Encouraging serendipity in research: Designing technologies to support connection-making

Mobile applications have the ability to present information to users that is influenced by their surroundings, activities and interests. Such applications have the potential to influence the likelihood of individuals experiencing 'serendipity', through a combination of information, context, insight and activity. This study reports the deployment of a system that sends push text suggestions to users throughout the day, where the content of those messages is informed by users' experience and interests. We investigated the responses to and interactions with messages that varied in format and relevance, and which were received at different times throughout the day. Sixteen participants were asked to use a mobile diary application to record their experiences and thoughts regarding information that was received over a period of five consecutive days. Results suggest that participants' perception of the received suggestions was influenced by the relevance of the suggestion to their interests, but that there were also positive attitudes towards seemingly irrelevant information. Qualitative data indicates that participants, if in an appropriate time and place, are willing to accept and act upon push suggestions as long as the number of suggestions that they receive is not overwhelming. This study contributes towards an understanding of how mobile users make connections with new information, furthering our understanding of how serendipitous connections and insightful thinking could be accommodated using technology. Tailored text messaging applied to a connection-making framework.'Irrelevant' text messages appeared to be positively perceived by participants.Suggestions' phrasing did not influence participants' responses on the suggestions.Unexpectedness involves location, memories, familiarity and non-familiarity.We propose a connection-making model and framework for design.

[1]  George Siemens.  Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age , 2004 .

[2]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Psychological aspects of natural language. use: our words, our selves. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[3]  Ting-Peng Liang,et al.  Consumer Attitudes Toward Mobile Advertising: An Empirical Study , 2004, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[4]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Discovery is never by chance: designing for (un)serendipity , 2009, C&C '09.

[5]  David Watson,et al.  Diurnal variation in the Positive Affects , 1989 .

[6]  Paul Resnick,et al.  Recommender systems , 1997, CACM.

[7]  Kirk Hallahan,et al.  Seven Models of Framing: Implications for Public Relations , 1999 .

[8]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Browsing in hypertext: a cognitive study , 1992, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[9]  Lior Rokach,et al.  Introduction to Recommender Systems Handbook , 2011, Recommender Systems Handbook.

[10]  Sarah Sharples,et al.  A user-centred mobile diary study approach to understanding serendipity in information research , 2011, Inf. Res..

[11]  Sunny Consolvo,et al.  Using the Experience Sampling Method to Evaluate Ubicomp Applications , 2003, IEEE Pervasive Comput..

[12]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[13]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities , 2007, WebKDD/SNA-KDD '07.

[14]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  The sounds of social life: a psychometric analysis of students' daily social environments and natural conversations. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  Joseph A. Konstan,et al.  Introduction to recommender systems , 2008, SIGMOD Conference.

[16]  David W. McDonald,et al.  Theory-driven design strategies for technologies that support behavior change in everyday life , 2009, CHI.

[17]  Barry Smyth,et al.  Understanding the intent behind mobile information needs , 2009, IUI.

[18]  Vincenzo Natale,et al.  Cognitive efficiency and circadian typologies: a diurnal study , 2003 .

[19]  Michael J. Pazzani,et al.  Content-Based Recommendation Systems , 2007, The Adaptive Web.

[20]  Daniele Quercia,et al.  Auralist: introducing serendipity into music recommendation , 2012, WSDM '12.

[21]  Rita Kop,et al.  The Unexpected Connection: Serendipity and Human Mediation in Networked Learning , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[22]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[23]  A. Zohar,et al.  How does information technology shape thinking , 2006 .

[24]  Donald F. Klein,et al.  The loss of serendipity in psychopharmacology. , 2008, JAMA.

[25]  C. Kitzinger,et al.  'The thief of womanhood': women's experience of polycystic ovarian syndrome. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[26]  J. C. Andrews,et al.  Suggestions For Manipulating and Measuring Involvement in Advertising Message Content , 1991 .

[27]  Russell Beale,et al.  Supporting serendipity: Using ambient intelligence to augment user exploration for data mining and web browsing , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[28]  Mark W. Newman,et al.  Designing for serendipity: supporting end-user configuration of ubiquitous computing environments , 2002, DIS '02.

[29]  V. Virtanen,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Drivers of Consumer Acceptance of Mobile Advertising , 2007 .

[30]  A. Lenhart,et al.  Teens and Mobile Phones: Text Messaging Explodes as Teens Embrace It as the Centerpiece of Their Communication Strategies with Friends. , 2010 .

[31]  Mattias Wallergård,et al.  WozARd: A Wizard of Oz Method for Wearable Augmented Reality Interaction - A Pilot Study , 2015, Adv. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[32]  M. Angela Sasse,et al.  When did my mobile turn into a 'sellphone'?: a study of consumer responses to tailored smartphone ads , 2012, BCS HCI.

[33]  Boris Egloff,et al.  Relationships between time of day, day of the week, and positive mood: Exploring the role of the mood measure , 1995 .

[34]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Delight by Design: The Role of Hedonic versus Utilitarian Benefits , 2008 .

[35]  Harry Hochheiser,et al.  Research Methods for Human-Computer Interaction , 2008 .

[36]  Gediminas Adomavicius,et al.  Incorporating contextual information in recommender systems using a multidimensional approach , 2005, TOIS.

[37]  N. Bolger,et al.  Diary methods: capturing life as it is lived. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[38]  Cecilio Angulo,et al.  Towards Ambient Recommender Systems: Results of New Cross-disciplinary Trends , 2006 .

[39]  Sean M. McNee,et al.  Being accurate is not enough: how accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems , 2006, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[40]  J. Krumboltz,et al.  Serendipity is not serendipitous. , 1998 .

[41]  Rebecca Campbell,et al.  Feminist Research Methods: A Content Analysis of Psychology and Social Science Textbooks , 1995 .

[42]  Ted S. Ferry,et al.  Modern accident investigation and analysis , 1988 .

[43]  Sanda Erdelez,et al.  Investigation of information encountering in the controlled research environment , 2004, Inf. Process. Manag..

[44]  David Bawden,et al.  Information systems and the stimulation of creativity , 1986, J. Inf. Sci..

[45]  E. Kissling,et al.  Bleeding out Loud: Communication about Menstruation , 1996 .

[46]  Sarah Sharples,et al.  Is THIS ‘Delight’? , 2012 .

[47]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  Finding facts vs. browsing knowledge in hypertext systems , 1988, Computer.

[48]  Maria Madlberger,et al.  Increasing Advertising Value of Mobile Marketing - An Empirical Study of Antecedents , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[49]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Words of Wisdom: Language Use Over the Life Span , 2003 .

[50]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  Serendipity in Entrepreneurship , 2009 .

[51]  Ut Na Sio,et al.  Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. , 2009, Psychological bulletin.

[52]  Sarah Sharples,et al.  Designing a semantic sketchbook to create opportunities for serendipity , 2012, BCS HCI.

[53]  Arne Jönsson,et al.  Wizard of Oz studies: why and how , 1993, IUI '93.

[54]  J. F. Kelley,et al.  An iterative design methodology for user-friendly natural language office information applications , 1984, TOIS.

[55]  Linda M. Scott,et al.  The Bridge from Text to Mind: Adapting Reader-Response Theory to Consumer Research , 1994 .

[56]  J. J. Franks,et al.  Effort toward comprehension: Elaboration or “aha”? , 1979 .

[57]  Pasquale Lops,et al.  Introducing Serendipity in a Content-Based Recommender System , 2008, 2008 Eighth International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems.

[58]  Carole L. Palmer,et al.  Structures and Strategies of Interdisciplinary Science , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[59]  Kathy G. Short,et al.  Making Connections Across Literature and Life , 2005 .

[60]  K. Duncker,et al.  On problem-solving , 1945 .

[61]  Abigail McBirnie,et al.  Seeking serendipity: the paradox of control , 2008, Aslib Proc..

[62]  Tuck Wah Leong,et al.  The serendipity shuffle , 2005, OZCHI.

[63]  Sarah Sharples,et al.  Emerging Issues in Mobile Data Capture Methods across Multiple Domains: Learning from the User Experience , 2015 .

[64]  Nigel Ford,et al.  Serendipity and information seeking: an empirical study , 2003, J. Documentation.

[65]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Coming across information serendipitously - Part 1: A process model , 2012, J. Documentation.

[66]  J. Fröberg.  Twenty-four-hour patterns in human performance, subjective and physiological variables and differences between morning and evening active subjects , 1977, Biological Psychology.

[67]  Zahid H. Qureshi,et al.  A review of accident modelling approaches for complex socio-technical systems , 2007 .

[68]  Elaine Toms,et al.  Measuring the dimensions of serendipity in digital environments , 2011, Inf. Res..

[69]  K. Mann,et al.  Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review , 2009, Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice.

[70]  M. Graff,et al.  Individual differences in hypertext browsing strategies , 2005, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[71]  Mouzhi Ge,et al.  Beyond accuracy: evaluating recommender systems by coverage and serendipity , 2010, RecSys '10.

[72]  Sandra Erdelez.  Information Encountering: It's More Than Just Bumping into Information , 2005 .

[73]  Steve Benford,et al.  Ambiguity as a resource for design , 2003, CHI '03.

[74]  Juwon Ahn,et al.  SEREFE: serendipitous file exchange between users and devices , 2005, Mobile HCI.

[75]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Recognizing Contextual Polarity in Phrase-Level Sentiment Analysis , 2005, HLT.

[76]  J. Reason.  Human error: models and management , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[77]  Lars Schmidt-Thieme,et al.  Guest Editors' Introduction: Recommender Systems , 2007, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[78]  Gediminas Adomavicius,et al.  Toward the next generation of recommender systems: a survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[79]  O. Westlund.  From Mobile Phone to Mobile Device: News Consumption on the Go , 2008 .

[80]  Thomas A. Ban,et al.  The role of serendipity in drug discovery , 2006, Dialogues in clinical neuroscience.

[81]  Roy Rada,et al.  Interacting With Hypertext: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies , 1996, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[82]  Gabriele Anderst-Kotsis,et al.  Mobile recommendation systems for decision making 'on the go' , 2005, International Conference on Mobile Business (ICMB'05).

[83]  Daniel Liestman.  Chance in the Midst of Design: Approaches to Library Research Serendipity. , 1992 .

[84]  Mike Sharples,et al.  Towards a Theory of Mobile Learning , 2005 .