| Title |
Technology and Reflection: Mood and Memory Mechanisms for Well-Being
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13612-016-0045-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Artie Konrad, Simon Tucker, John Crane, Steve Whittaker |
| Abstract |
We report a psychologically motivated intervention to explore Technology Mediated Reflection (TMR), the process of systematically reviewing rich digital records of past personal experiences. Although TMR benefits well-being, and is increasingly being deployed, we know little about how one's mood when using TMR influences these benefits. We use theories of memory and emotion-regulation to motivate hypotheses about the relationship between reflection, mood, and well-being when using technology. We test these hypotheses in a large-scale month long real world deployment using a web-based application, MoodAdaptor. MoodAdaptor prompted participants to reflect on positive or negative memories depending on current mood. We evaluated how mood and memory interact during written reflection and measured effects on well-being. We analyzed qualitative and quantitative data from 128 participants who generated 11157 mood evaluations, 5051 logfiles, 256 surveys, and 20 interviews. TMR regulated emotion; when participants reflected on memories with valences opposite to their current mood, their mood became more neutral. However this did not impact overall well-being. Our findings also clarify underlying TMR mechanisms. Moods and memories competed with each other; when positive moods prevailed over negative memories, people demonstrated classic mechanisms shown in prior work to influence well-being. When negative moods prevailed over positive memories, memories became negatively tainted. Our results have implications for new well-being interventions and technologies that capitalize on the interconnectedness of memory and emotion. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 22% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 12% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 15 | 22% |
| Psychology | 13 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 12% |
| Design | 5 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice
#43
of 44 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,119
of 367,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 44 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.7. This one scored the same or higher as 1 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.