Augmenting Couples’ Communication with Lifelines: Shared Timelines of Mixed Contextual Information Carla Griggio, Midas Nouwens, Joanna Mcgrenere, Wendy Mackay To cite this version: Carla Griggio, Midas Nouwens, Joanna Mcgrenere, Wendy Mackay. Augmenting Couples’ Commu- nication with Lifelines: Shared Timelines of Mixed Contextual Information. CHI 2019 - The ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, May 2019, Glasgow, United Kingdom. 10.1145/3290605.3300853. hal-02092673 HAL Id: hal-02092673 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02092673 Submitted on 8 Apr 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Augmenting Couples’ Communication with Lifelines: Shared Timelines of Mixed Contextual Information Carla F. Griggio Midas Nouwens∗ Joanna McGrenere∗ Wendy E. Mackay LRI, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, Digital Design & Dept of Computer Science LRI, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, Inria, Information Studies, University of British Inria, Université Paris-Saclay Aarhus University Columbia Université Paris-Saclay Orsay, France Aarhus, Denmark Vancouver, Canada Orsay, France [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT ACM Reference Format: Couples exhibit special communication practices, but apps Carla F. Griggio, Midas Nouwens, Joanna McGrenere, and Wendy rarely offer couple-specific functionality. Research shows E. Mackay. 2019. Augmenting Couples’ Communication with Life- lines: Shared Timelines of Mixed Contextual Information. In CHI that sharing streams of contextual information (e.g. location, Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Proceedings motion) helps couples coordinate and feel more connected. (CHI 2019), May 4–9, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland Uk. ACM, New York, Most studies explored a single, ephemeral stream; we study NY, USA, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300853 how couples’ communication changes when sharing multi- ple, persistent streams. We designed Lifelines, a mobile-app technology probe that visualizes up to six streams on a shared timeline: closeness to home, battery level, steps, media play- 1 INTRODUCTION ing, texts and calls. A month-long study with nine couples Couples have special mediated communication practices: showed that partners interpreted information mostly from they find different ways of staying in continuous touch individual streams, but also combined them for more nu- when apart [39, 40], share intimate information with each anced interpretations. Persistent streams allowed missing other [50], and use an entire ecosystem of communication data to become meaningful and provided new ways of under- apps to support their different relational needs [18, 41]. Scis- standing each other. Unexpected patterns from any stream sors et al. [47] show how couples switch back and forth can trigger calls and texts, whereas seeing expected data between diverse channels to strategically mediate conflicts. can replace direct communication, which may improve or Cramer and Jacobs [18] describe how couples intentionally disrupt established communication practices. We conclude leverage specific characteristics of diverse apps to adapt to with design implications for mediating awareness within each other’s routines or add meaning to their messages: one couples. app can become the “working hours” channel and another the “leisure”; importance or urgency can be conveyed by CCS CONCEPTS sending the same message via multiple apps; and a minimal- • Human-centered computing → Collaborative and so- ist Yo signal [3] can mean “I’m thinking about you”. cial computing systems and tools; Empirical studies in Despite these couple-specific communication practices collaborative and social computing. and needs, they end up largely using the same technology as everyone else. While there is a wealth of different commercial KEYWORDS communication apps they can choose from, these rarely offer CMC, couples, awareness, contextual information functionality tailored to their special communication prac- tices and intimate knowledge of each other. Communication as imagined by these technologies is two partners intention- ∗Also with LRI, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, Inria, Université Paris-Saclay. ally sending discrete (multimedia) messages back and forth, and a mediated relationship is represented as a vertical log of that data within a single app. HCI literature has explored This is the author’s version of the work. It is posted here by a more expansive view of couple communication, providing permission of ACM for your personal use. Not for redistribution. partners with diverse types of data about each others’ context when apart [23]. Researchers have mediated awareness by CHI 2019, May 4–9, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland Uk © 2019 Association for Computing Machinery. streaming different forms of contextual information, such as ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-5970-2/19/05...$15.00 location [5], motion [9] or ambient sound [32]. By leveraging https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300853 the knowledge couples have of their partner’s routines, this minimal information helped them to find peace of mind, co- To better support couple-specific communication prac- ordinate everyday tasks, increase feelings of connectedness, tices, researchers proposed designing technology for disclos- and support other relational needs [5, 8, 9, 24, 32, 46]. ing availability [18, 39, 50, 51], supporting micro-coordination However, these studies are limited in that they have fo- of everyday tasks [8, 46], encouraging reflection on the re- cused on a single stream of contextual information, exploring lationship [55], and increasing connectedness by sharing how one type of data could be valuable for couples’ commu- awareness of their daily activities [39, 40]. We discuss how nication. Bentley and Metcalf [9] speculate that the fusion of sharing multiple, persistent streams of contextual informa- multiple streams may provide value, by sparking conversa- tion serves some of these design goals. tions and providing richer awareness than any stream taken alone [9]. Secondly, most previous work supports awareness Technologies for mediating awareness within via ephemeral streams of contextual information, which com- couples and close relationships municate only live data. We speculate that persistent streams Most commercial communication systems focus on the ex- communicate richer information by revealing the duration plicit and intentional exchange of messages. By sharing and sequence of activities. small, casual messages throughout the day [16, 42], close We built the technology probe Lifelines [25] to explore how relationships try to create a sense of connected presence [30]. couples integrate multiple, persistent streams of contextual However, this type of communication requires symmetrical information into their communication practices by giving engagement between partners, risking a loss of connected them access to a peripheral visualization of behavioural data presence when one person is unable to respond [30]. Tech- (e.g. steps or location) and device state (e.g. battery level, nologies that mediate awareness try to address this loss of media playing). We deploy Lifelines in the wild to generate connection and instead create “a feeling of relatedness with- empirical results about changes in couples’ communication out direct communication” [23] by implicitly sharing pres- behaviour and inspire the design of future communication ence cues between partners (e.g. music playing or ambient apps beyond the homogeneous landscape currently available. sounds [32]): this supports connectedness even when one We first review the related work on mediated communi- partner cannot communicate explicitly [30] or during “empty cation for couples and close relationships, we then present moments" [32], i.e. times when one partner is involved in the design and development of the Lifelines probe, and lastly a mundane activity, such as queuing or riding the bus and report on the insights from a one month field study with misses their partner’s presence. Previous work explored di- nine co-located couples. We conclude with directions for verse streams of contextual information for mediating aware- future research and implications for the design of future ness, e.g. location cues [5, 12]; travel time to a contact’s lo- communication technologies for couples. cation [8]; drinking moments through a connected cup [15]; playing music [7, 32]; ambient sounds [32]; appointments in a calendar [49], in-chat heart rate visualizations [24]; and 2 RELATED WORK motion in front of a camera [44, 45] or between locations [9]. Couples’ mediated communication practices All studies focus on how single streams are used by couples Previous work shows couples have idiosyncratic information to support their relational needs. For example, location [5], sharing practices relative to other social relationships. motion (“moving”, “not moving”) [9], playing music [7], and Couples often share sensitive data with each other, for con- heart rate information [24] correlate with increased feelings venience