 ?[the	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read]	
 ?and	
 ?figuring	
 ?out	
 ?
what	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?[now],	
 ?than	
 ?accessing	
 ?them.?	
 ??	
 ?S8	
 ?Our	
 ?stashes	
 ?fill	
 ?with	
 ?things	
 ?we	
 ?aren?t	
 ?consuming.	
 ?We	
 ?might	
 ?overestimate	
 ?the	
 ?appetite	
 ?of	
 ??future	
 ?me?	
 ?for	
 ?consuming	
 ?those	
 ?items.	
 ?We	
 ?might	
 ?overestimate	
 ?the	
 ?frequency	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?particular	
 ??future	
 ?me?	
 ?context.	
 ?(We	
 ?may	
 ?love	
 ?watching	
 ?documentaries,	
 ?so	
 ?we	
 ?stash	
 ?many	
 ?documentaries	
 ?we?d	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?watch,	
 ?but	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?only	
 ?time	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?watching	
 ?them	
 ?is	
 ?late	
 ?at	
 ?night	
 ?when	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?tired,	
 ?and	
 ?documentaries	
 ?make	
 ?us	
 ?fall	
 ?asleep	
 ?in	
 ?that	
 ?context,	
 ?then	
 ?we	
 ?won?t	
 ?make	
 ?much	
 ?progress	
 ?in	
 ?viewing	
 ?them.)	
 ?This	
 ?results	
 ?in:	
 ?
? Identity	
 ?conflict	
 ?between	
 ?presented	
 ?media	
 ?and	
 ?self-??image:	
 ?I	
 ?say	
 ?I	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?these	
 ?things,	
 ?but	
 ?I	
 ?am	
 ?not	
 ?consuming	
 ?them.	
 ?
? Difficulty	
 ?finding	
 ?the	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?stash	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?context	
 ?among	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?don?t	
 ?fit.	
 ?
? Discouragement.	
 ?Several	
 ?subjects	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?when	
 ?their	
 ?book	
 ?stashes	
 ?are	
 ?full	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?wrong	
 ?things,	
 ?it	
 ?discourages	
 ?all	
 ?reading.	
 ?They	
 ?think,	
 ??I	
 ?shouldn?t	
 ?get	
 ?any	
 ?more	
 ?books,	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?too	
 ?many	
 ?waiting	
 ?for	
 ?me	
 ?to	
 ?read?	
 ?even	
 ?though	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?filling	
 ?the	
 ?stash	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?ones	
 ?that	
 ?fit	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?contextual	
 ?appetites.	
 ?The	
 ?result	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?decrease	
 ?their	
 ?reading,	
 ?tending	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?other	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?might	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read.	
 ?This	
 ?problem	
 ?of	
 ?full	
 ?stashes	
 ?has	
 ?generated	
 ?a	
 ?neologism.	
 ?Tsundoku	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?Japanese	
 ?slang	
 ?word	
 ?defined	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?accumulation	
 ?of	
 ?purchased	
 ?books	
 ?which	
 ?haven?t	
 ?yet	
 ?been	
 ?(and	
 ?might	
 ?not	
 ?ever	
 ?be)	
 ?read.	
 ?According	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?Wiktionary	
 ?entry	
 ?(2013)	
 ?this	
 ?word	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?pun	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?words	
 ?tsundeoku	
 ?(to	
 ?leave	
 ?piled	
 ?up)	
 ?and	
 ?doku	
 ?(to	
 ?read).	
 ?In	
 ?both	
 ?Japan	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?US,	
 ?people	
 ?report	
 ?having	
 ?negative	
 ?feelings	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?guilt,	
 ?embarrassment	
 ?or	
 ?shame	
 ?about	
 ?these	
 ?piles	
 ?of	
 ?unread	
 ?books	
 ?that	
 ?grow	
 ?little	
 ?by	
 ?little.	
 ?	
 ?Subjects	
 ?discussed	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?presence	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ?important	
 ?trigger	
 ?to	
 ?weed	
 ?their	
 ?collections	
 ?(see	
 ?also	
 ?Section	
 ?5.1.3):	
 ?
?I	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?pile	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?-??	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?got	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?point	
 ?of	
 ??Ok,	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?ridiculous,	
 ?I?ve	
 ?got	
 ?to	
 ?
get	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?some	
 ?stuff.?	
 ?I?ll	
 ?get	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?things	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?already	
 ?read	
 ?them	
 ?or	
 ?if	
 ?I?m	
 ?not	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?
	
 ? 45	
 ?
read	
 ?them.	
 ?And	
 ?I	
 ?got	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?whole	
 ?bunch	
 ?of	
 ?stuff	
 ?where	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?just	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?like,	
 ?ok:	
 ?look	
 ?
at	
 ?the	
 ?back	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?-??	
 ?are	
 ?you	
 ?really	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?it??	
 ??	
 ?S9	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ??We	
 ?need	
 ?a	
 ?bookshelf.	
 ?They?re	
 ?taking	
 ?over	
 ?every	
 ?work	
 ?surface	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?house	
 ?and	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?
to	
 ?do	
 ?something	
 ?about	
 ?that.?	
 ??	
 ?S10	
 ?
?I?m	
 ?feeling	
 ?overwhelmed	
 ?by	
 ?stuff	
 ??not	
 ?just	
 ?books,	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?kids	
 ?toys,	
 ?etc.	
 ?That	
 ?drives	
 ?use	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?library,	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?don?t	
 ?stay	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?house.?	
 ??S6	
 ?Given	
 ?the	
 ?virtually	
 ?unlimited	
 ?capacity	
 ?of	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?plethora	
 ?of	
 ?disconnected	
 ?stashes,	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?issues	
 ?are	
 ?more	
 ?problematic	
 ?for	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?than	
 ?physical	
 ?stashes,	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?can	
 ?affect	
 ?all	
 ?sorts	
 ?of	
 ?stashes.	
 ?	
 ?Removing	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?stash	
 ?is	
 ?usually	
 ?not	
 ?available	
 ?from	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?primary	
 ?interface	
 ?views;	
 ?typically,	
 ?one	
 ?must	
 ?go	
 ?down	
 ?into	
 ?a	
 ?separate	
 ?item	
 ?record	
 ?to	
 ?remove	
 ?it	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?stash.	
 ?Promoting	
 ?the	
 ?interface	
 ?for	
 ?removing	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?put	
 ?it	
 ?closer	
 ?to	
 ?parity	
 ?with	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices	
 ??	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?putting	
 ?a	
 ??remove?	
 ?command	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?level	
 ?as	
 ??play?	
 ??	
 ?might	
 ?increase	
 ?consumption	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?stash	
 ?overall	
 ?by	
 ?reducing	
 ?the	
 ?effort	
 ?needed	
 ?to	
 ?de-??clutter	
 ?the	
 ?stash.	
 ?By	
 ?listening	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects?	
 ?discussions	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?and	
 ?hassles,	
 ?and	
 ?considering	
 ?how	
 ?stashing	
 ?could	
 ?play	
 ?a	
 ?role	
 ?in	
 ?addressing	
 ?them,	
 ?I	
 ?identified	
 ?numerous	
 ?gaps	
 ?in	
 ?existing	
 ?media	
 ?stashing	
 ?capabilities.	
 ?A	
 ?stash	
 ?which	
 ?provided	
 ?these	
 ?capabilities	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?an	
 ?effective	
 ?tool	
 ?for	
 ?managing	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?find	
 ?valuable	
 ?because	
 ?it	
 ?helps	
 ?solve	
 ?their	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
Missing	
 ?capability	
 ? Discussion	
 ?
Weeding	
 ?is	
 ?harder	
 ?than	
 ?
consuming	
 ?
Removing	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?stash	
 ?is	
 ?usually	
 ?not	
 ?available	
 ?from	
 ?main	
 ?stash	
 ?
views.	
 ?Promoting	
 ?the	
 ?interface	
 ?for	
 ?removing	
 ?items	
 ?to	
 ?put	
 ?it	
 ?closer	
 ?to	
 ?parity	
 ?
with	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices	
 ?might	
 ?increase	
 ?consumption	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?stash	
 ?
overall	
 ?by	
 ?de-??cluttering	
 ?the	
 ?stash,	
 ?as	
 ?library	
 ?research	
 ?has	
 ?shown.	
 ?
Prompt	
 ?to	
 ?weed	
 ?items	
 ? With	
 ?food,	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?various	
 ?cues	
 ?that	
 ?items	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?candidates	
 ?for	
 ?
weeding,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?visual	
 ?appearance,	
 ?smell,	
 ?physical	
 ?position	
 ?(pushed	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?
back	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?cupboard	
 ?or	
 ?refrigerator)	
 ?or	
 ?expiration	
 ?date	
 ?printed	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?
package.	
 ?These	
 ?affordances	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?available	
 ?with	
 ?digital	
 ?media.	
 ?	
 ?
Limited	
 ?capacity	
 ?of	
 ?stashes	
 ? When	
 ?stashes	
 ?are	
 ?at	
 ?capacity,	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?filled	
 ?with	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?meet	
 ?
current	
 ?appetites,	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?discourage	
 ?acquiring	
 ?more	
 ?books.	
 ??I	
 ?can?t	
 ?buy	
 ?any	
 ?
more	
 ?books	
 ?right	
 ?now,	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?too	
 ?many	
 ?unread	
 ?books	
 ?waiting	
 ?for	
 ?me.?	
 ?
Table	
 ?7.	
 ?Stashes	
 ?for	
 ?digital	
 ?items	
 ?are	
 ?lacking	
 ?in	
 ?several	
 ?qualities	
 ?that	
 ?support	
 ?weeding.	
 ?Because	
 ?a	
 ?well-??weeded	
 ?
collection	
 ?gets	
 ?more	
 ?consumption	
 ?than	
 ?one	
 ?with	
 ?too	
 ?many	
 ?irrelevant	
 ?choices,	
 ?this	
 ?could	
 ?make	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?less	
 ?
effective	
 ?in	
 ?promoting	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?stashed	
 ?items.	
 ?
4.3 Conclusion	
 ?I	
 ?started	
 ?by	
 ?identifying	
 ?the	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?source	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?food.	
 ?I	
 ?probed	
 ?further	
 ?into	
 ?how	
 ?stashes	
 ?are	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?food,	
 ?including	
 ?identifying	
 ?strategies,	
 ?needs,	
 ?values,	
 ?and	
 ?affordances.	
 ?Then,	
 ?I	
 ?looked	
 ?for	
 ?parallels	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?stashes	
 ?missing	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?target	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section,	
 ?I	
 ?begin	
 ?designing	
 ?a	
 ?stashing	
 ?solution.	
 ?
	
 ? 46	
 ?
5 Design	
 ?Research:	
 ?Digital	
 ?To-??Be-??Read	
 ?Pile	
 ?Prototyping	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?previous	
 ?sections	
 ?have	
 ?enumerated	
 ?rich	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?target	
 ?domain	
 ?and	
 ?identified	
 ?several	
 ?potential	
 ?areas	
 ?of	
 ?investigation.	
 ?In	
 ?this	
 ?section,	
 ?I	
 ?investigate	
 ?one	
 ?specific	
 ?area:	
 ?a	
 ?stash	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ??	
 ?a	
 ?digital	
 ?To-??Be-??Read	
 ?pile	
 ?(TBR)	
 ??	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?reading.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?key	
 ?research	
 ?question	
 ?I	
 ?address	
 ?here	
 ?is:	
 ?	
 ?
? What	
 ?if	
 ?our	
 ?unread	
 ?ebooks	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?more	
 ?visible	
 ?presence,	
 ?like	
 ?a	
 ?bowl	
 ?of	
 ?fruit	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?kitchen	
 ?table,	
 ?or	
 ?a	
 ?stack	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?on	
 ?our	
 ?bedside	
 ?table?	
 ?How	
 ?might	
 ?such	
 ?an	
 ?ambient	
 ?display	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?stash	
 ?change	
 ?how	
 ?we	
 ?manage	
 ?our	
 ?information	
 ?diets?	
 ?Subsidiary	
 ?research	
 ?questions	
 ?include:	
 ?
? How	
 ?should	
 ?an	
 ?ebook	
 ?TBR	
 ?make	
 ?its	
 ?contents	
 ?visible?	
 ?
? How	
 ?will	
 ?people	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?populate	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?with	
 ?books?	
 ?
? How	
 ?can	
 ?we	
 ?connect	
 ?multiple	
 ?existing	
 ?ebook	
 ?stashes	
 ?into	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?TBR?	
 ?
? Could	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?work	
 ?to	
 ?give	
 ?books	
 ?a	
 ?place	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?centers,	
 ?alongside	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?already	
 ?present	
 ?there?	
 ?I	
 ?selected	
 ?ebooks	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?information	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?interviews.	
 ?Among	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects,	
 ?books	
 ?were	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?popular	
 ?form	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?Reading	
 ?more	
 ?	
 ?books	
 ?was	
 ?also	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?change	
 ?most	
 ?frequently	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?subjects.	
 ?	
 ?Media	
 ?centers	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?portal	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?vast	
 ?world	
 ?of	
 ?many	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?entertainment,	
 ?from	
 ?television	
 ?and	
 ?movies	
 ?to	
 ?music,	
 ?videogames,	
 ?and	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ??	
 ?but	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?no	
 ?place	
 ?for	
 ?books	
 ?on	
 ?media	
 ?centers.	
 ?	
 ?Books	
 ?are	
 ?now	
 ?faced	
 ?with	
 ?competition	
 ?for	
 ?our	
 ?attention	
 ?from	
 ?new	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?more	
 ?compelling	
 ?and	
 ?attractive	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?hedonistic	
 ?pleasures	
 ?of	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?to	
 ?select,	
 ?yet	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?provide	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?term	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?(?nutritional	
 ?value?	
 ?or	
 ?eudaimonic	
 ?happiness)	
 ?that	
 ?reading	
 ?books	
 ?does,	
 ?so	
 ?the	
 ??remembering	
 ?self?	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?satisfied	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?because	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?remembering	
 ?self	
 ?who	
 ?reflects	
 ?on	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?determines	
 ?our	
 ?overall	
 ?happiness,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?unhappy	
 ?about	
 ?it.	
 ?	
 ?Stashing	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?mechanism	
 ?was	
 ?interesting	
 ?to	
 ?pursue	
 ?for	
 ?several	
 ?reasons.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food,	
 ?visibility	
 ?of	
 ?stashes	
 ?is	
 ?successfully	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?some	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?or	
 ?reduce	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Book	
 ?stashes	
 ?were	
 ?also	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?several	
 ?subjects	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?major	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?approach	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?These	
 ?book	
 ?stashes	
 ??	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?piles	
 ?and	
 ?shelves	
 ??	
 ?make	
 ?choosing	
 ?something	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?easier	
 ?by	
 ?separating	
 ?the	
 ?wild	
 ?world	
 ?of	
 ?infinite	
 ?choice	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?moment	
 ?of	
 ?choosing	
 ?something	
 ?to	
 ?read.	
 ?	
 ?Priming,	
 ?availability,	
 ?and	
 ?satisficing	
 ?are	
 ?well-??known	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?decision-??making	
 ?processes	
 ?which	
 ?may	
 ?explain	
 ?why	
 ?stashing	
 ?works;	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?depend	
 ?on	
 ?visibility	
 ?of	
 ?stashed	
 ?items.	
 ?Yet	
 ?the	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?are	
 ?only	
 ?visible	
 ?when	
 ?you	
 ?access	
 ?them,	
 ?like	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?behind	
 ?a	
 ?refrigerator?s	
 ?closed	
 ?door.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 47	
 ?
People	
 ?aren?t	
 ?as	
 ?successful	
 ?at	
 ?changes	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?rely	
 ?on	
 ?willpower	
 ?alone	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?an	
 ?intentional	
 ?change.	
 ?But	
 ?changes	
 ?do	
 ?happen	
 ?frequently	
 ?without	
 ?effort	
 ?in	
 ?response	
 ?to	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?environment.	
 ?The	
 ?choice	
 ?architecture	
 ?approach	
 ?suggests	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?behavior	
 ?easier	
 ?to	
 ?select.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?review	
 ?various	
 ?technology	
 ?approaches	
 ?that	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?function	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?way	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?	
 ?
5.1 Background	
 ?Before	
 ?designing	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?stash,	
 ?I	
 ?investigated	
 ?several	
 ?areas	
 ?of	
 ?literature.	
 ?In	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?what	
 ?strategies	
 ?were	
 ?available	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?encourage	
 ?reading	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?context	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?stash,	
 ?I	
 ?investigated	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technologies.	
 ?	
 ?Stashes	
 ?influence	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices	
 ?primarily	
 ?by	
 ?being	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?environment,	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?through	
 ?interaction.	
 ?I	
 ?looked	
 ?at	
 ?similar	
 ?uses	
 ?of	
 ?technology,	
 ?under	
 ?the	
 ?various	
 ?labels	
 ?of	
 ?slow,	
 ?calm,	
 ?ambient,	
 ?and	
 ?environmental	
 ?technology.	
 ?	
 ?To	
 ?inform	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?display,	
 ?I	
 ?sought	
 ?information	
 ?on	
 ?how	
 ?libraries	
 ?and	
 ?bookstores	
 ?encourage	
 ?selection	
 ?of	
 ?certain	
 ?books.	
 ?And	
 ?to	
 ?build	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?has	
 ?already	
 ?been	
 ?created	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?starting	
 ?from	
 ?scratch,	
 ?I	
 ?examined	
 ?existing	
 ?software	
 ?tools	
 ?people	
 ?use	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?their	
 ?book	
 ?consumption.	
 ?
5.1.1 Persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?
Persuasive	
 ?technologies	
 ?are	
 ?defined	
 ?by	
 ?Fogg	
 ?(2002)	
 ?in	
 ?his	
 ?book	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?name	
 ?as	
 ??any	
 ?interactive	
 ?computing	
 ?system	
 ?designed	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?people?s	
 ?attitudes	
 ?or	
 ?behavior?	
 ?(p1).	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?learned	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?were	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?reading	
 ?more.	
 ?People	
 ?said	
 ?they	
 ?enjoyed	
 ?reading	
 ?books	
 ?and	
 ?found	
 ?it	
 ?rewarding,	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?just	
 ?didn?t	
 ?tend	
 ?to	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?books	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?time	
 ?came	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?do.	
 ?They	
 ?also	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?their	
 ?primary	
 ?problem	
 ?with	
 ?this	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?identifying	
 ?books	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?read,	
 ?but	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?decision	
 ?to	
 ?actually	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?such	
 ?a	
 ?book.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?went	
 ?looking	
 ?for	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?strategies	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?influence	
 ?those	
 ?sorts	
 ?of	
 ?decisions,	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?already	
 ?learned	
 ?about	
 ?people?s	
 ?decision	
 ?making	
 ?processes	
 ?(see	
 ?Section	
 ?4.1).	
 ?	
 ?Researchers	
 ?are	
 ?identifying	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?strategies	
 ?that	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?in	
 ?creating	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?solutions	
 ?(Consolvo	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?2008;	
 ?Fogg,	
 ?Cuellar,	
 ?&	
 ?Danielson,	
 ?2003;	
 ?Klasnja,	
 ?Consolvo,	
 ?&	
 ?Pratt,	
 ?2011;	
 ?Sander,	
 ?2009).	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?selected	
 ?several	
 ?strategies	
 ?as	
 ?being	
 ?most	
 ?applicable	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?problems	
 ?of	
 ?encouraging	
 ?reading	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?people	
 ?said	
 ?about	
 ?their	
 ?challenges.	
 ?These	
 ?strategies	
 ?are	
 ?compatible	
 ?with	
 ?an	
 ?approach	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?ambient	
 ?technology	
 ?(more	
 ?on	
 ?ambient	
 ?and	
 ?related	
 ?technologies	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.1.2).	
 ?I	
 ?intentionally	
 ?selected	
 ?strategies	
 ?which	
 ?echo	
 ?the	
 ?existing	
 ?uses	
 ?of	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?stashes	
 ?for	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?described	
 ?in	
 ?interviews.	
 ?	
 ?Table	
 ?8	
 ?explains	
 ?the	
 ?selected	
 ?strategies	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?applied	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototypes.	
 ?Because	
 ?an	
 ?iterative	
 ?design	
 ?process	
 ?was	
 ?used	
 ?(see	
 ?discussion	
 ?of	
 ?method	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.2)	
 ?the	
 ?relevance	
 ?of	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?strategies	
 ?and	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?specific	
 ?design	
 ?applications	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?uncovered	
 ?until	
 ?after	
 ?receiving	
 ?feedback	
 ?from	
 ?subjects	
 ?who	
 ?tried	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes.	
 ?A	
 ?full	
 ?listing	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?strategies	
 ?is	
 ?Appendix	
 ?B:	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?Technology	
 ?Strategies.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 48	
 ?
Strategy	
 ? Explanation	
 ? Application	
 ?in	
 ?TBR	
 ?design	
 ?
Priming	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
(Klasnja	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?
2011)	
 ?
Activating	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?it	
 ?more	
 ?
available	
 ?for	
 ?selection.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?done	
 ?by	
 ?
bringing	
 ?it	
 ?into	
 ?awareness,	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?only	
 ?
subconsciously.	
 ?(Priming?s	
 ?psychological	
 ?
mechanism	
 ?is	
 ?discussed	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?4.1)	
 ?
By	
 ?giving	
 ?previously	
 ?invisible	
 ?ebooks	
 ?
ongoing	
 ?visibility	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?user,	
 ?those	
 ?items	
 ?
are	
 ?activated	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?mind	
 ?for	
 ?later	
 ?
selection.	
 ?
Tailoring	
 ?
	
 ?
(Fogg	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?
2003)	
 ?
Personalizing	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?it	
 ?
specific	
 ?and	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?individual,	
 ?
instead	
 ?of	
 ?generic.	
 ?
The	
 ?TBR	
 ?is	
 ?personalized	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?with	
 ?
their	
 ?own	
 ?already-??acquired	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?yet	
 ?
read	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
Intrinsic	
 ?
motivation	
 ?
	
 ?
(Klasnja	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?
2011)	
 ?
Reminding	
 ?people	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?
the	
 ?desired	
 ?behavior	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?
themselves	
 ?find	
 ?appealing;	
 ?also,	
 ?make	
 ?
using	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?appealing	
 ?in	
 ?itself.	
 ?
Users	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?solution	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?
already	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more.	
 ?If	
 ?this	
 ?wasn?t	
 ?
the	
 ?case,	
 ?simply	
 ?priming	
 ?book	
 ?choices	
 ?
would	
 ?only	
 ?result	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?consideration,	
 ?
not	
 ?their	
 ?selection.	
 ?
Aesthetic	
 ?
	
 ?
(Consolvo,	
 ?
McDonald,	
 ?&	
 ?
Landay,	
 ?2009)	
 ?
If	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?adopted	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?
long	
 ?term,	
 ?it	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?appealing	
 ?and	
 ?
congruent	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?style.	
 ?
For	
 ?example,	
 ?some	
 ?studies	
 ?of	
 ?fitness	
 ?
devices	
 ?found	
 ?users	
 ?rejected	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?
unattractive	
 ?devices	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?didn?t	
 ?
like	
 ?how	
 ?wearing	
 ?them	
 ?reflected	
 ?on	
 ?their	
 ?
appearance	
 ?and	
 ?self-??image.	
 ?
Many	
 ?readers	
 ?(and	
 ?even	
 ?some	
 ?non-??
readers)	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?display	
 ?books	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?
living	
 ?spaces,	
 ?partially	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?find	
 ?
the	
 ?appearance	
 ?attractive.	
 ?	
 ?
Unobtrusive	
 ?
(Consolvo	
 ?et	
 ?
al.,	
 ?2009)	
 ?
While	
 ?collecting	
 ?or	
 ?presenting	
 ?data,	
 ?
solutions	
 ?should	
 ?fit	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?
everyday	
 ?life	
 ?without	
 ?interrupting	
 ?or	
 ?
unduly	
 ?calling	
 ?attention.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
The	
 ?TBR	
 ?display	
 ?should	
 ?fit	
 ?into	
 ?people?s	
 ?
living	
 ?spaces	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?
stashes	
 ?of	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?	
 ?
Controllable	
 ?
(Consolvo	
 ?et	
 ?
al.,	
 ?2009)	
 ?
Let	
 ?users	
 ?control	
 ?and	
 ?edit	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?so	
 ?
that	
 ?it	
 ?reflects	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?think	
 ?is	
 ?
appropriate.	
 ?Control	
 ?also	
 ?includes	
 ?
restricting	
 ?and	
 ?allowing	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?
data.	
 ?
Weeding	
 ?support	
 ?will	
 ?allow	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?
remove	
 ?items.	
 ?	
 ?
Filtering	
 ?support	
 ?could	
 ?enable	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?
hide	
 ?certain	
 ?items	
 ?except	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?
choose	
 ?to	
 ?show	
 ?them.	
 ?
Any	
 ?sharing	
 ?via	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ?would	
 ?
need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?under	
 ?the	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?
in	
 ?what	
 ?was	
 ?shared	
 ?and	
 ?with	
 ?whom.	
 ?
Table	
 ?8.	
 ?Various	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?strategies	
 ?are	
 ?incorporated	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototypes	
 ?to	
 ?
encourage	
 ?desired	
 ?reading	
 ?while	
 ?addressing	
 ?people?s	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?values.	
 ?These	
 ?strategies	
 ?informed	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions.	
 ?Specific	
 ?features	
 ?and	
 ?qualities	
 ?were	
 ?included	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?designs	
 ?to	
 ?attempt	
 ?to	
 ?implement	
 ?these	
 ?strategies.	
 ?And	
 ?because	
 ?the	
 ?underlying	
 ?strategies	
 ?were	
 ?explicitly	
 ?considered,	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?ask	
 ?users	
 ?not	
 ?just	
 ??what	
 ?do	
 ?you	
 ?think	
 ?of	
 ?that?	
 ?but	
 ?whether	
 ?it	
 ?actually	
 ?delivers	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?intended	
 ?strategy.	
 ?This	
 ?helped	
 ?focus	
 ?the	
 ?feedback	
 ?and	
 ?make	
 ?it	
 ?more	
 ?actionable	
 ?in	
 ?future	
 ?design	
 ?iterations.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 49	
 ?
5.1.2 Ambient	
 ?computing	
 ?Stashes	
 ?influence	
 ?consumption	
 ?choices	
 ?primarily	
 ?by	
 ?being	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?environment,	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?through	
 ?interaction.	
 ?I	
 ?looked	
 ?at	
 ?similar	
 ?uses	
 ?of	
 ?technology,	
 ?under	
 ?the	
 ?various	
 ?labels	
 ?of	
 ?slow,	
 ?calm,	
 ?ambient,	
 ?and	
 ?environmental	
 ?technology.	
 ?In	
 ?contrast	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?typical	
 ?interactive	
 ?technology	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?most	
 ?applications	
 ?that	
 ?run	
 ?on	
 ?PC?s	
 ?and	
 ?smartphones,	
 ?researchers	
 ?are	
 ?also	
 ?investigating	
 ?a	
 ?different	
 ?approach	
 ?to	
 ?technology	
 ?that	
 ?functions	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?background,	
 ?providing	
 ?information	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?surroundings.	
 ?This	
 ?approach	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?adopted	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?TBR.	
 ?This	
 ?approach,	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?called	
 ?calm	
 ?technology	
 ?by	
 ?Weiser	
 ?and	
 ?Brown	
 ?of	
 ?Xerox	
 ?PARC	
 ?(1996),	
 ?is	
 ?distinguished	
 ?by	
 ?how	
 ?we	
 ?engage	
 ?with	
 ?and	
 ?pay	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?it.	
 ?Weiser	
 ?and	
 ?Brown	
 ?were	
 ?inspired	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?neologism	
 ?in	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?an	
 ?artist?s	
 ?creation,	
 ?a	
 ??Dangling	
 ?String,?	
 ?which	
 ?moves	
 ?in	
 ?response	
 ?to	
 ?traffic	
 ?flowing	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?local	
 ?area	
 ?network.	
 ?Interactive	
 ?technology,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?word	
 ?processing	
 ?application	
 ?or	
 ?a	
 ?videogame,	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?center	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?function.	
 ?Calm	
 ?technology	
 ?works	
 ?by	
 ?moving	
 ?between	
 ?the	
 ?periphery	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?attention	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?center	
 ?of	
 ?it.	
 ?By	
 ?providing	
 ?value	
 ?(?encalming	
 ?and	
 ?informing?)	
 ?even	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?periphery,	
 ?the	
 ?authors	
 ?claim	
 ?that	
 ?calm	
 ?technology	
 ?empowers	
 ?users	
 ?without	
 ?overwhelming	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?Sengers	
 ?(2011)	
 ?reflected	
 ?upon	
 ?a	
 ?sabbatical	
 ?to	
 ?an	
 ?isolated	
 ?island	
 ?community	
 ?and	
 ?realized	
 ?the	
 ?benefits	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?informed	
 ?through	
 ?environmental	
 ?cues	
 ?and	
 ?tacit	
 ?social	
 ?knowledge	
 ?which	
 ?permeate	
 ?awareness	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?low	
 ?level,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?taking	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?frost	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?season	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?cue	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?picking	
 ?partridgeberries.	
 ?She	
 ?found	
 ?a	
 ?striking	
 ?contrast	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?typical	
 ?interactive	
 ?productivity	
 ?tools	
 ?which	
 ?actively	
 ?demand	
 ?their	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?pay	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?prompts,	
 ?and	
 ?which	
 ?often	
 ?leave	
 ?their	
 ?users	
 ?feeling	
 ?busy	
 ?and	
 ?unfulfilled	
 ?(Leshed	
 ?&	
 ?Sengers,	
 ?2011).	
 ?Leshed	
 ?(2012)	
 ?followed	
 ?up	
 ?this	
 ?research	
 ?by	
 ?designing	
 ?a	
 ?prototype	
 ?mobile	
 ?application	
 ??that	
 ?offers	
 ?serendipitous	
 ?moments	
 ?of	
 ?downtime,	
 ?pause,	
 ?and	
 ?introspective	
 ?reflection.?	
 ?In	
 ?doing	
 ?so	
 ?she:	
 ?	
 ?
??faced	
 ?a	
 ?paradoxical	
 ?challenge:	
 ?to	
 ?offer	
 ?ways	
 ?to	
 ?mitigate	
 ?stress	
 ?and	
 ?slow	
 ?down	
 ?with	
 ?
the	
 ?very	
 ?technology	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?accused	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?a	
 ?source	
 ?of	
 ?stress:	
 ?the	
 ?smartphone.	
 ?We	
 ?
therefore	
 ?followed	
 ?the	
 ?principle	
 ?of	
 ?minimal	
 ?design,	
 ?acknowledging	
 ?that	
 ?not	
 ?every	
 ?activity	
 ?
be	
 ?formally	
 ?represented	
 ?and	
 ?that	
 ?slowness	
 ?and	
 ?reflection	
 ?can	
 ?happen	
 ?outside	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?
system	
 ?without	
 ?leaving	
 ?digital	
 ?traces.	
 ?This	
 ?may	
 ?restore	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?when	
 ?and	
 ?
how	
 ?they	
 ?should	
 ?cut	
 ?back	
 ?and	
 ?slow	
 ?down,	
 ?without	
 ?being	
 ?coerced	
 ?or	
 ?feeling	
 ?bad	
 ?about	
 ?
not	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?application.?	
 ?The	
 ?idea	
 ?that	
 ?a	
 ?calm	
 ?technology	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?to	
 ?encompass	
 ?and	
 ?represent	
 ?every	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?entire	
 ?activity	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?key	
 ?one	
 ?here.	
 ?It	
 ?contrasts	
 ?with,	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?the	
 ?approach	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?self-??tracking	
 ?(see	
 ?Appendix	
 ?D)	
 ?and	
 ?food	
 ?diaries	
 ?(Section	
 ?3.5.2.2),	
 ?providing	
 ?a	
 ?possible	
 ?answer	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?problem	
 ?those	
 ?approaches	
 ?face	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?behavior	
 ?diverges	
 ?from	
 ?what	
 ?will	
 ?achieve	
 ?their	
 ?goals.	
 ?I	
 ?use	
 ?this	
 ?minimalist-??inspired	
 ?approach	
 ?in	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototyping.	
 ?Inspired	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?slow	
 ?food	
 ?movement	
 ?(discussed	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?2.4)	
 ?others	
 ?subsequently	
 ?used	
 ?the	
 ?label	
 ?of	
 ?slow	
 ?technology	
 ?(Hallnas	
 ?&	
 ?Redstrom,	
 ?2001)	
 ?to	
 ?describe	
 ?this	
 ?calm	
 ?approach,	
 ?making	
 ?information	
 ?available	
 ?in	
 ?subtle	
 ?ways	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?periphery	
 ?of	
 ?awareness.	
 ?But	
 ?slow	
 ?technology?s	
 ?design,	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?as	
 ?characterized	
 ?by	
 ?Hallnas	
 ?and	
 ?Redstrom,	
 ?includes	
 ?intentionally	
 ?making	
 ?it	
 ?somewhat	
 ?cryptic,	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?takes	
 ?time	
 ?to	
 ?understand	
 ?the	
 ?meaning	
 ?and	
 ?operation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?system.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 50	
 ?
Others	
 ?have	
 ?used	
 ?the	
 ?terms	
 ?ambient	
 ?computing	
 ?(Hap	
 ?&	
 ?Midden,	
 ?2010;	
 ?Jafarinaimi,	
 ?2005;	
 ?Kim,	
 ?Hong,	
 ?&	
 ?Magerko,	
 ?2010)	
 ?and	
 ?ambient	
 ?media	
 ?or	
 ?informative	
 ?art	
 ?(Holmquist,	
 ?Skog,	
 ?G?teborg,	
 ?&	
 ?Art,	
 ?2003)	
 ?to	
 ?emphasize	
 ?the	
 ?computer-??driven	
 ?display	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?outside	
 ?of	
 ?traditional	
 ?personal	
 ?computing	
 ?environments	
 ?(i.e.	
 ?desktop	
 ?and	
 ?handheld),	
 ?without	
 ?necessarily	
 ?including	
 ?an	
 ?obfuscated	
 ?design	
 ?that	
 ?requires	
 ?extended	
 ?time	
 ?to	
 ?comprehend.	
 ?	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?Breakaway	
 ?(Jafarinaimi,	
 ?2005)	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?ambient	
 ?computing	
 ?device	
 ?intended	
 ?to	
 ?remind	
 ?a	
 ?desk-??bound	
 ?worker	
 ?to	
 ?take	
 ?a	
 ?break	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?up	
 ?and	
 ?stretch.	
 ?Breakaway	
 ?receives	
 ?input	
 ?data	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?sensor	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?worker?s	
 ?chair	
 ?to	
 ?detect	
 ?how	
 ?long	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?sitting	
 ?without	
 ?a	
 ?break.	
 ?To	
 ?communicate	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?user,	
 ?its	
 ?output	
 ?mechanism	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?animated	
 ?abstract	
 ?sculpture	
 ?which	
 ?represents	
 ?a	
 ?person.	
 ?As	
 ?Breakaway	
 ?detects	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?person	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?sitting	
 ?longer	
 ?and	
 ?longer	
 ?without	
 ?taking	
 ?a	
 ?break,	
 ?it	
 ?slumps	
 ?over	
 ?further	
 ?and	
 ?further.	
 ?In	
 ?a	
 ?trial,	
 ?Breakaway	
 ?was	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?traditional	
 ?calendar	
 ?program	
 ?to	
 ?display	
 ?reminders.	
 ?Breakaway	
 ?was	
 ?more	
 ?effective	
 ?in	
 ?triggering	
 ?stretching,	
 ?and	
 ?caused	
 ?less	
 ?stress	
 ?and	
 ?disruption	
 ?because	
 ?its	
 ?alert	
 ?mechanism	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?interfere	
 ?with	
 ?other	
 ?work	
 ?being	
 ?done	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?computer,	
 ?unlike	
 ?the	
 ?calendar	
 ?reminders.	
 ?Therefore,	
 ?one	
 ?TBR	
 ?design	
 ?goal	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?create	
 ?an	
 ?ambient	
 ?display	
 ?that	
 ?conveys	
 ?the	
 ?needed	
 ?information	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?sufficient	
 ?to	
 ?affect	
 ?behavior	
 ?without	
 ?being	
 ?distracting.	
 ?
5.1.3 Encouraging	
 ?book	
 ?selection	
 ?in	
 ?libraries	
 ?and	
 ?bookstores	
 ?Interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?mentioned	
 ?reading	
 ?books	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ?activity	
 ?they	
 ?especially	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?increase.	
 ?To	
 ?find	
 ?ways	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?this	
 ?desire,	
 ?I	
 ?examined	
 ?how	
 ?libraries	
 ?and	
 ?bookstores	
 ?encourage	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?more	
 ?books.	
 ?Creating	
 ?a	
 ?display	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?front	
 ?covers	
 ?visible	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?well-??established	
 ?technique	
 ?in	
 ?bookstores	
 ?and	
 ?libraries,	
 ?as	
 ?pictured	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?9.	
 ?Doing	
 ?so	
 ?takes	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?shelf	
 ?space	
 ?than	
 ?shelving	
 ?books	
 ?spine-??out.	
 ?But	
 ?the	
 ?tradeoff	
 ?is	
 ?worthwhile;	
 ?books	
 ?which	
 ?are	
 ?displayed	
 ?this	
 ?way	
 ?are	
 ?borrowed	
 ?and	
 ?purchased	
 ?at	
 ?higher	
 ?rates	
 ?so	
 ?circulation	
 ?increases	
 ?overall	
 ?(Goldhor,	
 ?1981).	
 ?Even	
 ?among	
 ?books	
 ?all	
 ?oriented	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?way,	
 ?those	
 ?which	
 ?are	
 ?closer	
 ?to	
 ?eye	
 ?level	
 ?and	
 ?in	
 ?more	
 ?visible	
 ?locations	
 ?are	
 ?purchased	
 ?at	
 ?much	
 ?higher	
 ?levels	
 ?(Underhill,	
 ?1999).	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 51	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?9.	
 ?Librarians	
 ?display	
 ?books	
 ?face	
 ?out	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?readers	
 ?to	
 ?check	
 ?them	
 ?out.	
 ?Picture	
 ?taken	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?at	
 ?
the	
 ?Seattle	
 ?Public	
 ?Library?s	
 ?Greenwood	
 ?branch.	
 ?This	
 ?approach	
 ?of	
 ?making	
 ?books	
 ?visible,	
 ?especially	
 ?by	
 ?giving	
 ?a	
 ?clear	
 ?view	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?faces,	
 ?does	
 ?encourage	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?borrow	
 ?them	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?library	
 ?or	
 ?buy	
 ?them	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?store.	
 ?I	
 ?explore	
 ?whether	
 ?this	
 ?approach	
 ?can	
 ?also	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?in	
 ?readers?	
 ?personal	
 ?spaces	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?actually	
 ?read	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?they	
 ?acquire.	
 ?Another	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?display	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?reduced	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?options	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?among.	
 ?Senger	
 ?(2011)	
 ?mentioned	
 ?the	
 ?freeing	
 ?effects	
 ?of	
 ?living	
 ?in	
 ?an	
 ?isolated	
 ?environment	
 ?where	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?very	
 ?few	
 ?choices	
 ?available.	
 ?This	
 ?echoes	
 ?a	
 ?study	
 ?(Iyengar	
 ?&	
 ?Lepper,	
 ?2000)	
 ?which	
 ?compared	
 ?what	
 ?happened	
 ?when	
 ?people	
 ?were	
 ?asked	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?among	
 ?6	
 ?varieties	
 ?of	
 ?jam,	
 ?vs.	
 ?what	
 ?happened	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?24	
 ?varieties	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?from.	
 ?Their	
 ?results	
 ?showed	
 ?that	
 ?having	
 ?too	
 ?many	
 ?options	
 ?can	
 ?actually	
 ?lead	
 ?to	
 ??choice	
 ?overload?	
 ?and	
 ?lead	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?not	
 ?make	
 ?a	
 ?selection	
 ?at	
 ?all,	
 ?or	
 ?be	
 ?less	
 ?satisfied	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?selection.	
 ?This	
 ?study	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?widely	
 ?cited	
 ?as	
 ?demonstrating	
 ??the	
 ?paradox	
 ?of	
 ?choice.?	
 ?It	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?noted	
 ?that	
 ?a	
 ?meta-??analysis	
 ?covering	
 ?fifty	
 ?experiments	
 ?on	
 ?choice	
 ?overload	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?find	
 ?overall	
 ?empirical	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?phenomenon,	
 ?though	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?individual	
 ?studies	
 ?included	
 ?did	
 ?replicate	
 ?the	
 ?findings	
 ?(Scheibehenne,	
 ?Greifeneder,	
 ?&	
 ?Todd,	
 ?2010).	
 ?	
 ?Nonetheless,	
 ?as	
 ?Senger	
 ?reported	
 ?in	
 ?her	
 ?personal	
 ?experience,	
 ?having	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?huge	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?options	
 ?is	
 ?certainly	
 ?a	
 ?hassle	
 ?faced	
 ?by	
 ?modern	
 ?consumers,	
 ?and	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?literature	
 ?on	
 ?satisficing	
 ?demonstrates	
 ?(Section	
 ?4.1.2)	
 ?reducing	
 ?the	
 ?options	
 ?considered	
 ?in	
 ?reaching	
 ?a	
 ?decision	
 ?can	
 ?often	
 ?lead	
 ?to	
 ?higher	
 ?satisfaction.	
 ?Librarians	
 ?address	
 ?this	
 ?problem	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?collections	
 ?through	
 ?a	
 ?practice	
 ?they	
 ?call	
 ?weeding.	
 ?Like	
 ?its	
 ?botanical	
 ?analog,	
 ?weeding	
 ?removes	
 ?books	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?collection.	
 ?Slote	
 ?(1997)	
 ?performed	
 ?numerous	
 ?studies	
 ?of	
 ?library	
 ?patron	
 ?behavior	
 ?before	
 ?and	
 ?after	
 ?collections	
 ?were	
 ?reduced	
 ?through	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?various	
 ?techniques	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?books	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?using:	
 ??In	
 ?all	
 ?our	
 ?research,	
 ?weeding	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?suggested	
 ?methods	
 ?resulted	
 ?in	
 ?an	
 ?increase	
 ?in	
 ?circulation.	
 ?Fewer,	
 ?selected	
 ?volumes	
 ?seemed	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?more	
 ?use?	
 ?(p19).	
 ?	
 ?Even	
 ?though	
 ?fewer	
 ?books	
 ?were	
 ?available	
 ?overall,	
 ?more	
 ?books	
 ?were	
 ?borrowed.	
 ?Slote	
 ?suggests	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?because	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?easier	
 ?for	
 ?library	
 ?patrons	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?and	
 ?choose	
 ?books	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?undesired	
 ?
	
 ? 52	
 ?
books	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?getting	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?way.	
 ?A	
 ?retired	
 ?librarian	
 ?who	
 ?reviewed	
 ?a	
 ?draft	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?thesis	
 ?agreed,	
 ?commenting:	
 ??When	
 ?you	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?collection	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?of	
 ?low-??quality	
 ?books,	
 ?people	
 ?looking	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?say	
 ??no,	
 ?no,	
 ?no,	
 ?no,	
 ?no,?	
 ?and	
 ?once	
 ?they	
 ?get	
 ?in	
 ?that	
 ?pattern	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?harder	
 ?to	
 ?say	
 ??yes?	
 ?to	
 ?something	
 ?they	
 ?might	
 ?like.	
 ?But	
 ?after	
 ?you	
 ?get	
 ?rid	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?bad	
 ?books,	
 ?they	
 ?will	
 ?say	
 ??yes,	
 ?no,	
 ?maybe,	
 ?yes,	
 ?yes.??	
 ?(Deborah	
 ?Becker,	
 ?personal	
 ?communication,	
 ?May	
 ?7,	
 ?2013.)	
 ?In	
 ?this	
 ?design	
 ?research,	
 ?I	
 ?explore	
 ?how	
 ?these	
 ?key	
 ?concepts	
 ?relate	
 ?to	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?e-??book	
 ?reading.	
 ?In	
 ?what	
 ?ways	
 ?could	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?find	
 ?satisfactory	
 ?books	
 ?with	
 ?less	
 ?effort?	
 ?What	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?weeding	
 ?support	
 ?will	
 ?users	
 ?need	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?TBR?	
 ?	
 ?
5.1.4 Existing	
 ?reading	
 ?support	
 ?solutions	
 ?Before	
 ?beginning	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?tool,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?useful	
 ?to	
 ?examine	
 ?existing	
 ?solutions.	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?several	
 ?reasons	
 ?for	
 ?this.	
 ?A	
 ?good	
 ?solution	
 ?may	
 ?already	
 ?exist	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?exact	
 ?problem	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?solve.	
 ?Existing	
 ?tools	
 ?may	
 ?provide	
 ?partial	
 ?solutions	
 ?which	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?leveraged	
 ?and	
 ?tested.	
 ?Studying	
 ?these	
 ?tools	
 ?can	
 ?provide	
 ?an	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?existing	
 ?design	
 ?patterns	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?space	
 ?which	
 ?users	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?more	
 ?readily	
 ?adopt.	
 ?Finally,	
 ?looking	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?features	
 ?already	
 ?available	
 ?can	
 ?help	
 ?to	
 ?clarify	
 ?exactly	
 ?what	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?accomplished,	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?unique	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?problem	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?solve	
 ?that	
 ?hasn?t	
 ?been	
 ?solved	
 ?already.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?case	
 ?of	
 ?books,	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?many	
 ?existing	
 ?reading	
 ?support	
 ?tools.	
 ?These	
 ?tools	
 ?have	
 ?many	
 ?capabilities	
 ?to	
 ?assist	
 ?with	
 ?various	
 ?problems.	
 ?I	
 ?selected	
 ?a	
 ?subset	
 ?of	
 ?tools	
 ?using	
 ?an	
 ?informal	
 ?methodology,	
 ?choosing	
 ?from	
 ?among	
 ?those	
 ?mentioned	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?and	
 ?those	
 ?frequently	
 ?mentioned	
 ?in	
 ?online	
 ?reading	
 ?communities	
 ?and	
 ?by	
 ?book	
 ?bloggers.	
 ?A	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?tools	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?comparison	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?feature	
 ?sets	
 ?is	
 ?in	
 ?Appendix	
 ?C:	
 ?Features	
 ?&	
 ?Gaps	
 ?of	
 ?Existing	
 ?Reading	
 ?tools.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?survey	
 ?of	
 ?tools	
 ?combined	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?results	
 ?showed	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?problems	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?well	
 ?supported	
 ?by	
 ?existing	
 ?reading	
 ?tools.	
 ?If	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?can	
 ?address	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs,	
 ?it	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?compelling	
 ?and	
 ?useful	
 ?for	
 ?readers:	
 ?
? People	
 ?who	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?book	
 ?are	
 ?often	
 ?willing	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?decisions	
 ?about	
 ?tradeoffs	
 ?for	
 ?convenience	
 ?vs.	
 ?cost	
 ?to	
 ?fit	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?priorities	
 ?and	
 ?desires,	
 ?but	
 ?gathering	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?possible	
 ?options	
 ?from	
 ?several	
 ?sources	
 ?takes	
 ?too	
 ?much	
 ?time	
 ?and	
 ?effort.2	
 ?	
 ?
? People	
 ?have	
 ?several	
 ?places	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?collect	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?ebooks;	
 ?checking	
 ?them	
 ?all	
 ?takes	
 ?too	
 ?much	
 ?effort	
 ?so	
 ?people	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?realize	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?read.	
 ?People	
 ?also	
 ?can	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?hard	
 ?time	
 ?remembering	
 ?which	
 ?stash	
 ?contains	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?book	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read.	
 ?People	
 ?sometimes	
 ?even	
 ?forget	
 ?about	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?entirely.	
 ?	
 ?
? Digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?become	
 ?overrun	
 ?with	
 ?undesired	
 ?options.	
 ?Unlike	
 ?physical	
 ?stashes	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?no	
 ?inherent	
 ?capacity	
 ?limits	
 ?which	
 ?force	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?weed	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?
? People	
 ?purchase	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?then	
 ?forget	
 ?about	
 ?them	
 ?and	
 ?don?t	
 ?read	
 ?them;	
 ?or	
 ?they	
 ?start	
 ?reading	
 ?them	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?don?t	
 ?finish	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?2	
 ?Phix	
 ?the	
 ?Bookfinder	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?Windows	
 ?Phone	
 ?application	
 ?I	
 ?developed	
 ?with	
 ?Dave	
 ?Sanger	
 ?in	
 ?Kelvin	
 ?Sung?s	
 ?CSS590	
 ?Mobile	
 ?App	
 ?Development	
 ?class	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?address	
 ?the	
 ?problem	
 ?of	
 ?needing	
 ?to	
 ?perform	
 ?multiple	
 ?searches	
 ?at	
 ?multiple	
 ?sources	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?a	
 ?desired	
 ?book.	
 ?Phix	
 ?allows	
 ?a	
 ?user	
 ?to	
 ?search	
 ?once	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?book;	
 ?in	
 ?response,	
 ?it	
 ?displays	
 ?both	
 ?availability	
 ?at	
 ?local	
 ?libraries	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?price	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?at	
 ?multiple	
 ?online	
 ?booksellers.	
 ?A	
 ?demo	
 ?video	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?on	
 ?YouTube	
 ?at	
 ?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ5j5MKUEwY	
 ?or	
 ?search	
 ?for	
 ??phix	
 ?bookfinder.?	
 ?Unfortunately,	
 ?Phix	
 ?could	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?released	
 ?for	
 ?public	
 ?use	
 ?because	
 ?API	
 ?limits	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?quickly	
 ?reached	
 ?once	
 ?more	
 ?than	
 ?a	
 ?few	
 ?hundred	
 ?people	
 ?started	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?application.	
 ?
	
 ? 53	
 ?
? People?s	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?visibly	
 ?present	
 ?and	
 ?so	
 ?cannot	
 ?provide	
 ?identity	
 ?claims	
 ?to	
 ?visitors	
 ??	
 ?or	
 ?to	
 ?themselves.	
 ?
5.2 Method	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?a	
 ?design-??based	
 ?research	
 ?approach	
 ?to	
 ?explore	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?space	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?identified	
 ?problems	
 ?and	
 ?answer	
 ?the	
 ?questions	
 ?raised	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?background	
 ?research.	
 ?	
 ?Obrenovi?	
 ?(2011)	
 ?describes	
 ?how	
 ?design-??based	
 ?research	
 ?helps	
 ?deepen	
 ?understanding	
 ?through	
 ?the	
 ?process	
 ?of	
 ?attempting	
 ?to	
 ?design	
 ?solutions.	
 ?He	
 ?positions	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?relationship	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?research	
 ?methods	
 ?including	
 ?theoretical	
 ?analysis,	
 ?controlled	
 ?experiments,	
 ?and	
 ?ethnographic	
 ?inquiry:	
 ?
Design-??based	
 ?research,	
 ?however,	
 ?can	
 ?produce	
 ?knowledge	
 ?that	
 ?normally	
 ?could	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?
generated	
 ?by	
 ?isolated	
 ?analysis	
 ?or	
 ?traditional	
 ?empirical	
 ?approaches,	
 ?and	
 ?therefore	
 ?
complements	
 ?existing	
 ?empirical	
 ?and	
 ?theoretical	
 ?research	
 ?methods.	
 ?Design-??based	
 ?
research	
 ?facilitates	
 ?disciplined,	
 ?systematic	
 ?inquiry	
 ?into	
 ?a	
 ?real-??world	
 ?context	
 ?while	
 ?
simultaneously	
 ?doing	
 ?justice	
 ?to	
 ?its	
 ?complexity.	
 ?It	
 ?is	
 ?conducted	
 ?in	
 ?messy,	
 ?but	
 ?entirely	
 ?
realistic,	
 ?situations	
 ?and	
 ?while	
 ?it	
 ?produces	
 ?claims	
 ?with	
 ?less	
 ?certainty	
 ?and	
 ?replicability	
 ?than	
 ?
other	
 ?research	
 ?methods,	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?extend	
 ?our	
 ?area	
 ?of	
 ?inquiry	
 ?beyond	
 ?the	
 ?scope	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?
methods.	
 ?
Human-??centered	
 ?design	
 ?practice	
 ?prioritizes	
 ?getting	
 ?feedback	
 ?from	
 ?real	
 ?users	
 ?as	
 ?rapidly	
 ?as	
 ?possible	
 ?while	
 ?limiting	
 ?investment.	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?particularly	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?exploring	
 ?presentation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?digital	
 ?TBR.	
 ?Early	
 ?personal	
 ?work	
 ?with	
 ?prototypes	
 ?had	
 ?already	
 ?demonstrated	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?issues	
 ?and	
 ?benefits	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?apparent	
 ?until	
 ?I	
 ?actually	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?glowing	
 ?digital	
 ?display	
 ?to	
 ?place	
 ?in	
 ?front	
 ?of	
 ?users,	
 ?so	
 ?approaches	
 ?that	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?involve	
 ?working	
 ?technology,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?paper	
 ?prototyping,	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?appropriate.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?goal	
 ?was	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?minimum	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?functionality	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?shown	
 ?to	
 ?users	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?their	
 ?feedback.	
 ?Accordingly,	
 ?development	
 ?focused	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?was	
 ?needed	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?researcher	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?present	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?guide	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?or	
 ?set	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?application	
 ?for	
 ?them.	
 ?Other	
 ?considerations	
 ?which	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?necessary	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?production	
 ?deployment,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?error-??handling,	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?sources,	
 ?and	
 ?security,	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?important	
 ?for	
 ?this	
 ?use.	
 ?	
 ?
5.2.1 Interactive	
 ?Design	
 ?Research	
 ?Sessions	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?brought	
 ?back	
 ?4	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects,	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?2	
 ?new	
 ?subjects	
 ?(male	
 ?spouses	
 ?of	
 ?interview	
 ?participants)	
 ?for	
 ?half	
 ?a	
 ?dozen	
 ?design	
 ?research	
 ?sessions.	
 ?Some	
 ?sessions	
 ?included	
 ?multiple	
 ?subjects,	
 ?and	
 ?some	
 ?were	
 ?individual.	
 ?All	
 ?participants	
 ?used	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?stashes	
 ?for	
 ?physical	
 ?books.	
 ?All	
 ?participants	
 ?have	
 ?some	
 ?experience	
 ?with	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?though	
 ?ebook	
 ?adoption	
 ?rates	
 ?varied	
 ?widely,	
 ?from	
 ?reading	
 ?a	
 ?majority	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?as	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?to	
 ?only	
 ?having	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?few	
 ?ebooks	
 ?in	
 ?total.	
 ?	
 ?These	
 ?design	
 ?research	
 ?sessions	
 ?were	
 ?carried	
 ?out	
 ?in	
 ?either	
 ?the	
 ?researcher?s	
 ?or	
 ?the	
 ?subjects?	
 ?residences.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?were	
 ?asked	
 ?think	
 ?about	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?expect	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?to	
 ?work,	
 ?what	
 ?concerns	
 ?they	
 ?might	
 ?have	
 ?about	
 ?them,	
 ?things	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?with	
 ?them,	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?sorts	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?characteristics	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?expect	
 ?it	
 ?to	
 ?have.	
 ?Each	
 ?feedback	
 ?session	
 ?resulted	
 ?in	
 ?iterative	
 ?design	
 ?to	
 ?incorporate	
 ?insights	
 ?and	
 ?findings	
 ?into	
 ?prototypes	
 ?which	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?subsequent	
 ?sessions.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 54	
 ?
Insights	
 ?from	
 ?these	
 ?interactive	
 ?sessions	
 ?are	
 ?covered	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.4.	
 ?Using	
 ?short,	
 ?conversational	
 ?prototyping	
 ?sessions	
 ?to	
 ?explore	
 ?a	
 ?technology	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?intended	
 ?to	
 ?work	
 ?over	
 ?time	
 ?raises	
 ?validity	
 ?concerns.	
 ?Also,	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?feedback	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?actually	
 ?living	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?device	
 ?is	
 ?like.	
 ?This	
 ?limitation	
 ?is	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?partially	
 ?addressed	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?research	
 ?method,	
 ?described	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section.	
 ?
5.2.2 Personal	
 ?Long-??Term	
 ?Design	
 ?Research	
 ?As	
 ?Hallnas	
 ?and	
 ?Redstrom	
 ?(2001)	
 ?state,	
 ?slow	
 ?technologies	
 ?function	
 ?by	
 ?being	
 ?experienced	
 ?and	
 ?reflected	
 ?upon	
 ?over	
 ?long	
 ?periods	
 ?of	
 ?time.	
 ?Obviously,	
 ?short	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions	
 ?could	
 ?not	
 ?provide	
 ?this.	
 ?Following	
 ?the	
 ?example	
 ?of	
 ?Odom	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(2012)	
 ?I	
 ?lived	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?various	
 ?prototype	
 ?systems	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?own	
 ?environment	
 ?over	
 ?time,	
 ?and	
 ?reflected	
 ?upon	
 ?my	
 ?own	
 ?experiences.	
 ?	
 ?They	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?process	
 ?was	
 ?very	
 ?important	
 ?for	
 ?identifying,	
 ?understanding,	
 ?and	
 ?addressing	
 ?many	
 ?practical	
 ?implementation	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?slow	
 ?technology	
 ?that	
 ?only	
 ?surface	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?is	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?place	
 ?over	
 ?time.	
 ?	
 ?Insights	
 ?from	
 ?my	
 ?personal	
 ?experience	
 ?are	
 ?covered	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.5.	
 ?As	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?interactive	
 ?design	
 ?research	
 ?sessions,	
 ?findings	
 ?and	
 ?insights	
 ?were	
 ?incorporated	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes	
 ?on	
 ?an	
 ?ongoing	
 ?basis.	
 ?	
 ?Validity	
 ?challenges	
 ?are	
 ?caused	
 ?by	
 ?having	
 ?the	
 ?experimenter	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?subject;	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?obviously	
 ?a	
 ?potential	
 ?source	
 ?of	
 ?bias	
 ?in	
 ?terms	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?generalizability	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?conclusions,	
 ?especially	
 ?regarding	
 ?efficacy.	
 ?I	
 ?am	
 ?certainly	
 ?not	
 ?a	
 ?neutral	
 ?observer	
 ?evaluating	
 ?the	
 ?value	
 ?and	
 ?effectiveness	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?solution.	
 ?At	
 ?least	
 ?the	
 ?more	
 ?concrete	
 ?design	
 ?insights	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?physical	
 ?and	
 ?perceptual	
 ?attributes	
 ?are	
 ?less	
 ?likely	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?subject	
 ?to	
 ?my	
 ?personal	
 ?biases.	
 ?	
 ?
5.2.3 Tracking	
 ?and	
 ?iterating	
 ?on	
 ?feedback	
 ?A	
 ?backlog	
 ?of	
 ?features	
 ?and	
 ?functionality	
 ?was	
 ?maintained	
 ?on	
 ?an	
 ?online	
 ?kanban	
 ?board	
 ?(shown	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?10).	
 ?Both	
 ?the	
 ?prioritization	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?features	
 ?were	
 ?adjusted	
 ?continuously	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?what	
 ?was	
 ?learned	
 ?through	
 ?both	
 ?research	
 ?methods.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?10.	
 ?An	
 ?online	
 ?kanban	
 ?board	
 ?(http://kanbanery.com)	
 ?was	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?record	
 ?and	
 ?prioritize	
 ?design	
 ?and	
 ?coding	
 ?
tasks,	
 ?and	
 ?updated	
 ?continuously	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?learning	
 ?from	
 ?users	
 ?in	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions.	
 ?The	
 ?board	
 ?was	
 ?also	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?
author	
 ?and	
 ?his	
 ?advisor	
 ?to	
 ?track	
 ?and	
 ?communicate	
 ?other	
 ?thesis	
 ?activity	
 ?including	
 ?research,	
 ?writing	
 ?and	
 ?
administrative	
 ?tasks.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 55	
 ?
5.2.4 Exploring	
 ?TBR	
 ?presentation	
 ?Various	
 ?evolutions	
 ?of	
 ?functionality	
 ?began	
 ?with	
 ?simply	
 ?displaying	
 ?a	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?book	
 ?cover	
 ?images.	
 ?There	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?iteration	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?presentation	
 ?layer	
 ?as	
 ?more	
 ?was	
 ?learned	
 ?about	
 ?where	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?their	
 ?TBR	
 ?collections.	
 ?	
 ?
5.2.4.1 Spines	
 ?vs.	
 ?covers	
 ?&	
 ?single	
 ?vs.	
 ?multiple	
 ?To	
 ?investigate	
 ?the	
 ?effectiveness	
 ?of	
 ?different	
 ?ways	
 ?of	
 ?displaying	
 ?the	
 ?books,	
 ?I	
 ?compared	
 ?covers	
 ?vs.	
 ?spines	
 ?in	
 ?single	
 ?and	
 ?multiple	
 ?(excluding	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?spine).	
 ?Figure	
 ?11	
 ?depicts	
 ?the	
 ?variations.	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 56	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ? Single	
 ? Multiple	
 ?
Spines	
 ? (not	
 ?tried)	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ?
Covers	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?11.	
 ?Testing	
 ?variations	
 ?on	
 ?covers	
 ?vs.	
 ?spines	
 ?and	
 ?single	
 ?vs.	
 ?multiple	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?arrive	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?final	
 ?design.	
 ?
5.2.4.2 Bookshelves,	
 ?bedside	
 ?tables,	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?centers	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?making	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?fit	
 ?in	
 ?with	
 ?people?s	
 ?existing	
 ?TBR	
 ?piles	
 ?for	
 ?paper	
 ?books.	
 ?For	
 ?this,	
 ?I	
 ?initially	
 ?used	
 ?an	
 ?iPad,	
 ?since	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?approximately	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?size	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?hardcover	
 ?book	
 ?and	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?placed	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?locations	
 ?people	
 ?mentioned	
 ?keeping	
 ?TBR	
 ?piles.	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?also	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?bringing	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?centers,	
 ?which	
 ?have	
 ?developed	
 ?into	
 ?a	
 ?central	
 ?place	
 ?for	
 ?accessing	
 ?nearly	
 ?every	
 ?popular	
 ?type	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?except	
 ?for	
 ?books.	
 ?On	
 ?each	
 ?platform,	
 ?I	
 ?explored	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?affordances	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?image	
 ?of	
 ?multiple	
 ?spines	
 ?vs.	
 ?sequential	
 ?images	
 ?of	
 ?front	
 ?covers	
 ?presented	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?slideshow.	
 ?	
 ?For	
 ?the	
 ?slideshows	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?several	
 ?different	
 ?transition	
 ?types	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?fade,	
 ?wipe,	
 ?mosaic	
 ?tile)	
 ?and	
 ?2-??3	
 ?transition	
 ?speeds	
 ?(ranging	
 ?from	
 ?2	
 ?seconds	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?maximum	
 ?of	
 ?20	
 ?seconds).	
 ?	
 ?Figure	
 ?12	
 ?shows	
 ?the	
 ?variations.	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 57	
 ?
	
 ?
	
 ? Single	
 ?Cover	
 ?Slideshow	
 ? Multiple	
 ?Spines	
 ?Displayed	
 ?Together	
 ?
A	
 ?small	
 ?
TBR	
 ?
prototype	
 ?
on	
 ?a	
 ?shelf	
 ?
at	
 ?the	
 ?edge	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?
room	
 ?
(iPad,	
 ?10-??
inch	
 ?
display)	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ?
A	
 ?large	
 ?
TBR	
 ?
prototype	
 ?
at	
 ?the	
 ?
focus	
 ?of	
 ?
the	
 ?room	
 ?
(Television,	
 ?
42-??inch	
 ?
display)	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ?
Figure	
 ?12.	
 ?Prototype	
 ?display	
 ?mockups	
 ?comparing	
 ?different	
 ?device	
 ?sizes	
 ?and	
 ?display	
 ?approaches	
 ?provided	
 ?useful	
 ?
design	
 ?insights.	
 ?Top	
 ?left:	
 ?Bookshelf	
 ?display	
 ?with	
 ?cover	
 ?images.	
 ?Top	
 ?right:	
 ?bookshelf	
 ?display	
 ?with	
 ?spines.	
 ?Bottom	
 ?left:	
 ?
television	
 ?display	
 ?with	
 ?cover	
 ?images.	
 ?Bottom	
 ?right:	
 ?television	
 ?display	
 ?with	
 ?spines.	
 ?	
 ?
5.2.4.3 Supporting	
 ?endpoint	
 ?diversity	
 ?(device	
 ?type	
 ?and	
 ?display	
 ?size)	
 ?To	
 ?explore	
 ?a	
 ?wider	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?presentation	
 ?approaches	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?built-??in	
 ?slideshow	
 ?software	
 ?could	
 ?provide,	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?decided	
 ?to	
 ?develop	
 ?the	
 ?prototype	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?JavaScript	
 ?web	
 ?application	
 ?which	
 ?would	
 ?work	
 ?across	
 ?many	
 ?different	
 ?web	
 ?browsers.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?chose	
 ?this	
 ?approach	
 ?because	
 ?in	
 ?early	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions,	
 ?I	
 ?learned	
 ?that	
 ?different	
 ?users	
 ?were	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?endpoints	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?hardware	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?TBR.	
 ?The	
 ?variety	
 ?encompassed	
 ?device	
 ?type	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?smartphone,	
 ?tablet,	
 ?game	
 ?console,	
 ?Internet-??connected	
 ?TV,	
 ?PC)	
 ?and	
 ?display	
 ?size	
 ?(from	
 ?pocket-??sized	
 ?to	
 ?big-??screen	
 ?TV).	
 ?	
 ?To	
 ?address	
 ?the	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?device	
 ?sizes,	
 ?I	
 ?ultimately	
 ?used	
 ?a	
 ?responsive	
 ?web	
 ?design	
 ?(Marcotte,	
 ?2011).	
 ?My	
 ?implementation	
 ?used	
 ?JavaScript	
 ?with	
 ?CSS	
 ?and	
 ?jQuery	
 ?to	
 ?
	
 ? 58	
 ?
implement	
 ?a	
 ?flexible	
 ?grid	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?accommodate	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?display	
 ?resolutions	
 ?and	
 ?physical	
 ?sizes	
 ?while	
 ?retaining	
 ?legibility.	
 ?The	
 ?prototype	
 ?code	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ?open	
 ?source	
 ?project	
 ?on	
 ?GitHub3	
 ?for	
 ?people	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?examining	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?more	
 ?detail	
 ?or	
 ?extending	
 ?this	
 ?work	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?future.	
 ?
5.2.5 Exploring	
 ?TBR	
 ?interaction	
 ?The	
 ?prototypes	
 ?initially	
 ?displayed	
 ?manually-??collected	
 ?cover	
 ?images	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?which	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?had	
 ?acquired	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?yet	
 ?read.	
 ?The	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?customize	
 ?which	
 ?books	
 ?were	
 ?displayed	
 ?was	
 ?added	
 ?and	
 ?extended.	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?several	
 ?different	
 ?approaches	
 ?to	
 ?populating	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?shelf.	
 ?First	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?an	
 ?XML	
 ?manifest	
 ?created	
 ?by	
 ?hand,	
 ?which	
 ?specified	
 ?a	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?cover	
 ?image	
 ?URLs	
 ?and	
 ?book	
 ?titles.	
 ?Second,	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?unauthenticated	
 ?API	
 ?calls	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?public	
 ?Google	
 ?Books	
 ?bookshelf.	
 ?Third,	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?API	
 ?calls	
 ?in	
 ?conjunction	
 ?with	
 ?OAuth	
 ?to	
 ?connect	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?user?s	
 ?own	
 ?Google	
 ?Books	
 ?collection.	
 ?
5.3 Summary	
 ?of	
 ?Insights	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?summarizes	
 ?what	
 ?we	
 ?discovered.	
 ?Table	
 ?9	
 ?lists	
 ?considerations	
 ?for	
 ?designing	
 ?TBR	
 ?solutions	
 ?in	
 ?particular	
 ?and	
 ?stashes	
 ?in	
 ?general.	
 ?Each	
 ?insight	
 ?is	
 ?labeled	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?section	
 ?containing	
 ?further	
 ?discussion	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?relevant	
 ?results.	
 ?For	
 ?clarity,	
 ?each	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?feedback	
 ?and	
 ?its	
 ?subsequent	
 ?design	
 ?impact	
 ?is	
 ?discussed	
 ?together,	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?in	
 ?chronological	
 ?or	
 ?release	
 ?order.	
 ?In	
 ?some	
 ?cases,	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?implement	
 ?a	
 ?design	
 ?response	
 ?and	
 ?receive	
 ?further	
 ?feedback	
 ?on	
 ?it.	
 ?In	
 ?other	
 ?cases,	
 ?the	
 ?feedback	
 ?inspired	
 ?future	
 ?development	
 ?ideas.	
 ?The	
 ?results	
 ?are	
 ?summed	
 ?up	
 ?into	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?to	
 ?inform	
 ?designers	
 ?of	
 ?TBRs	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?stashing	
 ?solutions.	
 ?	
 ?
Section	
 ? Topic	
 ? Design	
 ?Considerations	
 ?
5.4.1	
 ? Privacy	
 ? Provide	
 ?users	
 ?with	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?data	
 ?is	
 ?shared	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?whom.	
 ?
Request	
 ?explicit	
 ?permission	
 ?before	
 ?each	
 ?act	
 ?of	
 ?sharing;	
 ?make	
 ?
clear	
 ?what	
 ?information	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?shared	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?what	
 ?audience.	
 ?
5.4.2	
 ? Spinal	
 ?affordances	
 ? Consider	
 ?how	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?can	
 ?provide	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?
people	
 ?are	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?physical	
 ?analogues.	
 ?
5.4.3	
 ? Multiplicity	
 ? Show	
 ?members	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?collection	
 ?together,	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?singly	
 ?and	
 ?
sequentially.	
 ?If	
 ?more	
 ?members	
 ?exist	
 ?than	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?displayed	
 ?
together,	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?minimize	
 ?transitions.	
 ?
5.4.4	
 ? Subsets	
 ?/	
 ?selection	
 ?/	
 ?
inventory	
 ?view	
 ?
Consider	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?ways	
 ?people	
 ?might	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?divide	
 ?and	
 ?
conquer	
 ?their	
 ?stashes	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?find	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?fits	
 ?
their	
 ?current	
 ?appetite	
 ?without	
 ?having	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?and	
 ?reject	
 ?
items	
 ?that	
 ?don?t	
 ?appeal	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?moment.	
 ?How	
 ?can	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?present	
 ?
that	
 ?information?	
 ?Can	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?anticipate	
 ?or	
 ?detect	
 ?a	
 ?user?s	
 ?
current	
 ?appetite?	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
3	
 ?https://github.com/massivelyuseful/ToBeRead/	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 59	
 ?
Section	
 ? Topic	
 ? Design	
 ?Considerations	
 ?
5.4.5	
 ? Television-??specific	
 ?
issues	
 ?
Since	
 ?these	
 ?displays	
 ?are	
 ?often	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes,	
 ?the	
 ?ease	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?turning	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?display	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?
optimize,	
 ?since	
 ?it	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?performed	
 ?more	
 ?often	
 ?than	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?
dedicated	
 ?TBR.	
 ?	
 ?
5.4.6	
 ? Size	
 ?&	
 ?Scalability	
 ? TBR	
 ?displays	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?predominantly	
 ?filled	
 ?by	
 ?representations	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?content.	
 ?	
 ?
Content	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?presented	
 ?with	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?information	
 ?density	
 ?
as	
 ?is	
 ?possible	
 ?without	
 ?sacrificing	
 ?legibility,	
 ?adapting	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?size	
 ?of	
 ?
the	
 ?display	
 ?used.	
 ?
5.4.7	
 ? Populating	
 ? People	
 ?are	
 ?willing	
 ?to	
 ?manually	
 ?populate	
 ?books	
 ?on	
 ?their	
 ?TBR;	
 ?
automatic	
 ?importing	
 ?and	
 ?syncing	
 ?from	
 ?other	
 ?source	
 ?stashes	
 ?is	
 ?
convenient	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?a	
 ?mandatory	
 ?feature	
 ?
5.4.8	
 ? Sense-??making	
 ? Enable	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?organize	
 ?the	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?TBRs.	
 ?	
 ?
Provide	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?for	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?to	
 ?more	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?
stashed	
 ?items.	
 ?
5.4.9	
 ? Weeding	
 ? Support	
 ?weeding	
 ?by	
 ?providing	
 ?cues	
 ?that	
 ?encourage	
 ?weeding	
 ?and	
 ?
a	
 ?capability	
 ?to	
 ?easily	
 ?remove	
 ?items.	
 ?
5.4.10	
 ? Energy	
 ?efficiency	
 ? Mitigate	
 ?people?s	
 ?concerns	
 ?about	
 ?energy	
 ?consumption;	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?
avoid	
 ?powering	
 ?displays	
 ?when	
 ?no	
 ?one	
 ?is	
 ?looking	
 ?at	
 ?them.	
 ?
5.4.11	
 ? TBR	
 ?as	
 ?screensaver	
 ? Existing	
 ?displays	
 ?are	
 ?good	
 ?candidates	
 ?for	
 ?hosting	
 ?TBRs	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?
are	
 ?not	
 ?being	
 ?actively	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes.	
 ?
5.5.1	
 ? Priming	
 ? TBR?s	
 ?priming	
 ?is	
 ?effective	
 ?in	
 ?helping	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?consumption	
 ?
5.5.2	
 ? 	
 ? Ambient	
 ?displays	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?tested	
 ?for	
 ?attention-??grabbing	
 ?
characteristics	
 ?over	
 ?time	
 ?in	
 ?environments	
 ?that	
 ?resemble	
 ?the	
 ?
places	
 ?they	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?used.	
 ?
Brightness	
 ?levels	
 ?higher	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?surroundings,	
 ?motion,	
 ?and	
 ?
frequent	
 ?changes	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?avoided.	
 ?
5.5.3	
 ? Correspondence	
 ? The	
 ?on-??screen	
 ?representation	
 ?should	
 ?match	
 ?the	
 ?item.	
 ?Allowing	
 ?
the	
 ?user	
 ?to	
 ?search	
 ?for	
 ?and	
 ?select	
 ?an	
 ?alternate	
 ?image	
 ?is	
 ?one	
 ?
solution.	
 ?
5.5.4	
 ? Content	
 ?Polymorphism	
 ? Design	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?additional	
 ?content	
 ?types	
 ?beyond	
 ?books	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?
included.	
 ?
5.5.5	
 ? Mobility	
 ? Be	
 ?aware	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?TBR?s	
 ?location	
 ?may	
 ?change.	
 ?Consider	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?
handle	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?available	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?is	
 ?being	
 ?
viewed.	
 ?
	
 ? 60	
 ?
Section	
 ? Topic	
 ? Design	
 ?Considerations	
 ?
5.5.6	
 ? Ubiquitous	
 ?access	
 ? Enable	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?access	
 ?the	
 ?contents	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?TBRs	
 ?from	
 ?any	
 ?
location	
 ?or	
 ?device.	
 ?
Table	
 ?9.	
 ?Design-??based	
 ?research	
 ?identified	
 ?many	
 ?specific	
 ?considerations	
 ?that	
 ?can	
 ?inform	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?stashes.	
 ?The	
 ?following	
 ?two	
 ?sections	
 ?provide	
 ?additional	
 ?detail	
 ?on	
 ?each	
 ?design	
 ?insight.	
 ?Section	
 ?5.4	
 ?contains	
 ?those	
 ?insights	
 ?primarily	
 ?derived	
 ?from	
 ?short	
 ?interactive	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions	
 ?with	
 ?subjects,	
 ?and	
 ?section	
 ?5.5	
 ?contains	
 ?those	
 ?insights	
 ?primarily	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?author?s	
 ?personal	
 ?exposure	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes	
 ?over	
 ?time.	
 ?
5.4 Results	
 ?&	
 ?Discussion	
 ?of	
 ?Insights	
 ?from	
 ?Interactive	
 ?Design	
 ?Research	
 ?Sessions	
 ?
5.4.1 Privacy	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?subject	
 ?pointed	
 ?out	
 ?that	
 ?displaying	
 ?everything	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?always	
 ?be	
 ?appropriate:	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?wouldn?t	
 ?want	
 ?everyone	
 ?who	
 ?comes	
 ?into	
 ?my	
 ?house	
 ?to	
 ?know	
 ?that	
 ?I?m	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?[a	
 ?
particular	
 ?subject].	
 ?My	
 ?close	
 ?friends,	
 ?sure,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?babysitter	
 ?or	
 ?my	
 ?parents?	
 ?No!?	
 ??	
 ?S2	
 ?Because	
 ?TBRs	
 ?are	
 ?displayed	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?share	
 ?living	
 ?space	
 ?or	
 ?visit,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?let	
 ?people	
 ?choose	
 ?what	
 ?gets	
 ?displayed.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?strategy	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?controllable	
 ?(Section	
 ?5.1.1).	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ??Some	
 ?books	
 ?are	
 ?displayed	
 ?to	
 ?impress	
 ?people.?	
 ??	
 ?S7	
 ?People	
 ?also	
 ?like	
 ?sharing	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?reading	
 ?with	
 ?friends	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?conversations	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?books,	
 ?and	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?and	
 ?receive	
 ?recommendations.	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?numerous	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ?which	
 ?people	
 ?already	
 ?participate	
 ?in,	
 ?both	
 ?general	
 ?purpose	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?Facebook,	
 ?Twitter)	
 ?and	
 ?reading	
 ?specific	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?Goodreads,	
 ?Shelfari).	
 ?Having	
 ?the	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?share	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?to	
 ?those	
 ?existing	
 ?networks	
 ?was	
 ?seen	
 ?by	
 ?subjects	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?useful	
 ?than	
 ?having	
 ?yet	
 ?another	
 ?social	
 ?network	
 ?to	
 ?join.	
 ?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implication:	
 ?controllability	
 ?is	
 ?key;	
 ?people	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?whether	
 ?to	
 ?share	
 ?everything	
 ?automatically	
 ?or	
 ?share	
 ?only	
 ?specific	
 ?books,	
 ?and	
 ?they	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?who	
 ?to	
 ?share	
 ?with	
 ??	
 ?whether	
 ?publicly	
 ?or	
 ?only	
 ?with	
 ?specific	
 ?individuals.	
 ?	
 ?
5.4.2 Spinal	
 ?affordances	
 ?When	
 ?people	
 ?saw	
 ?mockups	
 ?which	
 ?used	
 ?a	
 ?photograph	
 ?of	
 ?spines	
 ?(as	
 ?pictured	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?12),	
 ?they	
 ?appreciated	
 ?several	
 ?affordances	
 ?spines	
 ?provide	
 ?that	
 ?front	
 ?cover	
 ?images	
 ?do	
 ?not.	
 ?	
 ?Some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?provide	
 ?cues	
 ?about	
 ?timing	
 ?for	
 ?reading	
 ?the	
 ?book.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?the	
 ?length	
 ?of	
 ?book	
 ?is	
 ?indicated	
 ?by	
 ?thickness,	
 ?so	
 ?if	
 ?someone	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?long	
 ?period	
 ?of	
 ?time	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?reading,	
 ?they	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?more	
 ?inclined	
 ?to	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?a	
 ?thicker	
 ?book	
 ?than	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?don?t	
 ?have	
 ?much	
 ?time	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?reading.	
 ?One	
 ?reader	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?she	
 ?could	
 ?see	
 ?the	
 ?location	
 ?of	
 ?her	
 ?bookmarks	
 ?sticking	
 ?up	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book,	
 ?giving	
 ?another	
 ?set	
 ?of	
 ?cues	
 ?about	
 ?which	
 ?books	
 ?had	
 ?already	
 ?been	
 ?started,	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?time	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?take	
 ?to	
 ?finish	
 ?reading	
 ?each	
 ?book.	
 ?A	
 ?library	
 ?sticker	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?spine	
 ?indicates	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?will	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?returned	
 ?at	
 ?some	
 ?point,	
 ?so	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?constraint	
 ?on	
 ?how	
 ?long	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?read,	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?risk	
 ?of	
 ?fines	
 ?if	
 ?
	
 ? 61	
 ?
not	
 ?returned	
 ?on	
 ?time.	
 ?People	
 ?were	
 ?also	
 ?aware	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?social	
 ?obligation	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?readers	
 ?waiting	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?book,	
 ?especially	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?themselves	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?wait	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?hold	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?filled.	
 ?Despite	
 ?the	
 ?desirability	
 ?of	
 ?mimicking	
 ?physical	
 ?TBR	
 ?displays	
 ?directly,	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?feasibility	
 ?problems:	
 ?existing	
 ?images	
 ?of	
 ?book	
 ?spines	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?widely	
 ?available,	
 ?and	
 ?generating	
 ?spines	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?both	
 ?legible	
 ?and	
 ?matched	
 ?the	
 ?affordances	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?book	
 ?spines	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?significant	
 ?development	
 ?challenge.	
 ?Working	
 ?with	
 ?what	
 ?was	
 ?available,	
 ?I	
 ?used	
 ?front	
 ?cover	
 ?images	
 ?displayed	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?grid	
 ?layout.	
 ?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?This	
 ?leaves	
 ?open	
 ?several	
 ?as-??yet	
 ?unanswered	
 ?design	
 ?questions.	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?absence	
 ?of	
 ?spines,	
 ?how	
 ?could	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?help	
 ?users	
 ?determine	
 ?which	
 ?books	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?best	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?given	
 ?existing	
 ?time	
 ?constraints?	
 ?And	
 ?how	
 ?could	
 ?this	
 ?information	
 ?be	
 ?provided	
 ?without	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?overly	
 ?cluttered	
 ?and	
 ?complex,	
 ?detracting	
 ?from	
 ?its	
 ?simplicity	
 ?and	
 ?aesthetic	
 ?appeal?	
 ?	
 ?
5.4.3 Multiplicity	
 ?Subjects	
 ?preferred	
 ?a	
 ?display	
 ?of	
 ?multiple	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?sequential	
 ?display	
 ?that	
 ?showed	
 ?books	
 ?one	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?time.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?attention-??grabbing	
 ?nature	
 ?of	
 ?showing	
 ?one	
 ?book	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?time,	
 ?and	
 ?waiting	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?to	
 ?appear,	
 ?was	
 ?seen	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?negative.	
 ?Showing	
 ?multiple	
 ?books	
 ?together,	
 ?in	
 ?context	
 ?with	
 ?each	
 ?other,	
 ?was	
 ?seen	
 ?as	
 ?communicating	
 ?something	
 ?richer	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?reader?s	
 ?interests	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?sum	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?individual	
 ?books.	
 ?Displaying	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?so	
 ?many	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?seen	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?glance	
 ?required	
 ?less	
 ?time	
 ?than	
 ?waiting	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?the	
 ?entire	
 ?collection	
 ?scroll	
 ?past.	
 ?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implication:	
 ?showing	
 ?many	
 ?books	
 ?together	
 ?works	
 ?better	
 ?by	
 ?providing	
 ?more	
 ?information	
 ?in	
 ?less	
 ?time,	
 ?requiring	
 ?less	
 ?time	
 ?and	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?more	
 ?books,	
 ?than	
 ?showing	
 ?them	
 ?singly	
 ?and	
 ?sequentially	
 ?can.	
 ?When	
 ?displaying	
 ?collections	
 ?with	
 ?more	
 ?members	
 ?than	
 ?can	
 ?legibly	
 ?fit	
 ?onscreen	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?time,	
 ?consider	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?show	
 ?them	
 ?all	
 ?over	
 ?time	
 ?while	
 ?minimizing	
 ?transitions.	
 ?
5.4.4 Subsets	
 ?/	
 ?selection	
 ?/	
 ?inventory	
 ?view	
 ?People	
 ?were	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?subsets	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?TBR	
 ?books.	
 ?People	
 ?mentioned	
 ?several	
 ?different	
 ?dimensions	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?using	
 ?for	
 ?filtering:	
 ?
? Content-??centric:	
 ?These	
 ?are	
 ?attributes	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?those	
 ?found	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?library	
 ?card	
 ?catalog.	
 ?Examples	
 ?include	
 ?genre,	
 ?subject,	
 ?author.	
 ?Another	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?one	
 ?subject	
 ?is	
 ?awareness	
 ?of	
 ?world	
 ?events.	
 ?If	
 ?something	
 ?is	
 ?happening	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?world	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?stashed	
 ?item?s	
 ?content,	
 ?subject	
 ?matter,	
 ?or	
 ?author,	
 ?that	
 ?current	
 ?event	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?leveraged	
 ?and	
 ?linked	
 ?explicitly	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
? User-??centric:	
 ?I	
 ?learned	
 ?from	
 ?interviews	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?often	
 ?have	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?idiosyncratic	
 ?categories	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?books,	
 ?which	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?line	
 ?up	
 ?with	
 ?existing	
 ?book	
 ?metadata.	
 ?People	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?having	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?show	
 ?them	
 ?just	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?personal	
 ?category.	
 ?But	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?highly	
 ?resistant	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?concept	
 ?of	
 ?entering	
 ?such	
 ?metadata	
 ?themselves;	
 ?people	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?spend	
 ?time	
 ?entering	
 ?information	
 ?into	
 ?a	
 ?catalog	
 ?or	
 ?database.	
 ?	
 ?
? Context-??centric:	
 ?Showing	
 ?people	
 ?options	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?context,	
 ?including:	
 ?their	
 ?mood,	
 ?time	
 ?of	
 ?day,	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?time	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?available,	
 ?and	
 ?who	
 ?was	
 ?present	
 ?with	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?They	
 ?also	
 ?mentioned	
 ?what	
 ?other	
 ?media	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?currently	
 ?consuming,	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?just	
 ?finished.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?S5	
 ?said,	
 ??I	
 ?read	
 ?one	
 ?novel	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?
	
 ? 62	
 ?
time,	
 ?so	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?just	
 ?finished	
 ?one,	
 ?I?m	
 ?probably	
 ?looking	
 ?for	
 ?another.?	
 ?The	
 ?same	
 ?subject	
 ?also	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?only	
 ?partway	
 ?through	
 ?a	
 ?novel,	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?other	
 ?novels	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?waiting.	
 ?Other	
 ?subjects	
 ?described	
 ?numerous	
 ?and	
 ?varied	
 ?additional	
 ?ways	
 ?their	
 ?ongoing	
 ?and	
 ?immediately	
 ?prior	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?could	
 ?affect	
 ?their	
 ?next	
 ?media	
 ?choice.	
 ?
? Source-??centric:	
 ?Sometimes	
 ?people	
 ?did	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?only	
 ?options	
 ?available	
 ?from	
 ?particular	
 ?sources,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?particular	
 ?retailer,	
 ?or	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?library.	
 ?One	
 ?scenario	
 ?was	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?gift	
 ?certificate;	
 ?another	
 ?was	
 ?wanting	
 ?to	
 ?take	
 ?books	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?library.	
 ?Readers	
 ?with	
 ?significant	
 ?investments	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?particular	
 ?proprietary	
 ?commercial	
 ?ebook	
 ?ecosystem	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?Kindle	
 ?or	
 ?Barnes	
 ?and	
 ?Noble?s	
 ?Nook	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?strong	
 ?preference	
 ?to	
 ?stay	
 ?within	
 ?that	
 ?ecosystem	
 ?for	
 ?simplicity	
 ?and	
 ?convenience	
 ?sake.	
 ?
? Format-??centric:	
 ?People	
 ?mentioned	
 ?times	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?sought	
 ?books	
 ?in	
 ?specific	
 ?formats.	
 ?Examples	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?were	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?beach	
 ?(where	
 ?a	
 ?paper	
 ?book	
 ?was	
 ?preferred	
 ?for	
 ?resistance	
 ?to	
 ?damage	
 ?from	
 ?sunscreen	
 ?and	
 ?sand)	
 ?and	
 ?travel	
 ?reading	
 ?(where	
 ?ebooks	
 ?were	
 ?generally	
 ?preferred	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?lack	
 ?of	
 ?weight	
 ?and	
 ?bulk,	
 ?but	
 ?where	
 ?some	
 ?paper	
 ?reading	
 ?material	
 ?is	
 ?needed	
 ?because	
 ?at	
 ?present	
 ?US	
 ?air	
 ?travel	
 ?prohibits	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?electronic	
 ?devices	
 ?during	
 ?takeoff	
 ?and	
 ?landing).	
 ?Paperbacks	
 ?were	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?desirable	
 ?format	
 ?for	
 ?disposable	
 ?reading;	
 ?one	
 ?family	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?shared	
 ?vacation	
 ?home	
 ?where	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?typical	
 ?to	
 ?bring	
 ?a	
 ?few	
 ?light	
 ?reading	
 ?paperbacks	
 ?and	
 ?leave	
 ?them	
 ?there,	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?read	
 ?by	
 ?others	
 ?who	
 ?share	
 ?the	
 ?cabin.	
 ?As	
 ?a	
 ?bonus,	
 ?these	
 ?paperbacks	
 ?are	
 ?also	
 ?used	
 ?as	
 ?fireplace	
 ?kindling!	
 ?Many	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?contextual	
 ?factors	
 ?are	
 ?readily	
 ?available,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?time	
 ?of	
 ?day	
 ?and	
 ?day	
 ?of	
 ?week.	
 ?Other	
 ?contextual	
 ?factors	
 ?which	
 ?once	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?unavailable	
 ?to	
 ?computer	
 ?systems	
 ?are	
 ?now	
 ?becoming	
 ?more	
 ?accessible.	
 ?Camera-??equipped	
 ?devices	
 ?can	
 ?use	
 ?facial	
 ?recognition	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?biometrics	
 ?to	
 ?recognize	
 ?who	
 ?is	
 ?present.	
 ?Moods	
 ?and	
 ?stress	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?assessed	
 ?from	
 ?facial	
 ?expressions	
 ?and	
 ?tone	
 ?of	
 ?voice.	
 ?A	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?people?s	
 ?personal	
 ?contexts	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?on	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ?and	
 ?online	
 ?calendars.	
 ?Over	
 ?time,	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?factors	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?leveraged	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?identify	
 ?what	
 ?type	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?material	
 ?a	
 ?user	
 ?may	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?select	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?time.	
 ?Of	
 ?course,	
 ?the	
 ?privacy	
 ?concerns	
 ?mentioned	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.4.1	
 ?become	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?more	
 ?important	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?system	
 ?detects	
 ?more	
 ?personal	
 ?information.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?Consider	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?ways	
 ?people	
 ?might	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?divide	
 ?and	
 ?conquer	
 ?their	
 ?stashes	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?find	
 ?something	
 ?that	
 ?fits	
 ?their	
 ?current	
 ?appetite	
 ?without	
 ?having	
 ?to	
 ?consider	
 ?and	
 ?reject	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?don?t	
 ?appeal	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?moment.	
 ?How	
 ?can	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?present	
 ?that	
 ?information?	
 ?Can	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?anticipate	
 ?or	
 ?detect	
 ?a	
 ?user?s	
 ?current	
 ?appetite?	
 ?
5.4.5 Television-??specific	
 ?issues	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?special	
 ?challenges	
 ?in	
 ?putting	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?television	
 ?or	
 ?media	
 ?center	
 ?display.	
 ?Because	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?location	
 ?and	
 ?size,	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?attention-??drawing	
 ?issues	
 ?discussed	
 ?above	
 ?were	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?severe	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?television.	
 ?	
 ?
? Location.	
 ?Televisions	
 ?are	
 ?often	
 ?placed	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?focal	
 ?point	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?room,	
 ?while	
 ?bookshelves	
 ?are	
 ?usually	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?periphery.	
 ?	
 ?
? Size.	
 ?Television	
 ?screens	
 ?are	
 ?usually	
 ?much	
 ?larger	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?screens	
 ?of	
 ?other	
 ?devices,	
 ?and	
 ?are	
 ?intended	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?seen	
 ?from	
 ?across	
 ?the	
 ?room,	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?devices	
 ?which	
 ?are	
 ?normally	
 ?used	
 ?within	
 ?arm?s	
 ?length.	
 ?
	
 ? 63	
 ?
? Non-??dedicated	
 ?devices.	
 ?Televisions	
 ?are	
 ?shared	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?activities;	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?is	
 ?set	
 ?up	
 ?on	
 ?one,	
 ?it	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?knocked	
 ?off	
 ?when	
 ?someone	
 ?wants	
 ?to	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?television	
 ?to	
 ?play	
 ?a	
 ?videogame	
 ?or	
 ?watch	
 ?a	
 ?movie.	
 ?
? Cumbersome,	
 ?remote-??based	
 ?interface.	
 ?Television	
 ?remote	
 ?controls	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?excellent	
 ?for	
 ?frequently-??used	
 ?functions	
 ?with	
 ?dedicated	
 ?buttons,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?turning	
 ?the	
 ?power	
 ?on	
 ?and	
 ?adjusting	
 ?the	
 ?volume.	
 ?But	
 ?accessing	
 ?other	
 ?functions	
 ?usually	
 ?requires	
 ?navigating	
 ?through	
 ?a	
 ?menu	
 ?system	
 ?using	
 ?awkward	
 ?interfaces.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?it	
 ?took	
 ?considerably	
 ?more	
 ?effort	
 ?to	
 ?bring	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?display	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Panasonic	
 ?Viera	
 ?television	
 ?than	
 ?it	
 ?did	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?iPad:	
 ?locate	
 ?the	
 ?television	
 ?remote,	
 ?bring	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?applications	
 ?(waiting	
 ?5-??10	
 ?seconds),	
 ?select	
 ?the	
 ?photo	
 ?display	
 ?application	
 ?(wait),	
 ?select	
 ?the	
 ?appropriate	
 ?album	
 ?(wait),	
 ?select	
 ?slideshow	
 ?mode	
 ?(wait),	
 ?and	
 ?start	
 ?the	
 ?slideshow.	
 ?This	
 ?worked	
 ?against	
 ?the	
 ?purpose	
 ?and	
 ?intent	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?display,	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?supposed	
 ?to	
 ?just	
 ?quietly	
 ?remind	
 ?without	
 ?requiring	
 ?much	
 ?ongoing	
 ?effort.	
 ?Another	
 ?subject?s	
 ?media	
 ?center	
 ?display	
 ?(pictured	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?13)	
 ?required	
 ?using	
 ?multiple	
 ?remote-??controls	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?similarly	
 ?complex	
 ?procedure	
 ?to	
 ?bring	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?web	
 ?page	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototype.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?contrast	
 ?the	
 ?peripheral	
 ?display	
 ?was	
 ?much	
 ?less	
 ?complex	
 ?to	
 ?use;	
 ?the	
 ?iPad?s	
 ?picture	
 ?frame	
 ?mode	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?activated	
 ?without	
 ?even	
 ?unlocking	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ??	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?with	
 ?one	
 ?click	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?button	
 ?available	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?lock	
 ?screen.	
 ?And	
 ?since	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes,	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?restarted	
 ?as	
 ?often.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?Using	
 ?televisions	
 ?for	
 ?TBR	
 ?displays	
 ?presents	
 ?additional	
 ?design	
 ?challenges.	
 ?Because	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?is	
 ?already	
 ?frequently	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes,	
 ?the	
 ?process	
 ?of	
 ?returning	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?examined.	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?too	
 ?lengthy,	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?significant	
 ?factor	
 ?in	
 ?discouraging	
 ?use.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?much	
 ?less	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?consideration	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?dedicated	
 ?TBR	
 ?device,	
 ?which	
 ?may	
 ?only	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?set	
 ?up	
 ?once.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
5.4.6 Size	
 ?&	
 ?Scalability	
 ?	
 ?Subjects	
 ?were	
 ?asked	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?imagine	
 ?using	
 ?to	
 ?display	
 ?their	
 ?digital	
 ?TBR.	
 ?Responses	
 ?covered	
 ?a	
 ?very	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?display	
 ?sizes	
 ?and	
 ?resolutions,	
 ?from	
 ?pocket-??size	
 ?to	
 ?big-??screen	
 ?televisions.	
 ?When	
 ?displaying	
 ?book	
 ?covers	
 ?singly	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?42-??inch	
 ?TV,	
 ?they	
 ?looked	
 ?like	
 ?posters,	
 ?not	
 ?books.	
 ?This	
 ?made	
 ?the	
 ?connection	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?actual	
 ?book	
 ?more	
 ?tenuous,	
 ?and	
 ?broke	
 ?the	
 ?illusion	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?could	
 ?actually	
 ?be	
 ?picked	
 ?up.	
 ?Displaying	
 ?a	
 ?full	
 ?shelf	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?at	
 ?150%	
 ?of	
 ?life-??size	
 ?compensated	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?increased	
 ?viewing	
 ?distance	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TV	
 ?vs.	
 ?a	
 ?bookshelf	
 ?while	
 ?avoiding	
 ?the	
 ?poster	
 ?effect.	
 ?A	
 ?responsive	
 ?design	
 ?(Marcotte,	
 ?2011)	
 ?addressed	
 ?the	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?desired	
 ?endpoints.	
 ?Taking	
 ?window	
 ?size	
 ?(in	
 ?pixels)	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?best-??available	
 ?proxy	
 ?for	
 ?display	
 ?size,	
 ?I	
 ?created	
 ?a	
 ?flexible	
 ?grid	
 ?that	
 ?expanded	
 ?from	
 ?displaying	
 ?as	
 ?few	
 ?as	
 ?2	
 ?books	
 ?side-??by-??side	
 ?to	
 ?as	
 ?many	
 ?as	
 ?8,	
 ?depending	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?window	
 ?width.	
 ?This	
 ?worked	
 ?well	
 ?on	
 ?displays	
 ?ranging	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?65?	
 ?widescreen	
 ?television	
 ?(Figure	
 ?13)	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?narrow,	
 ?tall	
 ?browser	
 ?window	
 ?found	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?smartphone	
 ?(Figure	
 ?14).	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?responsive	
 ?design	
 ?also	
 ?helped	
 ?maintain	
 ?clarity	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?images	
 ?by	
 ?not	
 ?requiring	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?scale	
 ?too	
 ?far	
 ?beyond	
 ?their	
 ?original	
 ?size,	
 ?especially	
 ?when	
 ?only	
 ?a	
 ?relatively	
 ?low-??resolution	
 ?thumbnail	
 ?image	
 ?was	
 ?available.	
 ?Most	
 ?browsers	
 ?and	
 ?platforms	
 ?scaled	
 ?the	
 ?graphics	
 ?fairly	
 ?well	
 ?up	
 ?to	
 ?about	
 ?2-??3	
 ?times	
 ?original	
 ?size,	
 ?but	
 ?beyond	
 ?that,	
 ?the	
 ?image	
 ?quality	
 ?degraded	
 ?sufficiently	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?found	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?both	
 ?unattractive	
 ?and	
 ?unintelligible.	
 ?
	
 ? 64	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?13.	
 ?The	
 ?web	
 ?client	
 ?prototype?s	
 ?responsive	
 ?design	
 ?scales	
 ?up	
 ?to	
 ?take	
 ?advantage	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?density	
 ?
possible	
 ?on	
 ?this	
 ?65?	
 ?HDTV	
 ?in	
 ?one	
 ?subject?s	
 ?living	
 ?room.	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?14.	
 ?The	
 ?web	
 ?client	
 ?prototype?s	
 ?responsive	
 ?design	
 ?scales	
 ?down	
 ?to	
 ?adapt	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?smaller	
 ?browser	
 ?window,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?
on	
 ?a	
 ?smartphone	
 ?display,	
 ?by	
 ?reducing	
 ?the	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?columns	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?book	
 ?images	
 ?are	
 ?still	
 ?legibly	
 ?displayed	
 ?Tufte	
 ?(2001)	
 ?urges	
 ?designers	
 ?to	
 ?maintain	
 ?a	
 ?high	
 ?data-??ink	
 ?ratio	
 ??	
 ?minimizing	
 ?the	
 ?amount	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?graphic	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?ornamentation	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?information.	
 ?I	
 ?encountered	
 ?a	
 ?related	
 ?issue	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?poor	
 ?data-??whitespace	
 ?ratio	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?initial	
 ?responsive	
 ?design.	
 ?At	
 ?first,	
 ?the	
 ?web	
 ?application	
 ?allowed	
 ?the	
 ?gutters	
 ?(the	
 ?blank	
 ?space	
 ?between	
 ?images	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?grid)	
 ?to	
 ?grow	
 ?to	
 ?handle	
 ?intermediate	
 ?sizes	
 ?between	
 ?the	
 ?predefined	
 ?grid	
 ?breakpoints	
 ?at	
 ?which	
 ?additional	
 ?columns	
 ?
	
 ? 65	
 ?
were	
 ?added	
 ?.	
 ?This	
 ?resulted	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?very	
 ?poor	
 ?whitespace	
 ?to	
 ?data	
 ?ratio	
 ?at	
 ?some	
 ?resolutions;	
 ?at	
 ?worst,	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?occupied	
 ?far	
 ?less	
 ?than	
 ?half	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?(Figure	
 ?15).	
 ?Modifying	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?so	
 ?the	
 ?images	
 ?proportionally	
 ?grew	
 ?while	
 ?leaving	
 ?the	
 ?gutters	
 ?relatively	
 ?small	
 ?allowed	
 ?the	
 ?covers	
 ?to	
 ?grow	
 ?and	
 ?provide	
 ?maximum	
 ?visibility,	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?leaving	
 ?valuable	
 ?display	
 ?area	
 ?unused.	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?15.	
 ?The	
 ?initial	
 ?responsive	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?web	
 ?client	
 ?handled	
 ?scaling	
 ?by	
 ?inserting	
 ?extra	
 ?whitespace	
 ?(left).	
 ?
Scaling	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?images	
 ?and	
 ?leaving	
 ?the	
 ?gutters	
 ?constant	
 ?(right)	
 ?yielded	
 ?better	
 ?book	
 ?visibility.	
 ?Similarly,	
 ?making	
 ?it	
 ?possible	
 ?to	
 ?hide	
 ?and	
 ?reveal	
 ?the	
 ?controls	
 ?for	
 ?populating	
 ?and	
 ?manipulating	
 ?the	
 ?contents	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?allowed	
 ?more	
 ?space	
 ?for	
 ?displaying	
 ?content,	
 ?often	
 ?making	
 ?an	
 ?entire	
 ?additional	
 ?row	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?sufficiently	
 ?visible	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?identifiable.	
 ?Figure	
 ?16	
 ?shows	
 ?the	
 ?additional	
 ?visibility	
 ?yielded	
 ?by	
 ?hiding	
 ?the	
 ?controls.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?16.	
 ?Hiding	
 ?UI	
 ?chrome	
 ?provides	
 ?more	
 ?space	
 ?for	
 ?books.	
 ?Even	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?whole	
 ?cover	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?fit,	
 ?books	
 ?can	
 ?often	
 ?
be	
 ?identified	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?top	
 ?portion	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?image.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?TBR	
 ?displays	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?predominantly	
 ?filled	
 ?by	
 ?representations	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?content.	
 ?That	
 ?content	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?presented	
 ?with	
 ?as	
 ?much	
 ?information	
 ?density	
 ?as	
 ?is	
 ?possible	
 ?without	
 ?sacrificing	
 ?legibility,	
 ?adapting	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?size	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?used.	
 ?
5.4.7 Populating	
 ?While	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?combined	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?TBR	
 ?without	
 ?regard	
 ?to	
 ?source	
 ?simply	
 ?by	
 ?placing	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?stash,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?faced	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?more	
 ?complex	
 ?situation	
 ?for	
 ?digital	
 ?books.	
 ?People	
 ?have	
 ?proliferating	
 ?sources	
 ?for	
 ?digital	
 ?media,	
 ?each	
 ?of	
 ?which	
 ?usually	
 ?has	
 ?its	
 ?own	
 ?disconnected	
 ?stash.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 66	
 ?
As	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?progressed,	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?put	
 ?the	
 ?subjects?	
 ?own	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?ebooks	
 ?onto	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes.	
 ?Using	
 ?an	
 ?XML	
 ?manifest	
 ?to	
 ?set	
 ?up	
 ?prototype	
 ?sessions	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?selection	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?own	
 ?books	
 ?was	
 ?too	
 ?cumbersome	
 ?to	
 ?perform	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?beginning	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?feedback	
 ?session.	
 ?A	
 ?more	
 ?effective	
 ?approach	
 ?was	
 ?to	
 ?ask	
 ?subjects	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?books	
 ?in	
 ?advance	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?prototyping	
 ?session.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?first	
 ?independent	
 ?stash	
 ?that	
 ?was	
 ?connected	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?was	
 ?Google	
 ?Books.	
 ?Using	
 ?the	
 ?OAuth	
 ?protocol,	
 ?users	
 ?could	
 ?authenticate	
 ?using	
 ?their	
 ?Google	
 ?credentials	
 ?and	
 ?authorize	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?app	
 ?to	
 ?access	
 ?their	
 ?collection,	
 ?as	
 ?shown	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?17.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?17.	
 ?The	
 ?prototype	
 ?uses	
 ?OAuth	
 ?so	
 ?users	
 ?can	
 ?authorize	
 ?TBR	
 ?to	
 ?access	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?Google	
 ?Books	
 ?collections.	
 ?From	
 ?the	
 ?interviews,	
 ?I	
 ?knew	
 ?that	
 ?subjects	
 ?had	
 ?problems	
 ?caused	
 ?by	
 ?having	
 ?the	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?they	
 ?acquire	
 ?be	
 ?scattered	
 ?in	
 ?multiple,	
 ?disconnected	
 ?stashes	
 ?specific	
 ?to	
 ?each	
 ?source	
 ??	
 ?providers	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Amazon,	
 ?Netflix,	
 ?libraries,	
 ?and	
 ?so	
 ?on	
 ?all	
 ?have	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?different	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?digital	
 ?content	
 ?people	
 ?get	
 ?from	
 ?them.	
 ?But	
 ?quite	
 ?soon,	
 ?it	
 ?became	
 ?clear	
 ?to	
 ?me	
 ?that	
 ?most	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?use	
 ?any	
 ?source	
 ?stashes	
 ?that	
 ?have	
 ?accessible	
 ?API?s	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?provide	
 ?their	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TBR.	
 ?(For	
 ?example,	
 ?neither	
 ?Amazon	
 ?nor	
 ?the	
 ?Seattle	
 ?Public	
 ?Library	
 ??	
 ?the	
 ?two	
 ?most	
 ?popular	
 ?sources	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?among	
 ?my	
 ?subjects	
 ??	
 ?have	
 ?such	
 ?a	
 ?capability.)	
 ?While	
 ?a	
 ?screen-??scraping	
 ?approach	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?attempted,	
 ?such	
 ?a	
 ?solution	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?fragile	
 ?and	
 ?would	
 ?violate	
 ?the	
 ?terms	
 ?of	
 ?service	
 ?of	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?website.	
 ?	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?surprised	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?that	
 ?these	
 ?users	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?bothered	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?fact	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?shelf	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?automatically	
 ?load	
 ?their	
 ?books	
 ??	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?during	
 ?the	
 ?prototyping	
 ?session.	
 ?I	
 ?speculate	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?might	
 ?feel	
 ?differently	
 ?about	
 ?it,	
 ?even	
 ?being	
 ?driven	
 ?to	
 ?abandon	
 ?the	
 ?application,	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?continually	
 ?keep	
 ?it	
 ?updated	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?separate	
 ?action.	
 ?Speculation	
 ?aside,	
 ?during	
 ?the	
 ?feedback	
 ?sessions,	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?simple	
 ?request:	
 ??Just	
 ?let	
 ?me	
 ?add	
 ?books	
 ?right	
 ?here.?	
 ?They	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?type	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?search	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?title	
 ?or	
 ?an	
 ?author	
 ?and	
 ?be	
 ?shown	
 ?a	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?results;	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?select	
 ?the	
 ?right	
 ?one	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?added	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TBR.	
 ?This	
 ?came	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?surprise	
 ?to	
 ?me;	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?assumed	
 ?that	
 ?if	
 ?books	
 ?could	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?automatically	
 ?imported	
 ?from	
 ?other	
 ?stashes	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?major	
 ?detriment	
 ?to	
 ?adoption.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implication:	
 ?While	
 ?automated	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?some	
 ?stashes	
 ?is	
 ?convenient,	
 ?in	
 ?some	
 ?cases	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?feasible.	
 ?People	
 ?who	
 ?are	
 ?motivated	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?are	
 ?willing	
 ?to	
 ?put	
 ?in	
 ?some	
 ?effort	
 ?in	
 ?manually	
 ?populating	
 ?and	
 ?updating	
 ?their	
 ?stashes	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?find	
 ?that	
 ?doing	
 ?so	
 ?pays	
 ?off	
 ?in	
 ?achieving	
 ?satisfaction	
 ?and	
 ?fulfilling	
 ?intentions.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 67	
 ?
5.4.8 Sense-??making	
 ?and	
 ?organization	
 ?People	
 ?do	
 ?things	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?books	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?stashes	
 ?between	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?add	
 ?them	
 ?and	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?remove	
 ?them.	
 ?One	
 ?is	
 ?sense-??making:	
 ?reviewing	
 ?the	
 ?items	
 ?there.	
 ?Sometimes	
 ?this	
 ?is	
 ?done	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?deciding	
 ?whether	
 ?or	
 ?not	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?particular	
 ?book,	
 ?testing	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?has	
 ?the	
 ?right	
 ?taste	
 ?to	
 ?satisfy	
 ?the	
 ?appetite	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?moment.	
 ?
?There	
 ?are	
 ?parts	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?I	
 ?never	
 ?read	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?the	
 ?book,	
 ?just	
 ?to	
 ?decide	
 ?
whether	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?it	
 ?at	
 ?this	
 ?moment.	
 ?So	
 ?I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?pick	
 ?up	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?[off	
 ?
the	
 ?TBR]	
 ?and	
 ?see	
 ?those	
 ?things.?	
 ??	
 ?S5	
 ?The	
 ?key	
 ?items	
 ?this	
 ?user	
 ?said	
 ?they	
 ?examined	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?physical	
 ?TBR	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?that	
 ?further	
 ?determination	
 ?were	
 ?the	
 ?back	
 ?cover	
 ?text,	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?biography,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?introduction.	
 ?	
 ?People	
 ?also	
 ?spend	
 ?time	
 ?organizing	
 ?their	
 ?TBR	
 ?piles.	
 ?	
 ?
?I	
 ?love	
 ?to	
 ?rearrange	
 ?and	
 ?reorganize	
 ?my	
 ?library.	
 ?Organizing	
 ?my	
 ?books	
 ?helps	
 ?me	
 ?think	
 ?
about	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?differently	
 ?and	
 ?appreciate	
 ?them	
 ?more.?	
 ??	
 ?S7	
 ?Drawing	
 ?from	
 ?how	
 ?people	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?interact	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?physical	
 ?TBR	
 ?stashes,	
 ?we	
 ?see	
 ?that	
 ?organizing	
 ?books	
 ?physically	
 ?doesn?t	
 ?necessarily	
 ?rely	
 ?upon	
 ?generating	
 ?categories	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?applying	
 ?them.	
 ?Instead,	
 ?books	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?grouped	
 ?together	
 ?by	
 ?arranging	
 ?them	
 ?physically.	
 ?Using	
 ?drag	
 ?and	
 ?drop	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?touch	
 ?or	
 ?mouse	
 ?interface	
 ?is	
 ?quite	
 ?natural	
 ?for	
 ?users.	
 ?However,	
 ?media	
 ?center	
 ?interfaces	
 ?typically	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?such	
 ?an	
 ?easy	
 ?and	
 ?accurate	
 ?method	
 ?for	
 ?interacting;	
 ?traditional	
 ?remote	
 ?controls	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?well	
 ?suited	
 ?for	
 ?such	
 ?manipulation,	
 ?and	
 ?gestural	
 ?interfaces	
 ?are	
 ?still	
 ?not	
 ?widely	
 ?adopted	
 ?by	
 ?users.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?Consider	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?interact	
 ?with	
 ?and	
 ?organize	
 ?the	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?TBRs.	
 ?People	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?examine	
 ?the	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?stashes	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?more	
 ?about	
 ?them;	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?for	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?get	
 ?to	
 ?this	
 ?information	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?TBR.	
 ?Additionally,	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?layout	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?gains	
 ?a	
 ?semantic	
 ?level,	
 ?that	
 ?may	
 ?have	
 ?implications	
 ?for	
 ?what	
 ?methods	
 ?of	
 ?avoiding	
 ?burning	
 ?the	
 ?image	
 ?into	
 ?certain	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?displays,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?LCD	
 ?and	
 ?plasma,	
 ?which	
 ?can	
 ?happen	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?image	
 ?is	
 ?displayed	
 ?unchanging	
 ?for	
 ?an	
 ?extended	
 ?period	
 ?of	
 ?time.	
 ?Shuffling	
 ?a	
 ?carefully-??arranged	
 ?bookshelf	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?appreciated!	
 ?
5.4.9 Weeding	
 ?When	
 ?looking	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?lists	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?people	
 ?had	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?various	
 ?online	
 ?stashes,	
 ?there	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?frequent	
 ?response	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ??stale?	
 ?and	
 ?otherwise	
 ?outdated	
 ?items	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?them.	
 ?This	
 ?seemed	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?true	
 ?for	
 ?stashes	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?consulted	
 ?frequently	
 ?and	
 ?for	
 ?stashes	
 ?that	
 ?had	
 ?not	
 ?been	
 ?used	
 ?recently	
 ??	
 ?people	
 ?rarely	
 ?weeded	
 ?their	
 ?online	
 ?stashes.	
 ?Those	
 ?stashes	
 ?make	
 ?it	
 ?very	
 ?easy	
 ?to	
 ?add	
 ?items,	
 ?but	
 ?don?t	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?lot	
 ?of	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?removing	
 ?items.	
 ?Weeding	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?better	
 ?supported	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?features,	
 ?such	
 ?as:	
 ?
? Subjects	
 ?use	
 ?capacity	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?prompt	
 ?to	
 ?weed	
 ?in	
 ?physical	
 ?collections.	
 ?Online	
 ?stashes	
 ?generally	
 ?don?t	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?set	
 ?capacity	
 ?limit.	
 ?So	
 ?online	
 ?stashes	
 ?need	
 ?some	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?prompt	
 ?/	
 ?encourage	
 ?weeding.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ??you	
 ?added	
 ?this	
 ?item	
 ?a	
 ?long	
 ?time	
 ?ago	
 ?and	
 ?haven?t	
 ?even	
 ?taken	
 ?a	
 ?peek	
 ?at	
 ?it	
 ?since	
 ?then	
 ??	
 ?are	
 ?you	
 ?still	
 ?interested??	
 ?
	
 ? 68	
 ?
? Subjects	
 ?are	
 ?often	
 ?reluctant	
 ?to	
 ?irrevocably	
 ?delete	
 ?things.	
 ?They	
 ?want	
 ?some	
 ?record	
 ?to	
 ?remain,	
 ?just	
 ?not	
 ?so	
 ?obtrusive.	
 ?An	
 ?archival	
 ?function	
 ?would	
 ?address	
 ?that	
 ?concern,	
 ?where	
 ?archived	
 ?items	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?moved	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?main	
 ?visibility	
 ?but	
 ?still	
 ?retrievable.	
 ?	
 ?
? Weeding	
 ?by	
 ?topic	
 ??	
 ?if	
 ?there?s	
 ?an	
 ?entire	
 ?category	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?presently	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?pursuing	
 ??	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?material	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?project	
 ?that	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?completed	
 ??	
 ?that	
 ?entire	
 ?topic	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?dealt	
 ?with	
 ?at	
 ?once.	
 ?This	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?natural	
 ?fit	
 ?for	
 ?tying	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?categorization	
 ?capabilities	
 ?outlined	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.4.4.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?Support	
 ?weeding	
 ?by	
 ?providing	
 ?cues	
 ?that	
 ?encourage	
 ?weeding	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?capability	
 ?to	
 ?easily	
 ?remove	
 ?items.	
 ?
5.4.10 Energy	
 ?efficiency	
 ?People	
 ?were	
 ?concerned	
 ?that	
 ?leaving	
 ?the	
 ?device	
 ?on	
 ?continually	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?waste	
 ?of	
 ?energy.	
 ?Users	
 ?suggested	
 ?that	
 ?an	
 ?acceptable	
 ?design	
 ?response	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?to	
 ?sense	
 ?when	
 ?no	
 ?people	
 ?were	
 ?present	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?turn	
 ?off	
 ?the	
 ?display.	
 ?In	
 ?lieu	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?proximity	
 ?sensor	
 ?or	
 ?motion	
 ?detector	
 ?capability,	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?configured	
 ?like	
 ?a	
 ?traditional	
 ?programmable	
 ?thermostat	
 ?to	
 ?indicate	
 ?sleeping	
 ?or	
 ?work	
 ?hours	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?off.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?area	
 ?where	
 ?alternative	
 ?display	
 ?technologies	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?helpful;	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?e-??Ink	
 ?displays	
 ?only	
 ?use	
 ?power	
 ?when	
 ?changing	
 ?the	
 ?displayed	
 ?image.	
 ?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?people	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?concerned	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?energy	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?display	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?on	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?time.	
 ?Consider	
 ?how	
 ?this	
 ?concern	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?mitigated.	
 ?	
 ?
5.4.11 TBR	
 ?as	
 ?screensaver	
 ?People	
 ?discussed	
 ?two	
 ?distinct	
 ??screensaver?	
 ?scenarios	
 ?where	
 ?they	
 ?said	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?a	
 ?digital	
 ?TBR	
 ?on	
 ?non-??dedicated	
 ?displays	
 ?when	
 ?those	
 ?displays	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?actively	
 ?being	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes.	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?was	
 ?for	
 ?use	
 ?on	
 ?desktop	
 ?computers	
 ?whose	
 ?monitors	
 ?already	
 ?show	
 ?screensavers	
 ?when	
 ?not	
 ?in	
 ?use.	
 ?These	
 ?screensavers	
 ?are	
 ?used	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?visual	
 ?decoration	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?room;	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?only	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?preserve	
 ?the	
 ?screen,	
 ?they	
 ?could	
 ?set	
 ?the	
 ?display	
 ?to	
 ?turn	
 ?off	
 ?or	
 ?display	
 ?an	
 ?all-??black	
 ?image.	
 ?People	
 ?felt	
 ?showing	
 ?TBR	
 ?collections	
 ?worked	
 ?well	
 ?in	
 ?this	
 ?mode	
 ?because	
 ?books	
 ?are	
 ?attractive,	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?found	
 ?social	
 ?value	
 ?in	
 ?displaying	
 ?their	
 ?TBR	
 ?books	
 ?to	
 ?communicate	
 ?their	
 ?interests	
 ?to	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?could	
 ?see	
 ?their	
 ?screensavers	
 ??	
 ?often	
 ?their	
 ?coworkers	
 ?in	
 ?office	
 ?environments	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?thought	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?opportunity	
 ?to	
 ?expose	
 ?their	
 ?TBRs	
 ?in	
 ?an	
 ?ambient	
 ?manner	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?display	
 ?they	
 ?already	
 ?had	
 ?available.	
 ?Another	
 ?possible	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?screensaver	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?subjects	
 ?was	
 ?on	
 ?ereader	
 ?devices	
 ?themselves	
 ?when	
 ?not	
 ?in	
 ?use.	
 ?They	
 ?suggested	
 ?they	
 ?would	
 ?prefer	
 ?this	
 ?over,	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?advertisements	
 ?displayed	
 ?on	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?Kindle.	
 ?(Kindles	
 ?are	
 ?sold	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?choice	
 ?of	
 ?paying	
 ?less	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?unit	
 ?that	
 ?displays	
 ?ads,	
 ?or	
 ?paying	
 ?a	
 ?premium	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?device	
 ?that	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?display	
 ?ads.	
 ?At	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?US,	
 ?the	
 ?difference	
 ?is	
 ?$20,	
 ?but	
 ?those	
 ?who	
 ?pay	
 ?it	
 ?just	
 ?get	
 ?shown	
 ?artwork	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?ads.)	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?business	
 ?model	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?buy	
 ?more,	
 ?and	
 ?surely	
 ?the	
 ?ads	
 ?help	
 ?with	
 ?that,	
 ?but	
 ?perhaps	
 ?enabling	
 ?the	
 ?Kindle	
 ?display	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?could	
 ?also	
 ?increase	
 ?sales	
 ?by	
 ?increasing	
 ?the	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?read.	
 ?
	
 ? 69	
 ?
In	
 ?Figure	
 ?18	
 ?a	
 ?Kindle	
 ?is	
 ?pictured	
 ?displaying	
 ?an	
 ?advertisement	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?left,	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?mockup	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?shelf	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?right.	
 ?Another	
 ?approach	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?to	
 ?show	
 ?only	
 ?the	
 ?cover	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?currently	
 ?being	
 ?read;	
 ?either	
 ?one	
 ?might	
 ?serve	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?priming	
 ?prompt	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?reading.	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
Figure	
 ?18.	
 ?When	
 ?not	
 ?in	
 ?use,	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?Kindle	
 ?displays	
 ?advertisements	
 ?(center)	
 ?for	
 ?books	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?items	
 ?the	
 ?reader	
 ?
does	
 ?not	
 ?already	
 ?own,	
 ?and	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?interested	
 ?in.	
 ?Even	
 ?if	
 ?users	
 ?pay	
 ?extra	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?version	
 ?that	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?display	
 ?ads,	
 ?
the	
 ?Kindle	
 ?only	
 ?displays	
 ?generic	
 ?artwork	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?screensaver	
 ?(left).	
 ?What	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?instead	
 ?displayed	
 ?books	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?reader	
 ?
had	
 ?already	
 ?purchased	
 ?but	
 ?hadn?t	
 ?yet	
 ?read	
 ?(depicted	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?mockup,	
 ?right)	
 ??	
 ?or	
 ?books	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?reader	
 ?had	
 ?wished	
 ?for	
 ?
but	
 ?hadn?t	
 ?yet	
 ?purchased?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implication:	
 ?People	
 ?value	
 ?the	
 ?idea	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?display	
 ?and	
 ?had	
 ?several	
 ?ideas	
 ?for	
 ?putting	
 ?it	
 ?on	
 ?existing	
 ?displays	
 ?in	
 ?those	
 ?times	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?being	
 ?actively	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes.	
 ?Consider	
 ?what	
 ?displays	
 ?people	
 ?have	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?host	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?display.	
 ?
5.5 Results	
 ?&	
 ?Discussion	
 ?of	
 ?Insights	
 ?from	
 ?Personal	
 ?Long-??Term	
 ?Experience	
 ?As	
 ?previously	
 ?discussed,	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?insights	
 ?were	
 ?primarily	
 ?driven	
 ?from	
 ?my	
 ?personal	
 ?experience,	
 ?though	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?them	
 ?were	
 ?confirmed	
 ?or	
 ?expanded	
 ?upon	
 ?by	
 ?subjects	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interactive	
 ?sessions.	
 ?
5.5.1 Priming	
 ?Before	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototypes,	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?common	
 ?for	
 ?me	
 ?to	
 ?forget	
 ?newly-??purchased	
 ?ebooks	
 ?and	
 ?leave	
 ?them	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?consideration	
 ?if	
 ?they	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?consumed	
 ?immediately.	
 ?	
 ?After	
 ?adding	
 ?unread	
 ?ebooks	
 ?collected	
 ?since	
 ?2009	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototypes,	
 ?the	
 ?old	
 ?ebooks	
 ?were	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?in	
 ?awareness,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?3	
 ?of	
 ?them	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?2	
 ?months	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes.	
 ?This	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?personally	
 ?significant	
 ?effect,	
 ?especially	
 ?considering	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?also	
 ?doing	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?in	
 ?research	
 ?for	
 ?this	
 ?thesis	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?time!.	
 ?Other	
 ?ebooks	
 ?which	
 ?were	
 ?subsequently	
 ?acquired	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?included	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?get	
 ?a	
 ?boost	
 ?in	
 ?consumption.	
 ?It	
 ?seemed	
 ?to	
 ?me	
 ?that	
 ?because	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?forgetting	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?entirely,	
 ?when	
 ?it	
 ?came	
 ?time	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?to	
 ?read,	
 ?I	
 ?already	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?hunger	
 ?for	
 ?reading	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?ebooks	
 ??waiting	
 ?for	
 ?me?	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?TBR.	
 ?	
 ?This	
 ?personal	
 ?experience	
 ?strengthened	
 ?my	
 ?belief	
 ?that	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?might	
 ?also	
 ?find	
 ?the	
 ?TBR?s	
 ?priming	
 ?effective	
 ?in	
 ?helping	
 ?them	
 ?increase	
 ?reading	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?they?d	
 ?selected.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 70	
 ?
5.5.2 Attention-??drawing	
 ?vs.	
 ?Ambient	
 ?A	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?findings	
 ?were	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?drawing	
 ?attention.	
 ?An	
 ?ambient	
 ?display	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?allow	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?when	
 ?to	
 ?attend	
 ?to	
 ?it,	
 ?rather	
 ?than	
 ?drawing	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?attention.	
 ?	
 ?
? Light	
 ?levels	
 ?and	
 ?color	
 ?bleeding.	
 ?In	
 ?Seattle,	
 ?the	
 ?light	
 ?levels	
 ?change	
 ?frequently	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?sun	
 ?plays	
 ?peek-??a-??boo	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?clouds.	
 ?The	
 ?iPad	
 ?display	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?turned	
 ?up	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?bright	
 ?enough	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?legible	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?room	
 ?was	
 ?lit	
 ?with	
 ?sunlight.	
 ?But	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?clouds	
 ?came	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?room	
 ?dimmed,	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?brightness	
 ?level	
 ?caused	
 ?the	
 ?image	
 ?to	
 ?shine	
 ?out	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?room,	
 ?so	
 ?much	
 ?that	
 ?when	
 ?the	
 ?image	
 ?changed	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?different	
 ?color,	
 ?that	
 ?entire	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?room	
 ?glowed	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?new	
 ?hue,	
 ?as	
 ?pictured	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?19.	
 ?
	
 ? 	
 ?
Figure	
 ?19.	
 ?When	
 ?the	
 ?brightness	
 ?is	
 ?too	
 ?high	
 ?for	
 ?ambient	
 ?lighting	
 ?conditions	
 ?(left)	
 ?the	
 ?light	
 ?bleeds	
 ?onto	
 ?surrounding	
 ?
surfaces,	
 ? changing	
 ? their	
 ? color	
 ? and	
 ? drawing	
 ? attention	
 ?with	
 ? every	
 ? change.	
 ? Adjusting	
 ? the	
 ? brightness	
 ? to	
 ?match	
 ? the	
 ?
room	
 ?(right)	
 ?avoids	
 ?this	
 ?problem.	
 ?
? Perceived	
 ?motion.	
 ?The	
 ?prototypes	
 ?which	
 ?used	
 ?existing	
 ?slideshow	
 ?functionality	
 ?on	
 ?iPad	
 ?and	
 ?a	
 ?television	
 ?set	
 ?offered	
 ?choices	
 ?in	
 ?how	
 ?the	
 ?transition	
 ?between	
 ?images	
 ?was	
 ?managed,	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?simple	
 ?cross-??fade	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?complicated	
 ??checkerboard?	
 ?animation.	
 ?The	
 ?more	
 ?complex	
 ?and	
 ?longer	
 ?lasting	
 ?the	
 ?transition	
 ?was,	
 ?the	
 ?more	
 ?attention	
 ?it	
 ?drew.	
 ?This	
 ?distraction	
 ?was	
 ?obtrusive	
 ?and	
 ?unwelcome.	
 ?The	
 ?best	
 ?transition	
 ?was	
 ?an	
 ?instant	
 ?cut	
 ?from	
 ?one	
 ?image	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ??	
 ?as	
 ?long	
 ?as	
 ?this	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?cause	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?overall	
 ?room	
 ?lighting	
 ?brightness	
 ?and	
 ?hue	
 ?as	
 ?mentioned	
 ?above.	
 ?
? Frequency	
 ?of	
 ?changes.	
 ?When	
 ?the	
 ?image	
 ?changes,	
 ?even	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?minimal	
 ?transition,	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?still	
 ?draw	
 ?attention.	
 ?Therefore	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?best	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?quite	
 ?infrequently.	
 ?Ideally	
 ?no	
 ?changes	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?needed,	
 ?but	
 ?depending	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?resolution	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?display,	
 ?they	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?all	
 ?fit	
 ?onscreen	
 ?at	
 ?once.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?ambient	
 ?displays	
 ?must	
 ?avoid	
 ?drawing	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?attention	
 ?unintentionally.	
 ?Brightness	
 ?levels	
 ?higher	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?surroundings,	
 ?motion,	
 ?and	
 ?frequent	
 ?changes	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?avoided.	
 ?Other	
 ?attention-??grabbing	
 ?characteristics	
 ?may	
 ?only	
 ?surface	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?environments	
 ?where	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?used,	
 ?and	
 ?will	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?be	
 ?detectable	
 ?by	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?are	
 ?already	
 ?actively	
 ?paying	
 ?attention	
 ?to	
 ?it.	
 ?Ambient	
 ?displays	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?tested	
 ?for	
 ?attention-??grabbing	
 ?characteristics	
 ?over	
 ?time	
 ?in	
 ?environments	
 ?that	
 ?resemble	
 ?the	
 ?places	
 ?they	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?used.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 71	
 ?
5.5.3 Correspondence	
 ?At	
 ?one	
 ?point	
 ?I	
 ?decided	
 ?to	
 ?try	
 ?including	
 ?a	
 ?representation	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?prototype	
 ?TBR	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?using	
 ?(more	
 ?on	
 ?this	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?5.5.4).	
 ?In	
 ?some	
 ?cases	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?ended	
 ?up	
 ?displaying	
 ?a	
 ?cover	
 ?image	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?different	
 ?edition	
 ?which	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?match	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?book	
 ?I	
 ?had.	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?this	
 ?lack	
 ?of	
 ?correspondence	
 ?confusing;	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?recognize	
 ?the	
 ?book	
 ?from	
 ?across	
 ?the	
 ?room,	
 ?and	
 ?this	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?confusion	
 ?drew	
 ?my	
 ?attention	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?negative	
 ?way.	
 ?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implication:	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?the	
 ?on-??screen	
 ?representation	
 ?match	
 ?the	
 ?item.	
 ?An	
 ?effective	
 ?design	
 ?response	
 ?to	
 ?this	
 ?issue	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?allowing	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?to	
 ?search	
 ?for	
 ?and	
 ?select	
 ?an	
 ?alternate	
 ?cover.	
 ?
5.5.4 Content	
 ?polymorphism	
 ?Polymorphism	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?concept	
 ?from	
 ?computer	
 ?science	
 ?where	
 ?different	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?data	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?interface.	
 ?I	
 ?soon	
 ?realized	
 ?that	
 ?supporting	
 ?different	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?content	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?beneficial:	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?I	
 ?could	
 ?also	
 ?add	
 ?a	
 ?representation	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?into	
 ?my	
 ?TBR	
 ?display	
 ?alongside	
 ?the	
 ?ebooks.	
 ?This	
 ?was	
 ?easy	
 ?to	
 ?accomplish,	
 ?but	
 ?then	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?once	
 ?I	
 ?started	
 ?mixing	
 ?content,	
 ?I	
 ?needed	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?some	
 ?clues	
 ?about	
 ?where	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?the	
 ?book.	
 ?This	
 ?general	
 ?problem	
 ?also	
 ?occurred	
 ?for	
 ?users	
 ?who	
 ?added	
 ?ebooks	
 ?from	
 ?multiple	
 ?sources.	
 ?If	
 ?library	
 ?books	
 ?were	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?added,	
 ?giving	
 ?an	
 ?indication	
 ?of	
 ?due	
 ?date	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?helpful,	
 ?or	
 ?at	
 ?least	
 ?an	
 ?indication	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?library	
 ?book	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?first	
 ?place,	
 ?as	
 ?we	
 ?saw	
 ?was	
 ?helpful	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?picture	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?spines	
 ?that	
 ?showed	
 ?library	
 ?stickers	
 ?(Figure	
 ?12).	
 ?	
 ?Other	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?which	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?particularly	
 ?well	
 ?suited	
 ?to	
 ?including	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?include	
 ?other	
 ?reading	
 ?material	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?magazines,	
 ?journal	
 ?articles,	
 ?and	
 ?RSS	
 ?feeds	
 ?from	
 ?blogs.	
 ?	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?People	
 ?may	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?put	
 ?more	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?items	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?stash	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?originally	
 ?anticipated.	
 ?Consider	
 ?what	
 ?additional	
 ?content	
 ?types	
 ?people	
 ?may	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?include	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?they	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?included.	
 ?
5.5.5 Mobility	
 ?While	
 ?visiting	
 ?family	
 ?in	
 ?Minnesota	
 ?over	
 ?winter	
 ?break,	
 ?I	
 ?brought	
 ?the	
 ?iPad	
 ?along	
 ?so	
 ?it	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?other	
 ?purposes.	
 ?On	
 ?a	
 ?whim,	
 ?I	
 ?decided	
 ?to	
 ?set	
 ?it	
 ?up	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?display	
 ?while	
 ?it	
 ?was	
 ?charging	
 ?each	
 ?night.	
 ?This	
 ?ended	
 ?up	
 ?working	
 ?very	
 ?well.	
 ?	
 ?
? It	
 ?provided	
 ?a	
 ?bit	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?feeling	
 ?of	
 ?home	
 ?while	
 ?staying	
 ?in	
 ?someone	
 ?else?s	
 ?house.	
 ?	
 ?
? While	
 ?on	
 ?vacation,	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?more	
 ?time	
 ?than	
 ?usual	
 ?to	
 ?read.	
 ?So	
 ?having	
 ?visibility	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?available	
 ?is	
 ?particularly	
 ?useful:	
 ?as	
 ?I	
 ?finished	
 ?many	
 ?books,	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?to	
 ?choose	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?book	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?many	
 ?times.	
 ?
? Because	
 ?the	
 ?ebooks	
 ?displayed	
 ?were	
 ?all	
 ?accessible	
 ?to	
 ?me,	
 ?I	
 ?felt	
 ?like	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?brought	
 ?a	
 ?nice	
 ?stack	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?material	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?many	
 ?choices	
 ?to	
 ?fit	
 ?different	
 ?possible	
 ?appetites,	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?constrained	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?selections	
 ?made	
 ?while	
 ?packing	
 ?by	
 ?a	
 ??now	
 ?me?	
 ?who	
 ?
Figure	
 ?20.	
 ?Prior	
 ?to	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?digital	
 ?
TBR,	
 ?the	
 ?author	
 ?brought	
 ?this	
 ?TBR	
 ?
stack	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?vacation.	
 ?
	
 ? 72	
 ?
might	
 ?incorrectly	
 ?predict	
 ?what	
 ??future	
 ?me?	
 ?would	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?on	
 ?vacation.	
 ?As	
 ?it	
 ?happened,	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?end	
 ?up	
 ?reading	
 ?a	
 ?different	
 ?proportion	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?than	
 ?I	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?predicted	
 ??	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?considerably	
 ?more	
 ?non-??fiction	
 ?reading	
 ?than	
 ?I	
 ?anticipated.	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?past	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?taken	
 ?vacations	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?big	
 ?stack	
 ?of	
 ?physical	
 ?books	
 ?(one	
 ?is	
 ?shown	
 ?in	
 ?Error!	
 ?
Reference	
 ?source	
 ?not	
 ?found.),	
 ?which	
 ?provided	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?priming	
 ?effect.	
 ?When	
 ?traveling	
 ?with	
 ?only	
 ?ebooks	
 ?before	
 ?having	
 ?a	
 ?digital	
 ?TBR,	
 ?the	
 ?invisible	
 ?media	
 ?problem	
 ?affected	
 ?me,	
 ?and	
 ?selecting	
 ?a	
 ?next	
 ?book	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?took	
 ?additional	
 ?effort.	
 ?Being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?take	
 ?my	
 ?TBR	
 ?with	
 ?me	
 ?proved	
 ?quite	
 ?beneficial.	
 ?
Design	
 ?implications:	
 ?The	
 ?TBR	
 ?itself	
 ?may	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?changing	
 ?physical	
 ?location.	
 ?Especially	
 ?if	
 ?physical	
 ?media	
 ?items	
 ?are	
 ?included,	
 ?consider	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?handle	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?available	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?is	
 ?being	
 ?viewed.	
 ?
5.5.6 Ubiquitous	
 ?access	
 ?One	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?prototypes	
 ?used	
 ?a	
 ?collection	
 ?of	
 ?images	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?web	
 ?service.	
 ?This	
 ?provided	
 ?an	
 ?unexpected	
 ?benefit:	
 ?by	
 ?checking	
 ?the	
 ?collection	
 ?remotely	
 ?while	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?bookstore,	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?	
 ?verify	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?already	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?book,	
 ?and	
 ?so	
 ?avoided	
 ?buying	
 ?a	
 ?second	
 ?copy	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?I	
 ?already	
 ?owned.	
 ?(This	
 ?has	
 ?happened	
 ?far	
 ?more	
 ?often	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?past	
 ?than	
 ?I	
 ?care	
 ?to	
 ?quantify!)	
 ?
Design	
 ?implication:	
 ?Consider	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?enable	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?access	
 ?the	
 ?contents	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?TBRs	
 ?from	
 ?any	
 ?location	
 ?or	
 ?device.	
 ?	
 ?
5.6 Conclusion:	
 ?Summary	
 ?of	
 ?TBR	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?The	
 ?feedback	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?users	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?very	
 ?early	
 ?prototypes	
 ?inspired	
 ?new	
 ?features	
 ?and	
 ?also	
 ?helped	
 ?change	
 ?feature	
 ?prioritization.	
 ?Knowing	
 ?what	
 ?sorts	
 ?of	
 ?features	
 ?were	
 ?highly	
 ?desired	
 ?and	
 ?which	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?highly	
 ?valued	
 ?provided	
 ?clues	
 ?to	
 ?design	
 ?architecture	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?flexibility	
 ?where	
 ?needed.	
 ?This	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?nice	
 ?balance	
 ?between	
 ?taking	
 ?a	
 ?strict	
 ??YAGNI?	
 ?(You	
 ?Ain?t	
 ?Gonna	
 ?Need	
 ?It)	
 ?approach,	
 ?where	
 ?hooks	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?future	
 ?functionality	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?created	
 ?until	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?actually	
 ?required,	
 ?vs.	
 ?the	
 ?opposite	
 ?problem	
 ?of	
 ?over-??architecting	
 ?flexibility	
 ?that	
 ?may	
 ?never	
 ?be	
 ?needed.	
 ?In	
 ?addition,	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?received	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?value	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?for	
 ?implementing	
 ?desired	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?changes.	
 ?The	
 ?preliminary	
 ?prototypes	
 ?of	
 ?to-??be-??read	
 ?piles	
 ?successfully	
 ?changed	
 ?my	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?While	
 ?using	
 ?them,	
 ?I	
 ?read	
 ?the	
 ?displayed	
 ?books	
 ?more	
 ?often	
 ?than	
 ?before,	
 ?and	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?looking	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?book	
 ?to	
 ?read,	
 ?I	
 ?selected	
 ?books	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?available	
 ?list.	
 ?However,	
 ?visibility	
 ?alone	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?incline	
 ?me	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?interested	
 ?in	
 ?reading	
 ?otherwise.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?experience	
 ?of	
 ?exploring	
 ?the	
 ?potential	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?prototypes	
 ?myself	
 ?and	
 ?with	
 ?others	
 ?reinforced	
 ?my	
 ?belief	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?an	
 ?opportunity	
 ?to	
 ?use	
 ?TBRs	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?and	
 ?possibly	
 ?other	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?digital	
 ?media,	
 ?by	
 ?using	
 ?ambient	
 ?displays	
 ?to	
 ?increase	
 ?the	
 ?visibility	
 ?and	
 ?priming	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?we	
 ?have	
 ?stashed	
 ?because	
 ?we	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?it.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 73	
 ?
6 Conclusion	
 ?This	
 ?research	
 ?explored	
 ?the	
 ?thesis	
 ?that	
 ?applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?diet	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?could	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?better	
 ?understanding	
 ?and	
 ?inform	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?solutions	
 ?for	
 ?people?s	
 ?unaddressed	
 ?problems.	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?applying	
 ?food	
 ?thinking	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?was	
 ?very	
 ?fruitful.	
 ?Like	
 ?food,	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?central	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?most	
 ?people?s	
 ?lives.	
 ?We	
 ?have	
 ?woven	
 ?it	
 ?into	
 ?our	
 ?social	
 ?interactions.	
 ?We	
 ?have	
 ?emotional	
 ?responses	
 ?to	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media.	
 ?Our	
 ?identity	
 ?is	
 ?often	
 ?tied	
 ?to	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?both	
 ?in	
 ?communicating	
 ?our	
 ?identity	
 ?to	
 ?self	
 ?and	
 ?others,	
 ?and	
 ?our	
 ?eudaimonic	
 ?desires	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?media	
 ?in	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?accord	
 ?with	
 ?our	
 ?best	
 ?nature.	
 ?Finally,	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?also	
 ?a	
 ?degree	
 ?of	
 ?purely	
 ?aesthetic,	
 ?hedonistic	
 ?appreciation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?we	
 ?consume.	
 ?But	
 ?the	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?participated	
 ?in	
 ?interviews	
 ?told	
 ?me	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?Clay	
 ?Johnson?s	
 ??information	
 ?diet?	
 ?metaphor	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?the	
 ?best	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?convey	
 ?the	
 ?parallels	
 ?between	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media.	
 ?The	
 ?primary	
 ?shortcoming	
 ?was	
 ?the	
 ?emphasis	
 ?on	
 ?information,	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?regarded	
 ?as	
 ?describing	
 ?only	
 ?objective	
 ?facts	
 ?and	
 ?news,	
 ?not	
 ?including	
 ?such	
 ?things	
 ?as	
 ?art,	
 ?entertainment,	
 ?and	
 ?social	
 ?interactions.	
 ?The	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?felt	
 ?that	
 ?focusing	
 ?only	
 ?on	
 ??information?	
 ?was	
 ?an	
 ?overly	
 ?narrow	
 ?view	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?which	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?adequately	
 ?explain	
 ?their	
 ?motivations	
 ??	
 ?just	
 ?as	
 ?looking	
 ?at	
 ?one?s	
 ?food	
 ?consumption	
 ?purely	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?basis	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?nutrients	
 ?provided	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?cover	
 ?the	
 ?breadth	
 ?of	
 ?activities	
 ?and	
 ?values	
 ?people	
 ?associate	
 ?with	
 ?food.	
 ?	
 ?Applying	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?did	
 ?prove	
 ?valuable	
 ?in	
 ?understanding	
 ?people?s	
 ?needs	
 ?and	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?Using	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?starting	
 ?point	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?conversation	
 ?was	
 ?successful	
 ?in	
 ?eliciting	
 ?a	
 ?rich	
 ?and	
 ?detailed	
 ?understanding	
 ?of	
 ?people?s	
 ?motivations	
 ?and	
 ?desires	
 ?for	
 ?media.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?related	
 ?many	
 ?ways	
 ?that	
 ?context	
 ?changes	
 ?appetite	
 ?rapidly	
 ?over	
 ?the	
 ?short	
 ?term:	
 ?for	
 ?example,	
 ?being	
 ?sick	
 ?can	
 ?make	
 ?one	
 ?hunger	
 ?for	
 ?comfort	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?comfort	
 ?media,	
 ?and	
 ?encountering	
 ?a	
 ?repulsive	
 ?item	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?or	
 ?media	
 ?can	
 ?temporarily	
 ?suppress	
 ?one?s	
 ?appetite	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?respective	
 ?domain.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?also	
 ?told	
 ?of	
 ?how	
 ?their	
 ?tastes	
 ?and	
 ?habits	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?response	
 ?to	
 ?external,	
 ?or	
 ?exogenous,	
 ?causes.	
 ?	
 ?But	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?several	
 ?important	
 ?problems	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?uncovered	
 ?independent	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?changes	
 ?that	
 ?have	
 ?accompanied	
 ?the	
 ?digitization	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?were	
 ?the	
 ?subject	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?discussion	
 ?from	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects,	
 ?who	
 ?were	
 ?eager	
 ?to	
 ?discuss	
 ?how	
 ?these	
 ?changes	
 ?have	
 ?changed	
 ?their	
 ?habits	
 ?in	
 ?positive	
 ?and	
 ?negative	
 ?ways,	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?and	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?appreciate	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?ways	
 ?media	
 ?and	
 ?their	
 ?consumption	
 ?has	
 ?changed.	
 ?The	
 ?open-??ended	
 ?interview	
 ?approach	
 ?was	
 ?very	
 ?successful	
 ?at	
 ?eliciting	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?these,	
 ?primarily	
 ?by	
 ?diverging	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor-??based	
 ?inquiry.	
 ?The	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?good	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?exploring	
 ?the	
 ?differences	
 ?between	
 ?physical	
 ?media	
 ?and	
 ?digital	
 ?media.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?understandable	
 ?because	
 ?food,	
 ?unlike	
 ?media,	
 ?has	
 ?not	
 ?and	
 ?cannot	
 ?become	
 ?digital	
 ?and	
 ?leave	
 ?its	
 ?physical	
 ?nature	
 ?behind	
 ??	
 ?at	
 ?least,	
 ?as	
 ?long	
 ?as	
 ?humans	
 ?continue	
 ?to	
 ?exist	
 ?as	
 ?biological,	
 ?embodied	
 ?beings.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?metaphor	
 ?was	
 ?also	
 ?helpful	
 ?in	
 ?identifying	
 ?potential	
 ?approaches	
 ?to	
 ?solving	
 ?those	
 ?problems,	
 ?though	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?surprised	
 ?in	
 ?how	
 ?this	
 ?worked.	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?wondered	
 ?if	
 ?I	
 ?would	
 ?find	
 ?a	
 ?technique	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?realm	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?being	
 ?used	
 ?at	
 ?all	
 ?with	
 ?media,	
 ?and	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?would	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?investigate	
 ?how	
 ?it	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?to	
 ?media.	
 ?Instead,	
 ?by	
 ?examining	
 ?the	
 ?two	
 ?domains	
 ?in	
 ?parallel,	
 ?I	
 ?saw	
 ?how	
 ?some	
 ?techniques	
 ?were	
 ?applied	
 ?in	
 ?both	
 ?domains.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?
	
 ? 74	
 ?
the	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?for	
 ?both	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media.	
 ?If	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?not	
 ?heard	
 ?from	
 ?people	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?utility	
 ?of	
 ?those	
 ?techniques	
 ?for	
 ?supporting	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?food,	
 ?I	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?have	
 ?recognized	
 ?the	
 ?potential	
 ?for	
 ?better	
 ?applying	
 ?them	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?media.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?significance	
 ?of	
 ?stashing?s	
 ?use	
 ?in	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?was	
 ?uncovered	
 ?from	
 ?recognizing	
 ?its	
 ?presence	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?food.	
 ?Background	
 ?research	
 ?provides	
 ?experimental	
 ?confirmation	
 ?that	
 ?stashing	
 ?does	
 ?in	
 ?fact	
 ?affect	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?food.	
 ?The	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?explains	
 ?how	
 ?the	
 ?effectiveness	
 ?of	
 ?stashing	
 ?in	
 ?accomplishing	
 ?certain	
 ?functions	
 ?relies	
 ?upon	
 ?certain	
 ?qualities	
 ?as	
 ?visibility,	
 ?capacity	
 ?and	
 ?organizability.	
 ?Visibility	
 ?encourages	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?enables	
 ?identity	
 ?claims,	
 ?capacity	
 ?prompts	
 ?weeding	
 ?and	
 ?shifting	
 ?from	
 ?acquisition	
 ?to	
 ?consumption,	
 ?and	
 ?organizability	
 ?enables	
 ?sense-??making.	
 ?These	
 ?qualities	
 ?aren?t	
 ?present,	
 ?or	
 ?are	
 ?weaker,	
 ?for	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?digital	
 ?items	
 ?than	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?physical	
 ?stashes	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?discussed.	
 ?This	
 ?means	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?transition	
 ?to	
 ?digital	
 ?media	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?resulting	
 ?in	
 ?functionality	
 ?gaps	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumers.	
 ?Perhaps	
 ?if	
 ?these	
 ?gaps	
 ?were	
 ?addressed	
 ?by	
 ?providing	
 ?digital	
 ?stashes	
 ?with	
 ?these	
 ?qualities,	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?increase	
 ?media	
 ?consumers	
 ?ability	
 ?to	
 ?better	
 ?manage	
 ?their	
 ?	
 ?habits.	
 ?Exploring	
 ?the	
 ?design	
 ?space	
 ?possibilities	
 ?of	
 ?applying	
 ?stashes	
 ?to	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?problems	
 ?identified	
 ?was	
 ?accomplished	
 ?by	
 ?carrying	
 ?out	
 ?design-??based	
 ?research	
 ?with	
 ?prototypes,	
 ?both	
 ?independently	
 ?and	
 ?with	
 ?user	
 ?feedback.	
 ?The	
 ?approach	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?slow	
 ?technology	
 ?ambient	
 ?display	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?an	
 ?electronic	
 ??to-??be-??read?	
 ?display	
 ?for	
 ?ebooks	
 ?appears	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?promising.	
 ?Numerous	
 ?actionable	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?identified,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?additional	
 ?use	
 ?cases,	
 ?functionality,	
 ?and	
 ?other	
 ?possibilities,	
 ?all	
 ?without	
 ?requiring	
 ?large	
 ?investments	
 ?in	
 ?development.	
 ?Many	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?insights	
 ?have	
 ?already	
 ?been	
 ?incorporated	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?prototype	
 ?code,	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?available	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ?open-??source	
 ?project.	
 ?	
 ?Finally,	
 ?though	
 ?a	
 ?controlled	
 ?experiment	
 ?to	
 ?measure	
 ?the	
 ?efficacy	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?has	
 ?not	
 ?yet	
 ?been	
 ?conducted,	
 ?my	
 ?own	
 ?experience	
 ?was	
 ?that	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototype	
 ?in	
 ?use,	
 ?it	
 ?did	
 ?help	
 ?to	
 ?keep	
 ?previously-??acquired	
 ?ebooks	
 ?in	
 ?consideration	
 ?and	
 ?increased	
 ?their	
 ?consumption,	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?when	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?using	
 ?a	
 ?TBR	
 ?for	
 ?my	
 ?ebooks,	
 ?and	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?installed	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?my	
 ?home	
 ?as	
 ?an	
 ?ongoing	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?my	
 ?reading	
 ?toolkit	
 ?(Figure	
 ?22).	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?21.	
 ?A	
 ?TBR	
 ?prototype	
 ?installed	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?author's	
 ?personal	
 ?To-??Be-??Read	
 ?bookshelf.	
 ?
	
 ? 75	
 ?
7 References	
 ?Alter,	
 ?A.	
 ?(2012,	
 ?July	
 ?19).	
 ?Your	
 ?E-??Book	
 ?Is	
 ?Reading	
 ?You.	
 ?Wall	
 ?Street	
 ?Journal.	
 ?New	
 ?York.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304870304577490950051438304.html	
 ?Amazon.com.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Amazon.com	
 ?Now	
 ?Selling	
 ?More	
 ?Kindle	
 ?Books	
 ?Than	
 ?Print	
 ?Books	
 ?[Press	
 ?Release].	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?May	
 ?5,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://phx.corporate-??ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=176060&p=irol-??newsArticle&ID=1565581&highlight	
 ?American	
 ?Academy	
 ?of	
 ?Pediatrics.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Children,	
 ?adolescents,	
 ?obesity,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?media.	
 ?
Pediatrics,	
 ?128(1),	
 ?201?8.	
 ?doi:10.1542/peds.2011-??1066	
 ?Anderson,	
 ?C.	
 ?A.,	
 ?Bushman,	
 ?B.	
 ?J.,	
 ?&	
 ?Anderson,	
 ?B.	
 ?C.	
 ?A.	
 ?(2001).	
 ?Effects	
 ?of	
 ?violent	
 ?video	
 ?games	
 ?on	
 ?aggressive	
 ?behavior,	
 ?aggressive	
 ?cognition,	
 ?aggressive	
 ?affect,	
 ?physiological	
 ?arousal,	
 ?and	
 ?prosocial	
 ?behavior:	
 ?A	
 ?meta-??analytic	
 ?review.	
 ?Psychological	
 ?science,	
 ?12(5),	
 ?353?359.	
 ?Association	
 ?of	
 ?American	
 ?Publishers.	
 ?(2013).	
 ?Trade	
 ?Publishers?	
 ?Net	
 ?Revenue	
 ?Grows	
 ?6.2%	
 ?For	
 ?Calendar	
 ?Year	
 ?2012.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?May	
 ?5,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.publishers.org/press/101/	
 ?Bauer,	
 ?J.	
 ?S.,	
 ?Consolvo,	
 ?S.,	
 ?Greenstein,	
 ?B.,	
 ?Schooler,	
 ?J.,	
 ?Wu,	
 ?E.,	
 ?Watson,	
 ?N.	
 ?F.,	
 ?&	
 ?Kientz,	
 ?J.	
 ?A.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?ShutEye:	
 ?Encouraging	
 ?Awareness	
 ?of	
 ?Healthy	
 ?Sleep	
 ?Recommendations	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?Mobile,	
 ?Peripheral	
 ?Display.	
 ?CHI	
 ?2012	
 ?Conference	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?(pp.	
 ?1401?1410).	
 ?Austin,	
 ?Texas.	
 ?Birkerts,	
 ?S.	
 ?(1994).	
 ?The	
 ?Gutenberg	
 ?Elegies:	
 ?the	
 ?fate	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?in	
 ?an	
 ?electronic	
 ?age.	
 ?Boston:	
 ?Faber	
 ?and	
 ?Faber.	
 ?Blomberg,	
 ?J.,	
 ?&	
 ?Burrell,	
 ?M.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?An	
 ?Ethnographic	
 ?Approach	
 ?to	
 ?Design.	
 ?In	
 ?J.	
 ?Jacko	
 ?(Ed.),	
 ?The	
 ?
Human-??Computer	
 ?Interaction	
 ?Handbook:	
 ?Fundamentals,	
 ?evolving	
 ?technologies,	
 ?and	
 ?
emerging	
 ?applications	
 ?(3rd	
 ?ed.,	
 ?pp.	
 ?1025?1054).	
 ?Boca	
 ?Raton,	
 ?Florida.	
 ?Carpenter,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?qualitative	
 ?research:	
 ?shedding	
 ?light	
 ?or	
 ?casting	
 ?shadows?	
 ?
Research	
 ?in	
 ?nursing	
 ?&	
 ?health,	
 ?31(3),	
 ?274?82.	
 ?doi:10.1002/nur.20253	
 ?Carr,	
 ?D.	
 ?(2013,	
 ?February	
 ?25).	
 ?For	
 ??House	
 ?of	
 ?Cards,?	
 ?Using	
 ?Big	
 ?Data	
 ?to	
 ?Guarantee	
 ?Its	
 ?Popularity.	
 ?New	
 ?York	
 ?Times,	
 ?p.	
 ?B1.	
 ?New	
 ?York.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/25/business/media/for-??house-??of-??cards-??using-??big-??data-??to-??guarantee-??its-??popularity.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0	
 ?Carr,	
 ?N.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?The	
 ?Shallows:	
 ?What	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?Is	
 ?Doing	
 ?To	
 ?Our	
 ?Brains.	
 ?New	
 ?York,	
 ?New	
 ?York,	
 ?USA:	
 ?W.W.	
 ?Norton	
 ?&	
 ?Company.	
 ?
	
 ? 76	
 ?
Casakin,	
 ?H.	
 ?P.	
 ?(2007).	
 ?Metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?Design	
 ?Problem	
 ?Solving:	
 ?Implications	
 ?for	
 ?Creativity.	
 ?
International	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Design,	
 ?1(2).	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/53/27	
 ?Casakin,	
 ?H.	
 ?P.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Metaphorical	
 ?reasoning	
 ?and	
 ?design	
 ?expertise:	
 ?a	
 ?perspective	
 ?for	
 ?design	
 ?education.	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Learning	
 ?Design,	
 ?4(2),	
 ?29?38.	
 ?Consolvo,	
 ?S.,	
 ?Klasnja,	
 ?P.,	
 ?McDonald,	
 ?D.	
 ?W.,	
 ?Avrahami,	
 ?D.,	
 ?Froehlich,	
 ?J.,	
 ?LeGrand,	
 ?L.,	
 ?Libby,	
 ?R.,	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Flowers	
 ?or	
 ?a	
 ?Robot	
 ?Army?	
 ?Encouraging	
 ?Awareness	
 ?&	
 ?Activity	
 ?with	
 ?Personal,	
 ?Mobile	
 ?Displays.	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?10th	
 ?Annual	
 ?Ubiquitous	
 ?Computing	
 ?Conference	
 ?(pp.	
 ?54?63).	
 ?Seoul,	
 ?Korea.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1409644	
 ?Consolvo,	
 ?S.,	
 ?McDonald,	
 ?D.	
 ?W.,	
 ?&	
 ?Landay,	
 ?J.	
 ?A.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?Theory-??driven	
 ?design	
 ?strategies	
 ?for	
 ?technologies	
 ?that	
 ?support	
 ?behavior	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?everyday	
 ?life.	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?27th	
 ?
international	
 ?conference	
 ?on	
 ?Human	
 ?factors	
 ?in	
 ?computing	
 ?systems	
 ?-??	
 ?CHI	
 ?09,	
 ?405.	
 ?doi:10.1145/1518701.1518766	
 ?Dandekar,	
 ?P.,	
 ?Goel,	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Lee,	
 ?D.	
 ?T.	
 ?(2013).	
 ?Biased	
 ?assimilation,	
 ?homophily,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?dynamics	
 ?of	
 ?polarization.	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?National	
 ?Academy	
 ?of	
 ?Sciences.	
 ?doi:10.1073/pnas.1217220110	
 ?Dauncey,	
 ?M.	
 ?J.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?New	
 ?insights	
 ?into	
 ?nutrition	
 ?and	
 ?cognitive	
 ?neuroscience.	
 ?The	
 ?
Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?Nutrition	
 ?Society,	
 ?68(4),	
 ?408?15.	
 ?doi:10.1017/S0029665109990188	
 ?Federman,	
 ?M.	
 ?(2004).	
 ?What	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?Meaning	
 ?of	
 ?The	
 ?Medium	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?Message?	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://individual.utoronto.ca/markfederman/MeaningTheMediumistheMessage.pdf	
 ?Ferguson,	
 ?C.	
 ?J.,	
 ?&	
 ?Kilburn,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?The	
 ?public	
 ?health	
 ?risks	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?violence:	
 ?a	
 ?meta-??analytic	
 ?review.	
 ?The	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Pediatrics,	
 ?154(5),	
 ?759?63.	
 ?doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.11.033	
 ?Fogg,	
 ?B.	
 ?J.	
 ?(2002).	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?Technology:	
 ?Using	
 ?Computers	
 ?to	
 ?Change	
 ?What	
 ?We	
 ?Think	
 ?and	
 ?Do	
 ?(p.	
 ?312).	
 ?San	
 ?Francisco:	
 ?Morgan	
 ?Kaufmann.	
 ?Fogg,	
 ?B.	
 ?J.,	
 ?Cuellar,	
 ?G.,	
 ?&	
 ?Danielson,	
 ?D.	
 ?(2003).	
 ?Motivating,	
 ?influencing,	
 ?and	
 ?persuading	
 ?users.	
 ?In	
 ?J.	
 ?A.	
 ?Jacko	
 ?&	
 ?A.	
 ?Sears	
 ?(Eds.),	
 ?The	
 ?Human-??Computer	
 ?Interaction	
 ?Handbook:	
 ?
Fundamentals,	
 ?evolving	
 ?technologies,	
 ?and	
 ?emerging	
 ?applications	
 ?(pp.	
 ?133?147).	
 ?Mahwah,	
 ?New	
 ?Jersey:	
 ?Lawrence	
 ?Erlbaum	
 ?Associates.	
 ?Fox,	
 ?S.,	
 ?&	
 ?Duggan,	
 ?M.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Pew	
 ?Internet	
 ?Project:	
 ?Mobile	
 ?Health	
 ?2012	
 ?Report.	
 ?Washington	
 ?D.C.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Mobile-??Health.aspx	
 ?Garrison,	
 ?M.	
 ?M.,	
 ?&	
 ?Christakis,	
 ?D.	
 ?A.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?The	
 ?impact	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?healthy	
 ?media	
 ?use	
 ?intervention	
 ?on	
 ?sleep	
 ?in	
 ?preschool	
 ?children.	
 ?Pediatrics,	
 ?130(3),	
 ?492?9.	
 ?doi:10.1542/peds.2011-??3153	
 ?Gladstone,	
 ?B.,	
 ?&	
 ?Neufeld,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?The	
 ?Influencing	
 ?Machine:	
 ?Brooke	
 ?Gladstone	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Media.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?W.	
 ?W.	
 ?Norton	
 ?&	
 ?Company.	
 ?
	
 ? 77	
 ?
Goldhor,	
 ?H.	
 ?(1981).	
 ?Experimental	
 ?Effects	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Choice	
 ?of	
 ?Books	
 ?Borrowed	
 ?by	
 ?Public	
 ?Library	
 ?Adult	
 ?Patrons.	
 ?The	
 ?Library	
 ?Quarterly,	
 ?51(3),	
 ?253?268.	
 ?Golsteijn,	
 ?C.,	
 ?Van	
 ?den	
 ?Hoven,	
 ?E.,	
 ?Frohlich,	
 ?D.,	
 ?&	
 ?Sellen,	
 ?A.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Towards	
 ?a	
 ?More	
 ?Cherishable	
 ?Digital	
 ?Object.	
 ?ACM	
 ?Conference	
 ?on	
 ?Designing	
 ?Interactive	
 ?Systems	
 ?(DIS).	
 ?Gosling,	
 ?S.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Snoop:	
 ?What	
 ?Your	
 ?Stuff	
 ?Says	
 ?About	
 ?You.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Basic	
 ?Books.	
 ?Greif,	
 ?S.	
 ?(2013).	
 ?Flat	
 ?Pixels:	
 ?The	
 ?Battle	
 ?Between	
 ?Flat	
 ?Design	
 ?And	
 ?Skeuomorphism.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?May	
 ?12,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://sachagreif.com/flat-??pixels/	
 ?Hallnas,	
 ?L.,	
 ?&	
 ?Redstrom,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2001).	
 ?Slow	
 ?Technology	
 ??	
 ?Designing	
 ?for	
 ?Reflection.	
 ?Ubiquitous	
 ?
Computing,	
 ?5(3),	
 ?201?212.	
 ?Hap,	
 ?J.,	
 ?&	
 ?Midden,	
 ?C.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Ambient	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?Technology	
 ?Needs	
 ?Little	
 ?Cognitive	
 ?Effort:	
 ?The	
 ?Differential	
 ?Effects	
 ?of	
 ?Cognitive	
 ?Load	
 ?on	
 ?Lighting	
 ?Feedback	
 ?versus	
 ?Factual	
 ?Feedback.	
 ?(T.	
 ?Ploug,	
 ?P.	
 ?Hasle,	
 ?&	
 ?H.	
 ?Oinas-??Kukkonen,	
 ?Eds.)Persuasive	
 ?Technology	
 ?-??	
 ?
Lecture	
 ?Notes	
 ?in	
 ?Computer	
 ?Science,	
 ?6137,	
 ?132?142.	
 ?doi:10.1007/978-??3-??642-??13226-??1	
 ?Hauter,	
 ?W.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Foodopoly:	
 ?The	
 ?Battle	
 ?Over	
 ?The	
 ?Future	
 ?of	
 ?Food	
 ?and	
 ?Farming	
 ?In	
 ?America.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?The	
 ?New	
 ?Press.	
 ?Havermans,	
 ?R.	
 ?C.,	
 ?Janssen,	
 ?T.,	
 ?Giesen,	
 ?J.	
 ?C.	
 ?a	
 ?H.,	
 ?Roefs,	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Jansen,	
 ?A.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?Food	
 ?liking,	
 ?food	
 ?wanting,	
 ?and	
 ?sensory-??specific	
 ?satiety.	
 ?Appetite,	
 ?52(1),	
 ?222?5.	
 ?doi:10.1016/j.appet.2008.09.020	
 ?Hey,	
 ?J.,	
 ?Linsey,	
 ?J.,	
 ?Agogino,	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Wood,	
 ?K.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Analogies	
 ?and	
 ?Metaphors	
 ?in	
 ?Creative	
 ?Design.	
 ?International	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Engineering	
 ?Education,	
 ?24(2),	
 ?283.	
 ?Hobbs,	
 ?T.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Can	
 ?We	
 ?Please	
 ?Move	
 ?Past	
 ?Apple?s	
 ?Silly,	
 ?Faux-??Real	
 ?UIs?	
 ?Fast	
 ?Company	
 ?
Design.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?May	
 ?12,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669879/can-??we-??please-??move-??past-??apples-??silly-??faux-??real-??uis	
 ?Holmquist,	
 ?L.	
 ?E.,	
 ?Skog,	
 ?T.,	
 ?G?teborg,	
 ?S.-??,	
 ?&	
 ?Art,	
 ?I.	
 ?(2003).	
 ?Informative	
 ?Art?:	
 ?Information	
 ?Visualization	
 ?in	
 ?Everyday	
 ?Environments,	
 ?1(212),	
 ?229?235.	
 ?Huesmann,	
 ?L.	
 ?R.	
 ?(2007).	
 ?The	
 ?impact	
 ?of	
 ?electronic	
 ?media	
 ?violence:	
 ?scientific	
 ?theory	
 ?and	
 ?research.	
 ?The	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Adolescent	
 ?Health:	
 ?official	
 ?publication	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?Society	
 ?for	
 ?
Adolescent	
 ?Medicine,	
 ?41(6	
 ?Suppl	
 ?1),	
 ?S6?13.	
 ?doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.005	
 ?IDEO.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?Human	
 ?Centered	
 ?Design	
 ?Toolkit.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.hcdconnect.org/toolkit/en/download	
 ?Isaac,	
 ?B.	
 ?(2007).	
 ?Jerry	
 ?Seinfeld?s	
 ?Productivity	
 ?Secret.	
 ?Lifehacker.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?May	
 ?7,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://lifehacker.com/281626/jerry-??seinfelds-??productivity-??secret	
 ?Iyengar,	
 ?S.	
 ?S.,	
 ?&	
 ?Lepper,	
 ?M.	
 ?R.	
 ?(2000).	
 ?When	
 ?choice	
 ?is	
 ?demotivating:	
 ?can	
 ?one	
 ?desire	
 ?too	
 ?much	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?thing?	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Personality	
 ?and	
 ?Social	
 ?Psychology,	
 ?79(6),	
 ?995?1006.	
 ?
	
 ? 78	
 ?
Jafarinaimi,	
 ?N.	
 ?(2005).	
 ?Breakaway?:	
 ?An	
 ?Ambient	
 ?Display	
 ?Designed	
 ?to	
 ?Change	
 ?Human	
 ?Behavior,	
 ?1945?1948.	
 ?Johnson,	
 ?C.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?The	
 ?Information	
 ?Diet:	
 ?A	
 ?Case	
 ?for	
 ?Conscious	
 ?Consumption.	
 ?Sebastopol:	
 ?O?Reilly	
 ?Media.	
 ?Kahneman,	
 ?D.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Thinking,	
 ?fast	
 ?and	
 ?slow.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Farrar,	
 ?Straus	
 ?and	
 ?Giroux.	
 ?Kahneman,	
 ?D.,	
 ?Slovic,	
 ?P.,	
 ?&	
 ?Tversky,	
 ?A.	
 ?(1982).	
 ?Judgment	
 ?under	
 ?uncertainty?:	
 ?heuristics	
 ?and	
 ?
biases.	
 ?Cambridge:	
 ?Cambridge	
 ?University	
 ?Press.	
 ?Kay,	
 ?A.	
 ?(1990).	
 ?User	
 ?Interface:	
 ?A	
 ?personal	
 ?view.	
 ?In	
 ?B.	
 ?Laurel	
 ?(Ed.),	
 ?The	
 ?Art	
 ?of	
 ?Human-??
Computer	
 ?Interface	
 ?Design	
 ?(pp.	
 ?191?207).	
 ?Reading,	
 ?Mass.:	
 ?Addison-??Wesley.	
 ?Kim,	
 ?T.,	
 ?Hong,	
 ?H.,	
 ?&	
 ?Magerko,	
 ?B.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Design	
 ?requirements	
 ?for	
 ?ambient	
 ?display	
 ?that	
 ?supports	
 ?sustainable	
 ?lifestyle.	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?8th	
 ?ACM	
 ?Conference	
 ?on	
 ??,	
 ?103?112.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1858192	
 ?King,	
 ?N.,	
 ?&	
 ?Horrocks,	
 ?C.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Interviews	
 ?in	
 ?Qualitative	
 ?Research.	
 ?Thousand	
 ?Oaks,	
 ?California:	
 ?SAGE.	
 ?Klasnja,	
 ?P.,	
 ?Consolvo,	
 ?S.,	
 ?&	
 ?Pratt,	
 ?W.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?How	
 ?to	
 ?Evaluate	
 ?Technologies	
 ?for	
 ?Health	
 ?Behavior	
 ?Change	
 ?in	
 ?HCI	
 ?Research.	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?SIGCHI	
 ?Conference	
 ?/	
 ?Human	
 ?
Factors	
 ?in	
 ?Computing	
 ?Systems	
 ?(CHI	
 ?	
 ??11)	
 ?(pp.	
 ?3063?3072).	
 ?Klein,	
 ?G.	
 ?(1998).	
 ?Sources	
 ?of	
 ?Power.	
 ?Cambridge,	
 ?MA:	
 ?MIT	
 ?Press.	
 ?Konstan,	
 ?J.	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Riedl,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Deconstructing	
 ?Recommender	
 ?Systems:	
 ?How	
 ?Amazon	
 ?and	
 ?Netflix	
 ?predict	
 ?your	
 ?preferences	
 ?and	
 ?prod	
 ?you	
 ?to	
 ?purchase.	
 ?IEEE	
 ?Spectrum,	
 ?
49(October).	
 ?K?ng,	
 ?L.,	
 ?Picard,	
 ?R.	
 ?G.,	
 ?&	
 ?Towse,	
 ?R.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?The	
 ?internet	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?mass	
 ?media.	
 ?Los	
 ?Angeles:	
 ?SAGE.	
 ?Lakoff,	
 ?G.,	
 ?&	
 ?Johnson,	
 ?M.	
 ?(1980).	
 ?Metaphors	
 ?We	
 ?Live	
 ?By.	
 ?Chicago:	
 ?University	
 ?of	
 ?Chicago	
 ?Press.	
 ?Leshed,	
 ?G.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Slowing	
 ?down	
 ?with	
 ?personal	
 ?productivity	
 ?tools.	
 ?Interactions,	
 ?19(1),	
 ?58.	
 ?doi:10.1145/2065327.2065339	
 ?Leshed,	
 ?G.,	
 ?&	
 ?Sengers,	
 ?P.	
 ?(2011).	
 ??I	
 ?Lie	
 ?to	
 ?Myself	
 ?that	
 ?I	
 ?Have	
 ?Freedom	
 ?in	
 ?My	
 ?Own	
 ?Schedule?:	
 ?Productivity	
 ?Tools	
 ?and	
 ?Experiences	
 ?of	
 ?Busyness,	
 ?905?914.	
 ?Li,	
 ?I.,	
 ?Dey,	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Forlizzi,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?A	
 ?stage-??based	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?systems.	
 ?
Proceedings	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?28th	
 ?international	
 ?conference	
 ?on	
 ?Human	
 ?factors	
 ?in	
 ?computing	
 ?systems	
 ?
-??	
 ?CHI	
 ?	
 ??10	
 ?(p.	
 ?557).	
 ?New	
 ?York,	
 ?New	
 ?York,	
 ?USA:	
 ?ACM	
 ?Press.	
 ?doi:10.1145/1753326.1753409	
 ?
	
 ? 79	
 ?
MacAdams,	
 ?D.	
 ?P.	
 ?(1997).	
 ?The	
 ?Stories	
 ?We	
 ?Live	
 ?By:	
 ?Personal	
 ?Myths	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?Making	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?Self	
 ?(p.	
 ?336).	
 ?The	
 ?Guilford	
 ?Press.	
 ?Madsen,	
 ?K.	
 ?(1994).	
 ?A	
 ?Guide	
 ?To	
 ?Metaphorical	
 ?Design.	
 ?Communications	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?ACM,	
 ?37(12),	
 ?57?62.	
 ?Magaudda,	
 ?P.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?When	
 ?materiality	
 ??bites	
 ?back?:	
 ?Digital	
 ?music	
 ?consumption	
 ?practices	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?age	
 ?of	
 ?dematerialization.	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Consumer	
 ?Culture,	
 ?11(1),	
 ?15?36.	
 ?doi:10.1177/1469540510390499	
 ?Marcotte,	
 ?E.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Responsive	
 ?Web	
 ?Design.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?A	
 ?Book	
 ?Apart.	
 ?Marcus,	
 ?M.	
 ?D.,	
 ?&	
 ?Kalarchian,	
 ?M.	
 ?A.	
 ?(2003).	
 ?Binge	
 ?eating	
 ?in	
 ?children	
 ?and	
 ?adolescents.	
 ?The	
 ?
International	
 ?journal	
 ?of	
 ?eating	
 ?disorders,	
 ?34	
 ?Suppl(March),	
 ?S47?57.	
 ?doi:10.1002/eat.10205	
 ?McLuhan,	
 ?M.	
 ?(1964).	
 ?Understanding	
 ?Media:	
 ?The	
 ?Extensions	
 ?of	
 ?Man.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?McGraw	
 ?Hill.	
 ?Menzies,	
 ?H.,	
 ?&	
 ?Newson,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2007).	
 ?No	
 ?Time	
 ?to	
 ?Think:	
 ?Academics?	
 ?life	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?globally	
 ?wired	
 ?university.	
 ?Time	
 ?&	
 ?Society,	
 ?16(1),	
 ?83?98.	
 ?doi:10.1177/0961463X07074103	
 ?Meyers,	
 ?P.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Breaking	
 ?the	
 ?Page:	
 ?Preview	
 ?Edition.	
 ?Sebastopol:	
 ?O?Reilly	
 ?Media.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920020677.do	
 ?Mischel,	
 ?W.,	
 ?&	
 ?Ebbesen,	
 ?E.	
 ?(1970).	
 ?Attention	
 ?in	
 ?delay	
 ?of	
 ?gratification.	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Personality	
 ?
and	
 ?Social	
 ?Psychology,	
 ?16(2),	
 ?329?337.	
 ?Moll-??Carrillo,	
 ?H.	
 ?J.,	
 ?Salomon,	
 ?G.,	
 ?Marsh,	
 ?M.,	
 ?Fulton	
 ?Suri,	
 ?J.,	
 ?&	
 ?Spreenberg,	
 ?P.	
 ?(1995).	
 ?Articulating	
 ?a	
 ?Metaphor	
 ?through	
 ?User-??Centered	
 ?Design.	
 ?CHI	
 ?Conference	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?(pp.	
 ?566	
 ??	
 ?572).	
 ?Moss,	
 ?M.	
 ?(2013).	
 ?Salt	
 ?Sugar	
 ?Fat:	
 ?How	
 ?the	
 ?Food	
 ?Giants	
 ?Hooked	
 ?Us.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Random	
 ?House.	
 ?Munson,	
 ?S.	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Resnick,	
 ?P.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Presenting	
 ?Diverse	
 ?Political	
 ?Opinions?:	
 ?How	
 ?and	
 ?How	
 ?Much.	
 ?Proc.	
 ?CHI	
 ?2010	
 ?(pp.	
 ?1457?1466).	
 ?Atlanta,	
 ?Georgia.	
 ?Nielsen	
 ?Company.	
 ?(2012a).	
 ?Global	
 ?Online	
 ?Consumers	
 ?and	
 ?Multi-??Screen	
 ?Media:	
 ?Today	
 ?and	
 ?
Tomorrow.	
 ?Nielsen	
 ?Company.	
 ?(2012b).	
 ?State	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?Media:	
 ?The	
 ?Cross-??Platform	
 ?Report	
 ?Q3	
 ?2012.	
 ?Nielsen	
 ?Company.	
 ?(2013).	
 ?Consumer	
 ?Usage	
 ?Report	
 ?2012.	
 ?Norman,	
 ?D.	
 ?(2002).	
 ?The	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?everyday	
 ?things.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Basic	
 ?Books.	
 ?Obrenovi?,	
 ??.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Design-??Based	
 ?Research:	
 ?What	
 ?We	
 ?Learn	
 ?When	
 ?We	
 ?Engage	
 ?in	
 ?Design	
 ?of	
 ?Interactive	
 ?Systems.	
 ?Interactions,	
 ?18(5),	
 ?56?59.	
 ?
	
 ? 80	
 ?
Odom,	
 ?W.,	
 ?Sellen,	
 ?A.,	
 ?Harper,	
 ?R.,	
 ?&	
 ?Thereska,	
 ?E.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Lost	
 ?in	
 ?Translation?:	
 ?Understanding	
 ?the	
 ?Possession	
 ?of	
 ?Digital	
 ?Things	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?Cloud.	
 ?CHI	
 ?2012	
 ?Conference	
 ?Proceedings.	
 ?Austin,	
 ?Texas.	
 ?Olson,	
 ?R.,	
 ?Verley,	
 ?J.,	
 ?Santos,	
 ?L.,	
 ?&	
 ?Salas,	
 ?C.	
 ?(1994).	
 ?What	
 ?We	
 ?Teach	
 ?Students	
 ?About	
 ?the	
 ?Hawthorne	
 ?Studies?:	
 ?A	
 ?Review	
 ?of	
 ?Content	
 ?Within	
 ?a	
 ?Sample	
 ?of	
 ?Introductory	
 ?I-??O	
 ?and	
 ?OB	
 ?Textbooks.	
 ?The	
 ?Industrial-??Organizational	
 ?Psychologist,	
 ?41(3),	
 ?23?39.	
 ?Pariser,	
 ?E.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?The	
 ?Filter	
 ?Bubble:	
 ?What	
 ?the	
 ?Internet	
 ?is	
 ?Hiding	
 ?from	
 ?You.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Penguin	
 ?Press.	
 ?Petrini,	
 ?C.	
 ?(2003).	
 ?Slow	
 ?food:	
 ?the	
 ?case	
 ?for	
 ?taste.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Columbia	
 ?University	
 ?Press.	
 ?Petroski,	
 ?H.	
 ?(1999).	
 ?The	
 ?Book	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?Bookshelf.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Knopf.	
 ?Portinari,	
 ?F.	
 ?(1989).	
 ?Slow	
 ?Food	
 ?Manifesto.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?April	
 ?6,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.slowfood.com/about_us/eng/manifesto.lasso	
 ?Powers,	
 ?W.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Hamlet?s	
 ?Blackberry:	
 ?a	
 ?practical	
 ?philosophy	
 ?for	
 ?building	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?life	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?
digital	
 ?age.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Harper.	
 ?Rainie,	
 ?L.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Pew	
 ?Internet	
 ?Project:	
 ?E-??book	
 ?Reading	
 ?Jumps;	
 ?Print	
 ?Book	
 ?Reading	
 ?Declines.	
 ?Washington,	
 ?DC.	
 ?Riva,	
 ?G.,	
 ?Ba?os,	
 ?R.	
 ?M.,	
 ?Botella,	
 ?C.,	
 ?Wiederhold,	
 ?B.	
 ?K.,	
 ?&	
 ?Gaggioli,	
 ?A.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?Positive	
 ?technology:	
 ?using	
 ?interactive	
 ?technologies	
 ?to	
 ?promote	
 ?positive	
 ?functioning.	
 ?
Cyberpsychology,	
 ?behavior	
 ?and	
 ?social	
 ?networking,	
 ?15(2),	
 ?69?77.	
 ?doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0139	
 ?Rohrer,	
 ?C.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?When	
 ?to	
 ?Use	
 ?Which	
 ?User	
 ?Experience	
 ?Research	
 ?Methods.	
 ?Jakob	
 ?Nielsen?s	
 ?
Alertbox.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?May	
 ?13,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.nngroup.com/articles/which-??ux-??research-??methods/	
 ?Rosen,	
 ?L.,	
 ?Cheever,	
 ?N.,	
 ?&	
 ?Carrier,	
 ?L.	
 ?M.	
 ?(2012).	
 ?iDisorder:	
 ?Understanding	
 ?Our	
 ?Obsession	
 ?With	
 ?
Technology	
 ?and	
 ?Overcoming	
 ?Its	
 ?Hold	
 ?On	
 ?Us.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Palgrave	
 ?Macmillan.	
 ?Rowlands,	
 ?I.,	
 ?Nicholas,	
 ?D.,	
 ?Williams,	
 ?P.,	
 ?Huntington,	
 ?P.,	
 ?Fieldhouse,	
 ?M.,	
 ?Gunter,	
 ?B.,	
 ?Withey,	
 ?R.,	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?The	
 ?Google	
 ?generation:	
 ?the	
 ?information	
 ?behaviour	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?researcher	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?future.	
 ?Aslib	
 ?Proceedings,	
 ?60(4),	
 ?290?310.	
 ?doi:10.1108/00012530810887953	
 ?Sander,	
 ?T.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?Positive	
 ?Computing.	
 ?In	
 ?R.	
 ?Biswas-??Diener	
 ?(Ed.),	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?as	
 ?
Social	
 ?Change.	
 ?Dordrecht:	
 ?Springer	
 ?Netherlands.	
 ?doi:10.1007/978-??90-??481-??9938-??9	
 ?Scheibehenne,	
 ?B.,	
 ?Greifeneder,	
 ?R.,	
 ?&	
 ?Todd,	
 ?P.	
 ?M.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Can	
 ?There	
 ?Ever	
 ?Be	
 ?Too	
 ?Many	
 ?Options??	
 ?A	
 ?Meta-??Analytic	
 ?Review	
 ?of	
 ?Choice	
 ?Overload,	
 ?37(October).	
 ?Schlosser,	
 ?E.	
 ?(2001).	
 ?Fast	
 ?Food	
 ?Nation	
 ?(p.	
 ?288).	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Houghton	
 ?Mifflin	
 ?Company.	
 ?
	
 ? 81	
 ?
Schwartz,	
 ?B.	
 ?(2004).	
 ?The	
 ?Paradox	
 ?of	
 ?Choice:	
 ?Why	
 ?More	
 ?Is	
 ?Less.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Harper	
 ?Collins.	
 ?Scollon,	
 ?C.	
 ?N.,	
 ?&	
 ?King,	
 ?L.	
 ?A.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?What	
 ?people	
 ?really	
 ?want	
 ?in	
 ?life	
 ?and	
 ?why	
 ?it	
 ?matters.	
 ?In	
 ?R.	
 ?Biswas-??Diener	
 ?(Ed.),	
 ?Positive	
 ?Psychology	
 ?as	
 ?Social	
 ?Change	
 ?(pp.	
 ?1?16).	
 ?Dordrecht:	
 ?Springer	
 ?Netherlands.	
 ?Seligman,	
 ?M.	
 ?E.	
 ?P.,	
 ?&	
 ?Csikszentmihalyi,	
 ?M.	
 ?(2000).	
 ?Positive	
 ?psychology:	
 ?An	
 ?introduction.	
 ?
American	
 ?Psychologist,	
 ?55(1),	
 ?5?14.	
 ?doi:10.1037//0003-??066X.55.1.5	
 ?Sengers,	
 ?P.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?What	
 ?I	
 ?learned	
 ?on	
 ?Change	
 ?Islands:	
 ?reflections	
 ?on	
 ?IT	
 ?and	
 ?pace	
 ?of	
 ?life.	
 ?
interactions,	
 ?18(2),	
 ?40?48.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?from	
 ?http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1925830	
 ?Shen,	
 ?S.-??T.,	
 ?Woolley,	
 ?M.,	
 ?&	
 ?Prior,	
 ?S.	
 ?(2006).	
 ?Towards	
 ?culture-??centred	
 ?design.	
 ?Interacting	
 ?with	
 ?
Computers,	
 ?18(4),	
 ?820?852.	
 ?doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2005.11.014	
 ?Sill,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Recommend	
 ?a	
 ?Movie	
 ?,	
 ?Win	
 ?a	
 ?Million	
 ?Bucks.	
 ?Engineering	
 ?&	
 ?Science,	
 ?(Spring),	
 ?32?39.	
 ?Simon,	
 ?H.	
 ?(1956).	
 ?Rational	
 ?choice	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?structure	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?environment.	
 ?Psychological	
 ?
review,	
 ?63(2),	
 ?129?38.	
 ?Slote,	
 ?S.	
 ?(1997).	
 ?Weeding	
 ?library	
 ?collections?:	
 ?library	
 ?weeding	
 ?methods	
 ?(4th	
 ?ed.).	
 ?Englewood	
 ?	
 ?Colo.:	
 ?Libraries	
 ?Unlimited.	
 ?Slywotzky,	
 ?A.,	
 ?&	
 ?Weber,	
 ?K.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Demand:	
 ?Creating	
 ?what	
 ?people	
 ?love	
 ?before	
 ?they	
 ?know	
 ?they	
 ?
want	
 ?it.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Random	
 ?House.	
 ?Soon,	
 ?C.	
 ?S.,	
 ?Brass,	
 ?M.,	
 ?Heinze,	
 ?H.-??J.,	
 ?&	
 ?Haynes,	
 ?J.-??D.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Unconscious	
 ?determinants	
 ?of	
 ?free	
 ?decisions	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?human	
 ?brain.	
 ?Nature	
 ?neuroscience,	
 ?11(5),	
 ?543?5.	
 ?doi:10.1038/nn.2112	
 ?Swann,	
 ?W.	
 ?B.	
 ?J.	
 ?(1983).	
 ?Self-??verification:	
 ?Bringing	
 ?social	
 ?reality	
 ?into	
 ?harmony	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?self.	
 ?In	
 ?J.	
 ?Suls	
 ?&	
 ?A.	
 ?G.	
 ?Greenwald	
 ?(Eds.),	
 ?Social	
 ?psychological	
 ?perspectives	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?self	
 ?(pp.	
 ?33?66).	
 ?Hillsdale,	
 ?NJ:	
 ?Erlbaum.	
 ?Thaler,	
 ?R.	
 ?H.,	
 ?&	
 ?Sunstein,	
 ?C.	
 ?R.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Nudge:	
 ?Improving	
 ?Decisions	
 ?about	
 ?Health,	
 ?Wealth,	
 ?and	
 ?
Happiness.	
 ?New	
 ?Haven:	
 ?Yale	
 ?University	
 ?Press.	
 ?Thompson,	
 ?J.	
 ?K.,	
 ?&	
 ?Heinberg,	
 ?L.	
 ?J.	
 ?(1999).	
 ?The	
 ?Media?s	
 ?Influence	
 ?on	
 ?Body	
 ?Image	
 ?Disturbance	
 ?and	
 ?Eating	
 ?Disorders:	
 ?We've	
 ?Reviled	
 ?Them,	
 ?Now	
 ?Can	
 ?We	
 ?Rehabilitate	
 ?Them?	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?
Social	
 ?Issues,	
 ?55(2),	
 ?339?353.	
 ?doi:10.1111/0022-??4537.00119	
 ?Todd,	
 ?M.	
 ?K.,	
 ?Reis-??Bergan,	
 ?M.	
 ?J.,	
 ?Sidman,	
 ?C.	
 ?L.,	
 ?Flohr,	
 ?J.	
 ?a,	
 ?Jameson-??Walker,	
 ?K.,	
 ?Spicer-??Bartolau,	
 ?T.,	
 ?&	
 ?Wildeman,	
 ?K.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Effect	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?family-??based	
 ?intervention	
 ?on	
 ?electronic	
 ?media	
 ?use	
 ?and	
 ?body	
 ?composition	
 ?among	
 ?boys	
 ?aged	
 ?8-??-??11	
 ?years:	
 ?a	
 ?pilot	
 ?study.	
 ?Journal	
 ?of	
 ?Child	
 ?
Health	
 ?Care,	
 ?12(4),	
 ?344?58.	
 ?doi:10.1177/1367493508097404	
 ?Tufte,	
 ?E.	
 ?(2001).	
 ?The	
 ?Visual	
 ?Display	
 ?of	
 ?Quantitative	
 ?Information	
 ?(2nd	
 ?ed.).	
 ?Cheshire,	
 ?CT:	
 ?Graphics	
 ?Press.	
 ?
	
 ? 82	
 ?
Turner,	
 ?D.	
 ?W.	
 ?(2010).	
 ?Qualitative	
 ?Interview	
 ?Design?:	
 ?A	
 ?Practical	
 ?Guide	
 ?for	
 ?Novice	
 ?Investigators.	
 ?The	
 ?Qualitative	
 ?Report,	
 ?15(3),	
 ?754?760.	
 ?Tversky,	
 ?a,	
 ?&	
 ?Kahneman,	
 ?D.	
 ?(1974).	
 ?Judgment	
 ?under	
 ?Uncertainty:	
 ?Heuristics	
 ?and	
 ?Biases.	
 ?
Science	
 ?(New	
 ?York,	
 ?N.Y.),	
 ?185(4157),	
 ?1124?31.	
 ?doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124	
 ?Underhill,	
 ?P.	
 ?(1999).	
 ?Why	
 ?We	
 ?Buy:	
 ?The	
 ?Science	
 ?of	
 ?Shopping.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Simon	
 ?&	
 ?Schuster.	
 ?Urban	
 ?Dictionary:	
 ?FOMO.	
 ?(2011).	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?June	
 ?5,	
 ?2011,	
 ?from	
 ?http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fomo	
 ?Wansink,	
 ?B.	
 ?(2006).	
 ?Mindless	
 ?Eating:	
 ?Why	
 ?we	
 ?eat	
 ?more	
 ?than	
 ?we	
 ?think.	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Bantam	
 ?Books.	
 ?Wardle,	
 ?J.,	
 ?Haase,	
 ?A.	
 ?M.,	
 ?&	
 ?Steptoe,	
 ?A.	
 ?(2004).	
 ?Gender	
 ?differences	
 ?in	
 ?food	
 ?choice:	
 ?the	
 ?contribution	
 ?of	
 ?health	
 ?beliefs	
 ?and	
 ?dieting.	
 ?Annals	
 ?of	
 ?behavioral	
 ?medicine?:	
 ?a	
 ?publication	
 ?
of	
 ?the	
 ?Society	
 ?of	
 ?Behavioral	
 ?Medicine,	
 ?27(2),	
 ?107?116.	
 ?Weiser,	
 ?M.,	
 ?&	
 ?Brown,	
 ?J.	
 ?S.	
 ?(1996).	
 ?Designing	
 ?Calm	
 ?Technology.	
 ?PowerGrid	
 ?Journal,	
 ?1(1),	
 ?75?85.	
 ?Wiktionary.	
 ?(2013).	
 ????	
 ?-??	
 ?tsundoku.	
 ?Retrieved	
 ?April	
 ?30,	
 ?2013,	
 ?from	
 ?http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/???	
 ?Wolf,	
 ?M.	
 ?(2008).	
 ?Proust	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?squid?:	
 ?the	
 ?story	
 ?and	
 ?science	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?reading	
 ?brain	
 ?(1st	
 ?Harper.).	
 ?New	
 ?York:	
 ?Harper	
 ?Perennial.	
 ?Wurman,	
 ?R.	
 ?S.	
 ?(2001).	
 ?Information	
 ?Anxiety	
 ?2.	
 ?Indianapolis:	
 ?Que.	
 ?Zimmerman,	
 ?J.	
 ?(2009).	
 ?Designing	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?self:	
 ?making	
 ?products	
 ?that	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?become	
 ?the	
 ?person	
 ?they	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?be.	
 ?CHI	
 ?2009	
 ?Conference	
 ?Proceedings	
 ?(pp.	
 ?395?404).	
 ?Boston:	
 ?ACM.	
 ?
 
	
 ? 83	
 ?
8 Appendix	
 ?A:	
 ?Detailed	
 ?Interview	
 ?Data	
 ?
8.1 Interview	
 ?Questions	
 ?&	
 ?Topic	
 ?Prompts	
 ?The	
 ?following	
 ?table	
 ?contains	
 ?topic	
 ?prompts	
 ?and	
 ?questions,	
 ?which	
 ?I	
 ?referred	
 ?to	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?sure	
 ?all	
 ?subjects	
 ?were	
 ?covered.	
 ?Following	
 ?the	
 ?practice	
 ?of	
 ?guided	
 ?interviews,	
 ?not	
 ?every	
 ?question	
 ?was	
 ?asked	
 ?of	
 ?every	
 ?subject;	
 ?if	
 ?a	
 ?topic	
 ?had	
 ?already	
 ?been	
 ?thoroughly	
 ?discussed	
 ?earlier	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interview,	
 ?I	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?ask	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?repeat	
 ?themselves.	
 ?	
 ?
Category/topic	
 ? Topic	
 ?Prompts	
 ?&	
 ?Questions	
 ?
Metaphor	
 ?fit	
 ? Does	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?diet	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?
resonate	
 ?for	
 ?you,	
 ?or	
 ?not?	
 ?	
 ?
Are	
 ?there	
 ?parallels	
 ?you	
 ?have	
 ?between	
 ?food	
 ?and	
 ?media?	
 ?
Are	
 ?there	
 ?places	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?metaphor	
 ?does	
 ?not	
 ?work?	
 ?
Are	
 ?there	
 ?other	
 ?metaphors	
 ?that	
 ?work	
 ?better	
 ?for	
 ?you	
 ?for	
 ?any	
 ?
aspect	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?consumption?	
 ?
ID	
 ?contents	
 ?and	
 ?categories	
 ? What	
 ?categories	
 ?or	
 ??food	
 ?groups?	
 ?make	
 ?up	
 ?your	
 ?information	
 ?diet?	
 ?
Are	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?it	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?genre,	
 ?media/delivery,	
 ?specific	
 ?
subject	
 ?area?	
 ?
What	
 ?do	
 ?you	
 ?include	
 ?in	
 ??information	
 ?diet?	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?outside	
 ?of	
 ?
it?	
 ?
ID	
 ?changes	
 ?	
 ? If	
 ?you	
 ?could	
 ?do	
 ?whatever	
 ?you	
 ?wanted,	
 ?how	
 ?would	
 ?your	
 ?ID	
 ?change	
 ?
-??	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?your	
 ?ideal/fantasy	
 ?ID?	
 ?	
 ?
What	
 ?keeps	
 ?your	
 ?ID	
 ?from	
 ?being	
 ?that	
 ?ideal?	
 ?
Are	
 ?there	
 ?any	
 ?changes	
 ?you	
 ?would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?in	
 ?your	
 ?ID?	
 ?Are	
 ?you	
 ?
trying	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?that	
 ?change	
 ?now?	
 ?How?s	
 ?it	
 ?going?	
 ?
are	
 ?there	
 ?parts	
 ?of	
 ?your	
 ?ID	
 ?that	
 ?you	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?increase?	
 ?
other	
 ?parts	
 ?that	
 ?you	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?limit?	
 ?
Have	
 ?you	
 ?ever	
 ?changed	
 ?ID	
 ?diet,	
 ?or	
 ?tried	
 ?to?	
 ?
What	
 ?has	
 ?caused	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?your	
 ?ID?	
 ?
Was	
 ?it	
 ?a	
 ?decision	
 ?you	
 ?made	
 ?then	
 ?changed	
 ?behavior?	
 ?
Or	
 ?did	
 ?your	
 ?diet	
 ?	
 ?change	
 ?without	
 ?it	
 ?being	
 ?a	
 ?conscious	
 ?choice?	
 ?
	
 ? 84	
 ?
Category/topic	
 ? Topic	
 ?Prompts	
 ?&	
 ?Questions	
 ?
How	
 ?do	
 ?you	
 ?cope	
 ?with	
 ?your	
 ?ID	
 ?now?	
 ? Do	
 ?you	
 ?organize	
 ?your	
 ?media	
 ?into	
 ?categories?	
 ?What	
 ?categories?	
 ?Do	
 ?
you	
 ?use	
 ?that	
 ?organization?	
 ?How?	
 ?
Do	
 ?you	
 ?use	
 ?any	
 ?tools	
 ?or	
 ?processes?	
 ?
Do	
 ?you	
 ?track	
 ?or	
 ?	
 ?look	
 ?back	
 ?on	
 ?your	
 ?previous	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?any	
 ?
way?	
 ?
Are	
 ?there	
 ?problems	
 ?you	
 ?face	
 ?with	
 ?your	
 ?ID?	
 ?How	
 ?do	
 ?you	
 ?address	
 ?
them?	
 ?
Do	
 ?you	
 ?ever	
 ?have	
 ?problems	
 ?finding	
 ?something	
 ?to	
 ?consume?	
 ?
Do	
 ?you	
 ?go	
 ?category	
 ?first	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?pick	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?from	
 ?that	
 ?
category?	
 ?(I	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?book,	
 ?	
 ?let	
 ?me	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?pile	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?
I	
 ?have	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ??to	
 ?be	
 ?read	
 ?shelf?)	
 ?Or	
 ?pick	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?item	
 ?from	
 ?
among	
 ?candidates	
 ?in	
 ?many	
 ?categories?	
 ?
ID	
 ?variations	
 ?over	
 ?time	
 ? Is	
 ?your	
 ?ID	
 ?constant,	
 ?or	
 ?does	
 ?it	
 ?vary	
 ?depending	
 ?on	
 ?time?	
 ?Why?	
 ?	
 ?
Distinguish	
 ?one-??time	
 ?shifts	
 ?and	
 ?cyclical	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?vacation	
 ?reading,	
 ?
election	
 ?season	
 ?vs.	
 ?I	
 ?don?t	
 ?play	
 ?videogames	
 ?much	
 ?anymore)	
 ?
Contextual	
 ?factors?	
 ?Time	
 ?(of	
 ?day,	
 ?season);	
 ?who	
 ?is	
 ?with	
 ?you;	
 ?	
 ?
where	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?(home,	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?bus,	
 ?in	
 ?coffeeshop,	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?plane);	
 ?
what	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?doing	
 ?(Working?	
 ?on	
 ?vacation?	
 ?Exercising?);	
 ?how	
 ?you	
 ?
feel;	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?concentration	
 ?and	
 ?control	
 ?of	
 ?your	
 ?attention	
 ?you	
 ?
have	
 ?
Changes	
 ?outside	
 ?of	
 ?ID	
 ? Have	
 ?you	
 ?ever	
 ?attempted	
 ?/	
 ?made	
 ?a	
 ?behavior	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?your	
 ?life?	
 ?
(E.g.,	
 ?take	
 ?medicine/vitamins,	
 ?start	
 ?a	
 ?hobby,	
 ?diet,	
 ?exercise,	
 ?sleep	
 ?
habits...?)	
 ?
What	
 ?change	
 ?was	
 ?it?	
 ?What	
 ?motivated	
 ?it?	
 ?	
 ?
How	
 ?did	
 ?you	
 ?go	
 ?about	
 ?it?	
 ?Did	
 ?you	
 ?use	
 ?any	
 ?supports	
 ?for	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?
change?	
 ?
Did	
 ?you	
 ?successfully	
 ?change	
 ?the	
 ?behavior	
 ?you	
 ?were	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?
affect?	
 ?Partially	
 ?successful,	
 ?completely	
 ?successful?	
 ?
Did	
 ?you	
 ?get	
 ?the	
 ?expected	
 ?outcome	
 ?from	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?change?	
 ?(E.g.,	
 ?
if	
 ?your	
 ?change	
 ?was	
 ?to	
 ?exercise	
 ?more,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?motivation	
 ?was	
 ?to	
 ?
lose	
 ?weight,	
 ?did	
 ?you	
 ?lose	
 ?weight?)	
 ?	
 ?
How	
 ?did	
 ?you	
 ?know	
 ?the	
 ?outcome?	
 ?Did	
 ?you	
 ?measure,	
 ?track	
 ?or	
 ?
evaluate	
 ?the	
 ?behavior	
 ?or	
 ?the	
 ?outcome	
 ?in	
 ?any	
 ?way?	
 ?	
 ?
Did	
 ?you	
 ?get	
 ?any	
 ?unexpected	
 ?effects	
 ?from	
 ?making	
 ?the	
 ?change?	
 ?	
 ?
How	
 ?satisfied	
 ?were	
 ?you	
 ?overall?	
 ?
What	
 ?do	
 ?you	
 ?attribute	
 ?the	
 ?outcome	
 ?to	
 ?-??	
 ?what	
 ?mattered,	
 ?and	
 ?what	
 ?
was	
 ?just	
 ?coincidental	
 ?/	
 ?unimportant?	
 ?
Table	
 ?10.	
 ?The	
 ?researcher	
 ?used	
 ?this	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?questions	
 ?and	
 ?topic	
 ?prompts	
 ?to	
 ?ensure	
 ?that	
 ?all	
 ?interviews	
 ?covered	
 ?key	
 ?
areas	
 ?of	
 ?inquiry.	
 ?
	
 ? 85	
 ?
8.2 Food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?following	
 ?table	
 ?displays	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?In	
 ?cases	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?application	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?concept	
 ?from	
 ?food	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?ambiguous,	
 ?so	
 ?the	
 ?discussion	
 ?column	
 ?provides	
 ?clarification	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?meaning,	
 ?as	
 ?explained	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?subjects.	
 ?
Metaphor	
 ? Number	
 ?of	
 ?
subjects	
 ?who	
 ?
used	
 ?metaphor	
 ?
Discussion	
 ?
dieting	
 ? 4	
 ? Changing	
 ?consumption	
 ?
nutrition	
 ? 4	
 ? We	
 ?need	
 ?certain	
 ?minimum	
 ?amounts	
 ?of	
 ?some	
 ?components	
 ?of	
 ?our	
 ?
diets,	
 ?and	
 ?should	
 ?limit	
 ?the	
 ?amounts	
 ?of	
 ?others.	
 ?
breakfast	
 ? 3	
 ? Morning	
 ?news/information	
 ?routine,	
 ?consumed	
 ?along	
 ?with	
 ?
morning	
 ?coffee/breakfast;	
 ?skipping	
 ?either	
 ?is	
 ?disturbing	
 ?
junk	
 ?food	
 ? 3	
 ? Very	
 ?appealing	
 ?sensually,	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?nutritious	
 ?
candy	
 ?/	
 ?dessert	
 ? 3	
 ? Like	
 ?junk	
 ?food;	
 ?also	
 ?an	
 ?additional	
 ?implication	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?treat	
 ?that	
 ?
should	
 ?normally	
 ?be	
 ?had	
 ?only	
 ?after	
 ?a	
 ?healthy	
 ?meal	
 ?
potato	
 ?chips	
 ? 3	
 ? Easy	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?large	
 ?quantities	
 ?mindlessly;	
 ?low	
 ?nutritional	
 ?
value,	
 ?high	
 ?in	
 ?unhealthy	
 ?fats	
 ?and	
 ?salt	
 ?
satiation	
 ? 2	
 ? Sense	
 ?of	
 ?fullness	
 ?when	
 ?consumption	
 ?limit	
 ?has	
 ?been	
 ?reached	
 ?
balanced	
 ?diet	
 ? 2	
 ? Having	
 ?appropriate	
 ?relative	
 ?proportions	
 ?of	
 ?different	
 ?	
 ?
spinach	
 ?/	
 ?salad	
 ? 2	
 ? Healthy,	
 ?good	
 ?to	
 ?consume;	
 ?you	
 ?feel	
 ?you	
 ?ought	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?more	
 ?
of	
 ?it,	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?as	
 ?appealing	
 ?as	
 ?other,	
 ?less	
 ?healthy	
 ?options	
 ?	
 ?
bad	
 ?tasting	
 ?food	
 ? 2	
 ? Warns	
 ?you	
 ?to	
 ?stop	
 ?consuming	
 ?
appetite	
 ? 1	
 ? When	
 ?choosing	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?next,	
 ?what	
 ?fits	
 ?your	
 ?current	
 ?
appetite?	
 ?
bingeing	
 ? 1	
 ? Watching	
 ?many	
 ?episodes	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?TV	
 ?show	
 ?on-??demand	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?row,	
 ?back-??
to-??back	
 ?
choosing	
 ?a	
 ?restaurant	
 ? 1	
 ? Accommodate	
 ?multiple	
 ?people?s	
 ?preferences	
 ?-??	
 ?choosing	
 ?a	
 ?movie	
 ?
digestion	
 ? 1	
 ? Process	
 ?after	
 ?consuming	
 ?(output/excretion	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?included)	
 ?
meaty	
 ? 1	
 ? Information	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?worthwhile	
 ?to	
 ?consume;	
 ?has	
 ?merit	
 ?and	
 ?
significant	
 ?content	
 ?
sour	
 ?taste	
 ? 1	
 ? Content	
 ?in	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?causes	
 ?a	
 ?negative	
 ?reaction	
 ?and	
 ?impells	
 ?you	
 ?
to	
 ?stop	
 ?consuming	
 ?that	
 ?media	
 ?item	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?turn	
 ?off	
 ?the	
 ?news	
 ?after	
 ?a	
 ?
disturbing	
 ?story)	
 ?
	
 ? 86	
 ?
tastes/flavors	
 ? 1	
 ? Sensory	
 ?differences	
 ?among	
 ?media	
 ?-??	
 ?variety,	
 ?like	
 ?differences	
 ?in	
 ?
flavors	
 ?of	
 ?different	
 ?foods	
 ?or	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?cuisine	
 ?
eating	
 ?smart	
 ? 1	
 ? Learning	
 ?what	
 ?you	
 ?are	
 ?consuming,	
 ?staying	
 ?aware	
 ?of	
 ?&	
 ?evaluating	
 ?
your	
 ?food	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?terms	
 ?of	
 ?nutrition	
 ?
grazing	
 ? 1	
 ? Continual	
 ?consumption,	
 ?but	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?low	
 ?level	
 ?of	
 ?intensity	
 ?
flitting	
 ? 1	
 ? Like	
 ?a	
 ?hummingbird	
 ?-??	
 ?moving	
 ?rapidly	
 ?between	
 ?many	
 ?different	
 ?
sources	
 ?and	
 ?taking	
 ?a	
 ?quick	
 ?sip	
 ?from	
 ?each	
 ?
Table	
 ?11.	
 ?Interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?did	
 ?find	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor	
 ?resonated	
 ?with	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?diets	
 ?in	
 ?many	
 ?ways.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 87	
 ?
8.3 Non-??food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?interviews	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?assume	
 ?that	
 ?subjects	
 ?would	
 ?find	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor	
 ?to	
 ?apply	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?or	
 ?that	
 ?food	
 ?was	
 ?the	
 ?only	
 ?metaphor	
 ?that	
 ?might	
 ?be	
 ?used.	
 ?This	
 ?table	
 ?records	
 ?metaphors	
 ?from	
 ?outside	
 ?the	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?food	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?While	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?terms	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?considered	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?a	
 ?relationship	
 ?to	
 ?food	
 ?(for	
 ?example,	
 ?food	
 ?addictions)	
 ?the	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?said	
 ?that	
 ?these	
 ?were	
 ?not	
 ?food-??related	
 ?uses.	
 ?
Metaphor	
 ? Number	
 ?of	
 ?
subjects	
 ?who	
 ?
used	
 ?metaphor	
 ?
Discussion	
 ?
addiction	
 ? 2	
 ?
Compulsion	
 ?to	
 ?consume	
 ?media	
 ?independent	
 ?of	
 ?conscious	
 ?desire	
 ?
for	
 ?that	
 ?media;	
 ?subjects	
 ?compared	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?drug	
 ?addiction,	
 ?not	
 ?a	
 ?food	
 ?
addiction	
 ?
cigarettes	
 ? 1	
 ?
Anxiety	
 ?caused	
 ?by	
 ?not	
 ?having	
 ?phone	
 ?available	
 ?because	
 ?can?t	
 ?
access	
 ?the	
 ?media/information	
 ?on	
 ?it	
 ?
tools	
 ? 1	
 ?
Some	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?trying	
 ?out	
 ?a	
 ?new	
 ?media	
 ?just	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?curiosity	
 ?
about	
 ?what	
 ?the	
 ?medium	
 ?itself	
 ?is	
 ?like,	
 ?not	
 ?out	
 ?of	
 ?interest	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?
content.	
 ??It?s	
 ?like	
 ?ok,	
 ?tomorrow,	
 ?I	
 ?might	
 ?decide	
 ?to	
 ?look	
 ?at	
 ?what?s	
 ?
going	
 ?on	
 ?at	
 ?Pinterest	
 ?-??	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?to	
 ?effect	
 ?some	
 ?change	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?
information	
 ?I?m	
 ?consuming,	
 ?it?s	
 ?more	
 ?about	
 ?trying	
 ?the	
 ?tool.?	
 ?[S8]	
 ?
sleep	
 ? 1	
 ?
Would	
 ?like	
 ?to	
 ?have	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?of	
 ?both	
 ?sleep	
 ?and	
 ?enjoyable	
 ?
media,	
 ?but	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?time-??constrained	
 ?by	
 ?competing	
 ?
priorities	
 ?(have	
 ?to	
 ?go	
 ?to	
 ?work)	
 ?
financial	
 ?budget	
 ? 1	
 ?
Viewing	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?like	
 ?a	
 ?budget;	
 ?allocating	
 ?amounts	
 ?of	
 ?
time/attention	
 ?for	
 ?various	
 ?categories	
 ?and	
 ?staying	
 ?within	
 ?limits	
 ?
friends	
 ? 1	
 ?
Being	
 ?surrounded	
 ?by	
 ?books	
 ?is	
 ?like	
 ?having	
 ?friends	
 ?around	
 ?-??	
 ?don?t	
 ?
feel	
 ?lonely	
 ?or	
 ?bored	
 ?
poison	
 ? 1	
 ? Some	
 ?media	
 ?causes	
 ?adoption	
 ?of	
 ?ideas	
 ?or	
 ?values	
 ?that	
 ?lead	
 ?to	
 ?harm	
 ?
garbage	
 ? 1	
 ? Some	
 ?media	
 ?has	
 ?no	
 ?value	
 ?at	
 ?all,	
 ?should	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?consumed.	
 ?
Table	
 ?12.	
 ?Non-??food	
 ?metaphors	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 88	
 ?
8.4 Information	
 ?Diet	
 ?Categories	
 ?Within	
 ?a	
 ?common	
 ?culture,	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?very	
 ?consistent	
 ?on	
 ?whether	
 ?things	
 ?are	
 ?or	
 ?are	
 ?not	
 ?food.	
 ?But	
 ?there	
 ?was	
 ?considerable	
 ?divergence	
 ?in	
 ?opinions	
 ?of	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?included	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?larger	
 ?category	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?information	
 ?and	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?varied	
 ?on	
 ?whether	
 ?or	
 ?not	
 ?they	
 ?included	
 ?in	
 ?their	
 ?conception	
 ?of	
 ?information	
 ?diets	
 ?such	
 ?things	
 ?as:	
 ?
? Sporting	
 ?events	
 ?(disagreements	
 ?on	
 ?classification	
 ?went	
 ?down	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?level	
 ?of	
 ?professional	
 ?vs.	
 ?recreational,	
 ?and	
 ?in-??person	
 ?vs.	
 ?via	
 ?other	
 ?media)	
 ?
? Live	
 ?artistic	
 ?performances	
 ?(for	
 ?example,	
 ?one	
 ?person	
 ?felt	
 ?that	
 ?going	
 ?to	
 ?a	
 ?concert	
 ?was	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?information	
 ?diet,	
 ?but	
 ?seeing	
 ?a	
 ?busker	
 ?performing	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?street	
 ?was	
 ?not;	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?consider	
 ?any	
 ?live	
 ?performances	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?information	
 ?diet)	
 ?
? Interpersonal	
 ?communications	
 ?(face	
 ?to	
 ?face,	
 ?telephone	
 ?calls,	
 ?text	
 ?messages,	
 ?paper	
 ?letters,	
 ?emails,	
 ?social	
 ?network	
 ?status	
 ?updates,	
 ?video	
 ?chat)	
 ?Even	
 ?after	
 ?summarizing	
 ?top-??level	
 ?categories	
 ?(which	
 ?necessarily	
 ?obscures	
 ?differences	
 ?in	
 ?category	
 ?boundaries	
 ?between	
 ?individuals)	
 ?there	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?variety	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?said	
 ?were	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?information	
 ?diets.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
Category	
 ? Subjects	
 ?
books	
 ? 10	
 ?
movies	
 ? 9	
 ?
news	
 ? 7	
 ?
tv	
 ? 7	
 ?
email	
 ? 6	
 ?
Internet	
 ? 6	
 ?
social	
 ?networks	
 ? 6	
 ?
information	
 ?on	
 ?specific	
 ?subject	
 ?(work,	
 ?hobby,	
 ?interest)	
 ? 5	
 ?
music	
 ? 5	
 ?
face-??to-??face	
 ?conversations	
 ? 4	
 ?
parenting	
 ?information	
 ? 4	
 ?
podcasts	
 ? 4	
 ?
recipes	
 ? 4	
 ?
shopping	
 ? 3	
 ?
texting	
 ? 3	
 ?
videogames	
 ? 3	
 ?
live	
 ?performances	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?plays,	
 ?concerts)	
 ? 3	
 ?
magazines	
 ? 2	
 ?
mail	
 ? 2	
 ?
NPR	
 ?game	
 ?shows	
 ? 2	
 ?
personal	
 ?/	
 ?introspection	
 ? 2	
 ?
	
 ? 89	
 ?
Category	
 ? Subjects	
 ?
phone	
 ?calls	
 ? 2	
 ?
advertising	
 ? 1	
 ?
photos	
 ? 1	
 ?
art	
 ? 1	
 ?
Table	
 ?13.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?generated	
 ?a	
 ?highly	
 ?varied	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?categories.	
 ?Even	
 ?after	
 ?summarizing,	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?
variation	
 ?remained.	
 ?The	
 ?categories	
 ?people	
 ?discussed	
 ?in	
 ?terms	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?choices	
 ?were	
 ?far	
 ?more	
 ?granular	
 ?and	
 ?idiosyncratic.	
 ?To	
 ?give	
 ?a	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?variations	
 ?within	
 ?categories,	
 ?here	
 ?are	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?different	
 ?subcategories	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?mentioned.	
 ?Similar	
 ?variations	
 ?occurred	
 ?within	
 ?most	
 ?categories.	
 ?Every	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?distinctions	
 ?was	
 ?mentioned	
 ?as	
 ?something	
 ?salient	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?decisions.	
 ?	
 ?
Fiction	
 ?categories	
 ? Non-??fiction	
 ?categories	
 ? Other	
 ?categories	
 ?
vampire	
 ?stories	
 ? Martial	
 ?arts:	
 ?Shinto	
 ? library	
 ?books	
 ?
scifi	
 ? Martial	
 ?arts:	
 ?Aikido	
 ? audiobooks	
 ?
fantasy	
 ? Martial	
 ?arts:	
 ?Karate	
 ? books	
 ?to	
 ?loan	
 ?to	
 ?friends	
 ?
steampunk	
 ? Medicine	
 ?books	
 ? books	
 ?to	
 ?cherish	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?long	
 ?time	
 ?
novels	
 ? Massage	
 ?references	
 ? disposable	
 ?books	
 ?
short	
 ?stories	
 ? Design	
 ?resources	
 ? read-??aloud	
 ?books	
 ?
Entertainment	
 ?books	
 ? Biography	
 ? Hardcovers	
 ?
Smut	
 ?books	
 ? Books	
 ?to	
 ?learn	
 ?something	
 ?from	
 ? Paperbacks	
 ?
Uplifiting	
 ?emotional	
 ?stories	
 ? 	
 ? ebooks	
 ?	
 ?
Table	
 ?14.	
 ?People	
 ?make	
 ?many	
 ?distinctions	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?salient	
 ?to	
 ?them,	
 ?even	
 ?within	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?category.	
 ?I	
 ?had	
 ?been	
 ?interested	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?if	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?common	
 ??food	
 ?groups?	
 ?to	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption,	
 ?perhaps	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?a	
 ?media	
 ?version	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?classic	
 ?FDA	
 ??food	
 ?pyramid?	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?developed,	
 ?and	
 ?used	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?starting	
 ?point	
 ?for	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?My	
 ?takeaway	
 ?was	
 ?that	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?habits	
 ?are	
 ?quite	
 ?varied,	
 ?and	
 ?for	
 ?most	
 ?people	
 ?starting	
 ?at	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?broad	
 ?enough	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?shared	
 ?by	
 ?many	
 ?people	
 ?(such	
 ?as	
 ??music?	
 ?or	
 ??fiction?)	
 ?is	
 ?insufficiently	
 ?granular	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?meaningful	
 ?control	
 ?in	
 ?monitoring	
 ?and	
 ?shaping	
 ?their	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?to	
 ?achieve	
 ?their	
 ?goals.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 90	
 ?
8.5 Media	
 ?Sources	
 ?One	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?questions	
 ?considered	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?was	
 ?what	
 ?composed	
 ?people?s	
 ?current	
 ?media	
 ?diets.	
 ?I	
 ?was	
 ?curious	
 ?if	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?common	
 ?categories,	
 ?analogous	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ??food	
 ?groups?	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?prescriptive	
 ?diets	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?US	
 ?Food	
 ?and	
 ?Drug	
 ?Administration?s	
 ?classic	
 ??Food	
 ?Pyramid,?	
 ?which	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?basis	
 ?of	
 ?prescriptive	
 ?media	
 ?diets.	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?instead	
 ?that	
 ?subjects?	
 ?media	
 ?categories	
 ?are	
 ?highly	
 ?idiosyncratic.	
 ?People	
 ?agreed	
 ?on	
 ?common	
 ?high-??level	
 ?distinctions	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?fiction	
 ?and	
 ?non-??fiction,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?and	
 ?boundaries	
 ?where	
 ?people	
 ?distinguished	
 ?different	
 ?types	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?different	
 ?goals	
 ?and	
 ?preferences	
 ?for	
 ?were	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?specific	
 ?than	
 ?that.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?typically	
 ?expressed	
 ?their	
 ?unmet	
 ?media	
 ?desires	
 ?as	
 ?being	
 ?much	
 ?more	
 ?specific	
 ?than	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?that	
 ?were	
 ?broadly	
 ?shared	
 ?like	
 ?fiction,	
 ?or	
 ?even	
 ?genres	
 ?like	
 ?science-??fiction.	
 ?For	
 ?instance,	
 ?one	
 ?science	
 ?fiction	
 ?fan	
 ?made	
 ?distinctions	
 ?between	
 ?several	
 ?sub-??genres	
 ?of	
 ?science-??fiction,	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?enjoyed	
 ?and	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?not.	
 ?This	
 ?lack	
 ?of	
 ?commonality	
 ?may	
 ?indicate	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?helpful	
 ?to	
 ?try	
 ?to	
 ?establish	
 ?people?s	
 ?media	
 ?goals	
 ?in	
 ?terms	
 ?of	
 ?predefined	
 ?categories;	
 ?such	
 ?an	
 ?approach	
 ?should	
 ?allow	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?define	
 ?their	
 ?own	
 ?categories	
 ?if	
 ?the	
 ?basic	
 ?ones	
 ?are	
 ?insufficient	
 ?for	
 ?their	
 ?needs.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 91	
 ?
Media	
 ?type	
 ? Sources	
 ?
Physical	
 ?Books	
 ? Borrowed	
 ?(from	
 ?libraries,	
 ?from	
 ?friends)	
 ?
Purchased	
 ?(new,	
 ?used)	
 ?
Gifts	
 ?
eBooks	
 ? Commercial	
 ?ebook	
 ?ecosystems	
 ?(Amazon	
 ?Kindle,	
 ?Apple	
 ?iBooks,	
 ?Barnes	
 ?&	
 ?
Noble	
 ?Nook)	
 ?
Publisher-??direct	
 ?ebook	
 ?stores	
 ?(O?Reilly,	
 ?TED	
 ?Books)	
 ?
Open	
 ?ebooks	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?Gutenberg	
 ?library)	
 ?
Library	
 ?ebook	
 ?borrowing	
 ?
Ebook	
 ?pirating	
 ?
Ebook	
 ?lending	
 ?	
 ?
Television	
 ? Live	
 ?-??	
 ?whatever	
 ?is	
 ??on	
 ?right	
 ?now?	
 ?
Broadcasts	
 ?recorded	
 ?on	
 ?digital	
 ?video	
 ?recorder	
 ?(DVR)	
 ?for	
 ?later	
 ?viewing	
 ?
On-??demand	
 ?television	
 ?(Netflix,	
 ?Amazon	
 ?Instant	
 ?Video,	
 ?Hulu,	
 ?iTunes)	
 ?
Movies	
 ? Theaters	
 ?(3D,	
 ?IMAX,	
 ??regular?)	
 ?
On-??demand	
 ?subscriptions	
 ?(Netflix,	
 ?Amazon	
 ?Prime	
 ?Video)	
 ?
On-??demand	
 ?rental	
 ?(iTunes,	
 ?Amazon	
 ?Instant	
 ?Video)	
 ?
On-??demand	
 ?purchase	
 ?(iTunes,	
 ?Amazon	
 ?Instant	
 ?Video)	
 ?
Physical	
 ?media	
 ?(DVD,	
 ?Bluray)	
 ?rental	
 ?(Netflix,	
 ?Redbox,	
 ?local	
 ?video	
 ?store)	
 ?
Physical	
 ?media	
 ?purchase	
 ?(online	
 ?stores,	
 ?physical	
 ?stores)	
 ?
Physical	
 ?media	
 ?borrowing	
 ?(library,	
 ?friends)	
 ?
Pirated	
 ?downloads	
 ?(torrents)	
 ?
Newspapers	
 ?&	
 ?Magazines	
 ? Delivery	
 ?subscription	
 ?
Purchase	
 ?single	
 ?copies	
 ?
Public	
 ?copies	
 ?(coffeeshops,	
 ?libraries)	
 ?
Website	
 ?(free	
 ?vs.	
 ?paid)	
 ?
Dedicated	
 ?software	
 ?app	
 ?
Websites	
 ?/	
 ?Blogs	
 ? Visit	
 ?website	
 ?directly	
 ?(URL	
 ?memorized,	
 ?search,	
 ?bookmark)	
 ?
Dedicated	
 ?software	
 ?app	
 ?
Syndication	
 ?(RSS	
 ?reader	
 ?or	
 ?aggregation	
 ?portal)	
 ?
Feeds	
 ?on	
 ?social	
 ?networks	
 ?(Twitter,	
 ?Facebook,	
 ?Pinterest,	
 ?LiveJournal)	
 ?
Email	
 ?digests	
 ?
	
 ? 92	
 ?
Media	
 ?type	
 ? Sources	
 ?
Conversations	
 ? In	
 ?person	
 ?	
 ?
On	
 ?the	
 ?telephone	
 ?
Text	
 ?messages	
 ?and	
 ?instant	
 ?messaging	
 ?
Email	
 ?
Letters	
 ?
Social	
 ?networks	
 ? Facebook	
 ?
Twitter	
 ?
LiveJournal	
 ?
Google+	
 ?
MySpace	
 ?
Videogames	
 ? Console	
 ?game	
 ?rentals	
 ?(Gamefly,	
 ?Blockbuster)	
 ?
Online	
 ?purchases	
 ?(iOS	
 ?apps,	
 ?Xbox	
 ?Live	
 ?Arcade,	
 ?Steam)	
 ?
Physical	
 ?media	
 ?purchases	
 ?
Pirated	
 ?
Parenting	
 ?information	
 ? Information	
 ?&	
 ?forms	
 ?sent	
 ?home	
 ?from	
 ?school	
 ?with	
 ?children	
 ?	
 ?
Children?s	
 ?homework	
 ?assignments	
 ?and	
 ?completed/graded	
 ?work	
 ?
Websites	
 ?to	
 ?check	
 ?(children?s	
 ?homework	
 ?assignments,	
 ?class	
 ?news)	
 ?
School	
 ?email	
 ?listservs	
 ?
Direct	
 ?email	
 ?from	
 ?teachers	
 ?
?Googlestalking?	
 ?-??	
 ?checking	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?babysitters	
 ?and	
 ?kids?	
 ?
friends?	
 ?parents	
 ?before	
 ?entrusting	
 ?children	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?
Work-??related	
 ?information	
 ? Collaborative	
 ?&	
 ?informative	
 ?emails	
 ?	
 ?
Professional	
 ?email	
 ?lists	
 ?
Instant	
 ?messaging	
 ?
Music	
 ? Streaming	
 ?subscription	
 ?collections	
 ?(Spotify,	
 ?Rhapsody)	
 ?
Streaming	
 ?radio	
 ?(Pandora,	
 ?Last.fm,	
 ?Rdio)	
 ?
Purchased	
 ?songs	
 ?(downloaded	
 ?or	
 ?stored	
 ?in	
 ?cloud	
 ?services:	
 ?iTunes,	
 ?
Amazon,	
 ?Google)	
 ?
Pirated	
 ?songs	
 ?(ripped	
 ?from	
 ?friends	
 ?or	
 ?library	
 ?CDs,	
 ?downloaded	
 ?via	
 ?
Bittorrent)	
 ?
Listen	
 ?to	
 ?songs	
 ?on	
 ?web	
 ?(YouTube,	
 ?MySpace)	
 ?
Table	
 ?15.	
 ?Subjects	
 ?identified	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?/	
 ?information	
 ?sources.	
 ?This	
 ?table	
 ?is	
 ?organized	
 ?by	
 ?media	
 ?type	
 ?for	
 ?
clarity,	
 ?though	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?note	
 ?that	
 ?this	
 ?categorization	
 ?scheme	
 ?was	
 ?not	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?subjects.	
 ?
	
 ? 93	
 ?
9 Appendix	
 ?B:	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?Technology	
 ?Strategies	
 ?As	
 ?the	
 ?field	
 ?of	
 ?positive	
 ?technology	
 ?develops,	
 ?researchers	
 ?are	
 ?identifying	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?strategies	
 ?that	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?applied	
 ?in	
 ?creating	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?solutions.	
 ?This	
 ?section	
 ?provides	
 ?an	
 ?overview	
 ?of	
 ?strategies	
 ?identified	
 ?by	
 ?several	
 ?widely-??cited	
 ?papers	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?field.	
 ?	
 ?Table	
 ?16	
 ?identifies	
 ?the	
 ?source	
 ?of	
 ?each	
 ?strategy.	
 ?	
 ?
Fogg,	
 ?Cuellar,	
 ?&	
 ?
Danielson,	
 ?2003	
 ?[1]	
 ?
Sander,	
 ?2009	
 ?[2]	
 ? Consolvo,	
 ?McDonald,	
 ?&	
 ?
Landay,	
 ?2009	
 ?[3]	
 ?
Klasnja,	
 ?Consolvo,	
 ?&	
 ?
Pratt,	
 ?2011	
 ?[4]	
 ?
Reduction	
 ?	
 ?
Tunneling	
 ?	
 ?
Tailoring	
 ?	
 ?
Suggesting	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?right	
 ?
time	
 ?	
 ?
Self-??monitoring	
 ?	
 ?
Surveillance	
 ?	
 ?
Operant	
 ?conditioning	
 ?
Praise	
 ?
Social	
 ?comparison	
 ?	
 ?
Reciprocity	
 ?
Use	
 ?of	
 ?virtual	
 ?humans	
 ?
(to	
 ?exploit	
 ?mimicry,	
 ?
empathy,	
 ?emotional	
 ?
responses,	
 ?rapport)	
 ?
	
 ?
Abstract	
 ?&	
 ?reflective	
 ?	
 ?
Unobtrusive	
 ?	
 ?
Public	
 ?	
 ?
Aesthetic	
 ?	
 ?
Positive	
 ?	
 ?
Controllable	
 ?	
 ?
Trending	
 ?/	
 ?historical	
 ?	
 ?
Comprehensive	
 ?
Social	
 ?learning	
 ?
Social	
 ?influence	
 ?
Priming	
 ?
Goal	
 ?negotiation	
 ?and	
 ?
coaching	
 ?
Intrinsic	
 ?motivation	
 ?
Table	
 ?16.	
 ?Positive	
 ?Technology	
 ?researchers	
 ?have	
 ?identified	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?strategies	
 ?that	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?
positive	
 ?change;	
 ?this	
 ?table	
 ?identifies	
 ?the	
 ?source	
 ?of	
 ?each	
 ?strategy	
 ?discussed	
 ?below.	
 ?In	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?varied	
 ?strategies,	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?clustered	
 ?them	
 ?into	
 ?categories	
 ?and	
 ?included	
 ?definitions.	
 ?Strategies	
 ?proposed	
 ?by	
 ?different	
 ?researchers	
 ?may	
 ?partially	
 ?overlap	
 ?each	
 ?other.	
 ?Each	
 ?strategy	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?following	
 ?table	
 ?is	
 ?labeled	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?original	
 ?source	
 ?as	
 ?shown	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?table	
 ?above.	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 94	
 ?
Category	
 ? Strategy	
 ? Definition	
 ?
G
oa
l	
 ?s
et
tin
g	
 ?
Goal	
 ?negotiation	
 ?&	
 ?
coaching	
 ?[4]	
 ?
Providing	
 ?guidance	
 ?to	
 ?set	
 ?goals	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?significant	
 ?but	
 ?achievable	
 ?
Priming	
 ?[4]	
 ? Activating	
 ?an	
 ?item	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?it	
 ?more	
 ?available	
 ?for	
 ?selection.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?done	
 ?by	
 ?
bringing	
 ?it	
 ?into	
 ?awareness,	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?only	
 ?subconsciously.	
 ?(Priming	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?
psychological	
 ?mechanism	
 ?is	
 ?discussed	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?background	
 ?on	
 ?decision-??
making;	
 ?see	
 ?section	
 ?4.1)	
 ?
Tailoring	
 ?[1]	
 ? Personalizing	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?to	
 ?make	
 ?it	
 ?specific	
 ?and	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?
individual,	
 ?instead	
 ?of	
 ?generic.	
 ?
Ex
pe
rie
nc
e	
 ?
of
	
 ?D
oi
ng
	
 ?
Aesthetic	
 ?[3]	
 ? If	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?adopted	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?long	
 ?term,	
 ?it	
 ?needs	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?appealing	
 ?
and	
 ?congruent	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?style.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?some	
 ?studies	
 ?
of	
 ?fitness	
 ?devices	
 ?found	
 ?users	
 ?rejected	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?unattractive	
 ?wearable	
 ?
devices	
 ?because	
 ?they	
 ?didn?t	
 ?like	
 ?how	
 ?wearing	
 ?them	
 ?reflected	
 ?on	
 ?their	
 ?
appearance	
 ?and	
 ?self-??image.	
 ?
Intrinsic	
 ?
motivation	
 ?[4]	
 ?
Reminding	
 ?people	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?behavior	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?
themselves	
 ?find	
 ?appealing;	
 ?also,	
 ?make	
 ?using	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?appealing	
 ?in	
 ?
itself.	
 ?
Reduction	
 ?[1]	
 ? Making	
 ?complex	
 ?tasks	
 ?simpler	
 ?to	
 ?accomplish,	
 ?e.g.,	
 ?by	
 ?reducing	
 ?the	
 ?
number	
 ?of	
 ?steps	
 ?involved.	
 ?
Tunneling	
 ?[1]	
 ? Reducing	
 ?the	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?decision	
 ?points	
 ?involved	
 ?in	
 ?accomplishing	
 ?a	
 ?task,	
 ?
e.g.,	
 ?by	
 ?leading	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?through	
 ?a	
 ?series	
 ?of	
 ?pre-??determined	
 ?steps.	
 ?
Da
ta
	
 ?c
ol
le
ct
io
n	
 ?
Comprehensive	
 ?[3]	
 ? Provide	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?collection	
 ?and	
 ?display	
 ?of	
 ?all	
 ?behaviors	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?relevant,	
 ?
not	
 ?just	
 ?those	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?easy	
 ?to	
 ?handle	
 ?with	
 ?available	
 ?technology.	
 ?	
 ?
Controllable	
 ?[3]	
 ? it	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?let	
 ?people	
 ?control	
 ?and	
 ?edit	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?so	
 ?that	
 ?it	
 ?reflects	
 ?
what	
 ?they	
 ?think	
 ?is	
 ?appropriate.	
 ?Control	
 ?also	
 ?includes	
 ?restricting	
 ?and	
 ?
allowing	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?data.	
 ?
Self-??monitoring	
 ?[1]	
 ? Eliminate	
 ?the	
 ?tedium	
 ?and	
 ?increase	
 ?the	
 ?reliability	
 ?and	
 ?completeness	
 ?of	
 ?
collecting	
 ?data	
 ?on	
 ?activity,	
 ?progress,	
 ?or	
 ?status	
 ?by	
 ?automating	
 ?data	
 ?
collection.	
 ?Enables	
 ?reflection	
 ?on	
 ?current	
 ?state	
 ?and	
 ?trends.	
 ?
Unobtrusive	
 ?[3]	
 ? Solutions	
 ?should	
 ?fit	
 ?into	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?everyday	
 ?life	
 ?without	
 ?unduly	
 ?calling	
 ?
attention	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?solution	
 ?or	
 ?the	
 ?user.	
 ?
Fe
ed
ba
ck
	
 ?&
	
 ?R
ef
le
ct
io
n	
 ?
In
di
vi
du
al
	
 ?
	
 ?
Abstract	
 ?&	
 ?
reflective	
 ?[3]	
 ?
Instead	
 ?of	
 ?presenting	
 ?raw	
 ?data,	
 ?find	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?abstract	
 ?its	
 ?presentation	
 ?in	
 ?
a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?encourages	
 ?reflection	
 ?on	
 ?activity	
 ?and	
 ?its	
 ?relation	
 ?to	
 ?goals	
 ?
Operant	
 ?
conditioning	
 ?[1]	
 ?
From	
 ?behaviorism,	
 ?using	
 ?reinforcement	
 ?(either	
 ?reward	
 ?or	
 ?punishment)	
 ?to	
 ?
encourage	
 ?or	
 ?discourage	
 ?specific	
 ?behaviors.	
 ?Note	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?
significant	
 ?moral	
 ?considerations	
 ?in	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?this	
 ?technique	
 ?because	
 ?of	
 ?its	
 ?
potential	
 ?for	
 ?direct	
 ?harm	
 ?(from	
 ?punishments)	
 ?and	
 ?abuse	
 ?(even	
 ?when	
 ?
positive	
 ?reinforcement	
 ?is	
 ?used,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?powerful	
 ?technique	
 ?that	
 ?can	
 ?
	
 ? 95	
 ?
	
 ?
Table	
 ?17.	
 ?Persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?wide	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?strategies	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?different	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?behavior	
 ?
change.	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
encourage	
 ?behaviors	
 ?that	
 ?are	
 ?themselves	
 ?negative).	
 ?
Positive	
 ?[3]	
 ? Suggests	
 ?only	
 ?using	
 ?positive	
 ?reinforcement	
 ?when	
 ?desired	
 ?behaviors	
 ?are	
 ?
performed;	
 ?when	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?not,	
 ?sustain	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?interest,	
 ?but	
 ?do	
 ?not	
 ?
either	
 ?punish	
 ?or	
 ?reward.	
 ?
Praise	
 ?[2]	
 ? Cheering	
 ?desired	
 ?behaviors	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?simple	
 ?form	
 ?of	
 ?positive	
 ?reinforcement.	
 ?
Trending/historical	
 ?
[3]	
 ?
Allow	
 ?the	
 ?user	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?past	
 ?behavior	
 ?and	
 ?how	
 ?it	
 ?relates	
 ?to	
 ?their	
 ?goals.	
 ?
Consider	
 ?that	
 ?goals	
 ?may	
 ?change	
 ?over	
 ?time.	
 ?Devices	
 ?used	
 ?for	
 ?collecting	
 ?
data	
 ?may	
 ?change	
 ?over	
 ?time	
 ?as	
 ?well,	
 ?so	
 ?data	
 ?portability	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?for	
 ?
being	
 ?able	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?trends	
 ?over	
 ?time.	
 ?
So
ci
al
	
 ?
	
 ?
Public	
 ?[3]	
 ? Because	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?being	
 ?collected	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?exposed	
 ?to	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?while	
 ?
the	
 ?user	
 ?is	
 ?working	
 ?with	
 ?it,	
 ?represent	
 ?it	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?will	
 ?not	
 ?cause	
 ?
embarrassment	
 ?or	
 ?discomfort	
 ?in	
 ?that	
 ?event.	
 ?
Social	
 ?learning	
 ?[4]	
 ? Other	
 ?people	
 ?can	
 ?teach	
 ?how	
 ?to	
 ?do	
 ?activities	
 ?
Social	
 ?comparison	
 ?
[2]	
 ?
Enabling	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?how	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?behaving	
 ?can	
 ?motivate	
 ?and	
 ?
provide	
 ?information	
 ?about	
 ?what	
 ?is	
 ?achievable.	
 ?
Social	
 ?influence	
 ?[4]	
 ? Both	
 ?teamwork	
 ?(wanting	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?teammates	
 ?and	
 ?not	
 ?let	
 ?them	
 ?down)	
 ?
and	
 ?competition	
 ?(wanting	
 ?to	
 ?beat	
 ?others)	
 ?can	
 ?provide	
 ?motivation.	
 ?	
 ?
Surveillance	
 ?[1]	
 ? Awareness	
 ?that	
 ?one?s	
 ?behavior	
 ?is	
 ?being	
 ?monitored	
 ?motivates	
 ?people.	
 ?	
 ?
Reciprocity	
 ?[2]	
 ? Having	
 ?an	
 ?agreement	
 ?with	
 ?one	
 ?or	
 ?more	
 ?other	
 ?people	
 ?to	
 ?mutually	
 ?support	
 ?
each	
 ?other?s	
 ?goals	
 ?
Use	
 ?of	
 ?virtual	
 ?
humans	
 ?[2]	
 ?
People	
 ?respond	
 ?powerfully	
 ?to	
 ?images	
 ?of	
 ?human	
 ?expressions	
 ?and	
 ?body	
 ?
language;	
 ?virtual	
 ?humans	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?exploit	
 ?mimicry,	
 ?rapport,	
 ?and	
 ?
other	
 ?emotional	
 ?responses	
 ?to	
 ?motivate	
 ?desired	
 ?behaviors	
 ?and	
 ?strengthen	
 ?
commitment	
 ?to	
 ?goals.	
 ?
	
 ? 96	
 ?
10 Appendix	
 ?C:	
 ?Features	
 ?&	
 ?Gaps	
 ?of	
 ?Existing	
 ?Reading	
 ?tools	
 ?Many	
 ?tools	
 ?for	
 ?readers	
 ?exist.	
 ?These	
 ?tools	
 ?have	
 ?many	
 ?capabilities	
 ?to	
 ?assist	
 ?with	
 ?various	
 ?problems.	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?examine	
 ?these	
 ?tools	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?existing	
 ?design	
 ?patterns	
 ?and	
 ?idioms	
 ?used	
 ?in	
 ?reading	
 ?tools,	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?to	
 ?clarify	
 ?what	
 ?gaps	
 ?existed	
 ?that	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?filled.	
 ?I	
 ?selected	
 ?a	
 ?subset	
 ?of	
 ?tools	
 ?using	
 ?an	
 ?informal	
 ?methodology,	
 ?choosing	
 ?from	
 ?among	
 ?those	
 ?mentioned	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?interviews	
 ?and	
 ?those	
 ?frequently	
 ?mentioned	
 ?in	
 ?online	
 ?reading	
 ?communities	
 ?and	
 ?by	
 ?book	
 ?bloggers.	
 ?The	
 ?table	
 ?below	
 ?compares	
 ?the	
 ?available	
 ?functionality	
 ?of	
 ?several	
 ?tools.	
 ?Some	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?capabilities	
 ?are	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?survey	
 ?of	
 ?new	
 ?media	
 ?technology	
 ?(Section	
 ?2.8),	
 ?and	
 ?others	
 ?are	
 ?capabilities	
 ?imagined	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?problems	
 ?described	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.	
 ?The	
 ?tools	
 ?were	
 ?selected	
 ?through	
 ?an	
 ?informal	
 ?process.	
 ?Several	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?tools	
 ?were	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects,	
 ?including	
 ?physical	
 ?TBR	
 ?shelves,	
 ?emailing	
 ?notes	
 ?to	
 ?oneself,	
 ?paper	
 ?lists,	
 ?and	
 ?electronic	
 ?documents.	
 ?Goodreads.com	
 ?and	
 ?Amazon.com	
 ?were	
 ?both	
 ?mentioned	
 ?by	
 ?multiple	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects	
 ?as	
 ?well.	
 ?Amazon	
 ?has	
 ?several	
 ?overlapping	
 ?tools	
 ?with	
 ?different	
 ?capabilities;	
 ?for	
 ?clarity	
 ?I	
 ?distinguished	
 ?between	
 ?their	
 ?overall	
 ?website,	
 ?wishlists,	
 ?Listmania,	
 ?and	
 ?the	
 ?capabilities	
 ?available	
 ?using	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?Kindle	
 ?ereader	
 ?devices.	
 ?I	
 ?also	
 ?examined	
 ?a	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?other	
 ?existing	
 ?software	
 ?tools.	
 ?I	
 ?identified	
 ?these	
 ?tools	
 ?through	
 ?web	
 ?searches	
 ?for	
 ?reviews	
 ?of	
 ?tools	
 ?for	
 ?readers,	
 ?and	
 ?selected	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?frequently-??mentioned	
 ?ones.	
 ?These	
 ?included	
 ?Google	
 ?Books,	
 ?LibraryThing,	
 ?Delicious	
 ?Library,	
 ?and	
 ?Shelfari.	
 ?(Goodreads	
 ?also	
 ?featured	
 ?prominently	
 ?in	
 ?these	
 ?results,	
 ?and	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?have	
 ?been	
 ?included	
 ?for	
 ?that	
 ?reason	
 ?even	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?had	
 ?not	
 ?already	
 ?been	
 ?identified	
 ?by	
 ?multiple	
 ?interview	
 ?subjects.)	
 ?I	
 ?found	
 ?that	
 ?while	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?tools	
 ?provide	
 ?ample	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?identifying	
 ?books	
 ?of	
 ?interest	
 ?and	
 ?storing	
 ?a	
 ?reference	
 ?to	
 ?them	
 ?for	
 ?later,	
 ?they	
 ?did	
 ?not	
 ?provide	
 ?encouragement	
 ?to	
 ?actually	
 ?read	
 ?those	
 ?books.	
 ?They	
 ?also	
 ?had	
 ?limitations	
 ?in	
 ?spanning	
 ?multiple	
 ?stashes,	
 ?leaving	
 ?users	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?position	
 ?of	
 ?needing	
 ?to	
 ?perform	
 ?multiple	
 ?checks	
 ?and	
 ?searches	
 ?to	
 ?find	
 ?a	
 ?book	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?stashed	
 ?previously.	
 ?This	
 ?presents	
 ?an	
 ?opportunity	
 ?for	
 ?future	
 ?solutions	
 ?to	
 ?fill	
 ?these	
 ?unmet	
 ?needs.	
 ?	
 ?Key:	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?=	
 ?has	
 ?capability	
 ? o	
 ?=	
 ?partial	
 ?capability	
 ? blank	
 ?cell	
 ?=	
 ?no	
 ?capability	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ? 97	
 ?
	
 ?
Problem	
 ? Capability	
 ? Ph
ys
ic
al
	
 ?T
BR
	
 ?sh
el
f	
 ?
Em
ai
l	
 ?t
o	
 ?
se
lf	
 ?
Pa
pe
r	
 ?l
is
t	
 ?
U
ns
tr
uc
tu
re
d	
 ?
fil
e	
 ?
G
oo
dr
ea
ds
	
 ?
Sh
el
fa
ri	
 ?
Li
br
ar
yT
hi
ng
	
 ?
D
el
ic
io
us
	
 ?L
ib
ra
ry
	
 ?
G
oo
gl
e	
 ?
Bo
ok
s	
 ?
Bi
bl
io
co
m
m
on
s	
 ?
Am
az
on
.c
om
	
 ?w
eb
si
te
	
 ?
Am
az
on
	
 ?K
in
dl
e	
 ?
Am
az
on
	
 ?w
is
hl
is
ts
	
 ?
Am
az
on
	
 ?L
is
tm
an
ia
	
 ?
Discover	
 ?
books	
 ?you	
 ?
will	
 ?want	
 ?
to	
 ?read	
 ?
Recommendation	
 ?
engine	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Receive	
 ?
suggestions	
 ?from	
 ?
friends	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Curated	
 ?lists	
 ?
from	
 ?others	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Decide	
 ?
whether	
 ?
you	
 ?want	
 ?
to	
 ?read	
 ?a	
 ?
specific	
 ?
book	
 ?
reviews	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
publisher?s	
 ?
description	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
author	
 ?bio	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
cover	
 ?image	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
endorsement	
 ?
blurbs	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Organize	
 ?
books	
 ?
Existing	
 ?book	
 ?
metadata	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
User-??provided	
 ?
categories	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Arbitrary,	
 ?direct	
 ?
arrangement	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ?
Add	
 ?books	
 ? Barcode	
 ?scan	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
From	
 ?partial	
 ?/	
 ?
incomplete	
 ?
author	
 ?or	
 ?title	
 ?
o	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Cover	
 ?image	
 ?
recognition	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Remember	
 ?
a	
 ?book	
 ?you	
 ?
want	
 ?to	
 ?
read	
 ?later	
 ?
in	
 ?a	
 ?specific	
 ?
format	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
regardless	
 ?of	
 ?
format	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
before	
 ?it	
 ?has	
 ?
been	
 ?published	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Recall	
 ?&	
 ?
review	
 ?
previously-??
stashed	
 ?
books	
 ?
independent	
 ?of	
 ?
source/vendor	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
connect	
 ?to	
 ?and	
 ?
aggregate	
 ?
multiple	
 ?source	
 ?
stashes	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Choose	
 ?
what	
 ?to	
 ?
read	
 ?next	
 ?
from	
 ?
books	
 ?you	
 ?
already	
 ?
have	
 ?
Provide	
 ?a	
 ?stash	
 ?
for	
 ?books	
 ?you	
 ?
want	
 ?to	
 ?read	
 ?
?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Prime	
 ?awareness	
 ?
of	
 ?stashed	
 ?books	
 ?
through	
 ?ambient	
 ?
visibility	
 ?
?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 98	
 ?
Problem	
 ? Capability	
 ? Ph
ys
ic
al
	
 ?T
BR
	
 ?sh
el
f	
 ?
Em
ai
l	
 ?t
o	
 ?
se
lf	
 ?
Pa
pe
r	
 ?l
is
t	
 ?
U
ns
tr
uc
tu
re
d	
 ?
fil
e	
 ?
G
oo
dr
ea
ds
	
 ?
Sh
el
fa
ri	
 ?
Li
br
ar
yT
hi
ng
	
 ?
D
el
ic
io
us
	
 ?L
ib
ra
ry
	
 ?
G
oo
gl
e	
 ?
Bo
ok
s	
 ?
Bi
bl
io
co
m
m
on
s	
 ?
Am
az
on
.c
om
	
 ?w
eb
si
te
	
 ?
Am
az
on
	
 ?K
in
dl
e	
 ?
Am
az
on
	
 ?w
is
hl
is
ts
	
 ?
Am
az
on
	
 ?L
is
tm
an
ia
	
 ?
Share	
 ?and	
 ?
display	
 ?
your	
 ?
reading	
 ?
Tell	
 ?others	
 ?about	
 ?
a	
 ?specific	
 ?book	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ?
Display	
 ?what	
 ?
books	
 ?you	
 ?read	
 ?
to	
 ?people	
 ?online	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Display	
 ?what	
 ?
books	
 ?you	
 ?read	
 ?
to	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?
visit	
 ?you	
 ?
?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Finish	
 ?
reading	
 ??in	
 ?
progress?	
 ?
books	
 ?
Indicate	
 ?current	
 ?
position	
 ?in	
 ?book	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Provide	
 ?a	
 ?visible	
 ?
reminder	
 ?of	
 ?in-??
progress	
 ?books	
 ?
?	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ? o	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 99	
 ?
11 Appendix	
 ?D:	
 ?Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?for	
 ?Media	
 ?Consumption	
 ?	
 ?One	
 ?specific	
 ?subset	
 ?of	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology	
 ?that	
 ?has	
 ?gained	
 ?in	
 ?popularity	
 ?recently	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?field	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics:	
 ?	
 ?collecting	
 ?and	
 ?reflecting	
 ?on	
 ?objective	
 ?data	
 ?about	
 ?one?s	
 ?own	
 ?behavior	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?	
 ?better	
 ?achieve	
 ?desired	
 ?outcomes.	
 ?In	
 ?recent	
 ?years,	
 ?technology	
 ?capable	
 ?of	
 ?supporting	
 ?this	
 ?practice	
 ?has	
 ?become	
 ?more	
 ?affordable,	
 ?easy	
 ?to	
 ?use,	
 ?and	
 ?widely	
 ?available,	
 ?with	
 ?commercial	
 ?offerings	
 ?from	
 ?companies	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Nike,	
 ?Phillips,	
 ?and	
 ?Fitbit	
 ?crossing	
 ?into	
 ?mainstream	
 ?use.	
 ?	
 ?
11.1 Background	
 ?The	
 ?Quantified	
 ?Self	
 ?(QS)	
 ?movement	
 ?is	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?practice	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics.	
 ?In	
 ?personal	
 ?conversations	
 ?with	
 ?attendees	
 ?at	
 ?Seattle	
 ?Quantified	
 ?Self	
 ?Meetups,	
 ?they	
 ?told	
 ?me	
 ?they	
 ?often	
 ?find	
 ?that	
 ?simply	
 ?measuring	
 ?something	
 ?causes	
 ?the	
 ?measured	
 ?behavior	
 ?to	
 ?change.	
 ?This	
 ?is	
 ?reminiscent	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ??Hawthorne	
 ?effect?	
 ?discovered	
 ?in	
 ?productivity	
 ?studies	
 ?at	
 ?the	
 ?Hawthorne	
 ?power	
 ?plant	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?	
 ?early	
 ?twentieth	
 ?century.	
 ?The	
 ?meaning	
 ?and	
 ?mechanisms	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?effect	
 ?are	
 ?debated,	
 ?but	
 ?in	
 ?general	
 ?it	
 ?claims	
 ?that	
 ?performing	
 ?an	
 ?intervention	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?subjects	
 ?knew	
 ?their	
 ?productivity	
 ?was	
 ?being	
 ?measured	
 ?increased	
 ?productivity,	
 ?regardless	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?actual	
 ?intervention	
 ?(Olson,	
 ?Verley,	
 ?Santos,	
 ?&	
 ?Salas,	
 ?1994).	
 ?Another	
 ?powerful	
 ?mechanism	
 ?which	
 ?seems	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?at	
 ?work	
 ?in	
 ?QS	
 ?is	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ??Seinfeld	
 ?Chart,?	
 ?named	
 ?after	
 ?the	
 ?work	
 ?habits	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?comedian	
 ?Jerry	
 ?Seinfeld:	
 ?he	
 ?simply	
 ?marks	
 ?a	
 ?large	
 ?X	
 ?on	
 ?a	
 ?wall	
 ?calendar	
 ?each	
 ?day	
 ?that	
 ?he	
 ?writes	
 ?and	
 ?tries	
 ?to	
 ??not	
 ?break	
 ?the	
 ?chain?	
 ?(Isaac,	
 ?2007).	
 ?	
 ?In	
 ?addition	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?intrinsic	
 ?motivations	
 ?of	
 ?performing	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?action,	
 ?the	
 ?QS?ers	
 ?told	
 ?me	
 ?that	
 ?the	
 ?desire	
 ?to	
 ?maintain	
 ?the	
 ?unbroken	
 ?streak	
 ?and	
 ?see	
 ?the	
 ?ongoing	
 ?record	
 ?of	
 ?success	
 ?serves	
 ?as	
 ?extrinsic	
 ?motivation.	
 ?This	
 ?seems	
 ?connected	
 ?to	
 ?Macadams?	
 ?identity	
 ?claims	
 ?(MacAdams,	
 ?1997)	
 ?and	
 ?Swann?s	
 ?self-??verification	
 ?(Swann,	
 ?1983);	
 ?we	
 ?want	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?and	
 ?show	
 ?others	
 ?evidence	
 ?that	
 ?supports	
 ?our	
 ?self-??image,	
 ?so	
 ?by	
 ?creating	
 ?visual	
 ?evidence	
 ?about	
 ?our	
 ?behavior	
 ?where	
 ?we	
 ?will	
 ?see	
 ?it,	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?more	
 ?motivated	
 ?to	
 ?behave	
 ?as	
 ?desired	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?keep	
 ?the	
 ?evidence	
 ?and	
 ?our	
 ?self-??image	
 ?in	
 ?accord.)	
 ?QS?ers	
 ?also	
 ?reflect	
 ?upon	
 ?the	
 ?collected	
 ?data	
 ?and	
 ?sometimes	
 ?gain	
 ?insights	
 ?which	
 ?help	
 ?them	
 ?achieve	
 ?their	
 ?goals	
 ?by	
 ?finding	
 ?patterns.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?approach	
 ?of	
 ?tracking	
 ?data	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?problem,	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?stop	
 ?recording	
 ?data	
 ?when	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?favorable.	
 ?	
 ?
?There?s	
 ?a	
 ?discipline	
 ?switch	
 ?-??	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?stay	
 ?on	
 ?for	
 ?months	
 ?at	
 ?a	
 ?time.	
 ?Tracking	
 ?can	
 ?help.	
 ?But	
 ?
as	
 ?soon	
 ?as	
 ?I	
 ?go	
 ?off	
 ?my	
 ?goal,	
 ?I	
 ?stop	
 ?tracking.	
 ?I	
 ?might	
 ?record	
 ?breakfast	
 ?and	
 ?lunch,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?
record	
 ?nothing	
 ?for	
 ?dinner-??	
 ?because	
 ?dinner	
 ?didn?t	
 ?follow	
 ?the	
 ?diet.?	
 ??S1	
 ?Ian	
 ?Li	
 ?(Li,	
 ?Dey,	
 ?&	
 ?Forlizzi,	
 ?2010)	
 ?developed	
 ?a	
 ?model	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics,	
 ?where	
 ?he	
 ?identifies	
 ?different	
 ?phases	
 ?of	
 ?activity	
 ?around	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?and	
 ?challenges	
 ?that	
 ?people	
 ?encounter	
 ?in	
 ?each	
 ?phase.	
 ?	
 ?There	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?similarity	
 ?with	
 ?other	
 ?persuasive	
 ?technology,	
 ?but	
 ?the	
 ?focus	
 ?is	
 ?heavily	
 ?weighted	
 ?towards	
 ?data,	
 ?and	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?less	
 ?attention	
 ?paid	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?experience	
 ?being	
 ?measured.	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 100	
 ?
Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?Activity	
 ?Phase	
 ? Hassles	
 ?
Preparation	
 ??	
 ?decide	
 ?what	
 ?to	
 ?record	
 ?&	
 ?how	
 ? Tool/data	
 ?lock-??in	
 ?-??	
 ?choosing	
 ?the	
 ?wrong	
 ?tool	
 ?can	
 ?
result	
 ?in	
 ?abandoning	
 ?data	
 ?
wrong	
 ?/	
 ?insufficient	
 ?data	
 ?collected	
 ?-??	
 ?so	
 ?initial	
 ?
efforts	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?desired	
 ?insights	
 ?
Collection	
 ??	
 ?observe	
 ?and	
 ?record	
 ?data	
 ?(manually	
 ?or	
 ?
automated)	
 ?
Tool	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?be	
 ?available	
 ?when	
 ?/	
 ?where	
 ?needed	
 ?	
 ?
Remembering	
 ?to	
 ?collect	
 ?data	
 ?
Time-??consuming	
 ?to	
 ?collect	
 ?&	
 ?record	
 ?data	
 ?	
 ?
Accuracy	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?estimated	
 ?or	
 ?measured	
 ?poorly	
 ?
Motivation	
 ?needed	
 ?to	
 ?maintain	
 ?collection	
 ?effort	
 ?
Integration	
 ??	
 ?prepare	
 ?and	
 ?transform	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?so	
 ?
the	
 ?user	
 ?can	
 ?later	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?it	
 ?
Transcribing	
 ?data	
 ?from	
 ?collection	
 ?to	
 ?analysis	
 ?tools	
 ?
Organizing	
 ?data	
 ?so	
 ?it	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?processed	
 ?
Scattered	
 ?visualizations	
 ?requires	
 ?users	
 ?to	
 ?observe	
 ?
analysis	
 ?in	
 ?different	
 ?places	
 ?
Multiple	
 ?inputs	
 ?makes	
 ?combining	
 ?data	
 ?effortful	
 ?
Reflection	
 ??	
 ?short	
 ?term	
 ?to	
 ?review	
 ?recent	
 ?
performance;	
 ?long	
 ?term	
 ?to	
 ?reflect	
 ?on	
 ?goals,	
 ?
progress,	
 ?trends	
 ?and	
 ?identify	
 ?patterns	
 ?
Lack	
 ?of	
 ?time	
 ??	
 ?analysis	
 ?	
 ?
Visualization	
 ?tools	
 ?often	
 ?don?t	
 ?provide	
 ?the	
 ?views	
 ?of	
 ?
data	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?seeking	
 ?
Self-??criticism	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?hard	
 ?to	
 ?resist	
 ?when	
 ?reviewing	
 ?
personal	
 ?data,	
 ?this	
 ?can	
 ?prompt	
 ?avoiding	
 ?reflection	
 ?
Interpretation	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?difficult	
 ?
Searching	
 ?for	
 ?the	
 ?desired	
 ?information	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?
difficult	
 ?or	
 ?slow	
 ?
No	
 ?context	
 ?provided	
 ?-??	
 ?if	
 ?data	
 ?collection	
 ?is	
 ?sparse,	
 ?
the	
 ?reasons	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?change	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?unclear	
 ?
Sparse	
 ?data	
 ??	
 ?if	
 ?not	
 ?much	
 ?data	
 ?is	
 ?collected,	
 ?analysis	
 ?
may	
 ?provide	
 ?insufficient	
 ?meaning,	
 ?leading	
 ?to	
 ?giving	
 ?
up	
 ?on	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?
Action	
 ??	
 ?take	
 ?the	
 ?new	
 ?understanding	
 ?provided	
 ?by	
 ?
data	
 ?and	
 ?apply	
 ?it	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?behavior	
 ?to	
 ?meet	
 ?goals	
 ?
Lack	
 ?of	
 ?suggestions	
 ??	
 ?people	
 ?may	
 ?not	
 ?know	
 ?what	
 ?
to	
 ?do	
 ?to	
 ?change	
 ?a	
 ?pattern	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?identified	
 ?
Sharing	
 ?with	
 ?others	
 ??	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?difficult	
 ?to	
 ?present	
 ?
data	
 ?and	
 ?insights	
 ?to	
 ?others	
 ?who	
 ?can	
 ?advise	
 ?on	
 ?
actions	
 ?(doctors,	
 ?social	
 ?networks,	
 ?forums)	
 ?
Figure	
 ?22.	
 ?People	
 ?who	
 ?use	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?face	
 ?a	
 ?number	
 ?of	
 ?challenges	
 ?in	
 ?each	
 ?phase,	
 ?which	
 ?should	
 ?inform	
 ?
the	
 ?design	
 ?of	
 ?tools	
 ?(Li	
 ?et	
 ?al.,	
 ?2010).	
 ?In	
 ?the	
 ?next	
 ?section,	
 ?I	
 ?examine	
 ?existing	
 ?tools	
 ?that	
 ?address	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?and	
 ?evaluate	
 ?them	
 ?against	
 ?these	
 ?challenges.	
 ?I	
 ?will	
 ?also	
 ?show	
 ?how	
 ?many	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?challenges	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?
	
 ? 101	
 ?
addressed	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?design	
 ?concept	
 ?for	
 ?a	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?solution	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?section.	
 ?
11.2 Survey	
 ?of	
 ?existing	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?tools	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?Personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?is	
 ?effective	
 ?for	
 ?some	
 ?people	
 ?in	
 ?helping	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?behavior	
 ?and	
 ?achieve	
 ?desired	
 ?changes.	
 ?I	
 ?wanted	
 ?to	
 ?determine	
 ?if	
 ?there	
 ?were	
 ?existing	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?tools	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?help	
 ?address	
 ?the	
 ?needs	
 ?people	
 ?face.	
 ?	
 ?The	
 ?Quantified	
 ?Self	
 ?community	
 ?maintains	
 ?a	
 ?directory	
 ?of	
 ?over	
 ?500	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?tools4	
 ?submitted	
 ?and	
 ?categorized	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?community	
 ?members.	
 ?The	
 ?categories	
 ?represent	
 ?different	
 ?areas	
 ?of	
 ?life	
 ?where	
 ?people	
 ?want	
 ?support	
 ?in	
 ?making	
 ?changes.	
 ?While	
 ?some	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?are	
 ?tangentially	
 ?related	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?lifestyle,	
 ?productivity,	
 ?learning)	
 ?none	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?are	
 ?specific	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?23.	
 ?While	
 ?the	
 ?Quantified	
 ?Self	
 ?community	
 ?has	
 ?curated	
 ?a	
 ?guide	
 ?to	
 ?over	
 ?500	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?tools	
 ?
available	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?make	
 ?changes	
 ?in	
 ?many	
 ?areas	
 ?of	
 ?life,	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?represented.	
 ?Because	
 ?none	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?categories	
 ?was	
 ?a	
 ?direct	
 ?fit,	
 ?I	
 ?reviewed	
 ?the	
 ?descriptions	
 ?of	
 ?all	
 ?the	
 ?tools.	
 ?From	
 ?that	
 ?list,	
 ?I	
 ?identified	
 ?13	
 ?tools	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ??	
 ?if	
 ?it	
 ?were	
 ?a	
 ?distinct	
 ?category,	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?smaller	
 ?than	
 ?all	
 ?but	
 ?one	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?existing	
 ?categories	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?guide.	
 ?I	
 ?evaluated	
 ?which	
 ?categories	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?they	
 ?addressed	
 ?and	
 ?which	
 ?stages	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?activities	
 ?they	
 ?supported.	
 ?Table	
 ?18	
 ?summarizes	
 ?my	
 ?findings.	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?
	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?4	
 ?http://quantifiedself.com/guide/	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 102	
 ?
Tool	
 ?
Media	
 ?category	
 ?support	
 ?
Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?
stage	
 ?support	
 ?
Bo
ok
s	
 ?
Te
le
vi
sio
n	
 ?
M
ov
ie
s	
 ?
M
us
ic
	
 ?
W
eb
sit
es
	
 ?
M
ag
az
in
es
	
 ?	
 ?
N
ew
sp
ap
er
s	
 ?
So
ci
al
	
 ?n
et
w
or
ks
	
 ?
Pe
rp
ar
at
io
n	
 ?
Co
lle
ct
io
n	
 ?
In
te
gr
at
io
n	
 ?
Re
fle
ct
io
n	
 ?
Ac
tio
n	
 ?
GoodReads	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
LibraryThing	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
ReadMore	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Readmill	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Readernaut	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Amazon.com	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Recall	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
RescueTime	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
LastGraph	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
LastHistory	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Balancer	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ?
Miso	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Voyurl	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ? ?	
 ? 	
 ?	
 ?
Table	
 ?18.	
 ?Personal	
 ?Informatics	
 ?tools	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?are	
 ?incomplete	
 ?in	
 ?both	
 ?media	
 ?category	
 ?support	
 ?and	
 ?in	
 ?
supporting	
 ?all	
 ?stages	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?activities.	
 ?The	
 ?results	
 ?make	
 ?clear	
 ?that	
 ?there	
 ?are	
 ?no	
 ?solutions	
 ?that	
 ?support	
 ?all	
 ?stages	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?for	
 ?any	
 ?media	
 ?category.	
 ?And	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?at	
 ?present	
 ?even	
 ?more	
 ?poorly	
 ?supported	
 ?than	
 ?it	
 ?appears	
 ?from	
 ?the	
 ?table	
 ?above.	
 ?	
 ?
? Several	
 ?of	
 ?these	
 ?products	
 ?are	
 ?now	
 ?apparently	
 ?defunct	
 ?(Voyurl,	
 ?Readernaut)	
 ?or	
 ?are	
 ?research	
 ?tools	
 ?not	
 ?being	
 ?further	
 ?developed	
 ?(Balancer,	
 ?LastGraph,	
 ?LastHistory).	
 ?	
 ?
? Many	
 ?of	
 ?them	
 ?only	
 ?cover	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?user?s	
 ?consumption	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?given	
 ?category.	
 ?For	
 ?example,	
 ?RescueTime	
 ?can	
 ?track	
 ?websites	
 ?you	
 ?visit	
 ?on	
 ?your	
 ?computer,	
 ?but	
 ?not	
 ?your	
 ?mobile	
 ?phone.	
 ?Balancer	
 ?and	
 ?Voyurl	
 ?only	
 ?track	
 ?websites	
 ?visited	
 ?through	
 ?Google?s	
 ?Chrome	
 ?browser	
 ??	
 ?and	
 ?Balancer	
 ?only	
 ?tracks	
 ?politics	
 ?and	
 ?news	
 ?websites.	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?tools	
 ?only	
 ?provide	
 ?data	
 ?about	
 ?media	
 ?purchased	
 ?from	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?
? Preparation	
 ?support	
 ??	
 ?goal	
 ?setting	
 ??	
 ?is	
 ?missing	
 ?entirely.	
 ?
? Collection	
 ?support	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?common	
 ?feature	
 ?present	
 ?in	
 ?all	
 ?solutions,	
 ?but	
 ?solutions	
 ?either	
 ?require	
 ?manual	
 ?data	
 ?entry	
 ?or	
 ?only	
 ?support	
 ?a	
 ?small	
 ?fraction	
 ?of	
 ?sources	
 ?with	
 ?automated	
 ?data	
 ?collection.	
 ?
? Integration	
 ?support	
 ?is	
 ?practically	
 ?non-??existent.	
 ?Some	
 ?tools	
 ?provide	
 ?basic	
 ?export,	
 ?but	
 ?that	
 ?is	
 ?all.	
 ?
? The	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?reflection	
 ?is	
 ?quite	
 ?basic	
 ?in	
 ?most	
 ?cases,	
 ?usually	
 ?just	
 ?providing	
 ?a	
 ?raw	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?past	
 ?consumption.	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ? 103	
 ?
? The	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?action	
 ?is	
 ?limited	
 ?to	
 ?providing	
 ?a	
 ?list	
 ?of	
 ?items	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?consumed,	
 ?sometimes	
 ?with	
 ?links	
 ?to	
 ?one	
 ?or	
 ?more	
 ?sources	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?item	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?purchased.	
 ?One	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?interesting	
 ?tools	
 ?provided	
 ?is	
 ?also	
 ?the	
 ?most	
 ?narrowly	
 ?focused,	
 ?yet	
 ?it	
 ?has	
 ?a	
 ?broad	
 ?range	
 ?of	
 ?support	
 ?within	
 ?its	
 ?limited	
 ?domain.	
 ?Balancer,	
 ?a	
 ?browser	
 ?extension,	
 ?was	
 ?created	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?research	
 ?project	
 ?investigating	
 ?diversity	
 ?in	
 ?opinion	
 ?and	
 ?news	
 ?consumption	
 ?(Munson	
 ?&	
 ?Resnick,	
 ?2010).	
 ?	
 ?
	
 ?
Figure	
 ?24.	
 ?Balancer	
 ?(Munson	
 ?&	
 ?Resnick,	
 ?2010)	
 ?provides	
 ?strong	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?collection,	
 ?reflection,	
 ?and	
 ?action	
 ?in	
 ?its	
 ?
narrow	
 ?domain	
 ?of	
 ?reading	
 ?politically	
 ?balanced	
 ?news	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?web.	
 ?Within	
 ?the	
 ?constraints	
 ?mentioned	
 ?above,	
 ?Balancer	
 ?has	
 ?excellent	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?collection,	
 ?automatically	
 ?monitoring	
 ?websites	
 ?visited	
 ?with	
 ?no	
 ?effort	
 ?required	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?user.	
 ?Reflection	
 ?is	
 ?supported	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?simple	
 ?graphic	
 ?indication	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?political	
 ?viewpoint	
 ?of	
 ?news	
 ?consumption	
 ?(pictured	
 ?in	
 ?Figure	
 ?24).	
 ?And	
 ?action	
 ?support	
 ?is	
 ?provided	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?form	
 ?of	
 ?links	
 ?to	
 ?alternative	
 ?sites	
 ?from	
 ?either	
 ?side	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?political	
 ?spectrum.	
 ?Still,	
 ?it	
 ?has	
 ?no	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?preparation	
 ??	
 ?the	
 ?goal	
 ?it	
 ?supports	
 ?is	
 ?predetermined.	
 ?And	
 ?it	
 ?lacks	
 ?support	
 ?for	
 ?integration;	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?only	
 ?capable	
 ?of	
 ?using	
 ?data	
 ?gathered	
 ?within	
 ?a	
 ?single	
 ?desktop	
 ?web	
 ?browser	
 ?environment.	
 ?There	
 ?is	
 ?no	
 ?way	
 ?to	
 ?bring	
 ?in	
 ?data	
 ?from	
 ?other	
 ?sources	
 ?of	
 ?political	
 ?news	
 ?and	
 ?opinion,	
 ?or	
 ?even	
 ?to	
 ?combine	
 ?the	
 ?results	
 ?of	
 ?one	
 ?individual	
 ?on	
 ?two	
 ?different	
 ?computers.	
 ?
11.3 Design	
 ?considerations	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?Advertisers	
 ?and	
 ?publishers	
 ?currently	
 ?have	
 ?better	
 ?data	
 ?on	
 ?our	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?habits	
 ?than	
 ?we	
 ?do.	
 ?It	
 ?should	
 ?be	
 ?possible	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?interested	
 ?people	
 ?with	
 ?tools	
 ?and	
 ?information	
 ?to	
 ?help	
 ?them.	
 ?	
 ?Such	
 ?a	
 ?solution	
 ?should	
 ?address	
 ?the	
 ?limitations	
 ?we	
 ?found	
 ?when	
 ?surveying	
 ?existing	
 ?applications.	
 ?Emerging	
 ?technologies	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?leveraged	
 ?and	
 ?existing	
 ?technologies	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?extended	
 ?to	
 ?address	
 ?current	
 ?gaps.	
 ?Based	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?research	
 ?findings	
 ?about	
 ?people?s	
 ?challenges,	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?provided	
 ?design	
 ?considerations	
 ?relevant	
 ?to	
 ?supporting	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?behavior	
 ?change	
 ?for	
 ?each	
 ?of	
 ?the	
 ?five	
 ?phases	
 ?of	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?activity	
 ?defined	
 ?by	
 ?Li	
 ?et	
 ?al.	
 ?(2010):	
 ?preparation,	
 ?collection,	
 ?integration,	
 ?reflection,	
 ?and	
 ?action.	
 ?
	
 ? 104	
 ?
11.3.1 Preparation	
 ?The	
 ?solution	
 ?should	
 ?help	
 ?people	
 ?decide	
 ?what	
 ?changes	
 ?they	
 ?are	
 ?trying	
 ?to	
 ?accomplish.	
 ?Perhaps	
 ?using	
 ?an	
 ?approach	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?that	
 ?used	
 ?by	
 ?the	
 ?general	
 ?purpose	
 ?app	
 ?Lift,	
 ?where	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?free	
 ?to	
 ?suggest	
 ?any	
 ?goals	
 ?they	
 ?want,	
 ?and	
 ?then	
 ?these	
 ?goals	
 ?are	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?joined	
 ?by	
 ?other	
 ?people.	
 ?This	
 ?enables	
 ?formation	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?community	
 ?of	
 ?people	
 ?oriented	
 ?towards	
 ?the	
 ?same	
 ?activity,	
 ?who	
 ?can	
 ?provide	
 ?a	
 ?variety	
 ?of	
 ?social	
 ?supports	
 ?to	
 ?each	
 ?other	
 ?(see	
 ?the	
 ?relevant	
 ?social	
 ?strategies	
 ?in	
 ?Table	
 ?17).	
 ?
11.3.2 Collection	
 ?Existing	
 ?solutions	
 ?have	
 ?major	
 ?weakness	
 ?in	
 ?data	
 ?collection.	
 ?Requiring	
 ?manual	
 ?entry	
 ?of	
 ?all	
 ?items	
 ?is	
 ?too	
 ?effortful	
 ?for	
 ?most	
 ?users.	
 ?There	
 ?are	
 ?some	
 ?media	
 ?platforms	
 ?that	
 ?provide	
 ?excellent	
 ?automatic	
 ?data	
 ?collection	
 ?for	
 ?consumption	
 ?within	
 ?that	
 ?platform	
 ?(e.g.,	
 ?Amazon	
 ?Kindle,	
 ?TiVo	
 ?digital	
 ?video	
 ?recorder,	
 ?Netflix	
 ?streaming	
 ?video,	
 ?Last.fm	
 ?music),	
 ?but	
 ?they	
 ?have	
 ?no	
 ?visibility	
 ?to	
 ?media	
 ?consumed	
 ?outside	
 ?that	
 ?silo.	
 ?And	
 ?the	
 ?platform	
 ?providers	
 ?often	
 ?restrict	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ??	
 ?in	
 ?many	
 ?cases	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?more	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?publishers	
 ?and	
 ?advertisers	
 ?than	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?users	
 ?whose	
 ?purchasing	
 ?and	
 ?consumption	
 ?behavior	
 ?generated	
 ?it.	
 ?They	
 ?also	
 ?restrict	
 ?access	
 ?to	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?itself	
 ?using	
 ?Digital	
 ?Rights	
 ?Management.	
 ?Yet	
 ?fully	
 ?automated	
 ?data	
 ?collection	
 ?across	
 ?all	
 ?media	
 ?types	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?imagined	
 ?quite	
 ?easily;	
 ?it	
 ?appears	
 ?we	
 ?are	
 ?on	
 ?the	
 ?verge	
 ?of	
 ?being	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?achieve	
 ?automated	
 ?data	
 ?collection	
 ?of	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?one?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?After	
 ?all,	
 ?if	
 ?a	
 ?person	
 ?is	
 ?to	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?experience	
 ?media,	
 ?they	
 ?must	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?see	
 ?and	
 ?hear	
 ?it.	
 ?(This	
 ?is	
 ?referred	
 ?to	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ??analog	
 ?hole?	
 ?in	
 ?digital	
 ?rights	
 ?management.)	
 ?So	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?at	
 ?that	
 ?point	
 ?where	
 ?consumer-??empowering	
 ?technology	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?inserted,	
 ?identifying	
 ?the	
 ?media	
 ?through	
 ?sight	
 ?and	
 ?sound,	
 ?just	
 ?as	
 ?media	
 ?consumers	
 ?experience	
 ?it.	
 ?And	
 ?such	
 ?technologies	
 ?are	
 ?increasingly	
 ?prevalent	
 ?and	
 ?feasible.	
 ?
? Wearable	
 ?computing	
 ?devices	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?Google	
 ?Glass	
 ?will	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?record	
 ?samples	
 ?of	
 ?all	
 ?
media	
 ?a	
 ?person	
 ?consumes	
 ?or	
 ?examines.	
 ?It	
 ?must	
 ?be	
 ?noted	
 ?that	
 ?at	
 ?present,	
 ?there	
 ?is	
 ?a	
 ?great	
 ?deal	
 ?of	
 ?controversy	
 ?about	
 ?the	
 ?ethics	
 ?and	
 ?etiquette	
 ?of	
 ?ubiquitous	
 ?recording,	
 ?which	
 ?must	
 ?be	
 ?addressed	
 ?before	
 ?widespread	
 ?adoption.	
 ?	
 ?
? In	
 ?the	
 ?interim,	
 ?people	
 ?are	
 ?already	
 ?using	
 ?their	
 ?smartphones	
 ?to	
 ?take	
 ?capture	
 ?pictures	
 ?and	
 ?audio	
 ?snippets	
 ?of	
 ?specific	
 ?media	
 ?items	
 ?in	
 ?order	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?and	
 ?save	
 ?them.	
 ?
? Many	
 ?existing	
 ?tools	
 ?are	
 ?capable	
 ?of	
 ?identifying	
 ?specific	
 ?works	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?from	
 ?small	
 ?recorded	
 ?samples:	
 ?
o Books	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?identified	
 ?from	
 ?a	
 ?cover	
 ?photograph:	
 ?example	
 ?Amazon?s	
 ?mobile	
 ?app	
 ?and	
 ?Google	
 ?image	
 ?search	
 ?
o Texts	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?identified	
 ?from	
 ?small	
 ?excerpts,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?with	
 ?plagiarism	
 ?detection	
 ?systems	
 ?
o Songs	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?identified	
 ?from	
 ?short	
 ?recordings,	
 ?such	
 ?as	
 ?with	
 ?apps	
 ?like	
 ?Shazam	
 ?and	
 ?SoundHound.	
 ?This	
 ?technology	
 ?is	
 ?also	
 ?being	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?identify	
 ?television	
 ?shows	
 ?and	
 ?commercials;	
 ?it	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?conceptually	
 ?simple	
 ?to	
 ?extend	
 ?this	
 ?to	
 ?movies	
 ?as	
 ?well.	
 ?
o To	
 ?identify	
 ?live	
 ?performances,	
 ?location	
 ?could	
 ?be	
 ?combined	
 ?with	
 ?event	
 ?calendars.	
 ?
	
 ? 105	
 ?
11.3.3 Integration	
 ?If	
 ?all	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?person?s	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?is	
 ?collected	
 ?in	
 ?one	
 ?place,	
 ?the	
 ?integration	
 ?hassles	
 ?of	
 ?bringing	
 ?data	
 ?together	
 ?from	
 ?multiple	
 ?sources	
 ?can	
 ?be	
 ?avoided.	
 ?	
 ?Another	
 ?challenge	
 ?in	
 ?spanning	
 ?multiple	
 ?forms	
 ?of	
 ?media	
 ?is	
 ?that	
 ?of	
 ?units.	
 ?To	
 ?use	
 ?the	
 ?food	
 ?metaphor,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?the	
 ?apples	
 ?and	
 ?oranges	
 ?problem:	
 ?how	
 ?do	
 ?you	
 ?make	
 ?sense	
 ?of	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?books	
 ?vs.	
 ?consumption	
 ?of	
 ?television	
 ?shows?	
 ?Existing	
 ?tools	
 ?track	
 ?consumption	
 ?primarily	
 ?based	
 ?on	
 ?media	
 ?items:	
 ?here	
 ?are	
 ?the	
 ?books	
 ?I	
 ?read;	
 ?here	
 ?are	
 ?the	
 ?movies	
 ?I	
 ?watched.	
 ?But	
 ?a	
 ?recording/sampling	
 ?system	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?able	
 ?to	
 ?tell	
 ?how	
 ?much	
 ?time	
 ?was	
 ?spent	
 ?on	
 ?with	
 ?each	
 ?media	
 ?item,	
 ?and	
 ?use	
 ?time	
 ?as	
 ?a	
 ?common	
 ?measurement	
 ?basis.	
 ?	
 ?
11.3.4 Reflection	
 ?It	
 ?is	
 ?important	
 ?to	
 ?tie	
 ?reflection	
 ?back	
 ?to	
 ?goals.	
 ?We	
 ?have	
 ?already	
 ?seen	
 ?that	
 ?people?s	
 ?categories	
 ?and	
 ?goals	
 ?are	
 ?idiosyncratic.	
 ?A	
 ?solution	
 ?will	
 ?need	
 ?to	
 ?enable	
 ?presenting	
 ?the	
 ?data	
 ?in	
 ?a	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?aligns	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?goals	
 ?they	
 ?established	
 ?during	
 ?preparation.	
 ?This	
 ?could	
 ?involve	
 ?a	
 ?tagging/training	
 ?approach,	
 ?where	
 ?the	
 ?system	
 ?learns	
 ?the	
 ?user?s	
 ?categorization	
 ?patterns	
 ?over	
 ?time.	
 ?	
 ?Still,	
 ?it	
 ?is	
 ?useful	
 ?to	
 ?provide	
 ?people	
 ?with	
 ?a	
 ?starting	
 ?point,	
 ?so	
 ?breaking	
 ?things	
 ?down	
 ?into	
 ?media	
 ?category	
 ?(books,	
 ?television,	
 ?movies,	
 ?music,	
 ?social	
 ?networks,	
 ?etc.)	
 ?would	
 ?probably	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?good	
 ?starting	
 ?place.	
 ?
11.3.5 Action	
 ?	
 ?	
 ?Personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?solutions	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?could	
 ?help	
 ?with	
 ?action	
 ?in	
 ?several	
 ?ways.	
 ?First,	
 ?context-??sensitive	
 ?prompting	
 ?could	
 ?prompt	
 ?action.	
 ?One	
 ?aspect	
 ?of	
 ?context	
 ?that	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?readily	
 ?available	
 ?to	
 ?such	
 ?a	
 ?tool	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?a	
 ?person?s	
 ?previous	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?as	
 ?well	
 ?as	
 ?their	
 ?goals.	
 ?If	
 ?someone	
 ?had	
 ?just	
 ?consumed	
 ?something	
 ?from	
 ?one	
 ?category	
 ?they	
 ?had	
 ?set	
 ?as	
 ?part	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?desired	
 ?consumption,	
 ?prompting	
 ?them	
 ?to	
 ?select	
 ?something	
 ?from	
 ?another	
 ?category	
 ?that	
 ?they	
 ?hadn?t	
 ??eaten?	
 ?recently	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?helpful.	
 ?If	
 ?a	
 ?PI	
 ?solution	
 ?could	
 ?detect	
 ?other	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?a	
 ?user?s	
 ?context,	
 ?that	
 ?could	
 ?also	
 ?be	
 ?used	
 ?to	
 ?encourage	
 ?action	
 ?by	
 ?filtering	
 ?their	
 ?recommendations	
 ?based	
 ?upon	
 ?that	
 ?context,	
 ?as	
 ?discussed	
 ?in	
 ?Section	
 ?3.5.	
 ?	
 ?Another	
 ?way	
 ?that	
 ?a	
 ?solution	
 ?could	
 ?encourage	
 ?action	
 ?would	
 ?be	
 ?through	
 ?use	
 ?of	
 ?priming,	
 ?as	
 ?described	
 ?with	
 ?the	
 ?TBR	
 ?design	
 ?research.	
 ?	
 ?
11.4 Conclusion	
 ?Existing	
 ?PI	
 ?solutions	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?have	
 ?numerous	
 ?gaps	
 ?in	
 ?the	
 ?various	
 ?stages	
 ?of	
 ?PI	
 ?activities.	
 ?I	
 ?have	
 ?reviewed	
 ?these	
 ?and	
 ?identified	
 ?potential	
 ?opportunities	
 ?to	
 ?fill	
 ?these	
 ?gaps	
 ?in	
 ?developing	
 ?a	
 ?more	
 ?effective	
 ?PI	
 ?solution	
 ?to	
 ?support	
 ?media	
 ?consumption.	
 ?Yet	
 ?PI	
 ?is	
 ?not	
 ?necessarily	
 ?a	
 ?solution	
 ?for	
 ?everyone.	
 ?I	
 ?heard	
 ?(in	
 ?Section	
 ?3.5.2.2)	
 ?that	
 ?some	
 ?people	
 ?find	
 ?this	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?data	
 ?collection	
 ?and	
 ?review	
 ?approach	
 ?ineffective,	
 ?especially	
 ?in	
 ?returning	
 ?to	
 ?desired	
 ?behavior	
 ?after	
 ?a	
 ?	
 ?stumble,	
 ?while	
 ?others	
 ?feel	
 ?this	
 ?sort	
 ?of	
 ?activity	
 ?is	
 ??obsessing?	
 ?over	
 ?negative	
 ?aspects	
 ?of	
 ?their	
 ?behavior,	
 ?which	
 ?they	
 ?find	
 ?nearly	
 ?as	
 ?odious	
 ?as	
 ?the	
 ?behavior	
 ?itself.	
 ?Still,	
 ?at	
 ?
	
 ? 106	
 ?
least	
 ?those	
 ?people	
 ?who	
 ?do	
 ?find	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?a	
 ?rewarding	
 ?and	
 ?useful	
 ?activity	
 ?may	
 ?be	
 ?well-??served	
 ?by	
 ?a	
 ?personal	
 ?informatics	
 ?system	
 ?for	
 ?media	
 ?consumption	
 ?which	
 ?is	
 ?designed	
 ?in	
 ?accordance	
 ?with	
 ?these	
 ?design	
 ?considerations.	
 ?	
 ?