Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. in eebr7 2019 7, December Wien, Geraldine PhD Univ.Prof. Betreuung: Wien Universität Technischen der Informatik für Fakultät der an eairCag:DsgigfrReflection for Designing Change: Behavior o ad ananbePyia Activity Physical Maintainable Towards atrtdu otaeEgneig&Itre Computing Internet & Engineering Software Masterstudium naTcnlgclIntervention Technological a in -00Wien A-1040 u ragn e kdmshnGrades akademischen des Erlangung zur  alpaz13 Karlsplatz Utrcrf efse)(neshitBetreuung) (Unterschrift Verfasser) (Unterschrift arklumr00825845 Matrikelnummer ehiceUiesttWien Universität Technische mRhe e Studiums des Rahmen im Diplomingenieur DIPLOMARBEIT igrih von eingereicht ua Nagl Lukas  e .+43-1-58801-0 Tel.  www.tuwien.ac.at Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ina eebr7 2019 7, December Vienna, Geraldine PhD Univ.Prof. Advisor: Technology of University Vienna the at Informatics of Faculty the to eairCag:DsgigfrReflection for Designing Change: Behavior oad ananbePyia Activity Physical Maintainable Towards atrpormeSfwr niern nentComputing Internet & Engineering Software programme Master umte nprilfllmn fterqieet o h ereof degree the for requirements the of fulfillment partial in submitted naTcnlgclIntervention Technological a in -00Wien A-1040  alpaz13 Karlsplatz eitainNme 00825845 Number Registration Sgaueo uhr Sgaueo Advisor) of (Signature Author) of (Signature ATRSTHESIS MASTER’S ehiceUiesttWien Universität Technische Diplomingenieur ua Nagl Lukas  e .+43-1-58801-0 Tel. by in  www.tuwien.ac.at Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. otatoe e innc nnme id u ee alutrAgb e uleasEnt- als Quelle der Angabe unter im Fall - Internet jeden habe. Arbeit dem auf gemacht der sind, kenntlich oder Stellen lehnung entnommen Werken nach anderen die Sinn die ich dem -, dass oder Wortlaut Abbildungen und und habe Karten angegeben Tabellen, vollständig einschließlich Hilfsmittel und Quellen ten Pellendorf 2325 2/13, Lindenring Nagl Lukas iri rlr c,ds c is retslsädgvras ae asihdeverwende- die ich dass habe, verfasst selbständig Arbeit diese ich dass ich, erkläre Hiermit rlrn u efsugdrArbeit der Verfassung zur Erklärung Ot au)(neshitVerfasser) (Unterschrift Datum) (Ort, i Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. oyuwohv upre e ohda n alive. and dead both me, supported have who you To Acknowledgements iii Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. nevninpro ol,tgte ihori-et con faldcsos rvd solid a provide week decisions, approach. one long-term all our a of towards from lack account work findings future a in-depth for indicative our of point leading with these because starting results, together negatives Overall, other false could, period our encountered design. intervention have with persuasive might correlation of interventions surprising consideration easy past very a of as if preferred have well consider group as did to likable target persuasiveness Josef us our This found and Lastly, being provide use. human results technology. another to These than with reflection. rather reflection of Josef levels with support high talking to on as did how well Participants on as another. on dimensions knowledge effects of positive terms have might in MI both on & reflect insights SDT statistically provide of may observed aspect which one we category, supporting Nevertheless, this how of factors period. multiple intervention between week correlations significant one a countries. after 20 questions from participants related 94 measurements by and prototype questionnaires second two a of of form use the the a in during used taken data quantitative we using collected analysis, participants and 6 for prototype with data interviews a qualitative generate conducted To We perspectives. approach. research multiple mixed-method from involved of decisions documentation the detailed on for significant approaches. judging need offering and a as comparing is that well for there in field as Lastly, this role behavior in critical technology. the decisions a by design of supported play autonomy be could further to Reflection both potential could change. it behavior theoret- PA as promising long-term combination a little elicit as (MI) to too interviewing basis and motivational ical and al. (SDT) might et theory al., self-determination Hekler et of by Consolvo forth by noted put [9]. as as [8] individuals, problem theory follow-up of that on environment the to contributors focus and as be world of dimish social to lack the tend A for effects regard capa- these [7]. are but [3] PA, interventions increases Computer-based in increases time [6]. short-term [5] [4] supporting behavior of present health ble interventions improve computer-based to [3]. smartphones, potential factors and vast other a computers and constraints of resource ubiquitousness inter- of clinical the because and With problem health Traditional this [2]. address NCDs, [1] fully treat benefits cannot economic and ventions prevent and social help broad to leading having proven the as is (PA) were well activity as diabetes physical or and disease worldwide, heart deaths as of causes such (NCDs) diseases non-communicable 2018, In nlsswt ardttsssoe osaitclysgicn ifrnefrST&MI & SDT for difference significant statistically no showed t-tests paired with Analysis accounts detailed given have and “Josef” called intervention computer-based a created We combination a identified we intervention, computer-based a creating towards work our In Abstract v Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. hshudsh ifc ubdee.DeÜezuugkatvnJsfhteen überraschende eine hatte sympa- Josef Josef von fand Überzeugungskraft und Die sprechen, bedienen. zu zu unsere Menschen einfach bevorzugte anderen sehr Weiters einem und kann. mit thisch statt Erkenntnis- unterstützen Josef Technologie liefern mit mit Ergebnisse es, mehreren Reflexion Zielgruppe Diese auf man reflektiert. positive sowohl wie Dimensionen MI haben darüber, mehreren & Teilnehmer se auf SDT Die auch von könnte. als Aspekts haben Ebenen, eines anderen Unterstützung Auf- einen die die auf wie Kategorie, Auswirkungen können, dieser geben wir Faktoren darüber beobachteten mehreren schluss Dennoch zwischen Interventionszeit. Korrelationen einwöchigen signifikante einer statistisch nach Fragen MI-bezogene & wurden. gemacht zweiten Ländern eines 20 Nutzung aus der Teilnehmern während 94 die quantitative mit Messungen, sowie sammelten Prototypen Fragebögen, und zwei durch von Prototyp Form einem in Daten mit Teilnehmern führten Wir 6 Forschungsansatz. mit gemischten Interviews einen qualitative wir verwendeten generieren, zu Daten Analyse Um die für beschrieben. detailliert Perspektiven verschiedenen aus Entscheidungen verbundenen und vergleichen zu Ansätze beurteilen. um erforderlich, zu Bereich Dokumen- diesem detaillierte in eine Designentscheidungen ist der erhebliches Schließlich tation ein bietet. auch Rolle Technologie als durch verspricht, entscheidende Unterstützung Verhaltens zur des eine Potenzial Autonomie höhere Kombination eine sowohl dieser sie da in spielen, könnte Reflexion KA- des hervorzurufen. Veränderungen langfristige Verhaltens um als identifiziert, (MI) Grundlage Gesprächsführung theoretische Motivatierender des vielversprechende und Umfeld (SDT) [9]. das Selbstbestimmungstheorie [8] und aus beitragen Welt bination Problem soziale diesem zu die könnten wie auf festgestellt, Theorie, Rücksicht al. auf et wenig Fokus Consolvo zu diese an von und Mangel wie aber dargelegt, Einzelnen, Ein unterstützen, [7]. al. zu [3] et abzunehmen KA Hekler Zeit der von der Erhöhungen nach Computergestützte kurzfristige dazu, [6]. neigen Lage, [5] Effekte der [4] in verbessern sind zu Interventionen ein Gesundheitsverhalten Interventionen dieses computerbasierte Potenzial, bieten Mit Smartphones enormes [3]. und lösen Computern vollständig von nicht Allgegenwart Faktoren Pro- anderen der wirtschaftli- dieses und und können Ressourcenengpässen sozialen Interventionen von breiten klinische aufgrund einen und blem hat gesundheitliche Traditionelle und [2]. bei Nutzen NCDs chen nachweislich von trägt Dia- Behandlung (KA) oder und Aktivität Prävention Herzerkrankungen Körperliche zur wie [1]. weltweit (NCDs) Todesursachen Krankheiten häufigsten übertragbare die betes nicht waren 2018 Jahr Im i nls i eare -et ra ennsaitshsgikne neshe ü SDT für Unterschied signifikanten statistisch keinen ergab t-Tests gepaarten mit Analyse Die damit die und entwickelt “Josef” namens Intervention computergestützte eine haben Wir Kom- eine wir haben Intervention computerbasierten einer Schaffung zur Arbeit unserer In Kurzfassung vii Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eta ie agrsie nazbilden. Ansatz Ar- künftige langfristigen die einem unserer für an Ausgangspunkt mit beit soliden in- zusammen einen diese Entscheidungen Interventionszeitraum aller könnten Darstellung einwöchigen detaillierten Insgesamt unserem könnten. aus sein Ergebnisse gestoßen dikativen Design Ergebnisse überzeugendem negative von auf Berücksichtigung fälschlicherwise mangelnder nachzudenken, aufgrund darüber Interventionen veranlasste, dazu frühere uns ob was Ergebnissen, anderen unseren mit Korrelation Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. tt fteArt the of State 2 Introduction 1 Methodology 3 Implementation 4 Findings 5 Discussion 6 . potnte 12 . 5 ...... 9 ...... Opportunities . . Approaches . Given of 2.3 . Problems . Work 2.2 Related 2.1 . vlainPa 31 . . . . . 30 . . 30 37 ...... 25 ...... 22 ...... 26 ...... Expectations . . . . Experiment . . & . . . . Details . . Study ...... Plan 3.7 . . . . Evaluation . . . . . Plan . . . Implementation 3.6 . Program ...... Production 3.5 . . Program Intervention Computer-Based . . a into . . Theory 3.4 Translating . . Change . of Model 3.3 Logic Problem the of Model 3.2 Logic 3.1 . ehia rttpn 64 ...... 68 ...... 46 ...... 43 ...... 60 . . EX2 . Experiment . . of . Mechanism . . Hand-Through . E-Mail . . Understanding . and . . Empathy . lacking 4.5 Prototyping . Technical Agent . Artificial . Persuasive a . . in 4.4 Reflection . System . Dialogue Interviewing “Josef” Motivational Avatar 4.3 Josef’s the Designing – Agents Artificial 4.2 Persuasive 4.1 . epneAayi 78 77 74 . 72 ...... 71 ...... Analysis . . . . Response ...... 5.5 Persuasiveness ...... 5.4 . Reflection . . . MI & . 5.3 SDT Demography & 5.2 Participants 5.1 . eecsin fRflcin...... 87 84 ...... 85 ...... Reflection . . of Repercussions . Listening Reflective . and Empathy 6.3 . Expressing Therapist a as 6.2 Josef 6.1 Contents 21 43 71 83 ix 5 1 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Conclusion 7 Appendix A Bibliography x . efrac betvs...... 92 94 . . . . . 92 . . . . 89 ...... Limitations . . & . Reflection . . Critical ...... Objectives 6.7 Performance . . PA . about Thoughts . 6.6 Gridlocked Key is Reinforcement 6.5 Positive 6.4 . uueWr 100 ...... Work Future 7.1 . DRIfre 124 . . 120 . . . . 118 ...... 122 . . . . . 114 ...... 112 . . 116 ...... 113 ...... Informer . . GDPR ...... A.8 . . Questionnaire . . . . Post-Experiment ...... 2 . A.7 . . Session . . Josef ...... 1 A.6 . Session . . . Josef ...... A.5 . . Questionnaire Up-Front ...... A.4 Guide . . Interview . . Agreement A.3 . of Letter . . A.2 Handout A.1 111 101 97 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. nest Aprwe ra qiaetcmiaino hm[12]. them vigorous- of of for combination minutes equivalent recommendation 75 an or WHO or week per week the PA per moderate-intensity towards PA of intensity contributes minutes 150 that of activity 18–64 aged every adults PA consider we work, and dancing olwd,lvl fpyia ciiyhv o nrae nteps 5yas n h ol is inactivity. world of physical the definition reducing and for target years, 2025 15 global past the WHO the meet the in to meeting [1]. increased track not countries not on high-income were have not in over activity prevalence physical and a of years with levels 18 2016, Worldwide, Neverthe- aged in adults activity [10]. consequently physical of [2] is for 28% 2030 It recommendations over for reports goals benefits. WHO development economic the sustainable and less, WHO’s social of self- as confidence, 13 well of physical with sense as Furthermore, interconnected mood, functioning [2]. increased cognitive an cancer and from colon is ranging esteem, and stated benefits breast health factor and NCDs multiple risk treat diabetes, has behavioral and activity stroke, prevent key disease, help A to heart proven as is [1]. (PA) such worldwide activity physical deaths regular of since inactivity, causes physical diseases leading non-communicable mentions the (WHO) as Organization Health (NCDs) World the report, 2018 its In eiie n novs“rs oo oeetcaatrzdb hsclsrtg,poes and prowess, recognizes strategy, WHO physical The by characterized increase movement chance”. motor or “gross maintain involves to and objective petitive, the and movement bodily PA. repetitive and structured, planned, Exercise [10]: elements three following the by sports, and exercise .apstv orlto ihpyia fitness physical with correlation positive a high to 3. low from varies which expenditure energy muscles resulting skeletal the 2. by produced body the of movement 1. ob bet otiuetwrsaslto oti rbe,w edt eaaeo the of aware be to need we problem, this to solution a towards contribute to able be To Sport itnuse teffo Ab a by PA from itself distinguishes sdsrbda u-opnn feecs hthsrls ssrcue n com- and structured is rules, has that exercise of sub-component a as described is hsclactivity physical vigorous itniyP,sc srnig wmig rfs yln 1] nour In [11]. cycling fast or swimming, running, as such PA, -intensity P) idee l lrf h ento,adisdsicinwith distinction its and definition, the clarify al. et Biddle (PA). moderate itniyP,sc sbikwlig adnn,or gardening, walking, brisk as such PA, -intensity very oiiecreainwt hsclfins,a fitness, physical with correlation positive Introduction CHAPTER 1 1 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eeto,adadtie ouetto falrltddcsosfo utpeprpcie to perspectives multiple in from support MI decisions to 2 & related used SDT all be of of could combination documentation in technology the detailed interest how of a general of test and a investigation empirical reflection, have the the and intervention, were behavior PA computer-based contributions their key a increase Our to able so. change physically behavior doing PA are long-term elicit who to people aims that in intervention computer-based a in detailed reflection ther of offering lack as a well identified critical as field. behavior we a the However, the in play decisions of technology. could design autonomy by of Reflection further supported accounts both be effort. could to that it potential in as significant combination basis (MI), that theoretical interviewing in promising We motivational role a group. (SDT), as target theory our reflection self-determination of and environment of and combination world a social the identified considered and change, behavior PA [9]. world social individual’s support the technological impact how can ignore change often behavior proposed theories for an behavioral al. highlight et traditional and Consolvo that change, [8]. challenge behavior support designs additional that better knowledge technologies into build for translated approaches to be design can theory-driven researchers that theories enable and which systems, could in technical guidelines of ways design about design the is behind inform role. to assumptions important techniques, used an the of be play should testing combination could theory theory that or advise change technique, behavior al. which health, et Hekler Considering understood [7]. well so not do is to sufficient it but necessary PA, the in without change developed and [22]. [21] designed [20] are experience or apps knowledge might fitness expert problem experi- of and the which foundation of health and Part [18], standalone [19]. period months and that sustained three health be a before in significantly over present dropping motivate be rates to and get adherence seem engage trackers for ence issues to fitness same only fail the The utilized of which [7]. half are apps, usage than they fitness of more month that that first show suggest the even to within results abandoned seems Some research [17]. particular, [16] in periods short trackers, fitness For [14]. of capable are interventions mainte- computer-based [14]. health [13] that PA general evidence in modest increases and is short-term behaviors, producing there PA, binge/purge tobacco For behavior, nutrition, sexual [3]. to nances regards safer al- in use, success behaviors shown substance health has use, improving endeavor recipients This intervention clear. with is ready, interventions computer-based [6]. as PA behavior for health- app health their an downloaded support have [5]. to users users app app smartphone health an of were used 38% worldwide users internet and people smartphone goals, billion billion related five 3.9 3 in estimated around one an approximately 2018, was Additionally, In there 2017, an [4]. In offer worldwide technologies users promotion. information and health related populations, other for hard-to-reach and resource to innovative smartphones, Computers, access limited [3]. constraints, factors other resource of because address fully u anrsac usin hrfr,cniee h fet fcmoet eindt fur- to designed components of effects the considered therefore, question, research main Our long-term maintainable, of background theoretical the on focused therefore, we, work, our In behavior long-term wanted the achieve to needed approach another is there that seems It [15] increases time follow-up the as dimish to tend effects short-term these Nevertheless, improve to interventions deliver to devices these use to potential the numbers, these With cannot interventions clinical and health traditional that PA promote to need clear a is There Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. upr eeto,adordtie con fdsg eiin ssnhszdi hpe 7. to chapter used in synthesized be is could decisions technology design how of account of detailed investigation our the and intervention, reflection, computer-based support a impact in of MI negativity. lack a and & and participants work of our misinterpretation of handling scope of the way at our look with critical along about a tracking thoughts present gridlocked further and will reinforcement touched chapter positive and The reflection, PA. listening, of reflective repercussions of simulate empathy, topic express the on could therapist, a as worked and vention expected research. this than of ways fields other more the in with significantly reflection correlated persuasiveness support regarding successfully results that did further inter- intervention will SDT chapter our of The field that [25]. the correlations show research for further discovered insights require additional we characteristics provide operational Nevertheless, where could ventions, which significance. topic, this statistical for yield results between not did they change, SDT, behavior port health of perspectives the from engineering. involved software and were design, that persuasive decisions design the and We participants. 94 3. from par- chapter data 6 quantitative in from as data detail well qualitative in as collecting described ticipants experiments, two is with [27], research intervention mixed-method computer-based conducted a create to [23]. opportunities [26] guidance offering autonomy by supporting combination in this component in important part potentially a a reflection, played Technology support how given to [25]. relatedness on [24] and strategies autonomy, [23] concrete towards needs—competence, SDT with go psychological by contributing to innate latter factor three key the the a support and behavior, to behavior a that internalizing of with provid- users maintainability former support theory the the to with self-determination look- how approach, of and lends on this combination guidelines that art for ing a background promising the (MI) found theoretical of interviewing We a motivational state find and change. current to (SDT) behavior field the PA the to long-term in regards to opportunities itself in and research problems at our closer engineering. documented ing software we and 2, design, persuasive chapter change, In behavior health of at perspectives aimed respected components for examples intervention. change documented behavior of computer-based lack a a in of reflection gap supporting identified an closing with help aty u e otiuin nrgrst u miia eto h obnto fSDT of combination the of test empirical our to regards in contributions key our Lastly, inter- our ways which in consider and findings our interpret will 6 chapter in discussion Our sup- could intervention our that indicators see did we while that, found we 5, chapter In intervention computer-based a constructed we how of account detailed a give will 4 Chapter as protocol (IM) mapping intervention the used we where approach, methodological Our process, the in and intervention computer-based a evaluated and implemented, designed, We 3 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ee,3 upr oiliflec,ad4 osdrtepatclcntanso sr’lifestyles. users’ of constraints practical the Consider 4) and that activity [32] influence, of technologies awareness social personal for Provide Support requirements 2) 3) activities, design level, for credit four house-cleaning proper derived vigorous users Give then or 1) PA: They lifting, encourage weight detected. cycling, adequately as not such activities are common as PA, overall was of focus in The PA. weeks PA. of her three level into their overall The activities her increase incorporates increase to person [32]. to a wanted life here where everyday who relevance activities, women physical of opportunistic with is encouraging conducted on al., was et study Consolvo pilot by situ created friends with as count such studies previous pur- in that used To [31]. were Chan frame, data. and time appropriate [30] a Tudor-Locke getting in by is taken PA steps in measuring pedometers, changes pose, measuring with difficulty significant A Work Related 2.1 opportunities and consider problems of the will detail. examining effectiveness we more before the in context sections, consider approaches that following existing topic, in the of plays the theory In on role research the [7]. existing and there an BCTs at relevance with looking of by factors BCTs, topics social approaches some and the different rewards, incorporated feedback, of setting, 24 some goal apps, as just such 25 BCTs are from [29]. per-app that BCTs 6 found of average is al. It et Schoeppe . adolescents,” [28] behavior regulate change. that behavior about processes bring causal of to redirect component ingredient” irreducible or “active the and alter replicable, to define observable, designed al. an intervention et as Michie an (BCT) behavior. their technique change change users behavior help a to techniques change behavior apply Apps osloe l hwdta eoeesd o eesrl rvd rprmeasurement proper a provide necessarily not do pedometers that showed al. et Consolvo step sharing by activity encouraging for application phone mobile prototype a Houston, and children in behavior sedentary and PA diet, improve to “Apps about article their In tt fteArt the of State CHAPTER 5 2 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 6 constraints practical Issues the in. consider log to to requirement forgetting design or al.’s lifestyles. on, et users’ it Consolvo put of to to forgetting mapped belt, be inconvenience the can the on that was pedometer factor the such wear to One having behavior. the of healthier challenged new, factors the Multiple of Fish’n’Steps. sustainability in continuous noticeable also their were changing Houston with participants observations [33] 3 two. count, the of step combination during daily a change experiencing positive their 7 new a and increasing had established PA, participants towards participants had 19 attitude they 4 of weeks, out with player’s 14 two study, most patterns. first although PA the game’s that healthier found to the led a al. after character, that et decreased routines virtual Lin game study, animated fourteen-week an the the of in During activity enthusiasm and tank. growth fish the a to in activity fish player’s a links that game pcfi susta lctdtedsg eurmnsCnov ta.peetdatrtheir after presented al. et Consolvo requirements design the elicited that issues Specific computer social a Fish’n’Steps, is count footstep day’s a on relying intervention Another iue2.2: Figure atcpnsdslyo ihnSesadaFs’’tp is [33] kiosk Fish’n’Steps a and Fish’n’Steps of display participants A iue2.1: Figure h mo J12pdmtri s [32] use in pedometer HJ-112 Omron The Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eairi atclryueu foei rigt hnebhvo rhbt.Uii exclusively display, one’s glanceable UbiFit the of habits. on awareness garden or the This behavior to change butterflies added to [35]. PA trying Doing awareness implications is reinforcement. general promote positive one the used to if and devices useful life particularly mobile daily is everyday of behavior awareness of improving use for the means for a as displays device’s of [34] the was. ness garden on the garden motivating how virtual at surprised a where of participants com- growth some all and and the found essential, participants edited, to ponents well-received—most added, was linked Garden be UbiFit is informa- can Overall, PA display. activities includes glanceable performed where application the journal interactive Lastly, a The provides deleted. and captures biking. activities automatically and physical device running, about fitness device, tion walking, The fitness like a PA, display. of user’s glanceable consists It a a technology. and lifestyle application, healthy interactive a an Garden, UbiFit develop to on went seeing avoid fish to their game the for with responsible interactions felt their by [33] reduced participants behavior crying. some many desired them crying, While from of it grow. prevent lack not to the tried did and reinforce that negatively fish to crying designed a reinforcement. was showing negative character than pet rather virtual change, behavior The long-term foster to reinforcement positive nte esnlandfo h td a htgmssc sFs’’tp hudprovide should Fish’n’Steps as such games that was study the from learned lesson Another osloe l ute icse h eut rmUii adni ead oteeffective- the to regards in Garden UbiFit from results the discussed further al. et Consolvo al. et Consolvo Fish’n’Steps, and Houston including projects, previous several on Drawing ogtt u to,o o ol ogtt o ti n tf ieta...Ihv to have I [33] . . . . that. that. like of stuff top and on is in that it and log day, the to during forget things would of you lot or a remember on, it put to forget twsectn ttebgnig u hni undit usne o would you nuisance; a into turned it then but beginning, the at exciting was It iue2.3: Figure bFtGre’ ipa [33] display Garden’s UbiFit 7 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. iedsg rnils(ssfwr einfaue) swl sterlvn eairchange en- behavior and relevant interactions the 8 immersive user’s as the well enrich as can features), components), persua- intervention design relevant (as the software techniques considering (as behavior together, persuasive principles perspectives in design field’s implemented sive both and Applying applied features systems. software change of persuasive of design principles the the whereas inform persuasive interventions, BCTs design change and behavior apps. health sciences change of behavior health PA components successful the of are designing perspectives, for both necessary PA and that relevant in argue are principles technology, design further persuasive They of application the change. and behavior BCTs of does implementation What the intervention? with users. tered change their behavior health of a PA of the design changing the of of for use goal imply the combination the with this to technology techniques persuasive change of advantages behavior combined multiple They persuasive. be [37]. to behaviors designed or attitudes people’s Fogg by change defined to technology, from designed persuasive knowledge is system that, field computing only such interactive One Not any well. as decision. as informed necessary intervention’s be and might an conscious fields as a goal-setting, other use be self-monitoring, interventions to to BCTs include of needs Which blocks BCTs content support. building of active social Examples and the 16 personalization, of feedback, [28]. into characterization rewards, specificity clustered for and techniques allow precision 93 to with of order list in extensive groups an hierarchic developed Taxonomy Technique [7]. suitable Change most behavior this the of likely into combination is looked a approach have this include al. that interventions et suggesting successful Sullivan techniques, many change change? that behavior found PA have driving and for question useful most groups? a is PA? population one at-risk it in specific which increase Is with lower, well albeit regard? works sustainable, this that a component in building a mean it finding effectiveness it Is ele- does is which behavior? Or what PA remains so, in question rise more the short-term Even technology, sharp effective. fitness most design are to available ments options many so With Change Behavior technology, for Components fitness Design of of parts Effectiveness which clear not still consumers is by used it being and that impactful [7]. most 2017 are in applications, However, smartphone found and [36]. trackers “fitness” have including category the for al. market et the on Sullivan available apps health mobile im- 59400 were the on remarked pointedly individual’s the impacts al. change et [9] behavior world. for Consolvo social support knowl- technological change. gain how to considering behavior of used support portance were to theories how psychological about social and edge behavioral from garden the Concepts goal, Garden. a meet not did individual butterfly. the a If gain punishment. not any did in simply result not did inactivity but hmo ta.ageta hr sa vra fdsg-eae suscmol encoun- commonly issues design-related of overlap an is there that argue al. et Thomson were Garden UbiFit and Fish’n’Steps, Houston, as such examples, previous the of Some Behavior The together. BCTs of mixing a just not is intervention an designing Nevertheless, However, examples. previous the in used techniques change behavior different seen have We there 2015, In field. this in approaches early of examples are Fish’n’Steps and Garden UbiFit UbiFit design to goals design existing of set a extend to used were work prior and Theory Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. gmn,sca neato,sca upr,adejyet otpol eonzdtehealth the recognized people Most man- enjoyment. weight and were activities support, physical social in participation interaction, for bar- social reasons and agement, Common motivations given [40]. have 2.1 and PA, table and in sport riers in non-participation and participation for at sons it. targeted of interventions understanding with solid be- associated a need problems and first the general, we at in behavior, look particular change To that behavior PA. between to distinguish specific change clearly havior not did sections previous The Approaches Given of Problems 2.2 an of implementation the de- during respecting decisions and change, design behavior informed that for to necessity intervention. match a a is for guidelines theories sign Analyzing establish. which [39]. to BCTs identify aims of to choice helping the by guiding interventions by improve and targeted in can behavior be Theory changing should significantly constructs goal. in theoretical a successful towards be to way random unlikely focused a is how a intervention discussed an have guide we in section, systems, BCTs last of technical the mix In of users. design target the define into inform and translated researchers strategies, should be evaluation HCI background can theories enable theoretical behavioral can A which designs.” that guidelines, in in better for ways technology explicitly about space a knowledge assumptions design generalizable how these the build about Testing to exploring [8]. assumptions with behavior. situations of along users’ design studies, set affect user a concrete should is for guideline guideline specificity the theory each lack embodies instantiating “Behind constructs that that theoretical notice argue also as behavior They al. task, for et difficult support Hekler a technological world. how is design social of individual’s theory-driven component the proposed design impacts critical change al. the behavioral traditional ignore et that still often noticing Consolvo [9], is theories change there behavior individuals. support that that designing of technologies suggest for for reality They guidelines approaches lived theoretically-principled [38]. everyday and used” theory the conceptual widely for a be between can gap when that design especially applications a interaction, design computer human to for want important we critically are design, for interven- adaptation the in upheld? adopted be design to be complex need of should principles previ- multitude techniques design the a persuasive change Which implies behavior in tion? this of behavior intervention, combination PA health of What change a combination to of choices. a designers advantageous and For is techniques section. principles change ous design behavior persuasive of with combination those a that highlighted have We Change Behavior Driving in Theory of Role The change behavior the intervention through the individuals potential supporting persuasive and overall [20] motivating, the process. facilitating, enhance on further have will can It apps. with gagements ledre l aeeaie ulttv eerhsuiso Kcide’ n dls rea- adults’ and children’s UK of studies research qualitative examined have al. et Allender intervention an behavior target the at look closer a suggests research of state current The and/or interpretation their and approaches “theoretically-driven that argue al. et Balaam 9 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. e ihteaegop o xml,aut eemtvtdb es faheeet skill enjoyment. achievement, and of benefits, sense health while support, a responsibilities, social daily by about from motivated more away cared were themselves adults on adults older time” example, “luxury spend For dif- to barriers and group. and development, motivators social age These shifting the activities. and with physical identity, in to fer participating related to costs, issues in barriers High and and were active. environments, frequently networks physically unsafe Individuals not more facilities, PA. as active to themselves of be perceived access types to who poor those all tended than in person activity active participate of physically types to Self-perception more a people participation. as for for self-perception motivator reason a essential main with an their be not to was found it was but PA, with associated benefits yMhre l hwdta 83 fcretuesad7.%o omruesrpre an reported users former of 70.2% and users current of 10 68.3% that showed al. et Maher by or tracker, daily wrist-worn weight, scale, of digital overview phone-app. a an another on provide in al- measured entries can and metrics manual they combining data, example, by sensor For intake phone’s metrics water data. the and health that with steps, collect import them to combine both apps phone, They other the low “Googl- on metrics. installed Android health Google’s apps tracking and multiple around a from app ecosystem with such “Health” come the Companies iOS often Apple’s support sleep. that eFit” platform. and trackers online diet, wrist-worn PA, created or as have app Jawbone such smartphone and areas Garmin, in Fitbit, lifestyle Apple, healthier as a with help to promise le Adults Older Adults women young and Teenagers children Young Group Age hs rceswr elt rvd niiilbott Abhvo.Acosscinlstudy cross-sectional A behavior. PA to boost initial an provide to well work trackers These the with years past the in market consumer the entered have trackers activity Wearable al 2.1: Table oiain n aresfrpyia ciiy[40] activity physical for barriers and Motivations ersupport Peer support Family networks social New management Weight shape Body environment Safe support Parental activities Unusual Experimentation Motivations Enjoyment benefits Healh support Social Enjoyment networks Support sanction Medical development Skill acheivement of Sense os oiac nclass in dominance Boys’ uniforms PE conflict Identity pressure Peer school at experiences Negative activities structured Highly sports Competitive Barriers ako oemodels role of Lack guidance Unclear models role of Lack conflict Identity network social of Lack surrounds unfamiliar in Anxiety experiences school Negative support teacher of Lack classes Competitive Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eiin n fot omtvt h raino elh aiswt nitreto aebeen have intervention an conscious with a habits than healthy habit of by be- creation determined Health-related the the more motivate is which PA [49]. to in and efforts past use, situation and the substance a decision, in sleep, to consistently diet, response as and in such repeatedly havior automatically performed enacted been pattern has behavioral behavior a as habit cause of even might and effect, intended their or achieve users. time, to from that reactions fail during adverse will that messages towards goals account build motivating unachievable to into of of supposedly injury take to prevalence statistics Receiving due must behavior the wanted intervention change. consider the change behavior continue PA, to behavior sustainable For able A be physically change. not [48]. might behavior [47] users example targeted an the as to injuries context in world social before significantly behavior dropping long-term [19]. rates adherence months with with ’em three issues counterparts, “show experience wearable spurious a their apps or to in These bewilderment similar data to change [46]. leads health issue scaffolding, visualizing fitness that proper of exemplifies without from trend that, conclusions absent a approach be hope” by and may exemplified graph is argue populations a issue inactive al. This et for Sullivan strategies [7]. Indeed, behavior technology [22]. relevant [21] most [20] the experience neces- or that the knowledge without developed expert and of designed often foundation are sary they market, app fitness native [45]. consumer that all the at suggest within strategy even theory-based authors purely some a PA, than through ini- beneficial loss offering more weight initial to be of the not addition context after may in the practices trackers that and In believe needs use. different They of have wearers weeks [44]. long-term change behavior, change, new behavior for the durable motivation of persua- for tial valuable, maintenance critical be the to is for proven motivation it have explicit as aspects offer these should although improvements that tools or out technology changes point sive introduce al. to et cues Fritz or motivational behavior. prompts extra in use incorporating often by Wearables change [43]. behavior [7] lasting techniques fostering in effective more are tions to uncomfortable be whereabouts to the device PA. or the their reporting device with aesthetics, the interfering most and wear or The design wear to physical [42]. with as weeks participants issues such four the and first remembering, it, of the of with 50% within issues than 75% more were and that issues weeks, are report two common trackers even after activity Some device that their [42]. using suggest [41] trackers stopped that of periods effect reports short long-term by for The only questioned [31]. used furthermore [30] use is pedometer change of behavior weeks on four first the after had count levels step activity their that and fleeting and media [17] was users levels. social increase current baseline on of this to 9.5% data declined that PA, subsequently activity reported in users their increase Neverthe- the former shared of of features. 23% maintainability 27.0% of only the multitude at and a looking features, When provide social often platforms. using trackers 35% The only [17]. less, PA their in increase initial osdrhat nevnin ae nhbt.LlyadGree aegvnoedefinition one given have Gardener and Lally habits. on based interventions health Consider individual’s the of disregard a to due be may this background, theoretical of lack a Beyond category substantial a constitute and promising, are apps fitness and health standalone While interven- some change, behavior facilitating in sufficient be may alone trackers fitness While daily participants’ in plateau a reported that studies earlier with line in go findings These 11 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. igast s n oes uha ehv eni eto ..A Adcess oi the is so interven- decreases, the PA what As like just 2.1. 12 they from section do that—but ranging in like creative, seen to have quite seem Users we be interventions. as can those such in that flowers, progress for and mechanisms fish The to diagrams progress. visualize that leading of anisms a instead but trigger 2.4, often figure levels. in interventions baseline A to These area down first drop PA abandoned. the behavior, and with maintained be visualized trackers towards to as activity PA prone that in increase be is initial sections to sharp previous seem the apps from change observation behavior One PA [53]. behavior maintainable consideration ing more with a and create theory to on designed based be would, world, change? environment/social that behavior groups like, target look the intervention of an could how So Opportunities 2.3 problem. that to contributor consideration insufficient a be the may and PA theory-backed 2.1 of a section world using previous environment/social of the the lack in of supposed highlighted The have we [7]. effects that long-term approach wanted the the achieve are change. to behavior habits ficient PA if long-term us relation maintainable to create this to questionable to mechanism is Due central it the PA, as situations. of choice should, environment these right the habits moments in and on for individuals habits, preparing based support disruption, by intervention and or between individual An occur active sickness, physically disruptions injuries, habit. and a those a as of situation, when world disrupt such consistent social could sources a the that numerous in consider seasons are therefore, enacted the there definition, PA, of by With change are, the Habits [52]. disrupted [51]. easily [50] are research of topic a oeo h rvoseape fcmue-ae nevnin mlymtvtoa mech- motivational employ interventions computer-based of examples previous the of Some lead- maintained, a become can behavior new a how show al. et Kawsnicka by 2.4 Figure suf- are technology fitness in techniques change behavior which understood well not still is It iue2.4: Figure ieiodo naigi eairoe ie[53] time over behavior a in engaging of Likelihood Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. o eairsat ute ntelf ftesetu,teitreto hudspotuesin users support should intervention the regulation spectrum, the if of Even in- left to change. the close long-term on as support further starts to is behavior possible that behavior a as regulation for The motivation spectrum motivation. build the extrinsic users on of motivation help area trinsic to the aim in should spectrum, intervention the change on extremes two these [23] between motivation. of Different type this form. type uphold pure This to a used satisfaction. in the are self-determination inherent of regulation represents its end of other and for styles the autonomous activity On highly an it. is no of of do motivation provide doing state to of to the competence the motivation, activity the amotivation, lack intrinsic the is a is perceiving or left spectrum from outcome far result desired left no the can providing Amotivation from At it arranged value, act. are are. to They they intention self-determined any types. how motivational lacking to of hinder taxonomy according or promote OIT right either the to that shows factors 2.5 contextual Figure the and them. motivation of forms this different build the participants details helps that designed, be intervention change motivation? of behavior promis- type are a motivation to could self-authored trying How of of advantages goal ing. these the behavior, To PA [23]. maintainable well-being more effectiveness, subjective elicit behavioral enhanced more and contrast like persistence, advantages in volitional of self-authored, The multitude greater are a motivations example. show people’s for they fo- if controlled, bribe, a that externally monetary is to suggests a regulation meta-theory like external The self SDT. and themselves, of the self-motivation for cus to between primarily external differences reason it experiential a do and by mo- and functional action be itself, can into activity urged People an be value construct. or singular could a They not differently. is very intention—and tivated and activation of [59]. aspects [23] ity—all controlled emphasizes relatively that versus motivation autonomous human relatively are of behaviors theory which general to a extent the is (SDT) theory self-determination The Motivation of Types the and Theory the Determination in Self autonomy and motivation al. intrinsic mo- et supporting autonomously Ng at context are look patients promotion closer section. when health a next take lasting and will and care We effective health more [58]. a moti- tivated is in of change meta-study forms behavior a autonomous that In and of found increasing concept [57]. et on the [56] Deci research of [55] Current Indeed, undermined importance vation performance [54]. the out. studies shows and drop however, 128 completion, PA, to of maintaining engagement, users meta-analysis a to cause in might related motivation it rewards behavior intrinsic PA behavior, that initial new confirmed the the for in motivator al. joy primary the of being momentary was despite instead a even intervention fail tracks, or change, the their injury, users in in sickness, efforts if progress as change happens If behavior such their What motivated. disruption stopping themselves. to a 2.2. lead for of might section because than It in behavior relapse? rather new behavior intervention, PA their up to the might keep barriers in Users to possible progress too? at behavior, to PA looked mainly healthier have a behavior We having PA enjoy their they up do or keep with, them rewarding is tion satcnlgclitreto sa xenlmtvtr twl lctmtvtoa regulation motivational elicit will it motivator, external an is intervention technological a As theory, self-determination the within sub-theory a (OIT), theory integration organismic The equifinal- and persistence, direction, energy, concerns SDT of context the in Motivation 13 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 14 adbudrn ot hl olausaewthn,i oiaig n epeaemr likely more perceived are the people that suggests and OIT motivating, activities. is such watching, adopt are to colleagues while itself. route in bouldering hard interesting be not might itself activity internalization. the for facilitator though even in, identifies join OIT might One their for partake. regulation autonomous build users help should motivation. intervention external The through behavior it. qualities promote many to shares how is but enjoyment, inherent of out motivation done intrinsic [23] purely from it. differs not with motivation are of type actions This the needs. because and values other one’s with line eet osiu aun fabhvo.Tems uooosfr fetiscmotivation extrinsic of form autonomous most The behavior. a is of valuing is conscious or it a anxiety, meaningful, personally reflects or as guilt accepted avoid or owned to is identification regulation behavior through regulated If allows but ego. one’s self, enhance or the maintain of to part be to perceived controlled. full-heartedly as experienced typically are eesrl aet otruhec ftesae fitraiainsqetal.Ised they Instead, [23] continuum. sequentially. this not internalization on do of point People any and stages at the intervention motivator. regulation of the behavior external each internalize needs further can through longer internalized no go no more needing to user behavior, and have new the necessarily more the point, to internalized one transition fully At a has regulation. supports motivational and of beginning through motivation types the elicits intervention in an where regulation scenario external a Consider it. internalize to continuing nertdregulation integrated en oda natvt htrlvn oilgop au,sc sfiihn particularly a finishing as such value, groups social relevant that activity an at good to Being one prompt one loved or colleague, friend, a have to common is it PA, with Especially intervention an of design the for question the shown, internalization of significance the With xenlyregulated Externally iue2.5: Figure relatedness efdtriaincniumsoigtpso oiain[23] motivation of types showing continuum Self-determination tocr hnrgltosaeprevda ato h efadaein are and self the of part as perceived are regulations when occurs It . eair r efre ostsya xenldmn rrwr and reward or demand external an satisfy to performed are behaviors h edt elblnigesadcnetdeswt tes sa as others, with connectedness and belongingness feel to need the , oeatnmu,o efdtrie,fr fmtvto that motivation of form self-determined, or autonomous, more a , nrjce regulation Introjected competence ersnsbhvo hti not is that behavior represents nsc ciiisfacilitates activities such in Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. related this regulation, a integrating For element. regulation. autonomous of out tivation, internalization. esetr nrae hi ri n eeal naecmae otoeworcie tailored received who those [63]. motivation to autonomous compared on intake focused vegetable not newsletters and these in fruit communication their autonomy-supportive increased more newsletters received who participants The newsletters. behavior a for decisions design guide to backing theoretical intervention. solid change a MI and SDT of combination satisfied. when health mental and yield SDT, self-motivation to enhanced according relatedness—which, and autonomy, needs—competence, psychological achieved, be for realistically need need can the the [60] that MI. information, support goals by neutral blame supported pick presenting is or to and competence criticism client feedback the of nonjudgemental helping positive, avoidance providing by the ex- Finally, the and warmth, relatedness. support, demonstrated concept for and SDT’s and with interest empathy fit genuine concepts of therapist’s These A pression practice. agree- [62]. the an autonomy of in supporting part concerns is and of goals therapist client’s and the client reflects between that ment agenda mutual a setting and clinical themselves, particular [25]. for [59] directions [61] specific [60] gives before investigated MI been where has background techniques. match theoretical This a client” offers notion. the within SDT similar from very motivation “eliciting a MI, like of terms seems In clear. made was internalization high and statements, self-motivating eliciting listening, [24] empathic resistance. of to responding areas skill be counselor should core but three imposed change, hinder be for not or arguments should improve counselor change client could to from time. to motivation as the spoken that was without, were at notion from clients themselves guiding way clients The the the change. that to of motivation hypothesis mo- qualities the Poor as from viewed counseling. emerged were alcohol MI of resistance context and the denial, in tivation, developed was (MI) interviewing Motivational this Interviewing how Motivational at look will we should applied. chapter, approach—it empirically next general when the intervention’s like look In our could for autonomy. approach basis and solid competence, a relatedness, with support us provides SDT havior. nitreto hud hrfr,amt oiaei a htalw esnt feel to person a allows that way a in motivate to aim therefore, mo- one’s should, of intervention out purely An activity an doing of example an is relax to run evening pleasant A hshg nenlzto sesnili epn ofcltt ogtr ananbeP be- PA maintainable long-term facilitate to helping in essential is internalization high This encwe l sdta oml ocet rn-ae nevnino he tailored three of intervention print-based a create to formula that used al. the et making Resnicow behavior, target the of internalization higher to leads needs these Supporting innate three the support to how on strategies and guidelines concrete provides MI Therefore, change for arguments present clients letting coercion, and confrontation avoiding MI, In of advantages section, last the in (SDT) theory self-determination the into looked we When h he eta ocpso edns,abvlne n eitnewr undit the into turned were resistance and ambivalence, readiness, of concepts central three The . , competent and , autonomous oyeditgae euaino h agtbehavior. target the of regulation integrated yield to lctdfo ihnthe within from elicited autonomy sacritical a is 15 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 16 autonomy: supporting in facilitator component key a a as be reflection could to which akin oneself, consider about would Ryan insights we [23]. gaining processing well-being” for holistic personal deep, development mention growth social constructive for Deci for propensities and as natural well the of as functioning integration, optimal and for need psychological important “an consideration for work [71]. guiding par- [26] provided In have design Baumer, decisions. in as design reflection well of inform as to Fitzpatrick, it, and of Fleck understanding ticular, creator’s their [70]. and insight” definitions, of previous as sort way some a gain such to in or together understanding them better “reviewing putting a as and to reflection etc., come define stories, applied to to events, [68]. others, is experiences, solution” and previous that obvious Moon, of an outcome Schön, series not [69], a anticipated is Dewey an there consider which and/or al. for et purpose ideas Baumer a reflection unstructured Moon, with or on complicated processing Drawing relatively mental to con- [67]. of situation the form the through of “a problem-solving reframing is enables and For which understanding [66]. thinking an appreciations” of of and struction understandings type engage new a individuals to involved which lead reflection in to activities Schön, order affective in reflec- and experiences of intellectual their understanding those explore Boud’s for to term it. generic of “a definitions is different and tion education, on healthcare, drew including consequently research, of which fields design, different in interest of been has Interventions Reflection MI & SDT in of Reflection out of (included Role apps The 25 of review a in [29]. draw behaviors MI can health [65]. employed improve we needed app to apps, ones) is single commercial identified in promotion a 42,595 PA techniques Not initially change web-based behavior in conclusion. of and MI use similar outcome and the a intended at SDT the look of a on effects taking depend argu- the When should the on foundations with research theoretical concluded more study the The that of focus hoped. traditional as the on significant that difference based as ment the intervention not However, PA was computer-tailored [65]. theories, web-based baseline behavioral health from traditional weekly months a increasing 12 Plus, at at Active PA successful to was vigorous and Move to I adults moderate among coaches. of PA video minutes maintaining and interactive and virtual an increasing both with investigated at conversations pro- project aimed The simulated and Move approach. skills answer I MI and translated question tailoring. and computer protocol web-based (IM) into mapping cesses intervention the using developed was hncmiigSTadM,w aeloe tteiprac fspotn autonomy, supporting of importance the at looked have we MI, and SDT combining When on build instead will but reflection, of definition one distill to attempt not does work This It [64]. intervention PA computer-tailored web-based a in MI and SDT combined Move I o uooyalw niiul oatvl rnfr ausit hi w.[23] own. their support into sense, values this transform actively In to way. individuals excessive certain allows from a holistic autonomy freedom thinking for deep, and or Such volition, behaving choice, toward values. of pressure and sense external goals a other by their facilitated is to processing respect synthe- with and meaning meaning its that grasp size must people self-regulation, behavioral a integrate To Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ihaciiin ogssxdsic datgscmueshv vrhmnprudr oeto come persuaders human over have computers [37]: advantages mind distinct six Fogg’s the clinician, that a implies with that of None one. technological motivation. a internalized be of to facilitation has necessarily the autonomy,intervention support support to to reflection need of theory an vital importance in self-determination a the change into combining behavior looked PA of furthermore maintainable have advantages more We elicit the intervention. to at (MI) looked interviewing motivational have and we (SDT) sections, last the In Intervention Technological a in Reflection & context. Persuasiveness that in has reflection through autonomy supporting role what and interventions, tional intervention. technological a in autonomy porting [62] choices. autonomous that and make so self-awareness to person’s thoughts position a and increase a feelings to in clinician various true help him/her the they with their puts Consequently, to or involve recognized. verbatim access context better either more be gain person, this can to the they in patient to Reflections the back allow words They person’s support. the emphases. of autonomy most to or part related repeating be to likely is .Saaiiy ti ifiutt cl h xeineahmnprudrofr,especially offers, persuader human a experience the scale to difficult is It Scalability: 5. persua- its modality-influences information-the of presentation The Modalities: Multiple 4. vast manipulate and process, access, store, can Computers Stores: Data Huge Utilize 3. sensitive for important is which anonymity, higher for allow They Anonymity: Greater 2. sleep to need not do beings, human than persistent more be can They Persistence: Higher 1. hncmaigatcnlgclitreto oapitbsditreto,o session a or intervention, print-based a to intervention technological a comparing When tradi- more over intervention technological a of advantages sup- the in at vital look be will could section next reflection The that show arguments these of connection a that believe We that technique important an is listening reflective where MI, to parallels are there Again, aessin ihaciiin ycnrs,cmue otaecnb aiydpoe to deployed easily world. be the can around software people of computer millions contrast, to face-to- By available as be clinician. such interventions a traditional with scale sessions to face hard and expensive about thinking when of preferences the to impact. persuasive modes optimum hyperlinked those the match or produce to further simulation, presented. user and is the animation, thereof, it how video, combinations by and audio, also content but graphics, information, leverage by can influenced Computers only not are the People for siveness. step next perfect the on with decide happened and ever data, sessions behavior therapy recorded all patient. all store could load they patient, example, the For data. of being. amounts human another face to than anonymously information or It help behaviors. get or to attitudes new easier with often experimenting is or problems psychological as such the areas for wait to clock the around work can They frustrated. intervene. or to bored moment get right not do and eat, or 17 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. aento,w aeosre htteraoigfrdsg eiin ntecomputer-based the in decisions the design On for 18 gap. deci- reasoning a design the presents concrete impact, that for their observed examples and have of reflection, we support lack notion, to the aims same Especially that area. intervention an that is in in there sions learned reflection, be support to to much opportunities excellent still offers the technology support Although to autonomy. how ing on techniques SDT. and by relatedness—presented guidelines and with autonomy, needs—competence, us of (MI) psychological provide interviewing because innate motivational to three there that SDT common found with are we Next, well which behavior, injuries. combined environment in or key the issues, disruptions a matches health to approach behavior, changes, resistance This target seasonal offers behavior. the it a internalizing since of PA with maintainability of users the towards support go to to guidelines factor provides target it the since consider an and tion for theory that, on found based have be We to behavior needs PA problem. it a maintainable area, environment. still this building group’s in is that successful intervention presented be technological to have a intervention we of chapter, use the this through of beginning the At Outline Research work. this in intervention change behavior crucial technological be a will Baumer, of Both [26]. construction [71]. reflection the reflection of for of levels dimensions the and introduces aspects perspective, the another on presenting advise Fitzpatrick implicit and Fleck with interventions, working reflection were on reflection focused encourage [70]. explicitly reflection to constitutes reflection, them feedback in of that used especially concept assumptions, techniques the the defined that them and 2011, of itself of few year publication that median the found with papers, and 76 analyzed Baumer [26]. use-case understood pro- change behavior PA the the of supporting potential and persuasive motivating, lever-cess. overall facilitating, If enhanced with the [20]. help that techniques can argue change intervention they behavior perspectives, and fields’ design dia- both persuasive aging or between disconnect consumption a alcohol is eating, there healthy sex, safer [77]. , [76] [75] cessation created [74] been smoking [73] have betes interventions of Digital scal- context and [72]. safe, health the effective, improve in provide to to used potential been this has interventions messaging, text able or smartphones as such means .Uiutuns:Tcnlg a eams vrwee ti bqios ihtegrowth the With ubiquitous. is it everywhere; almost be can Technology Ubiquitousness: 6. eeto ly rca ati hsapoc ic tcudb e opnn nsupport- in component key a be could it since approach this in part crucial a plays Reflection interven- our for basis a as promising be to found was (SDT) theory self-determination The technological for decisions design guide and reflection, for design to how on gap the close To well a not it potential, vast offers technology where field another is reflection Although that out point al. et Thomson detailed, just have we persuasion of advantages the Beyond via delivered interventions as such interventions, health digital purely of scope the in Even tpeieytergttm n lc n nstain hr ua esae ih be might persuader human a where situations in and intervene place can and unwelcome. computers time right smartphones, the of precisely pervasiveness at the and computers embedded of Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ept esnaotorrslsadices oprblt ihohrwr rfidns We health of findings. perspectives or the engineering. work from software other decisions and these design, with persuasive about comparability change, brought behavior increase that should and reasoning concrete intervention the results the change document our of behavior will PA presentation about that our The reason in of focus to detail. construction autonomy will help in the further we for decisions could necessary Second, related which decisions our reflection, design intervention. document support we technological to Third, a used in be context. could MI technology and how SDT on of operational combination the the that test methods remark [25]. multiple research al. further through et require and Teixeira still intervention domains and SDT perspective [59] multiple an appropriately.” the of in them characteristics From tested expand be and utility. refine must practical to theories science real-world basic science, expanding have for basic that both of important interventions is that developing interventions topic test the for on and notice and inform al. to et theory Patrick of [64]. use tailoring “the computer web-based in MI and SDT integrate arrive to omittance chance The the risk. increase or a work pose conclusions. the could wrong of fields the work. comparability three at previous the of these decrease aspect could of perspective specific any about one a in reason of on proficiency to focuses of harder that lack approach it researcher’s these another makes to A take regards way to in interconnected or detail behav- an results of health observed in lack of decisions This perspectives and considers engineering. perspectives software that different and way design, holistic persuasive a change, in ior done seldom is field intervention hrfr,w i ocnrbt ntrewy.Frt hr ssilane oempirically to need a still is there First, ways. three in contribute to aim we Therefore, Move I hc ehv rvosydsusd ecie tefa n ftefis tepsto attempts first the of one as itself describes discussed, previously have we which , 19 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. r tbe a edlvrdwt ihfieiy n iharaoal ieiodta tyields it that likelihood reasonable a with and a fidelity, using high from [72]. approach refrained with benefits delivery We the meaningful delivered its clinically and and reasoning. be intervention change, our the can when documenting to stable, undertaken as want best are well are we they as since behavior so, trial the It do controlled in randomized of to us intervention. take picture aid change to clearer to wanted behavior a protocol we technological gaining IM a in the to us used approach We assisted change [78]. behavior intervention our creating the translating or of methods, the implementation picking change of inadequate behavior risks inappropriate the an reduce picking to objectives, [64] Move change the I behavior encountered by we wrong used intervention, was change It behavior protocol. a (IM) create Mapping to Intervention how on guidance for looking When .Gnrt neauto lnt odc fetadpoesevaluations. process and effect conduct to plan evaluation contexts. an real-life Generate in program 6. the of sustainability and implementation, adoption, for Plan program. 5. organized an into applications practical and methods Integrate 4. iden- the which into determinants the match that methods intervention theory-based Select 3. objec- (performance (sub-)behaviors combining by objectives change of matrices Create to needs 2. anything, if what, identifying analysis, problem or assessment needs a Conduct 1. h tp fteI rtclaesmaie sflos[27]: follows as summarized are protocol IM the of steps The ie eif grgt,adtasaeteeit rcia plctosta aif h pa- the methods. satisfy selected that the applications of practical effectiveness into the for these rameters translate and aggregate, beliefs tified the by targeted be should beliefs which identifying intervention. determinants, behavioral with tives) whom. for and changed be Methodology CHAPTER 21 3 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. mrvdteprevdqaiyo ieadwl-en.Pyhlgclbnfisrnefo an from function- cognitive range 22 and benefits opportunities, Psychological social self-esteem, well-being. confidence, of and sense life mood, of increased quality and perceived health, the functional improved function, bone improved breast as diabetes, well stroke, as [80]. disease, control depression, heart weight coronary and hypertension, cancer, of colon risk and reduced a notes WHO the ih olf,adra rmlf orgta aslmdlatrcompletion. after model causal a as right to left from read a and solve left, to to helped aims right intervention It PA. our maintained which of in lack environment a the influence of or understanding cause problem. better that a factors gain the to of us model logic a built we Problem the For the of Model Logic 3.1 for allowed and reflection on decisions hypothesis. our design to our relation with of provide analysis research prototype, effects statistical our mixed-method possible of persuasiveness this of the to of this statistics relation with part round, descriptive analysis experiment quantitative statistical a another The do ran to and us approach. allowed was prototype quantitative construction the a the refined ways following we which results, time, qualitative in the conducted check on and then the Based We insights of first feasible. gain process. prototype to a the participants built in with we decisions interviews background, design this the With documenting intervention, review. literature extensive accordingly the Ai ute soitdwt mrvdmna elh ea nteosto eeta and dementia, of onset the in delay health, mental improved with associated further is PA h oi oe ftepolm hc sdslydi gr .,i sal eeoe from developed usually is 3.1, improves PA figure in displayed is which problem, the of model logic The conducted and work theoretical on prototype technological our base to care great took We rtstep first ult fLife of Quality fteI rtcl ocnutanesassmn rpolmaayi [79], analysis problem or assessment needs a conduct to protocol, IM the of iue3.1: Figure nmlil aes nisgoa taeyo it A n health, and PA, diet, on strategy global its In layers. multiple on oi oe ftepolm[79] problem the of model Logic Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. n example: ing i ult,pluin ako ak,sdwls n prsrceto aiiismydiscourage may facilities sports/recreation and and walking sidewalks, in low [81] PA. decline traffic, parks, in a high-density of participation to violence, lack lead of cities pollution, factors of quality, connected design air the the in and change urbanization a Increased and increase cycling. vehicles the motor Furthermore, of activities. use recreational the and in occupational during behavior sedentary in ocag hi eair foritreto osntwr o hm ti nieyt okfor work to unlikely is depression. or it injuries them, serious for from convince work suffering to not people easiest as does the such intervention be groups to our general target assumed If harder-to-convince a was have behavior. it and because their behavior group PA change this their to selected increase We to so. able doing physically in are interest who people as group target [10]. ing eeteespoieteWOsgoa cinpa nP 08–23 ntefloig We following. [2]: the environment the in in 2030 agents for – we determinants 2018 situation, personal derive PA overall to the on source of excellent plan an picture action it better consider global a WHO’s provide the To provide only. nevertheless factors these on consideration our factors are These [79] skills. influence. as or atti- such change knowledge, capabilities can as interventions as that well factors—such values—as cognitive and include self-efficacy, usually beliefs, They tudes, influence. or control directly 3. 2. 1. nscin22 ehv rsne ou nteise feliciting of issues the on focus a 3.2. presented have figure we in 2.2, shown section are In PA regular hindering factors behavioral Concrete idee l ihih h motneof importance the highlight al. et Biddle mn the our Among identified we 1, chapter in shown we’ve as issue global a is PA of lack a Although ic u prahfcsso hnigtebhvo fidvdasa ik ewl focus will we risk, at individuals of behavior the changing on focuses approach our Since esnlDeterminants Personal aig hie oiainad liaey eairo h ato h individual the of part decision- the as on well walk as behavior or ultimately, [10]. attitudes, cycle and and, to beliefs motivation of people choice, development for making, the system requires incentive still an work creating to routes, walking safe and ohl epeo l gsadaiiist naei eua Aa niiul,fmle,and families, individuals, as PA regular in engage to abilities and communities. ages all of people help and to to places according safe PA, People to regular Active Create in access engage equitable to have which to in ages, communities, all and ability. of cities their people, in all spaces, of rights the guard raeAtv Environments Active Create according PA, regular ages. of all at benefits and multiple ability the for, to appreciation and of, understanding and Societies Active Create o xml,ee hnawrpaei elsre ihddctdcceroutes cycle dedicated with served well is workplace a when even example, For niomna Factors Environmental raeadpooeacs oopruiisars utpesettings multiple across opportunities to access promote and Create : r atr htidvdasa iko gnsi h niomn can environment the in agents or risk at individuals that factors are raeaprdg hf nalo oit yehnigknowledge enhancing by society of all in shift paradigm a Create : raeadmiti niomnsta rmt n safe- and promote that environments maintain and Create : o h urn eeso hscliatvt sa increase an is inactivity physical of levels current the for eairlFactors Behavioral fP eairwt h follow- the with behavior PA of maintainable Abehavior. PA 23 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 24 following: oavoid to ins uvyfrEgad[82] England for Survey Fitness 3.2: Figure 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. 4. esnlDeterminants Personal ead oterP behavior. PA their to regards Barriers/Benefits Perceived PA. Self-Efficacy Skills Attitude Knowledge inl ainladsbainlato oices Aadrdc eetr behavior. sedentary reduce and PA interna- increase to coordinated to action of sectors subnational implementation and across and national systems tional, mobilization resource information in and excellence advocacy, achieve capabilities, workforce nerships, Systems Active Create elhProblems Health eesr klsidvdashv rne odvlpt naei elh PA. healthy in engage to develop to need or have individuals skills Necessary : atr ie sbrir ypol gd1–9yasi h lidDna National Dunbar Allied the in years 16–69 aged people by barriers as given Factors h tiueidvdasso oad PA. towards show individuals attitude The : osdrn h nweg niiul aeaotPA. about have individuals knowledge the Considering : h niiulsble nterint blt oegg nmitie healthy maintained in engage to ability innate their in belief individual’s The : n improve and o eairlfcosaefcosta niiul oto rinfluence or control individuals that factors are factors behavioral for raeadsrnte edrhp oenne ut-etrlpart- multi-sectoral governance, leadership, strengthen and Create : niiul a hf hi ecpino eet/aresin benefits/barriers of perception their shift can Individuals : ult fLife of Quality nrgrst A ehv hsnthe chosen have We PA. to regards in Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. olwn u oi oe ftepolm in problem, the of model logic our Change Following of Model Logic 3.2 level base intervention their an from PA create in will increase We fast so. a so. doing over phys- PA do in are to maintainable interest fosters that an to people have individuals for and helps accessible PA PA that their of increase levels to health maintained able of ically benefits the make to want nevninmpigprotocol. mapping intervention irgr h niomna ucm u oti oksfocus. work’s this to due outcome environmental the disregard outcomes ioral h n htwl hnea euto h nevnint ul u oi oe fchange. of model logic our build to intervention the of result a as change will what and who 3. 2. 1. hs eemnnswl egiigu ihfidn hneojcie ntenx tpo the of step next the in objectives change finding with us guiding be will determinants These stels tpi u oi oe ftepolm ederive we problem, the of model logic our in step last the As esatb osdrn htnest hnei h eairo u agtgop the group, target our of behavior the in change to needs what considering by start We irpe o ie uha eas fijr rscns,teidvda ilpc tup it pick will individual the sickness, or injury of disruption. because the as after again such time, a for Disruption disrupted after Behavior PA in breaks. Re-engage and setbacks smaller with long-term months the multiple in PA over of PA of levels healthy Maintain [12]. tion hwhatylvl fPA of levels healthy Show o niiul.A ihtedtriat ntelgcmdlo h rbe,we problem, the of model logic the in determinants the with As individuals. for iue3.3: Figure niiul aeabsln Afitn h H recommenda- WHO the fitting PA baseline a have Individuals : oi oe fcag [79] change of model Logic tptwo step vni h Abhvo fa niiulis individual an of behavior PA the if Even : fteI rtcl eg nodti on detail into go we protocol, IM the of niiul ananhatylevels healthy maintain Individuals : ol o h intervention the for goals behav- We . 25 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. fta eair(atr htexplain that (factors behavior that of outcomes. behavioral the perform to do to need participants omtvt nwy htspotuesi nenlzn h agtbhvo,isedo providing 26 of instead behavior, target the internalizing aims in that users approach motivation. an support external on that focus a ways to of have in instead we motivate rapidly, change, behavior baseline to PA to maintainable falls a that foster increase to short-time order sharp in that believe We outcome. ioral [79]. intervention deliverable and Intervention Computer-Based three Step a into Theory Translating change behavior a build 3.3 to knowledge that use will objectives we change step, the next of the picture clearer In intervention. a draw intervention. to our determinants of the with together them brought objectives). to participants want we (what objectives performance our crosses It oarv torcag betvs(htpriiat have participants (what objectives change our at arrive to 3. 2. 1. 7. 6. 5. 4. h anwr nti tprvle rudfidn hoeia akrudt u behav- our to background theoretical a finding around revolves step this in work main The and objectives performance our derived have we defined, outcomes behavioral our With support. to want we change the detail to objectives change of matrix a create will we Next, rmtebhvoa ucms ecndrv our derive can we outcomes, behavioral the From O eual hc hi ABehavior PA their not Check is Regularly it PO3 goal, stated baseline. the our from For behavior PA levels. increase healthy rapidly below to if necessary baseline levels from recommended behavior the PA below increase if Behavior PA them. Baseline change Increase to PO2 want they if re-evaluate Behavior and PA behavior PA their their of about views Views their Question PO1 sdsutdfratm,teidvda ilpc tu gi afterward. again up it pick will individual the time, a for disrupted is Disruption after Behavior PA in Re-engage PO7 PA. of Behavior PA their in Competent Feel PO6 behavior. PA their Someone discuss with Behavior PA their Discuss PO5 Behavior PA volition. their own Start their to Themselves Motivate PO4 adjusting. needs it if consider and regularly havior fteitreto apn rtcli h rga ein hr ebidacoherent a build we where design, program the is protocol mapping intervention the of why atcpnswudo olntcag hi behavior) their change wouldn’t or would participants niiul hn bu hi eeso Abe- PA of levels their about think Individuals : niiul elcmeeti hi hsntype chosen their in competent feel Individuals : niiul aeacnesto ate to partner conversation a have Individuals : vni h Abhvo fa individual an of behavior PA the if Even : efrac objectives performance olearn to niiul usintercurrent their question Individuals : niiul tr on Aotof out PA doing start Individuals : oaheeteperformance the achieve to do ihtedeterminants the with ) niiul slowly Individuals : enn what defining , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. PerformanceThe approved originalKnowledge version of (K) this thesisAttitude is available (A) in print at TUSkills Wien (SK)Bibliothek. Self-Efficacy (SE) Perceived Benefits/Barri- Objective (PO) ers (BE, BA) PO1 Question K1.a. Know that A1.a. Believe that PA SK1.a. Express the ability SE1.a. Demonstrate BE1.a. Recognize that PA their Views about PA is good for is a worthwhile activ- to process information about confidence in decid- is good for them. BA1.a. PA their physical ity for them. PA. SK1.b. Express ability in ing whether or not Understand that, given the health. K1.b. thinking about past PA. SK1.c. to change their views huge variety of options, a Know that PA Express the ability to envision about PA. healthy level of PA has low is good for their alternatives to current behavior. barriers of entry. mental health. SK1.d. Express the ability to look at PA behavior from dif- ferent perspectives. PO2 Increase K2.a. Know an A2.a. If below SK2.a. Express physical abil- SE2.a. Demonstrate BA2.a. Recognize their Baseline PA engageable type healthy levels, be- ity to perform PA. confidence in decid- physical and mental ca- of PA. lieve that they should ing whether or not to pability to perform PA. increase their PA. change their PA be- BA2.b. Understand that A2.b. If above havior. they can find the time to do healthy levels, be- PA. lieve that they should uphold healthy levels of PA. PO3 Regularly K3.a. Recognize A3.a. Believe that SK3.a. Express to have a way SE3.a. Demonstrate BA3.a. Recognize that the Check their PA that some bene- keeping their PA be- of reminding themselves to do confidence in being time effort for regulation fits of PA only havior in check is im- PA. able to regulate their can be negligible. BE3.a. apply in the long- portant to them. PA behavior. Understand that regularly term if the behav- checking their behavior is ior is maintained. necessary to keep it at healthy levels. PO4 Start Doing K4.a. Recognize A4.a. Believe that PA SK4.a. Express the ability to SE4.a. Demonstrate BE4.a Understand that get- PA Themselves that there are is worth their time. think about PA on their own. confidence in their ting started on their own multiple ways A4.b. Believe that ability to motivate helps to ensure the benefits of reminding PA is good for them. themselves to do PA. over the long-term. BA5.b. oneself to do PA. A4.c. Believe that PA SE4.b. Demonstrate Recognize that relying on helps them achieve a confidence in finding external cues could lead to 27 personal goal. their own reasons for avoidable disruption. doing PA. Table 3.1: Matrix of change objectives for maintaining PA behavior; performance objectives 1-4 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek.

28

arxo hneojcie o anann abhvo;promneojcie 4-7 objectives performance behavior; pa maintaining for objectives change of Matrix al 3.2: Table

ruption.

eettpso dis- of types ferent

o codn odif- to according ior uttd fdisruptions. of multitude

hi rasi behav- in breaks their ihP eairfra for behavior PA with

nwhwt adjust to how Know elh ast epup keep to ways healthy ruption. disruption.

havior. K7.c. disruption. of nesadta hr are there that Understand dis- a after behavior of types different for

n fterP be- PA their of end types different for ior fe irpin BA7.a. disruption. after their start to ability treatment necessary

irpini o the not is disruption behav- PA ternative Disruption after PA e eairi orestart to is behavior key their in confidence the apply to ability

7a eiv that Believe A7.a. al- of Know K7.a. in Re-engage PO7 E..Rcgieta the that Recognize BE7.a. Demonstrate SE7.a. the Express SK7a.

eet rmit. from benefits

atratp fP ogain to PA of type a master

htte ontne to need not do they that

ut rbetter. or quate tently. A A..Recognize BA6.a. PA. PA. PA. of type

yeo Ai ade- is PA of type a compe- PA of type hi blt operform to ability their of type a forming a in are they good

hi optnein competence their a perform to takes it PA Doing tent rciewl influence will practice per- in confidence how judge can they

6a eiv that Believe A6.a. what Know K6.a. Compe- Feel PO6 E..Udrtn that Understand BE6.a. Demonstrate SE6.a. that Express SK6.a.

euaigit. regulating rassing. behavior. behavior.

hi Abehavior. PA their with helps PA about n hudntb embar- be not should one PA their cussing PA their about to talk

oen ae about cares someone someone to talking Someone with icsigP ihsome- with PA discussing dis- in confidence to someone have they

5a eiv that Believe A5.a. that Recognize K5.a. PA Discuss PO5 A..Udrtn that Understand BA5.a. Demonstrate SE5.a. that Express SK5.a

betv (PO) Objective r B,BA) (BE, ers

tiue(A) Attitude (K) Knowledge Performance ecie Benefits/Barri- Perceived (SE) Self-Efficacy (SK) Skills Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. nd n otipraty h eieymto sarsosv e-p,w a okit the into look section. can next we the in web-app, responsive intervention a the of as production method delivery program the importantly, most and stay fined, to order in sessions, between programme. week master one this with of sessions, sessions, scope multiple two over the conducted to within usually intervention is our MI limit Although will learning knowledge. we MI our from of questions best and the approach to the material derive chosen will we our background, theoretical matches our that matches avatar an select to have will changes we induce to Therefore, tool theme. useful [83]. a as behavior function human may which in mind, supportive to come and agents positive artificial Persuasive a be will intervention the of theme the 2.2, one. see regular time, a over as interaction usable be smartphone. will a on it as web-app, well responsive as a computer a As on website web-app. responsive a as intervention which in context [79]. the conducted and be group intervention will the intervention with the fit detail. that in ways intervention in methods our operationalizing in the dialogue a implement will to We how angles. on multiple multiple decision tackle from design to objectives a possibility change make the these to offers tackle need dialogue to This us allows users. and our objectives with change dialogue a be will method regards in vividly. gap more this even perceive translation techno- we a a reflection, such in on making decisions application. Focusing correctly concrete practical to concerning concept. into do from this SDT draw to of transfer to how implementation research to on logical of how theoretical lack guidance on a the little advice is consider provides is there to MI Nonetheless, there is However, research. work current this change. in of behavior that premises targeted basic the the for of background one since overstated a be cannot create therefore, will, We promising. higher is and intervention. offers anonymity technological greater intervention the therapy, technological Especially psychological a 2.3. as looked such section ubiquitousness have areas in we sensitive persuaders Furthermore, of human context 2.3. over the section have in in computers MI advantages and distinct SDT Fogg’s of at context the in used was technology 2.3. section in of choice combination this the detailed have of We foundation reflection. theoretical and the on MI, SDT, based be will conditions, environmental and ihtetertclbcgon,tee n cp forbhvo hneitreto de- intervention change behavior our of scope and theme, background, theoretical the With avatar the and user the between dialogue the sure make To “Josef”. avatar this named We techniques. MI from derived dialogue a create will we that mentioned reduced already to have We leads reinforcement negative where work, related of findings the with line our In build will we intervention, the of persuasiveness and ubiquitousness the increase for To technique practical a is Application application. of topic the consider to need we Next, primary our sessions, therapy in used conventionally technique interviewing an is MI Since intervention change behavior actual an to idea from transitioning in effort necessary The how and reflection support to technology using of opportunities the highlighted have We behavior of determinants the in changes influencing for processes general the methods, Our 29 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. In Plan Implementation Program 3.5 the of nature approach. split change behavior the our to into closely insights wanted more the adhere to try will we simulates. prototype this, the For sessions therapy people. of group larger being research. audience—both this target in its efforts by our a use for of technology’s advantages design the essential the affects how understanding change in behavior demon- contribution for full-blown a implemen- technology and a between strategy, the intervention comparability requiring same better that without the mention show doing, of further tations to They be them [84]. to change ap- enables supposed behavior evaluation it are of the stration since they tailoring what researchers, of doing HCI approach are for this gain systems strategy support to intervention manner al. the quick et a to Klasnja in proach phase. round this experiment may We this in of findings. faster This first sessions the insights intervention the from offer. the to mapping would according simulate in adjustments to approach for choose issues quantitative opportunity about a an early offered With than further out implementation manifold. approach finding be our to of to expected possibility background were higher theoretical which a decision, had design many we our interviews, of effects the of analysis the an as create soon will of as we part interviews, it conducting as using For detail participants completed. guide. in is interview with intervention process interviews our design qualitative for and conduct prototype creation initial will We this document research. will our We [79]. experiments. materials our needed duct the produce and test, prepare, and structure program the refine and In Production Program 3.4 utiaiiyo h rga.Tepromneojcie endi hsse tt h a to has 30 continued. who and implemented, state adopted, step be this to in program defined the objectives for performance what The do program. the of sustainability tpfour step tpfive step .Wrigt dets otk ati h experiment. the in part take to advertise prototype. to second Wording the for 4. participants experiment find to channels of Selection further 3. about them notify to e-mail by participants contact to us allowing pur- for texts research Consent for data 2. collected of use the allowing participants for documents Consent 1. o h xeiet ihtepooye,w ilcet h olwn documents: following the create will we prototypes, the with experiments the For provide should part quantitative and qualitative a a to with accessible approach research made mixed-method time The this prototype; refined second, a create to be will step next The the to itself lends research qualitative because mainly chosen was approach qualitative A con- to create we intervention technological the is “material” foremost intervention’s Our nevninsessions. intervention poses. fteI rtcl h eerhta ln o h dpin mlmnain and implementation, adoption, the for plans team research the protocol, IM the of fteI rtcl ecet nognzdpormfroritreto.W define We intervention. our for program organized an create we protocol, IM the of Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eeaiga vlainpa sthe is plan evaluation an Generating Plan Evaluation 3.6 and technological with be effectively to very determined supported is approach be the ways. can automated If maintenance and and advantages. adoption scalability adoption notable feasible, group has target approach for our plan internet, not do We that. beyond intervention approach. the intervention of maintenance change behavior a of prahs[1.Frt nta fasking unfit- other of with an instead evaluated reflective,” be “more First, should is reflection Baumer individual [71]. phenomenon, an complex reflection, approaches incredibly when evaluate an To determine of to reduction reflection. trying ting finding. grounding of for notable gain instead designs another to that, sophisticated literature was suggests theoretical more papers the reviewed for with the engage inspiration in to and [70]. suggestion reflection reflection a on support with di- focus to concludes the specific techniques Baumer with a further engage develop of to to lack opportunity topic The an the offering on reflection, literature theoretical of verse concept the defined clearly papers necessary the own. in its conclude on necessarily occur not and can but does reflection immediately of reflection reflection. change nature Lastly, behavior complex of effectively. the view it into simplistic promote insights rather to provide a how to provide fail they may effectiveness, scales their such Consequently, for use of reliability and coder, single a bias. for more advise but therefore, consistency would, and higher interpretation coding yielding of that degree argue They high a a to [85]. from requires assessment as assessed reflection academic far be in as should apparent typically and go no than measurement Fleet perspective quantitative on are broader and to there agreement Sumsion unsuited Since appears reflection, general we reflection assessing evaluation. that a 2.3, or state for identifying of section ground of In lack starting means The rough accepted evaluate. widely a to provides reflection. hard reflection defining notoriously constitutes to is what reflection approaches section, previous this shown in have show will we As Reflection Evaluating evaluated. be can reflection how at this look of closer knowledge further gain to want intervention. we approach technological particular, our a In to further in connection reflection. should combination possible and of we a MI, answer model intervention, SDT, to logic our combining work our of of help to in background questions objectives theoretical evaluation change the our structure the of to consideration regards In in change. intervention our of effectiveness the eetees ic eaebidn ehooia nevninta sdlvrdoe the over delivered is that intervention technological a building are we since Nevertheless, feasibility the about knowledge and data research gathering mainly are we research, this For amrhstknamr eetlo teautn eeto n on htrltvl few relatively that found and reflection evaluating at look recent more a taken has Baumer ease on depend utilized usually are that scales rating since that, state they Furthermore, a take to need we assessment, an for measurements and indicators into look can we Before it step sixth o much how fteI rtcl[9.W att evaluate to want We [79]. protocol IM the of esni eetn,w hudask should we reflecting, is person a 31 in Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 32 rrqiie o ihrlvl frflcin[8.FekadFtptikdfie v different five defined [26]. highest Fitzpatrick the are and R4, levels to Fleck lower lowest, that the R0, [88]. suggested from is reflection reflection”, it of of where “levels levels and higher [26], reflective for more prerequisites be to considered are levels frflcini fvle ial,rflcigde o oentrlyt l epeadi time- is and [68]. people [86] so all do to to naturally encouragement come or reason guidance not a or does need support reflecting usually with structured they Finally, time Therefore, reflection, over value. of consuming. reflective of purposes often more formal is is be more reflection Reflection to For of [68]. learn [87]. reflect can to [68] people time [86] and for support process, allow development or a create to as essential discussed is it time, takes reflection be might that images or ideas of outcomes, [26]. resolutions other representation solutions or and other decisions emancipation or self-development, or theory, action empowerment of reflection, uncertainty, building further the review, for critical material learning, the of and learning including the poses, as serve which reflection, of into [71]. dimensions organized informatics three have reflective defines and they for Baumer Fitzpatrick that basis and reflection and [26], of Fleck reflection aspects from of outlined levels perspectives have Fitzpatrick research and consideration Fleck into Baumer. taken have we tocol, topic support the to on literature used existing be considered could have grounding. we technology Lastly, solid how provide focus. investigating to specific further a it In give we 2.3. reflection, section as in reflection reflection of of nature the deepening interventions. both of our about of means knowledge impacts a potential gain towards in- the to working Lastly, as itself evaluation, well provides. reflection the reflection of during benefits work?” understanding what it our determine “Did to asking, occurs of it stead which in contexts broader ways what 4. 3. 2. 1. o h ups fdsg,i sueu otiko different of think to useful is it design, of purpose the For Since [26]. reflection for conditions the of analysis an with continue Fitzpatrick and Fleck pur- many have can reflection that state Fitzpatrick and Fleck [68], Moon from Drawing pro- mapping intervention the of part as objectives performance measurable towards go To definition the of understanding our given have we work, this in reflection evaluating Towards eetrspito iwt aeit con e esetvs ti eesr orec- to necessary is It perspectives. new account into take to view of point reflector’s Change Fundamental Reflection: understanding. Transformative of R3 level different descriptions, a and reach ideas to between alternatives interpret- relationships of of consideration the cycles and involves from reflection generalizing This questioning, aspect person. and an another is ing which with perspective, conversation different ideal a an from of things seeing involves primarily and tions Relationships Exploring Reflection: Dialogic R2 perspective. miss- of way, descriptive changes or or reporting explanations a alternate in ing but descriptions, Explanation accompany justifications with or Revisiting sons, Description: Reflective R1 reflective. not such, as and explanation, or oration Revisiting Description: R0 h esnrflce.Scn,oecudisedakwa oerflcinpasi the in plays reflection role what ask instead could one Second, reflected. person the sadsrpino ttmn bu vnswtotfrhrelab- further without events about statement or description a is rbsfrrltosisbtendescrip- between relationships for probes saotatrn rtasomn the transforming or altering about is eeso reflection of levels cuswe xlntos rea- explanations, when occurs hr higher where , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. h usinof question the how articulate help to informatics [71]. reflective reflection for support foundation may the design as serve which – transformation independent three identified and reflection, of of reflection, question of the levels of answering concept as behaviors the them of simplify To types describe them. the could encourage identify we to to how ways and as encourage well to as want reflection, we for conditions and purpose the about 1. 5. 3. 2. lc n izarc aepoie swt udlnst einfrrflcinb thinking by reflection for design to guidelines with us provided have Fitzpatrick and Fleck osmlf h praho h ocp fdmnin,w ol eciei yanswering by it describe could we dimensions, of concept the of approach the simplify To background theoretical the analyzed has Baumer angle, another from reflection at Looking Breakdown rare. very reportedly is and issues ethical or social as such picture, Implications wider Wider a Reflection: to Critical lead R4 to almost assumptions been personal understanding. have challenge or that practice and Reflec- beliefs in questions change of transformation. fundamental set this ask achieve a should to by tors environment governed our are from actions assimilated our unconsciously of many that ognize vrseiggis eetv eiinmkn nbe eiin htaefe rmsuch from free are losses that avoiding decisions for enables preference making the biases. decision While loss-aversion, reflective processes. gains, on thought seeking re- based over automatic approaches, often more cognitive are to of decisions contrast example of heuristic in an stands material, In making learned decision of situations. flective transforma- understanding or – transforming schemata involve change conceptual involves could existing ultimately reflection It This alternatives. envisioning tions. about also but self and upon, Transformations inquired be should that activities particular primary a discussions. the designates group from that of separate design way inquiry, a a the experiences, for inquiry: past support space along to of occur reviews strategies even design incorporates knows three that may already suggests design or Baumer he/she knowledge, system. what the that user with of interacting the re-examination iterative to for a clear providing encourage making as to such refinement, forms, and many testing take hypothesis could and inquiry Supporting knowledge. for existing opportunities of re-examination creating a or hypotheses, testing further and Inquiry perplexity. attention of moments drawing behavior. creating are or implicit breakdowns them, or for inducing to support them, unconscious individual’s leading to technological previously an provide by of with to reflection strategies consideration fit for Useful explicit not opportunities and do provide conscious that They a anomalies perspectives. disturbing meaning or current uncertainty, or surprise of sacncosaditninlpoes tivle eeaig etn,revising, testing, generating, involves It process. intentional and conscious a is nwihways which in amrpeet radwsa obflo uzigstain,situations situations, puzzling or doubtful as breakdowns presents Baumer : eeto sntol xmnn h urn tt ftewrdo one’s or world the of state current the examining only not is Reflection : eeto occurred. reflection iesoso reflection of dimensions novstkn nocnieaintemuch the consideration into taking involves o deep how h eeto was. reflection the radw,iqiy and inquiry, breakdown, – 33 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. frflcin swl stedmnin frflcin otyt e nie of idea an get to try to reflection, of dimensions the as well as reflection, of 34 extent which “To of statement?”. introduction this accompanying with For the agree introduction. with you short paired do a is with scale presented Likert was first option the answering example, of type new each reflection. and of description, dimensions and reflection of reflection, levels For in the changes considering relatedness. regarding questions and data choose autonomy, with will us we needs—competence, providing psychological on background. innate focus theoretical three will chosen MI the our and of SDT perspective regarding the measures from Our in interested are we that participants inter- the Some of end the intervention. at the questionnaire the completed in have repeat vention. will they questionnaire up-front after the questionnaire from questions freely. longer experience a their the about and of speak end questionnaire, to the able reach be to to about are moments we more that few indicate a during time, them their give encountered out for and they point interview, them or thank situations minds we puzzling that, their After speak otherwise to usage. or chance another confusing, get consequential, participants each so particular through one, go furthermore by We one behavior. PA option about dialogue thoughts respondent’s the to connected was in ihtepooyeuaeadteevrneto h atcpnsi re ounderstand to order in connec- participants build the us of help environment design. to the our designed with and are issues usage questions possible un- The prototype questions basic PA, behavior. the includes PA increase a with It their to PA. get tions efforts about to previous us think their regards they help about if in inquires to PA, and participants designed towards the attitude is current of guide their situation regarding interview interviews current The qualitative the conduct of and guide. derstanding 3.3, interview table an in to shown according as usage, intervention questions. research during indi- our surements the answer to define help can to we evaluate reflection, to evaluate want to we approach measures appropriate and an cators found have we that Now Measures and Indicators ways which ogieteeauto frflcini u ok ewl s ohteprpcieo levels of perspective the both use will we work, our in reflection of evaluation the guide To eue yeomt odc h usinar 8] ahscinsatdwt short a with started section Each [89]. questionnaire the conduct to Typeform used We in changes indicate to used be can they that way a in themselves questions the chose We up-front short a with participants present will we research, our of part quantitative the For usage app how about questions with interview the continue we usage, prototype the After o h rttp,w rgamtclyipeetteatmtctkn ftcnclmea- technical of taking automatic the implement programmatically we prototype, the For al 3.3: Table vrg egho response of length Average answer text to time Average time usage Total Measurement u nevninpriiat reflected. participants intervention our ehia esrmnsfo nevninuaefrpooye1 prototype for usage intervention from measurements Technical contemplation reflection for conditions Background eieaeresponses deliberate o deep how and in Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. owr ncnetwt hsevrnetadipoespotfrteohrdeterminants. other the for support improve and environment this intervention with our subject designed concert mandatory We a in [90]. is work EU education to the physical in example, education general For compulsory abundant. full-time are throughout PA, neces- do the with to individuals skills providing basic behavior and PA sary PA, determinants of about environment the knowledge the increase for In to self-efficacy. questions interventions and change, answering -benefits on and barriers, focused perceived are attitude, of measurements and questions our par- that responses saved the from constructed be can or given. intervention, have the ticipants of usage the during ically theory- our of perspective the from usage during of approach. participants understanding backed on our had deepen intervention to our aims effects it the Furthermore, changes. measure to questionnaire up-front questionnaire. the of participants to visible not were background and classifications The Josef’s disliked neg- “I both Yes-saying. as and used No-saying reframed and of was order types biases appearance” the answer choice Josef’s reduce the answer liked to appearance.”) mixed the (“I further statements and We positive bias, and participant. forced-choice ative each a an for avoid had randomized to questions was Multiple-Choice reasonable where agreement. option regarding questions “Other” for Agree) Strongly Agree, Question elpesrdit on hsclactivity. physical doing goal. into personal pressured a feel reach I to activity? me physical helps do activity to physical you Doing triggers activity. what physical life, preferred daily my In at good I’m think time. I my worth is activity need. physical I Doing as exercise much as as get about I or active less active, age? more your persons help physically other to are as you active ) . that . Watch,. say Apple you (Fitbit, Would activity? wearable physical do or to app you an motivate use currently you Do gender? your born? What’s you were year what In address? e-mail your origin? What’s of country your is What h usinar rsne opriiat fe h nevninrpasqetosfo the from questions repeats intervention the after participants to presented questionnaire The hnloigbc torlgcmdlo hnea ato h Mpooo,i snoticeable is it protocol, IM the of part as change of model logic our at back looking When automat- taken are that measurements implement will we questionnaires, the to addition In perspective. research a from questionnaire up-front the for questions the shows 3.4 Table Undecided, Disagree, Disagree, (Strongly 5 to 1 from Scales Likert used we types, scale For al 3.4: Table pfotqetonie(loseAppendix) see (also questionnaire Up-front eea usin Demography & Questions General usin ocrigST&MI & SDT concerning Questions Demography Demography Demography Demography Structure Experiment Demography Background D autonomy SDT autonomy SDT autonomy SDT competence SDT autonomy SDT autonomy SDT 35 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. olo lctn oemitial Abhvo a emt f nteohrhn,teinter- behavior. 36 PA the long-term hand, resulting other the background, investigating the theoretical with on the continue If, then to can according met. work behavior be future for can the support behavior that implements PA unlikely successfully maintainable is vention it more technological background, a our theoretical eliciting if the of that of believe aspects goal We the even counts. support step to through fails as intervention such behavior, PA actual of tenance ol aepeerddsusn ypyia ciiywt ua rather human a with activity physical Josef. my than discussing preferred have would I me. towards supportive was Josef appearance. Josef’s use? disliked to I robot) (the Josef was easy/hard How activity. physical doing goal. into personal pressured a feel reach I to me activity. helps physical activity preferred physical my Doing at good I’m think time. I my worth is activity need. physical I Doing as exercise much as get I Question a niinmsl on n rsm fteenwalternatives. new these of some or one choices. doing activity myself physical envision previous can my I behavior. to activity alternatives physical new my considered about have think I and stop me made Josef talking before was it as same the Josef. perspective. still to new is a activity from physical towards behavior attitude activity My physical activity. my physical at do looked have to I reasons new find me helped Josef behavior. activity physical my about behavior. activity thinking physical from my me about discouraged thoughts Josef my structure me helped Josef utemr,i a entcal htw ontatmtt ietymauefrtemain- the for measure directly to attempt not do we that noticeable be may it Furthermore, odcodo responses of cloud Word responses text of length Average answer to time Average time usage Total Measurement al 3.6: Table usin ocrigST&M,Rpae rmfis Questionnaire first from Repeated MI, & SDT concerning Questions al 3.5: Table ehia esrmnsfo nevninuaefrpooye2 prototype for usage intervention from measurements Technical usin ocrigtedmnin freflection of dimensions the concerning Questions usin ocrigCniin o Reflection for Conditions concerning Questions oteprmn usinar as e Appendix) see (also questionnaire Post-experiment usin ocriglvl freflection of levels concerning Questions usin ocrigPersuasiveness concerning Questions etrudrtnigo responses of understanding better responses deliberate contemplation reflection for conditions Background eeto ee R3 level reflection R2 level reflection R3 level reflection encouragement structure relatedness SDT relatedness SDT Persuasiveness Persuasiveness autonomy SDT autonomy SDT competence SDT autonomy SDT autonomy SDT Background transformation transformation breakdown Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. al . hw noeve ftesuydtisw osdri eali hsscin The section. this in experiment for detail basis in the consider as served we Josef details of study prototype initial the the of of overview construction an shows 3.7 Table Expectations Experiment & Details Study 3.7 aeti vrl praht aeaqikrwyt hc u supin n ogtfeedback transcribed get We to implementation. and technical the assumptions using or our to interviews mapping check decided intervention the to our we way with them, issues quicker between of a case week have in a to participants. have approach the asked overall to on and this designed impact issues take an were any had sessions about intervention intervention’s out our done. ways our finding were which on While they in focus until determine again a us technical room with help the any interview to Then, left another questions if and did phone. passed check we their had quick step, days on few this a intervention a After did that the imagine we of When to session session, them intervention. told second first the we the the of initialized session finished and first they occurred the that problems completed known they it on the while prototype made For room the PA. opened they the to we regards left Then, in and Appendix. behavior the phone their in their given in and guide participant structure interview the the experiment’s started used about talk, the we learn small interview, some of to and interview overview introduction short the an after a and, presented with separately, have person each We met We 3.4. approach [96]. figure sampling convenience friends” a of with recruited “friends we group of target our in participants six with done oe oatmtclycetdtemaueet hw ntbe33 After 3.3. table in shown measurements the created automatically to Josef using hce httevle eeraoal nta sr a sg atrsta niae htthey app. that the indicated through that rushing patterns of usage instead had responses users their that contemplate in indeed reasonable did were values the that checked Convenience Sampling Convenience f4analyse N=6 9]b okn o atrsrltdt u eerhqeto.W programmed We question. research our to related patterns for looking by [92] f4transkript iue3.4: Figure Post-Experiment Interview Post-Experiment Pre-Experiment Interview Pre-Experiment n i hmtcaayi sn h rncit ecoded we transcripts the using analysis thematic a did and tutr fteexperiment the of Structure N=6 Prototype Session 2 Session Prototype Prototype Session 1 Session Prototype EX1 ~5 minute break ~5minute EX1 EX1 emanually we , . EX1 was 37 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar.

The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. so. doing in interest general a have and behavior PA their increase to able physically are who people in change behavior PA long-term elicit to aims that intervention computer-based a in reflection further to designed components of effects the are What tion Ques- Research 38 engineering. software and design, behavior persuasive of change, the health from perspectives in detail decisions de- sign all Document autonomy. further could re- which flection, support to used how be could technology Investigate techno- a intervention. logical in MI & SDT of combination the test Empirically Contributions ilgersossi database. a in all responses of dialogue Persisting 3.6. table in shown measurements technical automatic of implementation 3.5. Software and 3.4 tables to according Questionnaires Instagram,...). (Reddit, media social through invited participants 94 the with on internet published Josef of 2 prototype with 3.5 figure in shown structure the to according collection data (EX2) 2 Experiment database. a in all responses of dialogue Persisting 3.3. table in shown measurements technical automatic of implementation Software 3.4. figure in the shown to structure according Josef of 1 prototype using sampling convenience through found participants 6 with interviews (EX1) 1 Experiment collection. data quantitative and qualitative- with research Mixed-method Instruments & Sampling ouetto ncatr4. chapter in Documentation al 3.7: Table td details Study Quantitative : Qualitative : analysis. thematic to contribute to answers of overview text a show to tool Self-written and Generator Cloud Word using responses dialogue participant’s of analysis sentiment and cloud Word responses. questionnaire MI & SDT for analysis t-test Paired measurements. technical for statistics Descriptive responses. questionnaire for correlation rank-order Spearman and statistics Descriptive using EX2 manually. checked measurements f4analyse using analysis thematic with coded using transcribed Appendix), (see guide interview an using EX1 Analysis ncatr5ad6. and 5 chapter decisions in of Consideration sentiment ttsia analysis Statistical : conducted Interviews : Minitab f4transkript 9] Technical [92]. [95]. [93]. 9]and [91] [94] Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. oetra ead eetees u prahrsle n9 atcpnsfiln u h first promising the motivation, out filling own participants user’s experiment be 94 whole the might in the on ones completing resulted mostly external 39 approach and relies of of our questionnaire, Nevertheless, part instead it motivation large because reward. internal a regard external should fostering that no effect this novelty expected on in the We focus while hindrance the that, a group. favor, reasoned target We our the sessions. in both in be media complete people social not used find would and goal experiment users to the Our our of 3.5. ) parts . table all . Reddit,. completing in participants participants defined (Instagram, After 20 we least questionnaire 3.6. at have the table to presented in was we given sessions, as both measurements completed automatic had took we intervention, whole following: the in listed sepce,btcudwr ihmnrcags hs nune rmtefis experiment much first as the deviate from to influences need These not would changes. included: we minor that that changes with in determined work resulted could we but results, expected, first as the at looking After ra ykeigJsfi h tt ftedaou nigtefis eso ni eueascript a use we until week session one first this the implemented ending We dialogue the session. of first state the the after in week Josef one keeping of by break break a with sessions, two .Atmtcfradt nlqetonie2 questionnaire final to forward Automatic 9. 2 session e-mail Prototype “drop-out” a 8. send e-mail, previous to reaction 1 no session If completed have 7. that participants all to e-mails sent Manually 6. break week One 5. 1 session Prototype 4. 1 session prototype to forward Automatic 3. 1 questionnaire Up-front 2. study the to participants Invite 1. • • • • atcpnsfildotteu-rn usinar ehv ie ntbe34 uigthe During 3.4. table in given have we questionnaire up-front the out filled Participants For ewr ul xetn ocag u mlmnainapoc ut xesvl after extensively quite approach implementation our change to expecting fully were We elcn h eitainlgnapoc ihuigteemi nee uigteup-front the during entered e-mail the questionnaire using with approach registration/login the replacing questionnaires for support building one fixed dialogues a specific of of favor wordings in simplify session second the of date the break for week choice selector date a removing EX2 eue uniaiedt collection. data quantitative used we , EX2 ssrcuei iulzdi gr . and 3.5 figure in visualized is structure ’s EX2 eahrdt h eaainof separation the to adhered We . EX1 39 . Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. yortertclgonigo D,M,adrflcin h ttsia nlsswsconducted was analysis statistical The defined reflection. processes We and change 3.2. MI, the SDT, chapter using supported of in intervention grounding given our theoretical have our we that by change indicating of results model see logic to the expected to regards with participants fected osic otedaouso h eodssin netedaouswr ed o h second the for e-mail: by ready her were or dialogues him the informed Once we user, session. particular second a the for of session dialogues the to switch to l sdLkr clsfrteqetonie,wihueodnlvle ahrta continuous than rather values ordinal use 40 which questionnaires, heav- the we for because coefficient scales correlation Likert chose Pearson we used the correlation, ily over For coefficient them. correlation between relationship Spearman the the analyze to correlation rank-order man Shared Experiment Link SharedExperiment eaaye h usinar eut of results questionnaire the analyzed We Team Research Josef’s Regards, Best [here]. meeting! click next continue, your To for ready ago. your now week about is a Robot Josef behavior the activity Josef physical to meeting talked next you’ve your for Ready emoji]: Hi, [robot Robot the Josef Subject: Post-Experiment Post-Experiment Minitab Questionnaire 2 Questionnaire N=39 9] eue ecitv ttsisfralqetoniersossadSpear- and responses questionnaire all for statistics descriptive used We [93]. iue3.5: Figure Up-Front Questionnaire 1 Questionnaire Up-Front Prototype Session 2 Session Prototype tutr fteexperiment the of Structure N=94 N=42 EX2 osei hc asoritreto a af- had intervention our ways which in see to Prototype Session 1 Session Prototype Session 2 E-Mail 2 Session EX2 N=90 N=75 ≥ 7 Day≥ Break 7 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. nwr sefiue36 n olce oeeapeasesfrtetpc hteegdi the in emerged these that of topics overview the text for a answers show example from to more analysis tool collected thematic and software 3.6) a figure implemented (see We answers questions. open to answers rushed. not were average answers the the and that answer, indicating to values time see average to the expected app, behavior. we the new response, in the of time of length total maintainability as but not such increase, is measurements, motivation motivation the internal immediate For on high focus For in our motivation. since result reported though, to indicator, in primary meant increase a intended. slight not a as is see responses this to approach, their expected our we contemplate ruler, did change users to readiness if the see For to statistics descriptive the using analyzed as same the well on case, as our up-front in usage. as the intervention such after in ana- conditions, and for different both before useful two participant asked are under t-tests measured we Paired items same which analysis. the t-test MI, lyzing paired & a used SDT we questionnaire, to post-experiment variables. related between questions relationships linear, the necessarily For not but monotonous, expected and variables, hne nrgrst tiuetwrsP.Snew aesvrldcsost mlmn an implement to decisions several made we Since PA. towards attitude answers. to the regards of in sentiment mixed changes a and clouds word the in words “negative” and “positive” both EX1 lu with cloud iue3.6: Figure uigteitreto s,w uoaial rce erc ie ntbe36 hc we which 3.6, table in given metrics tracked automatically we use, intervention the During h eut o usin ocrigorpromneojcie eeepce oshow to expected were objectives performance our concerning questions for results The l nwr ie oJsfin Josef to given answers All eosre htpol a ie elnsaottercretP,adteeoeexpected therefore and PA, current their about feelings mixed had people that observed we , odCodGenerator Cloud Word xml upto olt hwrsodn etase vriw experiment overview, answer text respondent show to tool of output Example EX1 o ute nlsso h atcpn nwr ecetdaword a created we answers participant the of analysis further For . EX2 9]adddasmni nlssusing analysis semantic a did and [94] eeatmtclysvdi aaae ilig40text 420 yielding database, a in saved automatically were sentiment 9] In [95]. EX2 41 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. osdrdrltdtikn ohv curd o h iesoso eeto,w xetdto we expected improbable we more reflection, the of dimensions. reflection, dimensions three the of all For level in the agreement occurred. see higher have in to the background thinking is, related that complexity That increasing considered with the with processes. designed agreement involved in being drop the to structure of expected were dialogue reflection of the levels highest The the of were see mind. nature to but expected the were questions reflection with for related conditions agreement, The the questions. in related the increase in agreement slight a see suffice. would to period hoped intervention our we if skeptical approach, MI and SDT 42 ebitmcaim pcfial agtda uprigrflcin n hrfr expected therefore and reflection, supporting at targeted specifically mechanisms built We Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. bu h rnlto fateayssin n h ilge ntoessin,t technological a to sessions, those in consideration dialogues required the therapists intervention. and step human change session, first However, behavior therapy mapping’s a intervention. of the translation this Therefore, the in about sessions. MI of MI conventional use conduct our “Josef” Avatar discussed the previously Designing have We – Agents Artificial Persuasive 4.1 research. further and we decisions, study, other further potential should after decision adaptation about each reasoning if, technological documenting it, Even a us critiquing effects, designed. create with unintended have help we had to we decision that review approach particular ensure literature a change to that behavior further conclude tried the a to we conducted way, true the we is This of that perspective impactful, choice. the more our from for be judge make one Furthermore, to not help each expected background. at could we theoretical look we our that to that and decisions sure theme aware made supportive persuasive were we and theory, extent, positive we psychological intervention’s full Although bridge its to to decisions. decision us every intervention software required our practical this change Essentially, and behavior the design, impact users. potentially our could in one invokes each since decision, the each as of work our to intervention of change part behavior this our to for program. requirements refer software the will a behavior of We the transformation thorough implementing the solution. a i.e., and technological give “mapping,” designing a will with as we involved Now, intervention decisions change design protocol. in many intervention mapping the change intervention of behavior the account a proceeded following we to how way opportunity detailed identified design structured technologi- have an the a we a from document chapter, in approach last to MI our the and and developing In reflection SDT in endeavor. support of an to such combination used in the involved be test decisions can to technology need how a intervention, identified cal have we 2 chapter In hl negigti apn,w a otk ra aet aeasldunderstanding solid a have to care great take to had we mapping, this undergoing While Implementation CHAPTER 43 4 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ehooy[7 9] aiga gn htmthsorteeo en uprieadpositive and for supportive need being the computer of support to theme to socially our trying with matches respond line that people in agent Since was an having users. [98], our [97] with technology communication for agent artificial e.U. 4.1: Figure 44 “Josef”. avatar our named We intervention. our for avatar anthropomor- be [51]. non-anthropomorphic interventions simple to health that suggests for designed that beneficial specifically research be with not can line avatars are in support is interfaces attitudes finding to the and This motivations respond [102]. if personalities, phic” may even “attributing people are devices, People that inanimate found people. to are we they closely, [51]. if intelligence more as and topic computers emotions, movements, the bodily researching of when modeling requires Nevertheless, being human a of tion may theories, learning cognitive social [99]. to They learning according [101]. that, used. to [100] interaction contribute widely them social are for of avatars beneficial form human most a gener- interventions, provide the is health can not it technological are situation, other who that at agents in [99]. looking choose intuitive motivation When to seem promoting tend in might users success agents as its of unwise for choice ally factor a key with a users be providing to While shown was its agent on the decide of pearance to needed we agent, artificial persuasive play a can we create we Once to time, area. looks. need same this would the in dialogue ubiquitousness we At sophisticated and decided a anonymity, answers. have greater have the persistence, we of higher sure understanding of make strengths semantic our to a have lack to We human-to- we need a We since aspect. with system that 2.3. compete in section cannot session in systems therapy discussed computer-based human have since we relatedness environment support and carefully setting our in intervention it. ical with relationship supportive a build would people design, our to according ic ilgeipisa es w cos efl hti a aua odsg persuasive a design to natural was it that felt we actors, two least at implies dialogue Since epce hspriua itr farbtbcuei ace h oiieadsupportive and positive the matched it because robot an a as 4.1 of figure picture (see particular robot this a picked of We picture a use to decided we knowledge, newfound this With imita- the since challenging, is avatar anthropomorphic fitting a of creation the However, ap- the motivation, promoting of context the in first, at superficial seem might this While technolog- of advantages and issues the of aware be to had we decision, this in Especially Jsf,orprusv rica gn,knl rvddb ailBdr tinygraphy Bader, Daniel by provided kindly agent, artificial persuasive our “Josef”, relatedness sgvnb D.I h gn worked agent the If SDT. by given as Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. oigi sterscn hie edcddt s tfrJsf atcpn hieo color of choice Participant emo- on Josef. color of for effects it the of use perspective to the students from two decided also and we theme choice intervention first choice, our their second with it coincided their making students as three it with voting often, most picked choice got second choice, and first a make to them feedback them, asked gathered and to theme. other, theme we color the interventions the after Next, our for one explained them We elements. to design group. UI the target showed primary the our matching students for seven variations from color eight created We Selection Color SDT. by defined needs psychological innate the of one reason- cannot intervention our persuasiveness. hinder under- which complexity, would expectation, of fulfill, wrong sense ably This false a professionalism. conveyed have and might standing, and prominently aims more it and session makes that therapy robot Josef friendly and sessions. simple therapy a capacity. doing is limited are it of its that they in lack designed that users we distinct help users dialogues to This first to the fact of persuasive, the robot. one be stress in a to clear to intervention for our want for simplistic not because, and did choice essential we friendly an was looks robot It the in sophistication intervention. our of theme al . hw h akn ftecocs ic einnme ,abih lecolor blue bright a 8, number design Since choices. the of ranking the shows 4.2 Table is mentioned, as which, relatable, and persuasive avatar the make to was Josef a for to goal relation Our the highlighted have might hand, other the on avatar, human a of choice A iue4.2: Figure oo aitosfrJosef for variations Color 45 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. let odsoe hi w esn o hneadrltdesb en opsint [64]. compassionate allowing being by 46 by autonomy relatedness and compe- confidence, change for build for need and reasons the explore own is, their to That discover strategies SDT. to are by by clients strategies defined furthered these as be needs 2.3, could psychological section tence basic in the discussed fulfill summariz- previously to As listening, using argued reflective in [104]. affirming, practice informing/advising questions, in and open applied ing, asking by are as These supported such are planning. skills which and communication evoking, core evocation, its focusing, and At engaging, compassion, of [104]. acceptance, change processes partnership, to commitment of and principles motivation own are our person’s a transition. with strengthening this Especially for make style to care intervention. of great change mapping take to faithful behavior had a technological we create engineering, a to software to in was background step session this therapy technological in our MI with challenge interaction an main primary the The designed picture we dialogue. a how representation, discuss intervention—a visual will avatar’s we the Now, of robot. choice a our of into insight given have sections System last Dialogue The Interviewing Motivational Josef’s 4.2 in hr lei soitdwt mtossc s“euecmotbe n “tender/sooth- and “secure/comfortable” as such emotions with [103]. associated ing” is Blue where tion, is fal ervstdtecnesto tl sdi I claoaie conversation “collaborative” a MI, in used style conversation the revisited we all, of First S2 S1 Student S7 S6 S5 S4 S3 D8 D7 D6 D5 D4 D3 D2 D1 Design al 4.2: Table 3 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 Choices 1st of Sum D3 D3 Choice Design 1st # D8 D8 D5 D8 D5 al 4.1: Table akdclrdsg choices design color Ranked oo einchoices design Color 1 1 0 2 0 Choices 2nd of Sum 2 0 1 D2 D4 D2 D5 D8 D6 D8 Choice Design 2nd # Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ewe ed,w aeloe tti prahfo h esetv fprusv strategies persuasive of perspective the follows: from as intervention approach our this categorized have at We looked [105]. have we fields, between u ansuc nti tp ti sdt eemn o elo oryapattoe using practitioner a poorly or Autono- well Collaboration, how Evocation, determine score [106]: to to Empathy used scales and Direction, is using my/Support, by It was doing [106] is step. Integrity interviewing this Treatment motivational Interviewing in Motivational source The main dialogue. our actual our build to ued odn fec ilge ti otwiet okit hmmr lsl rmageneral a from closely more them into practitioner. MI look an as to work worthwhile potentially can is intervention It our how on perspective dialogue. each of wording • • • • • • • • • rnigti ocp akt u nevnintee n ofrhrtyt rdetegap the bridge to try further to and theme, intervention our to back concept this Bringing ihtegnrlteestfo h esetv fM n esaiesrtge,w contin- we strategies, persuasive and MI of perspective the from set theme general the With ehv sdti crn ytmt ug u eiin,epcal ntrso h actual the of terms in especially decisions, our judge to system scoring this used have We oiieRifreet esaeteue yadn oiiesiuu,rte hnby than rather stimulus, positive a adding stimulus. aversive by an user removing the Persuade Reinforcement: Positive than rather healthy, feeling as such motivators external. internal through user the Persuade Intrinsic: Josef, with case competition. our by in teamwork, than and rather cooperating through user the Persuade who authoritative Cooperative: or friend, trainer personal a strict as a therapist. than such a rather agent like goals, figure their neutral meet a to user through the user encourage the Persuading Non-Authoritative: letsprpcieadfeig.Ltrly o uhteciiinatmt o“r on” “try to the attempts grasp clinician to thinks. effort the or feels an much client makes how the Literally, or what understands feelings. clinician and the perspective which client’s to scale extent this The on scores Empathy: high MI. scales, of other use the better target Unlike reflect specific necessarily it. a not to on do tied focus directly appropriate concerns maintain or clinicians behavior which choices. to or degree behavior client’s The the Direction: control to client attempting fosters to actively opposed and as supports choice clinician of the the perception which in to extent useful The be Autonomy/Support: might that knowledge occurring have is interview whom the consideration. of under if both problem as partners, behaves equal clinician two the which between to extent therapeutic The the Collaboration: within client. motivation the this within expand mostly and reside elicit change, to motivation that interaction. efforts toward that move focuses understanding to clinician an ability conveys The the clinician and the change, which for to extent The Evocation: 47 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. n hi Abhvo,sc ssoighwmn tp otk rta hyhv k run 5km in a Proceeding have they 2.2. of that section scale or in the on take approach low that to rate criticized steps would already way many have this how We showing tomorrow. as for such planned behavior, PA their ing fitting. very is authoritative users. our in change of to motivation evoke to help opinions, could thoughts, sessions their past on even reflect or clients experiences, Letting opportunities. ample provides reflection using n u fadhwte att hneterbhvo,isedo etitn hmt pre-defined to them restricting users of help instead will behavior, we their dialogue, change the to want of paths. they design how our structured and With how if opportu- value. discussed out of have the find is we users reflection 3.6, offer of section to guidance In intervention or here. support the straightforward structuring seems Again, reflection for goal. nity the is choice of perception towards efforts 48 and sequence therapy: METM dialogue the with from intervention examples technological the and a building principles to when of them choices choice of our wording. translation a judge our to present and used now [108], we will We approach what system. shown has dialogue far so section This Detail in Sequence and Wording Dialogue provided sessions. it multiple since lasting use therapy for MI of of guide was example dependence, research an and clinical with particular, abuse us In a alcohol dialogue. with [108], individuals session (METM) high treating therapy Manual therapists MI be Therapy an could of Enhancement confidence implementation Motivational our faithful because the a helpful creating especially are examples were concrete we and These that options the dialogue use. “good” endeavor, of therapists find this to Network phrases us In of Interviewing for source “Motivational good Josef. a the were of [107] from Trainers” structure resources dialogue interviewing concrete motivational the various towards working continue can space, leave place. must perceive take design and to dialogue interpret moments Our users such our for agent. how facilitate, artificial of even an or because onto be understanding will project show a and will Josef with agent our working empathy time All behavior. same PA none. their the changing at towards follow while will users restricting, that feeling flow avoid programmed and to predefined enough lose dialogue the Collaboration • seilycmeca nevnin fe cieypoiesgetost sr o increas- for users to suggestions provide actively often scale interventions commercial the Especially and follow, we strategy persuasive the intervention, our of theme the at Looking hsmnindsrcuei u rmr nuneon influence primary our is structure mentioned This our focus to have will we answers, of understanding emotional of lack inherent an With is fal E tutrsteayit orssin hc r ae ntepae fthe of phases the on based are which sessions four into therapy structures MET all, of First we practitioner, MI an as intervention our judge can we how at looked have we that Now Empathy hs :Bidn oiainfrChange for Motivation Building 1: Phase ilb h raetcalnefru eas u ehooia nevninhas intervention technological our because us for challenge greatest the be will Evocation u praho oe sacoeaieadclaoaieaetisedo an of instead agent collaborative and cooperative a as Josef of approach our , ntecinsa neddb h cl.Ti meieti where is impediment This scale. the by intended as clients the on Autonomy/Support hr cieyfseigteclient’s the fostering actively where , Direction ewl edt design to need will We . Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. rce ihteitrcin hygtpeetdaohrcoc f“oyufe ed othink to ready feel you “Do clients of If ready.” choice you’re another whenever (no) presented X here get chose be they clients I’ll If interaction, fine. client. the “That’s the with utter, of proceed would choice Josef free question, the highlighting the selection, for yes/no a with quit to following one: next the the into to separated proceed and to purpose had confirms our METM user to the from the Luckily, rephrased expectations which by have approach. dialogues, clear step we our led set which of being to wording, explanation example persuasive of want a an expectation will give the We and with beginning process. come very change will the elicit clients therapist-directed to Some a them through client. step for the of desirable choice and free possible the be would it determination are, towards far users how our on statements. self-motivating Depending behavior behavior. their their change change to to done be might what for The Session First followthrough a if future for the for sessions sessions two two implement same the would redo We to needed. option two. is the first leave and the 2, on and 1 focus phase to decided we commitment, redo .Hwde htsud hl egtstarted? get we Shall you. sound? is that change does to How how is and 8. whether that decide of can all who with person do only you The what 7. but yourself, about information what of you lot tell a can you Nobody giving it. be does I’ll who 6. one the be will you changing, helping any about is all there is if Today But plan. exercise 5. an make to is though today do physical won’t present your we about What think you 4. help can I that hope together. I working be limited. very will we are how circuits about My little a 3. explain just behavior. me activity let physical begin, your we on Before you with 2. work to programmed I’m Josef. I’m Hi, 1. • • seilybcuepae3cnuesrtge rmpae n ornwmtvto and motivation renew to 2 and 1 phases from strategies use can 3 phase because Especially seilytels teac a nitrsigdsg hie eas tofr la option clear a offers it because choice, design interesting an was utterance last the Especially communicate and approach the for expectations communicate to want we session, this In rtsession first opeeyu oyu olntcag o fIwne to. wanted I if you change couldn’t I you. to up completely change. you make can nobody do; to changing. about think you do. to want might you anything, if what, consider and behavior activity Strategies Followthrough 3: Phase Change to Commitment Strengthening 2: Phase ol edsge ohl h let ei oeii huhs da,adplans and ideas, thoughts, elicit to begin clients the help to designed be would 49 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. h osqecso cinadiato yakn eea questions: several asking by inaction loop and or action of session consequences the the dialogue. with ready” you’re proceed whenever to . them . “. allows the to that back behavior?” them activity physical your about neatwt ort htapc hmevs aldte“edns ocag ue”[109]. ruler” change to “readiness the called themselves, aspect that rate to with interact ttmns eporme he ifrn olwu usin,dpnigo h atanswer: last the on depending questions, motivational self-determined follow-up elicit different to three and programmed reflect We to statements. opportunity important an users offers it stead, u nevninwudntb uhmr hnaprusv omt l u nta fapersuasive a of instead 50 out fill to intentionally form persuasive by a than design more reflection, much with Without be space. issue not problem would this the intervention our consider solve carefully We that reflection for both. mechanisms lacking creating more. intervention the once technological statements from a reflection. self-motivational reaction support in own to negating their approach a our hear with prevent to hand to in clients hand allow well goes or to as concept reluctance is This summary of goal the Elements The in client. statements. included self-motivational be client’s may the by resistance summarize changing and of repeat importance to the for argue to [109]. contradictions clients unexpected get with with them to comparison presenting effort not in talk “Why paradox”–an approach sustain this and “therapeutic validates than Techniques talk [111], as and rather change Strategies MI Interviewing talk Motivational than of change higher?”. talk practitioners express not sustain “Why active to from more patient express the responses prompts patients those lower?” when chosen have happen We to likely [110]. less is change that • • • • • • • • hncniun ihtessin efloe h rnil feiiigsaeet about statements eliciting of principle the followed we session, the with continuing When et odtriehwfri h rcs h sri,w rsne cl htuescould users that scale a presented we is, user the process the in far how determine to Next, tti on,i sntepcal motn o si h eutn au shg rlw In- low. or high is value resulting the if us for important especially not is it point, this At eeto sacr rnil eebcuei losu ocne nesadn n empathy and understanding convey to us allows it because here principle core a is Reflection used are They recapitulating. and summarizing of concepts mentions [108] METM The principle the on based is but surprising, be might lower?" not "Why of choice the Especially htwudsm ftebnfiso hnigbe? changing of benefits the of you? some to would important What this is Why described. just you what about Think change? to you for reasons be would behavior? What activity physical current your about feel you do How entl ed ocag,wa ubrbs eet o ed o r ttepresent the at is are 10 you and change ready to how ready activity? reflects not physical best your definitely number change is to what 1 time where change, 10, to to ready 1 definitely from scale following the On au -:Hge hnoe htsgo!Ayieswa ih as orconfidence? lower? your not raise Why might 7-10: what Value ideas Any good! that’s scale? one, the than on Higher higher 2-6: bit Value a move to take it would What 1: Value Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. hmra hi nwr nteronwrscudhl hmt aease akadlo ttheir at look and back step a take to lets them that level. help overview higher could concise every- a words a on from own with behavior their back participants in look answers Presenting to their session. user read the the them during allows said summary was This that thing statements. reflection connected the and ”. . you . be. for would reasons from be change would to blocks For “What reasons “Your question building sessions. the was future the to change?” in answer to are the responses for These past statement interweave reflection and our dialogue. summaries example, automatic that build for can we statement which reflection pre-written a and written reflection: manual support and to summaries, mechanisms automatic main statements, three reflection use summaries. We with answers space. user problem recording the for designed agent utemr,ti sJsfswyt vi iitrrtto n sepce ontb o tedious too be summary. not automatic to the expected after is thoughts. right and and users misinterpretation revelations avoid our closing to for down way write Josef’s to is chance this a Furthermore, participants giving words, own their in • • tteedo ahssin eso natmtcsmaycnitn fteue’ answers user’s the of consisting summary automatic an show we session, each of end the At provides user a answer every records Josef answers, one’s on reflecting for basis the As ih fe h uoai umr,Jsfak atcpnst rt umr ftesession the of summary a write to participants asks Josef summary, automatic the after Right e epa aksm ftetig o said. you things the of some back play me Let o ol o umrz htyuv said? you’ve what summarize you would How iue4.3: Figure Cbosrdaou xmlsfrteatmtcsummary automatic the for examples dialogue browser PC 51 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 52 closes and period, one-week fixed note. positive a a of favor on in session prototype first second the the with removed we dialogue • fe h aulsmay oe ssteue o odtm o h eodssin a session, second the for time good a for user the asks Josef summary, manual the After hn o o h fotyuhv hw oa.Wudi eueu oceki ihme with in check to useful when? so, be If it Would doing? are today. you shown how have review to you again effort the for you Thank iue4.4: Figure mrpoedaou xml o h aulsummary manual the for example dialogue Smartphone Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. imn ocag.W tr ywloigteue akadstigteue expectation. user the setting and back user the welcoming by start We change. to mitment the In Session Second olwdb oeqetosta olwtepicpeo lctn ttmnsaotteconse- the about statements eliciting of principle inaction. the and action follow of that quences questions more by followed The participant’s the in one. session. changed last automatic have the may the since what on present behavior point and to of starting thoughts lack a we provide Josef’s session’s were to by last helps occurred alienated summary the have be manual of might to words participants that own for his/her understanding chance in semantic the user reduces the approach remind This to discussion. summary automatic the of instead hi urn eair eoehglgtn h oiieapcso hnigterbhvo.We with behavior. sticking their user of change. changing aspects the to of negative commitment negative benefits the aspects a for the at positive furthering look continue the asks with a then highlighting up Josef take before follows to case, behavior, then participant current this the It their In get to behavior. time PA structure. answers last the dialogue past mentioned changing the of not interweaving of of this goal use consequences the We furthers reflect. it to whenever opportunity another offering session, first • • • • • • • • h ilgecniusb iigteopruiyt eeto h iesnetels session, last the since time the on reflect to opportunity the giving by continues dialogue The it use We summary. user’s the back playing by reflection for opportunity the offer we Next, ntels teac,w lybc h srsase otebnfisqeto eakdi the in asked we question benefits the to answer user’s the back play we utterance, last the In prcaetemtvto o aeptit hspoestdy n mhpyt e you see to happy am and today, process this into put then! have you motivation the appreciate I oa,Il epyut hn bu orpyia ciiybhvo oemr,adhow and more, some behavior look. activity could physical changing your towards steps about first think so the to process you this help into I’ll put Today, have you motivation the appreciate I again! far. you see to good It’s eeswa o odm attm nwa h eet fcagn ol efryou. for be would changing of benefits the what on time last me told activity you physical what Here’s your changing not of consequences negative behavior? possible be behavior? would sports your What to regards in go days last your did How entl ed ocag,wa ubrbs eet o ed o r ttepresent the at is are 10 you and change ready to how ready activity? reflects not physical best your definitely number change is to what 1 time where change, 10, to to ready 1 definitely those from reach scale to following take the could On you that you for step achievable and benefits? specific a be would What eodsession second ihJsf ewn ofcso hs fMT teghnn h com- the strengthening MET, of 2 phase on focus to want we Josef, with 53 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. rmtefis eso,adakamr endflo-pqeto eedn nteue’ answer user’s the on depending conditionals: question of follow-up order refined following more the a in ask and session, first the from umr rmteue,adedn h eso napstv note. positive a on are. session the still ending they and hope user, the we matter. from the scale, summary into the deeper on dive the current users high on their help previously higher and know be were accordingly will also they react they we If can session, Josef first but session. Regardless, the change, in second scale to this the readiness in on scale low of were terms they in if Preferably, started situation. user the where know luino oe sa gn ihudrtnig oi ewl aeacoe oka nsection system. in dialogue at the look of closer construction 54 a technological the take at will a look we offer a topic to take a the when will understanding, up of we keeping with Next, choices with agent Wise 4.3. helps an what second. as are the Josef answers in of previous on illusion and reflect topics which can on users gather opportunity that to reflection need session the first by the caused is in circumstance data This reflection. for opportunities effort. more less substantially with chosen, approach have similar we a wording flexible with the designed of be Because could two. sessions and further one session as strategies same the uses • • • • • • • • • • hstm,we rsnigteraiest hnerlr ecnlo ako h response the on back look can we ruler, change to readiness the presenting when time, This ecoetessinjs ietefis,b iigteatmtcsmay eusigamanual a requesting summary, automatic the giving by first, the like just session the close We we do only Not information. more with us provide does scale the to answer the time, This okn akoe h ilgeotoso h eodssin ti paetta eoffer we that apparent is it session, second the of options dialogue the over back Looking MET of 3 phase because mainly sessions two only with Josef implement to chosen have We l te ae:Wa ol ttk omv i ihro h scale? the on higher bit a move to take it would What cases: changes? other those All making about feel you do changes? How those 8-10: making Value about Current feel you do to How happen Value: to Current have < Value would time? Last think last you from Value) do (Last thing the one to What back you 1): get + Value (Current on higher > Value bit Last a move to take it would What scale? Answer: Last the < Value Current 1-8, Value to from now?” Last ready Value) go (Current being you a not did to How from time changing. went last Value) about you (Last thinking like a to sounds behavior activity it physical So your 6-10: change Value Value)?” Current (Current 1-4, a ambivalent Value change to Value) Last being to (Last a need from from you go went thinking you did you longer How no like behavior. activity to sounds physical behavior your it activity physical So, your 1-3: changing Value about Current 4-6, Value Last ’ ldyuto ortm ihm,adhp ol epyurflc n hn about think and reflect you help could I hope and me, behavior. with activity physical time your your took you glad I’m said? you’ve what summarize you said. would you How things the of some back play me Let Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. uvs[1] qipdwt h kthssoni gr . n .,w rae h following the created we 4.6, open and and 4.5 features figure elements: friendly in dialogue having shown of sketches time types the same with the Equipped at [112]. but curves forms, input. geometric agree/disagree with intuitive designed very shows mainly a 4.6 as Figure well adequately. as 4.2 scales section of types from different dialogues the with our playing using translate us situation. to when same need answers the might in sensitive we recording modes type voice a still make might to more wanting one not for example, while allowing would subway, input, for text the media in typing is, other intervention that (e.g., than That was users device advantage our user’s use. Another of environments the ubiquitous that microphone). and for or settings was requirements more Furthermore, camera decision in a technological work this favorable. need fewer even more was of yields not be factor utterances do input would deciding the we text responses main for text to both The intervention, limitation only, our a text options. allowing of use response text evaluation of to to the idea the decided addition for the as we in with well prototype, videos, playing as initial or were the photos, Josef we For recordings, phase, voice 4.5). as design for (figure such this way media in a different and Early with question, responses statement, respond. a to pose users to capability our the require dialogues intervention’s Our Interface User following. con- the Dialogue crucial in ours a give it therefore, consider will, We and choices omitted. those often exemplify circumstance are to This work them future for decisions. to explanations tribution these why of reason this some one to be for connection might The complicated intricacies. rather interven- construction is technological and grounding a change decisions psychological behavior as design our intervention of for diversity the background a of involves theoretical implementation tion solid technical a have actual to The is work approach. this of part significant A System Dialogue the of Design Technical • • • • • • • • • o h etisl,w eie ouetefn Rbt” eeoe yGol,Rbt was Roboto Google, by Developed “Roboto”. font the use to input decided we various itself, for text the concepts For the with proceeded we method, input the on decided Having igeRflcin:Saeet hwn atase fteuser. the of answer past a showing session. Statements the Reflections: summarize Single to user the for possibility answer Text Reflections: Manual session. the of responses up answer. Summed scale Reflections: ruler Automatic readiness the on depending 10. question to follow-up 1 A from Response: scale Scale a on moved be can that ruler Readiness Scales: possibility. answer text Multi-line Questions: Open confirm/deny. to need users that Questions answer. an Questions: Yes/No require not do that Josef from statements Dialogue Statements: intervention; the for registering for Input Registrations: 55 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. lsrcnrlo h o hog h nevnin loigfrmr n-rie ecin to reactions fine-grained more for 56 allowing intervention, the bring through would flow answers the pre-determined can Furthermore, of we control ones. respond. since to pre-defined closer cases, user to these the types in as favorable for response designed be asking the would we are limit questions 4.2 we closed types, elements standpoint, element dialogue evaluation multiple an the For From as it. well of as realization 4.2 technical structure the dialogue our shown have We Design Response User • • aeQetos lo o ieaddt nu,eg,frtedt ftenx session. next session. the a of for date statements the Closing for Endings: e.g., input, date and time for Allow Questions: Date iue4.5: Figure lyn ihteie falwn nu fdfeetmdatypes media different of input allowing of idea the with Playing Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. pnqetossneti prahi evl sdi I[62]. MI in used heavily is approach this since questions open choice [64]. multiple questions open with asking approach of structured importance a the using underline this they although implemented questions, Move I answers. user’s the nipratdsg eiindrn hspaewst ev ml pc o epne to responses for space ample leave to was phase this during decision design important An eainhp n nigacerdrcin pnqetosas lyakyrl in role key [104]) a ( play change. also toward questions course a Open planning and direction. motivation clear evoking a collaborative a finding strengthening help and reference, questions of relationship, open frame processes, internal important person’s focusing most the and the understand engaging not to the is In information gathering questions. MI, of In function answer. usually short can a that and as information reflect offered specific to for be ask person contrast, the in invite questions, that Closed those questions, elaborate. open of use particular makes MI iue4.6: Figure ocpso nu modes input of Concepts 57 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. bevdb ikoee l [113]. al. et Bickmore by observed nwa h eet fcagn ol efryu”wt h srsps response. past user’s the 58 with time you.” last for me user be told the would you of changing what answers of “Here’s past benefits showing back the as play what such further on element, can dialogue We physical reflection your answer)”. single to user’s regards our (the “In with would as . behavior?” text . reflection activity that. our feel physical with you current summary activity, automatic your the about in short feel back pre-defined played example, you For get We to do direction. question “How user. provided open question and an the reflection dialogue to to for response the opportunities past back offered a play approach show This to could user. used we the we which that text,” way “reflection call distinct we a sentences in [109]. it questions therapist. put open the Sobell to by direction. and client Sobell unrestricted the as and to stories.”, back their detail reflected tell more be to can clients in that allow answers dialogue questions further Open-ended their promote about to is think goal to “The users inviting of favor eyn oeyo lsdqetosmgtee eprevda iie ytecins as clients, the by limited as perceived be even might questions closed on solely Relying ob bet iuaeayudrtnigo oe,w eie orcr srresponses user record to decided we Josef, of understanding any simulate to in able question be To open an to response a of understanding full of lack a accepted we Josef, For rmapriiato reo fepeso nacntanditrcin[113]) interaction constrained a in Response expression to of response freedom (In could on she question. I participant Or another and a explain. with never question from through could a follow I ask But or would up, .. She follow four. never screen. three, two, the programmed one, on was choice, put She a you have answer. would that to questions the programmed to was listen agent] to [relational she that felt I iue4.7: Figure mrpoedaou xmlsfrsae e/oadstatement and yes/no scale, for examples dialogue Smartphone Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. prah u eierqieet r oprbymnmlsi.Teeoe o oe,w de- different we completely Josef, a for on Therefore, work a minimalistic. to create comparably aims to are intervention cided requirements our device Since PA. our track approach, that sensors for need [20]. solved be to still challenges many with [118], inconclusive remains them. influence that experiences downtime—moments interactive of to to moments other users open or be allows schedules may that their they in convenience where gaps high Smart- in intervention in [37]. our resulting context in with and responsive, part help take time and could right available offers the always smartphone at are available a phones being connectedness by and behaviors mobility and the attitudes particular, influencing In value. of be ute edt xiigrsac eut ic hr sarpre eln nahrnet app- to [117]. adherence [116] in work decline our could with reported tackle app a to an try is as we there intervention issue since an our - results Offering interventions research smartphone based motivate [115]. exciting to healthcare to clinical, tool to lead as a access as further such serve limited uses may have using of and of who effective range approach is users wide the apps a Furthermore, in techniques for [115]. change potential settings behavior rehabilitation the and have health, Apps public preventive, [19]. and [114] can ubiquity we that about as goals persuasive Two as intervention. being our are of platform the the needs to the of ubiquity. regards to combination supporting in specific any theme choice a to intervention this from lab our make span match a to choices in need The machine We intervention. specialized haveabove. technological We website, our visualization. app, of their smartphone platform designed pedometer, target and the dialogues defined the structured yet have not we sections, last the In Platform Target more Technical a to them lead hopefully mecha- would this it encounter answers, never the would changing through mind. they without rush of answer, that to frame each try thoughtful after would for question they time next if take the relevant to but users to feels nism, input If continue that confirm to more answer. to choose an something initial tries still displays there the could user Josef Is Users question, a answer. particular If you?”. your that to about for seconds. “Think TTA 10 of configured statement of the ap- additional than default our faster a sec- to question with in adverse open (TTA) question be time-to-answer an would open minimum behavior configurable each a Such for create onds proceed. to decided to we answers Therefore, short proach. provide to urge the feel tr h rtssino hi mrpoeadd h eodo hi C raycmiainof combination any or PC, might their They on second participate. the to do choose and they smartphone two. time their the the on at session them first choose of to the to “best convenient users a start most our is allowing inclusiveness is and This that intervention laptop. platform our or of the PC reach a the on increasing browser approach, web worlds” regular both a as well as smartphone a n esnwysm nevnin edt eiet u xlsvl nasathn sthe is smartphone a on exclusively run to decide effectiveness to need their interventions to some why regards reason in One PA encouraging in smartphones of role the Nevertheless, ntrsof terms In thinking when mind to come lives, daily people’s in use widespread their with Smartphones, would users if wondering were we questions, open on relying heavily intervention our With persuasiveness epniewbapp web responsive etn sr aigpr nteitreto nterpoecould phone their on intervention the in part taking users letting , loigteitreto ob ovnetyue ohon both used conveniently be to intervention the allowing , 59 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 60 adn h eeto ffeig.Nt hti hscnet eetosrfrt h teacsof utterances the to refer reflections context, this listening: reflective in during that therapist Note the feelings. of [119]. reflection world will the inner garding client her or the his that of notes under- reflections further therapist’s as Roger’s the understanding whether of [120]. ascertain testing correct to accurate is is perceive experience Rogers, therapist subjective to the the according of goal, of perception The standing the revise accurate. every to tech- not where client feelings is the the of it of to reflection if invitation misconstruction of that implied a conception clear an interactional as include made fully must utters is a reflection client be it the should [119], it what listening Instead, of reflective nique. repetition on mechanical work a Roger’s saw Carl Roger’s on look Arnold’s Kyle In Agent Artificial Persuasive a in setting. Listening therapy Reflective regular a in [104], MI in skill core a mind. listening, in reflective goal of this with user- designed showing deliberately and was user, moments the opportune of offering at answers of summaries previous mechanism written offer of Our to reflections answers. moments presenting previous the illusion summaries, and choosing The topics automatic carefully specific deliberately. by on supported reflection reflection is support Our for understanding to opportunities with was intervention. agent hand an the as at of Josef topic environment of the the for about choice limited knowledge important a and to most properties design these careful possesses intervention through our degree like appearing by disbelief of suspension conditionals This some empathy. are prac- programmed. nor human statically understanding there a semantic mostly to while neither has be intervention has that, can technological titioner—Josef apparent our it contrast answer, now starkest user’s the is the highlights back- It circumstance on theoretical depend the that mind. with utterances system in dialogue and approach a our constructed we of how ground shown have sections last The Empathy lacking Agent Artificial Persuasive a in Reflection 4.3 .Rflcin a esfs hnsupe u fmtra rw rmtecin’ remarks, client’s the from drawn material of out sculpted when safest be may Reflections 4. implicit the include must they Accordingly, dialogue. empathic an of part are empathy. Reflections and acceptance 3. of attitudes therapist implement congruently expressed, must Reflections has client 2. the what of essence emotional the to directed be should Reflections 1. rodcnldswt ito lnclrcmedtos itle rmRgr’wr re- work Rogers’ from distilled recommendations, clinical of list a with concludes Arnold understanding the at look to need we closely, more choices these of effect the understand To with help to attempt can we However, facets. its all in issue this solve completely cannot We vr fteepti ilgehsavne otepitta letadteaitaein are therapist and client that point How- the expressed. to yet advanced not client, has has the client dialogue in the emerge empathic that to the attitudes begun if and already ever, feelings have to that referring insights than develop rather further they when and experiencing, felt inner client’s the needed. with if accuracy them their correct check to and to client the for invitation issues. particular to than rather experiencing, emerging their of sense felt client’s the to and n Understanding and Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eeto.Nwta ehv ie u eindcsosi eal ecntk lsrlo at look closer a take can we of detail, dimensions in the decisions and design perspective. reflection, consid- our this of given from of levels have them approach the we our that reflection, and Now for reflection conditions reflection. evaluating and of purpose challenge the the ering introduced has 3.6 Section Josef with Reflection Support to Decisions Design further 5), structure good in A suggested made. as reflections 7). it the supporting of While of with congruence frame expressed. the helps yet improve empathetic to not an structure has simulate use client as can cannot the we remarks mind, something own a client’s to the lacking refer using summary intervention, to cor- but risk our manual make anything the do our to obviating cannot them showing 4), We allows by First, 6). and suggested summary and theme 3) automatic list. by chosen own above suggested Our their as the rections write work. of to can 2) clients/users agent with allowing our line before which in in are ways strategy meaningful persuasive for look can we agent, in is n oeot edcddt raeJsfa epniewbapwt 1 While the D1. 4.2, with in app described web as responsive persuasiveness, Josef’s a to as regards Josef in create advantages to many decided has decision we this foremost, and First deliberate tion. a with one each further introduced to have D0. introduced decision we we design regard, mechanic in this purpose each in While differently serve [68]. might uncertainty reflection of resolutions with helping or .Rflcin hudntitrutteflwo h letsprocess. client’s the of flow the interrupt reject not or should amend Reflections to 7. client the allowing form, provisional in couched best are Reflections 6. empathic an cultivate may therapist the reflections, use effectively to position a in be To 5. al 4.3: Table hl ecno oefrti et frflcielseigfo u rica persuasive artificial our from listening reflective of depth this for hope cannot we While eeto a ev ifrn upss uha moeig uprigself-development, supporting empowering, as such purposes, different serve can Reflection utpedsg eiin eemd ohl ihcetn h ih odtosfrreflec- for conditions right the creating with help to made were decisions design Multiple hm ahrta elrtv one. declarative a than rather them, and, incongruent be may reflections absent, effective. be is to attitude unlikely underlying are this therefore, If mind. of frame explicitly has client the what to unrelated appear may may that said. understandings remarks therapist trance), as (=empathy naturally consciousness emerge of state altered shared, a 3Pstv od norgn Dialogue Encouraging Mood, Positive D3 Dialogue Structured D2 Multi-Platform D1 Purpose Chosen D0 Decisions Design eindcsoswt ead oteproeo,adcniin o,reflection for, conditions and of, purpose the to regards with decisions Design odtosfrReflection for Conditions Reflection of Purpose Aspect 61 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. eto oe uprs ecnlo notedsg eiin ospottedfeetlvl of levels different the support to decisions design the into look reflection. can we and supports, reflect Josef to flection reason a with users provide to basis so. do the to establishes encouragement this them since prompts one Josef supportive cases, and such in back step a answers take dialogue to succinct users hypothesized to to encourage we lead To D1, could in situations. web-app decided certain responsive behavior. approach in an their app as about to web implementation thinking user responsive Josef’s them the the that keep for of to enough flexibility enough open given being closed the but by With this needs, for their backbone to questions dialogue the according the provided answer of 4.2, structure The section D2. in in given reflection itself, for support location, needed the physical provide to of chosen regardless 24/7, later. Josef continue to with session Josef session a makes a pause this even start setup, can can PC and user desktop regular A therapy a planned, flexible. on physical, intervention incredibly a intervention computer-based with our a Compared even means reflect. or choice to session, time its have because users reflection our whenever to available regards is in important equally is platform ecie.Wyi hsipratt o?.Sc usin r eindt hleg personal just challenge you 62 R3. to respective what designed reflection about transformative are for “Think questions answers Such and with thoughts up you?”. provoke may following to and important before assumptions this change?” “What is inquires, to Why Josef you example, described. for For reasons questions questions. Josef’s be fundamental of Some would dif- about from R2. think it reflection approach to dialogic and as participants topic categorized user prompt a be about can the think such, guide to as to users and angles help designed ferent to implicitly and is reflecting of dialogue process Josef’s the MI, through in lays described therefore approaches and the R1, Given and R0 levels reflection. into of falls levels behavior higher potentially for their and the basis thoughts for answer the their reasons users describe give Letting to to structure. option so dialogue’s them the answer, the evoking them each fitting giving remembers when restrictions, Josef users without the question. to questions each back to played customized be time can requir- specific it by may a answers answers take in-depth user’s to more the encourages users Josef While ing elaboration, question. further your without closed to answers regards a short in asking be go of days last instead your behavior?” did activity “How inquire, physical might Josef example, For in-depth. answer really o htw aegvntedsg eiin eadn h ups n odtosfrre- for conditions and purpose the regarding decisions design the given have we that Now positive a as theme intervention the of choice the during mainly influential was D3 Decision was questions, dialogue of serious a through lead is user the where system, dialogue Josef’s edcddt aeJsfsdaou n h sdwrigo D n Ii eiinD5. decision in MI and SDT on wording used the and dialogue Josef’s base to decided We to users for allowing dialogues, the in questions open uses Josef D4, decision design With hn bu hi nwri ehns ehv ecie ndti n4.2. in detail in described have we mechanism a in answer their about think 6PaigBc eoddAnswers Recorded Back Playing D6 Dialogue Theory-Backed D5 Questions Open D4 Decision Design al 4.4: Table eeso eeto n hi upr yJosef by support their and reflection of Levels R0 X R1 X R2 X R3 X X R4 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. o eeto,dsge o rvdn h eesr odtosfrrflcin n aedesign reflection. made of and levels reflection, higher reaching for with conditions participants necessary support the to providing decisions for to designed decided reflection, we for and reflection. of [26], levels rare lower very the reach reportedly to is participants reflection helping on of a focus level is this such, Reaching as and implications. assumptions, previous R3. own, level their on may questioning reflection perspective, further to providing to of basis decision purpose a design the having serves them context new to a lead in participant’s answers previous the their in pants changed have may what session. on last the point thoughts. since starting and behavior revelations a and closing provide thoughts down to write to helps chance level. summary a higher The participants a giving from words, behavior own own their their their at in in look and answers back their step said. read a was them take that to lets everything them on that help back overview could look concise words to a users with allows participants end session’s Presenting a at reflect shown to summary used matic are mechanisms These D6. answers decision past of interwoven part answers. and as previous 4.2, summaries, on section manual in summaries, detail in automatic described of mechanism the in codn oteronnes eiinD,teeoe ae omfrtransformations. questions for asks room them makes answer Josef therefore, and while D4, differently Even Decision them needs. comprehend own so. write can their do users should to intention, they can according and that they stance feel them, particular and to a answer, relevant with partic- their feels If about that conceptualizations. thinking different down while with something wander approached mind be their can that let emphasized design ipants freely different a questions with having dialogue approached of design Josef’s point when the answer the useful) that people and/or requires Letting usable then, perhaps [71]. or conceptualizations.” (and transformation, stance comprehensible single) for least (i.e., Designing at particular be a situation. embodies trans- a often for however, of designing design, that conceptualization “A mentions but, Baumer hard; answers. is predefined formations to participants limiting of stead [71]. Baumer by given as transformation, and inquiry, breakdown, reflection, of ncnlso,w aeahrdt lc n izarc’ udlnsb ttn purpose a stating by guidelines Fitzpatrick’s and Fleck to adhered have we conclusion, In broader the on reflecting critically R4, level support to decision design a made not have We partici- Showing structure. dialogue the in interwoven are answers past session, a During session the of summary a write to participants asks Josef summary, automatic the after Right auto- The reflection. of levels the of perspective a from mechanisms those at look us Let used provides, user a answer every records Josef answers, one’s on reflecting for basis a As et ewl aealo tordsg eiin rmteprpcieo h he dimensions three the of perspective the from decisions design our at look a take will we Next, ehv rvosydsusdhwJsfak pnqetoswt eindcso 4 in- D4, decision design with questions open asks Josef how discussed previously have We 6PaigBc eoddAnswers Recorded Back Playing D6 Dialogue Theory-Backed D5 Questions Open D4 Decision Design al 4.5: Table upr o h iesoso eeto yJosef by reflection of dimensions the for Support Breakdown X Inquiry X X Transformations X 63 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ltomo ytm n pt-aebosrcnfll u ed.Ti icmtnemeans circumstance This a to needs. specific our features fulfill low-level 64 can need browser not up-to-date do Any we because system. effort or this platform in helpful is circumstance setting, this would in [124] Even Blackberry app. or Android [123] Phone the excluded. Windows for be as Kotlin such and share of app, market negligible iOS choice with the the platforms for e.g., Swift involve, was in website, could software prototypes scenario the same a for our Such the PHP creating implementations. of native mean as creation could languages platforms programming the multiple multiple to Supporting 4.2. regards in in given platform, decision influential most The Frameworks and Languages, Programming our Platforms, of implementation technical the present to need intervention. we change science, behavior computer and psychology as communi- tech- network of and choice persistence, the data cation. change involves frameworks, behavior endeavor languages, our This programming the translate system. platforms, at to technical nical efforts looked usable, our have actual, introduce an we now into and can intervention We defined, detail. is in implementation decisions technical involved our supporting reasoning The Prototyping Technical 4.4 question, another. one in in behavior behavior topics changing changing approaching of of by effects benefits negative possible idea ar- possible for the this and asking follows and as dialogue measures such angles, ballot Josef’s different state from statements. opposing those or exten- inquiry, support supporting of and to either context exploration guments the statements in for shows example hand that another as system at reflection [122] a a ConsiderIt problem gave presents includes the Baumer Baumer which to [121]. example al., [71] related rel- sion” et reference information are Arias a “present[ing] they by resembles for described if design space design questions civic This to collaborative be answers inquiry—a can structure. past for they dialogue’s shows Josef, the sessions, Josef follow-up with for during inquiry. session evant them with previous displays involved a Josef steps in when important revised hypotheses decision or formed design re-examined, has with tested, participant reviewed, summaries a user-written Once and automatic showing D6. by and answers previous opportunities further up opens for and hypotheses inquiry form of D6. not to dimension decision might them the design they with helps for that step approach essential This one an supports directly. topic, behavior, asked so MI specific their not Doing of a if behavior. about principles about PA knowledge think the their existing consciously of follow their aspects closely re-examining particular questions in about them Josef’s think to inquiry. participants help for and support the influenced D5 ehv rvosymnindtelc ftcnclrqieet o u nevnin This intervention. our for requirements technical of lack the mentioned previously have We such contribute, fields multiple where setting a in contributes work or because Especially interweaving by users to back them plays and answers records Josef how discussed have We decision in chosen have we theories particular the and basis theoretical a have to choice Our Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. loe st eal ocet evrbcedi h aepormiglnug fneeded, if language programming same the in backend and server prototypes a of create friction. to development reducing able efficient be promised to write They to us change allowed and use [127]. can software we that application-specific functionality generic providing abstractions are frameworks well-documented and popular of choice exhaustive [125] respondents 4.8: Figure web CSS, modern of in HTML, stack uncommon as not technological is development. a such knowledge of even combined knowledge possibly this number Nevertheless, tangential and high development. testing, requires backend a tools, It learn- with build The managers, [126], package 4.8). involved In frameworks, [125]. figure rather sector website. (see is that regular development technologies in fairly JavaScript related popularity a modern enormous create of can gained curve we has ing which (.js) JavaScript with language years, programming recent any use can we ecoeJvSrp eas trn nams n rwe,adteeoepafr,hsan has platform, therefore and browser, any almost in runs it because JavaScript chose We once ehooisfo h 08SakOeflwsre ih> 100,000 >= with survey Overflow Stack 2018 the from technologies Connected frameworks n cetbetoig Software tooling. acceptable and 65 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 20 19 17 16 14 13 11 10 21 18 15 12 3 2 1 8 5 9 7 6 4 h rttopoete r fitrs oordaou ytm eu,i un ok elwith well describe works which actions, turn, with in Redux, system. especially dialogue case, our our to interest In [132]. of [131]. React are flexible properties and two debuggable, first centralized, the predictable, being as itself nte eaki h aedaou.Frhroe ehv cin o srmngmn,such showing management, user and for dialogue, actions in. a at have logging we dialogues answering and Furthermore, intervention’s all registering dialogue, dialogue. setting our as next same as of the the such applies core in to dialogues, remark the state, proceeding handling another given for application for have start, actions current We have application the We the state. takes 4.1. application reducer listing new in the a reducer essence, returns and its action, In the state. application our tt addaou) ehv rcsl n tt otasto o(etdaou)freeyuser every for dialogue) (next to transition to state one current each precisely from input. have that we meaning answers. machine, inter- dialogue), related state the Our (and finite “go and deterministic state system they a website. dialogue is the if the itself in even system closing progress dialogue the or users, The is app saved our be the of to backgrounding data progress primary by vention’s the e.g., saving sessions, with in-between deals away” intervention our for Persistence Communication Network and Persistence Data the in discuss will which intervention, our state for with symbiosis factor following. in important well offers, an works ecosystem React technologies, React Furthermore, management the cycles. examples development programming faster and with documentation helping of amount sheer the by eoestln for settling before 66 switch ihRdx u plcto tt ssoe sasnl bet oiyn htojc sdone is object that Modifying object. single a as stored is state application our Redux, With let hscnetwrswl with well works concept This uigtedcso rcs,w aebitpooye using prototypes built have we process, decision the During } case ettt state; = nextState case case case case case ato.ye { (action.type) ettt innsae cinue,action.data); action.user, signIn(state, break = nextState action.user); register(state, break = nextState action.feedback); feedback(state, break = nextState action.answer); answer(state, break = nextState ettt next(state); break = nextState action.dialogues); setDialogues(state, break = nextState "SET_DIALOGUES": "SIGNIN": "REGISTER": "FEEDBACK": "ANSWER": "NEXT": ; ; ; ; ; ; React.js /poedt h etdialogue next the to proceed // /ue login user // dialogue the to answer an record // /ue registration dialogue user same // the in utterance another display // 10 o h rnedipeetto.Ti hiewssupported was choice This implementation. frontend the for [130] hthappened what /stteiiildialogues initial the set // Redux itn 4.1: Listing tt otie o aacitap.Rdxadvertises Redux apps. JavaScript for container state a , 13.The [133]. oe’ Reducer Josef’s reducer eemnshwatoschange actions how determines Ember.js 18 and [128] volt [129], Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 13 12 11 10 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 1 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 current etcs rprstesatn tt,apisteato ots,adcek xettosagainst expectations checks and 4.3. test, listing to in action shown the as such applies state, state, resulting starting the the prepares case test rather is outstanding action to all the state of of list application logic the one from actual from dialogue The move first the to mutations. picks us accidental it for about straightforward—first, not easy worrying do it without we making next sure creation, make the To after state. changed used application be we whole cannot accident, the return by and objects state change current the modify to has anyb w atr.Frt h aai trda SN aigi ayfru osv our save to us for easy it making JSON, as stored is data the First, the factors. use to two decided by we Instead, mainly database. (application relational API a an to implemented cloud-hosted data application, we saved software architecture, and system software backend interface), a standard a to programming fairly create data In to away.” the “goes needed transfer have application to would our need after we even goal, it that saves To that persistence. imply automatically not does function cin ieti r ayt eu n etwt rmwr uha oh 14.Atypical A [134]. mocha as such framework a with test and debug to easy are this like Actions ehv ie neapeo nato nlsig42 ic h eue ssi,teaction the it, uses reducer the Since 4.2. listing in action an of example an given have We describe } aaigtesaeo u plcto napeitbeadcnrlzdwyi igeobject single a in way centralized and predictable a in application our of state the Managing }); dialogue it }); return const it }); }); ’ae h etdaou’ )= { => () dialogue’, next the (’takes "ae h etdaou vni ilgei npors" )= { => () progress", in is dialogue a if even dialogue next the ("takes ’et,( >{ => () (’next’, /temre tt srtre sanwobject new a as returned is state merged the // dialogues.skip(1), dialogues: dialogues.first(), dialogue: })); expect(nextState).to.equal(Map({ const }); const ); expect(nextState).to.equal( const }); const ieaeRatm Database Realtime Firebase etsae { next(state) ilge state.get(’dialogues’); = dialogues state.merge({ n kp hspc ntenx plcto tt’ itof list state’s application next the in pick this skips and , itn 4.2: Listing }) Map({ ilge:Ls.f’o r o?,’o oyufeel?’), you do ’How you?’, ’Hi’, are dialogue: List.of(’How feel?’), dialogues: you do ’How you?’, are ’How List.of(’Hi’, dialogues: ilge:Ls.f"o r o?,"o oyufeel?"), you do "How you?", ’Hi’ are dialogue: List.of("How dialogues: ettt next(state); = nextState Map({ = state ettt next(state); = nextState Map({ = state ilge Hwaeyou?" feel?"), are you "How do dialogue: List.of("How dialogues: oe’ cin“et o rceigt h etdialogue next the to proceeding for “next” action Josef’s /saei nimtbej Map immutable-js an is state // itn 4.3: Listing immutable-js 15 opritordt.Tecoc a supported was choice The data. our persist to [135] etn h cin“next” action the testing hslbaypoie aasrcue that structures data provides library This . /a mual-sList immutable-js an // dialogues dialogues . sthe as 67 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 1 2 1 vredo rtn e cin oamnmmadalwdu ofcso h eindecisions design the on focus to the with us kept issues allowed simplification and no technicalities. this minimum networking found a implementation, of have to instead our but actions For new issues, we writing prototypes. cause of state, actual overhead would application the actions user’s with all the approach transferring for changed that if state that considering were action application We Redux list- whole 4.5. in every listing the with shown of state as end application network, complete the the the over synchronized at existing state Then, an application Whenever persisted 4.4. last completely. ing the implementation loaded backend we custom appeared, second a user the of and necessity laptop, the their venting setting. on our session in advantageous first was the Second, property do this Realtime Redux. to smartphone, Firebase of their choose with use on platforms might our session different users on of our clients because connected Since object to JSON Database. data single synchronize a to easy as is kept it is it since data application oetal euedo-usin drop-outs reduce potentially aeaue iie h nevninwbapwtota -al nta ae ewudprompt would study. we the in case, 68 state that appropriate In the to e-mail. them an forward without and app e-mail web their for intervention users the visited user a experiment. case the throughout data merge to with us “https://josef-study.typeform.com/BeEf a two allowed click therefore session and e.g. prototype would can two together parameter, users questionnaire which tied simi- query two, feature, mechanism HTTP a session fields” This an with prototype “hidden ?email=REMEMBERED_EMAIL”. Typeform’s from The of time using data end this questionnaire input the one. two, a take At session session to redirected prototype prototype e-mail. that for the and button users in one invite link questionnaire structured to of larly used data was the mechanism together same joining scenes, entered the participant the e-mail “https://josef-study.com?email=REMEMBERED_MAIL”. the e.g., along questionnaire, pass the to of feature end to the this at used We data. [89] Typeform entered previously used we this, prevent To anymore. we user data questionnaires. same to our the step, lead for to each would re- which connect in to sessions, properly addresses between Having different not break enter user. could week to same one them the the considering cause of when potentially 1-2 especially would sessions address and e-mail 1-2 the questionnaires enter from data the match could nscin37w aesontesrcueo h eodexperiment second the of structure the shown have we EX2 3.7 Experiment section In of Mechanism Hand-Through E-Mail 4.5 yvru fti eiin u ewriglgccudb eue otosalprs circum- parts, small two to reduced be could logic networking our decision, this of virtue By sasft rcuin efrhradda ro-ehns htwudgttigrdin triggered get would that error-mechanism an added further we precaution, safety a As behind it for user a registered automatically and parameter, containing that detected parameter intervention query Our HTTP an with website a to redirect to us allowed Typeform /la aafo firebase from data load // ieaedtbs(.e(ues’+userId).once(’value’) + firebase.database().ref(’users/’ ieaedtbs(.e(ues’+user.get(’uid’)).set(nextState); + firebase.database().ref(’users/’ itn 4.4: Listing itn 4.5: Listing ycrnzn plcto tt o sroe h Network the over User a for State Application Synchronizing ycrnzn plcto tt o sroe h Network the over User a for State Application Synchronizing EX2 a omk sr nyetrteremi nes htwe that so once e-mail their enter only users make to was EX2 n e hleg to challenge key One . Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. aibe:dvc sd -alpoie nUL rvosssinfud hscmiainof combination This three consider found. to session had previous we URL, flexibility, in this in sessions resulted with provided for variables users e-mail PC) provide used, To tablet, device (smartphone, session. variables: devices a different during use breaks take potentially or could They scenes. the ute idncmlxt fti prahwsta sr eergsee yemi behind e-mail by registered were users that was approach this of complexity hidden further A 2 3 osbeatetcto cnro ehdt osdradimplement. and consider to had we scenarios authentication possible 69 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. iios opee t eevn u -alt s hmt otnewt h xeietaweek a experiment the with continue to of them (38% ask 75 to and e-mail session, our prototype receiving initial the it, the in completed started participants the visitors) participants becoming visitors) on it, of visitors completing new (46% 197 visitors with Ninety tracked visitors) We happening, study. of action. be (48% further 94 to any with seemed taking questionnaire, mouth” first us of without “word even in that joining noticed participants even We participants. find to h rtexperiment first The Demography & Participants 5.1 between relationship possible in the findings as observed. well our we as detailing persuasiveness, fields and before those reflection demography, MI, experiment & experiments the SDT from present to regards results first the will implementa- present We its can detailed findings. we and Now, our approach chapter. research last our the of overview in an tion given have we 3.7, section In ie ntbe5.1. table in given o u eodexperiment second our For EX1 hr eddqaiaieitriw,wscnutdwt participants 6 with conducted was interviews, qualitative did we where , al 5.1: Table EX2 atcpn F Participant E Participant D Participant C Participant B Participant A Participant Alias iulsdi gr .,i a airta xetdfrus for expected than easier was it 3.5, figure in visualised , atcpn al,eprmn EX1 experiment table, Participant Gender m m f f f f Age 24 28 30 26 29 25 EX1 Findings CHAPTER and EX2 ostate to 71 5 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. on A xetfrasih eraei gemn ihtesaeetta Ahlste to SDT. them by helps proposed PA needs 72 psychological that the statement of the support into with see pressured did agreement less we in goal, felt decrease personal also time slight a They PA. reach their a preferred worth for PA an their Except considering at had PA. good Participants and doing themselves need intended. considering they we as exercise trend well the the as getting follow with did agreement questionnaire, in second increase the in external, Josef other, of on use relying regard. this of in would, instead We approach motivator. PA our frequent supporting and do as present to already this an internal interpret trigger is therefore, more it a elicit as in behavior, to PA as option experiment trigger worthwhile SDT picked to is this mechanisms most by it in the that supported participate motivation indicate as own may to motivation making result own to this their Nevertheless, contribute on could question. apps motivation which this and participating place, some 7%) respondents first ( show the Wearables the that to routine in considered choice. had or be frequent have should habit most It likely surpassing the choices. will as motivation, unpopular 34%) rather own ( were their family 5%) that ( and friends stated and respondents 48%) of ( peers 82% than active PA, less being doing as pressure social behavior. good the that a change suggest as results to group, These wanting target towards peers. our contribute their might to as active respondents equally the as 28% of fit and active, more 19% active, noraayi o D I etk lsrlo ttersossi ead oP behavior PA to regards in responses the at look closer a show. take people we motivation MI, the & and SDT for analysis our In MI & SDT 5.2 world. the of rest device. 23% other mobile and or Canada from table shifted 9% a coming ratio from This Austria, were 1% responses device. remaining other the the or of and tablet PC, 61% a a 3% from where 38% remaining questionnaire, phones, the second and the PC, in a slightly 26% phone, say. mobile to a not preferred or gender non-binary/third as 3% and 39 male, with as expected, 46% experiment. we the than in higher step each much completing was fully rate participants completion visitors) overall of the (20% surprise, our To later. u usin eadn A hc eakdi h rtqetonieadaanatrthe after again and questionnaire first the in asked we which PA, regarding questions Our start to respondents triggered what question multiple-choice a in asked when Interestingly, fte9 epne otefis usinar of questionnaire first the to responses 94 the Of 19% USA, 49% was distribution The countries. different 20 from responses gathered We using were participants the of 71% female, as questionnaire, identified first the them for of device 51% of choice the 5.1). for (see As 29.6 was participants our of age mean The iue5.1: Figure ttsisfrpriiatae xeietEX2 experiment age, participant for Statistics EX2 3 ecie hmevst eless be to themselves perceived 53% , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar.

The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. activity. physical doing into pressured feel I goal. personal a reach to me helps activity physical Doing activity. physical preferred my at good I’m think I time. my worth is activity physical Doing need. I as exercise much as get I Question uheecs sIne.,weetema nrae lgtyi gemn rm221t 2.410 to as 2.231 got from agreement “I in in slightly changes increased were mean the significance where with statistical need.”, I for as candidates exercise strongest much The analysis. t-test lgtydcesdtwrsdsgemn rm275t .6 with 2.564 to 2.795 from disagreement towards decreased slightly usin rmteST&M eto.Fraayi,w sdSera orlto ic most since correlation Spearman scale. used Likert we a analysis, using For our questions and to section. ruler were MI change responses & to readiness SDT Nevertheless, the the change. to to from responses ready questions the definitely 10, between was to 10 correlations 1 and interesting from change, found behavior PA to we ready their not change definitely to was readiness 1 their where rated people our where employed, in we significance ruler statistical showing not if even research future period, for motivationsetting. intervention data in indicative extended change offer an short could a a results showing targeting used these experiment other period, our the usage Since and intervention where motivation. frequency, internal one-week to to exercise closer motivator feel of pressured externally they terms an where in from life be their to in changes want made they having respondents as interpreted be efficient ( 0 epnet,wihi n fteint scooia ed rsne yST eprevda perceived we of SDT, competence by perceived presented the needs about psychological more of innate know correlation the us lower of let one to is meant which is respondents, it though Even activity.”. change. results ical to Our readiness PA. with doing positively correlates of internalization internalization stronger stronger that a support suggests to seem statements these to agreement MI, rn edns ocag hni swe rigt ananbhvo.Ti nepeainwould interpretation This consid- behavior. when maintain important to trying less when is is behavior PA it than present change any to in readiness competence ering the that be might result ρ . 008 0 = u esrmnsi htctgr i o il ttsia infiac hndigapaired a doing when significance statistical yield not did category that in measurements Our o the For change to readiness the on changes overall the for held insignificance statistical same The hr soefrhrntbersl o h usin ItikImgo tm rfre phys- preferred my at good I’m think “I question, the for result notable further one is There p .We okn tteesaeet ihrlto otetertclbcgon fST& SDT of background theoretical the to relation with statements these at looking When ). . 0 = 441 ρ ewe h ue n Digpyia ciiyhlsm orahaproa goal.” personal a reach to me helps activity physical “Doing and ruler the between p , . ue ntefis questionnaire first the in ruler 147 0 = n hne n“ elpesrdit on hsclatvt.,weetemean the where activity.”, physical doing into pressured feel “I in changes and . 0007 al 5.2: Table ρ 0 = swl s“on hsclatvt swrhm ie”( time.” my worth is activity physical “Doing as well as ) . 2435 epne oqetosrltdt D MI & SDT to related questions to Responses ( p 0 = . 034 eosre h togs pamncreainco- correlation spearman strongest the observed we , oteraiest hne n esetv nthis on perspective One change. to readiness the to ) Questionnaire 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 p 39 94 39 94 39 94 39 94 39 94 0 = N . 277 Mean 2.564 2.766 3.744 3.840 3.308 3.245 4.154 4.148 2.410 2.223 h rtcould first The . ρ 0 = EMean SE 0.0956 . 0.190 0.125 0.150 0.102 0.181 0.108 0.130 0.167 0.107 400 p , 73 = 0.9270 StDev 1.188 1.213 0.938 0.987 1.127 1.044 0.812 1.044 1.039 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ohl epnet hn bu Ai tutrdfsin eetees epnet i not regard. did 74 that respondents in Nevertheless, anticipated as fashion. helpful structured as Josef a with in experience PA their about perceive think respondents help to esrcuem huhsaotm hsclatvt eair”rsle nanurlresponse neutral helped a in “Josef resulted question behavior.” the activity physical Nevertheless, my behavior.”. about ( activity thoughts my physical structure my me about think to me h eodqetonieof questionnaire second The Reflection 5.3 with results our analyze we worthwhile. where is section, it next on reflection. the doing reflecting on in of that focus detailed perspective importance a further our the be given noticed have will we and relationship Lastly, goal This of another. personal aspect a on one further effects supporting ways positive to PA which have in might insight MI new multi- & provides between SDT which correlations category, significant this statistically of observe factors with further positively ple did correlates We internalization results change. stronger our to that Nevertheless, support readiness period. to period. seem intervention intervention analysis short week correlation one the from a given after unsurprising MI & were SDT findings category These the of strengthen answers for or analysis goals t-test paired new yield might people this factors supporting since other of behavior furthers approach their ones. also our about present with it already deeply autonomy, line think of in and need this reflect innate consider to We the behavior. of that facet internalizing a of goal, personal a further to ( epdpriiat eeto hi Abhvo.W aegvna vriwo h related the of overview an given have We ( behavior. participants PA the of their statistics response on reflect participants helped atdrsls ihasrn gemn ( agreement strong a with results, wanted hsclatvt ep et ec esnlga. ihbt Digpyia ciiyi worth is activity physical “Doing both with goal.” ( personal time.” a my reach to me strong helps not activity physical is correlation the However, closer confidence. got intervention. with respondents this the that state with suggest to could amount enough this exercise questionnaire, desired first their the to in correlation that see not niaeahge nenlzto.I otatt h rtraiest hnerlr eosre a with observed need.” we I ruler, as exercise change much to as readiness get first “I the to to correlation contrast slight In internalization. higher a indicate nevnin ile h togs orlto ih“on hsclatvt ep et ec a reach to me helps activity ( physical again “Doing goal.” with personal correlation strongest the yielded intervention, espotdb u bevdcreainbten“ hn ’ oda ypeerdphysical preferred my of at need.” good I as I’m exercise think much “I as between get “I correlation and observed activity.” our by supported be ar.Rslsse oidct htpol eln oecndn ntercretpeerdPA intervention. preferred the with current starting their when in frequency confident exercise more desired feeling their people to that closer are indicate to seem Results naire. ρ mean 0 = nsmay eddntprev n ttsial infiatcag npriiat iha with participants in change significant statistically any perceive not did we summary, In vrl,ordsg ocet h ih odtosfrrflcinsest aesonthe shown have to seems reflection for conditions right the create to design our Overall, nte neetn orlto ntescn usinar a h orlto f“Doing of correlation the was questionnaire second the in correlation interesting Another The . 3 = 408 edns ocag ue ntescn questionnaire second the in ruler change to readiness p , . ρ 154 0 = 0 = .Ti ucm a nxetdsnetewoedaou ytmwsdesigned was system dialogue whole the since unexpected was outcome This ). . . 531 010 ρ p , .Teerslssgetta frsodnscnie h agtbehavior target the consider respondents if that suggest results These ). 0 = 0 = . 445 EX2 . 001 p , otie usin ie tfidn u nwihwy Josef ways which in out finding at aimed questions contained ,ad“ hn ’ oda ypeerdpyia activity.” physical preferred my at good I’m think “I and ), 0 = N . 005 39 = mean n ewudaanapyteagmn htthese that argument the apply again would we and ) ntbe5.3. table in ) 4 = ρ 0 = . 385 . otesaeet“oe encouraged “Josef statement the to ) 517 ρ 0 = ( p hc a rsne fe the after presented was which , . 0 = 367 . p , 000 0 = ntefis question- first the in ) . 022 ic edid we Since . Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. Josef. to talking before was it as same the still is choices. activity activity physical physical towards previous attitude my My behavior. to activity alternatives physical new my considered about have perspective. think I new and a stop from me behavior made activity Josef physical activity. my physical at do looked have to I behavior. reasons activity new physical find my me about helped thoughts Josef my behavior. activity structure physical me my helped about Josef think to me encouraged Josef Question The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. o hneterattd infiaty ic iareetwt hssaeetwudso a show would statement this did with respondents Josef.” disagreement the reflection, to Since of of talking level part before high substantial significantly. very was more attitude it the their that as change meaning same though, not the 3.546, still of is mean activity a showed physical towards statement. attitude the “My to eral, agreed strongly or 8% and agreed, respondents the of 26% where 5.3: Table e esetv.,wihi eae to related is which perspective.”, new a they that behavior. indicating target statement, wanted that with our agreed – strongly intensively people reflected two and agreeing, were 12 dents, of dimension the to statement this to agreement attribute would We Transformation 5.2. figure in activity.” cal question a average. if on even rate meaningful agreement are high results a these have Therefore, of po- not ev- higher dimensions change. does a behavior Since or has notable and reflection and a 3.5. of reflection possible, for considerable levels table tential as undergone specific in potentially high indicating given has as is respondent have the statement is we reflection, a questions that to the value agreeing of mean response that background ery a from theoretical seen for the be look consider should exclusively to are responses reflection: to of levels analysis, than dimensions the higher rather three For and the perspective, reflection, presented transformation. further of reflec- and have of levels inquiry, We levels breakdown, higher reflective. the of more presented be have prerequisites to we are considered 3.6, levels section lower In where reflection. tion, to regards in change behavior etwith ment efdigoeo oeo hs e lentvs”yeddgnrlareet( agreement general yielded alternatives.” my- new envision these can of “I some question or follow-up one the doing Furthermore, self choices.”. activity physical previous h enrsl ftersodnsi lgtyblwnurlareet from agreement, neutral below slightly while is So respondents statement. the this with of agreeing result respondents mean in the place taken has process thought reflective oterflciedmninof dimension reflective the to ecudosreegtrsodnssl-eotn hnei tiuetwrsP.I gen- In PA. towards attitude in change a self-reporting respondents eight observe could We ewudapyasmlragmn o“ aeloe tm hsclatvt eairfrom behavior activity physical my at looked have “I to argument similar a apply would We physi- do to reasons new find me helped “Josef to response the of histogram the Consider of field the in move we that consider to essential is it scales, Likert to responses these For Jsfmd eso n hn bu ypyia ciiybhvo. o aoal agree- favorable a got behavior.” activity physical my about think and stop me made “Josef lvnpriiat gedwt h ttmn,“ aecniee e lentvst my to alternatives new considered have “I statement, the with agreed participants Eleven mean epne oqetosrltdt eeto,sre yodri hc hywr asked were they which in order by sorted reflection, to related questions to Responses swl srflcinlevel reflection as well as 3 = . 538 hsrsl ol upr htJsfddafc atcpnsi regards in participants affect did Josef that support could result This . 3Tasomtv Reflection Transformative R3 breakdown . 2Daoi Reflection Dialogic R2 3Tasomtv Reflection Transformative R3 hsrsl sntsurprising. not is result this , n h ieso of dimension the and niaigta highly a that indicating , Mean 3.564 2.897 3.538 2.923 2.744 3.154 4.385 N mean 39 = 3 = EMean SE Inquiry respon- 0.159 0.175 0.220 0.189 0.197 0.189 0.125 . 636 75 , , StDev 0.995 1.095 1.374 1.178 1.229 1.182 0.782 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. usin eadn eeto.“ aeloe tm hsclatvt eairfo new a new from find me behavior with helped activity.” activity “Josef physical physical to do connection my to a at showing reasons correlation, looked strongest have the “I had perspective.” reflection. regarding questions et ihterflciedmninof dimension reflective the with dents rdnwatraie om rvospyia ciiycocs”with choices.” activity physical previous my to alternatives new ered SEmean ity.” 5.2: Figure huhsaotm hsclatvt eair”with behavior.” activity physical my about thoughts epdm tutr ytogt bu ypyia ciiybhvo. hwdangtv corre- negative a “Josef showed behavior.” analysis. activity correlation physical of the my lation about in thoughts noticeable my also structure was me PA helped about thinking with structured for reflection support of dimensions the as well as levels We the transformation. both of successfully. dimension supported sec- Josef reflective the the having reflection, to as third of the this level and higher interpret reflection a for indicating conditions questions to between is correlation ond a is first the While eddfidta hyrflce nhge eesadmr iesosta expected. than dimensions well, 76 more work and to levels seemed higher Josef on where reflected they participants that the as find experience For did the thoughts. perceive we their not did structure participants to some number them as significant helping process, more reflective a their support to in hoping participants were of we Nevertheless, reflection. of dimensions the Josef.”. to talking before was it on arieSera orlto,w bevdmlil orltosbtenour between correlations multiple observed we correlation, Spearman pairwise a Doing u rvosfidn eadn upiiglc fareeti ead oteperceived the to regards in agreement of lack surprising a regarding finding previous Our nsmay ebleei ucsflyhvn upre h eeso eeto,a elas well as reflection, of levels the supported having successfully in believe we summary, In ρ 0 = = itga frsosst Jsfhle efidnwraost opyia activ- physical do to reasons new find me helped “Josef to responses of Histogram − . 338 0 . 502 , StDev p , 0 = 1 = . 001 . 120 ih“yattd oad hsclatvt ssiltesm as same the still is activity physical towards attitude “My with .W a ocueta eddspot2%o h respon- the of 28% support did we that conclude can We ). transformations ρ 0 = . 784 p , ρ 0 = . 0 = . 000 . 611 Jsfhle esrcuemy structure me helped “Josef , p , 0 = . 000 ρ 0 = n Ihv consid- have “I and . 595 p , 0 = . 000 . Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. Josef. than rather human a with activity physical my discussing preferred have would I me. towards supportive was Josef (inverted) appearance. Josef’s use? liked to I robot) (the Josef was easy/hard How Question The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. t ihahmnrte hnJsf”soe lgtdsgemn ( disagreement slight showed Josef.” than rather human a with ity there. results and positive stronger a see be to to liked theme have interventions would the we chosen one, have supportive we Since me.”. towards supportive was terbt oue”soigama of mean a scoring use?” to robot) (the group. built target and that designed not to are would available interventions that provide advantages these interventions health does If technical make situation. result will for same The they group the correctly, target in (laughing)’”. humans a other is course! out there regarding sought of that like have opinion Great feel the actually prob- me. for you I’ll it’s basis to do myself, more ’How hint hello, it ’Well, further says: do else say a to someone I’d given me if have asks sports?’, than app might honestly an C more if Participant “Well, answer interviews: ably them. qualitative to where the consequences environment, during the any reason that judgment-free to that of mean somewhat related also fear a be could no be It might is to there [136]. result intervention their professional technical This about health the think mental expected human. to a users way another from right help-seeking with the to topic Josef related the found stigma indeed discussing that than group rather target PA, a reached having as this htorcoc ftefinl itebu oo a h ih one. right the was robot blue little friendly the of choice our that oeprusv epnet on oe,temr ol nrgrst D Iwr reached. were MI & SDT to regards in goals more the Josef, found respondents persuasive more o“on hsclatvt ep et ec esnlga. ( goal.” personal a reach to me helps activity physical ruler. “Doing change reflection. to as to well readiness as the MI to & persuasiveness SDT of on effects effects significant any were for there true However, was same The results. siveness. our skewing problems usability any weren’t there that deduct can We use. aigue h nevnin h aeo s a ute on ocreaewt ItikI’m think “I with correlate to found ( further activity.” was physical use preferred of my ease at The good intervention. the used having erne hnivrigtesoeo Idsie oe’ perne”t u eua cl,we scale, regular our to appearance.” Josef’s disliked of “I agreement of an got score the inverting When pearance. asked 5.4: Table Persuasiveness 5.4 ewr apl upie oseta ol aepeerddsusn ypyia activ- physical my discussing preferred have would I “ that see to surprised happily were We vrl,pol on oe eyes oue ihteqeto Hwes/adwsJosef was easy/hard “How question the with use, to easy very Josef found people Overall, epnet on oe oehtspotv,with supportive, somewhat Josef found Respondents h airrsodnsfudteueo oe 1=vr ayt s) h oete agreed they more the use), to easy very = (1 Josef of use the found respondents easier persua- The within questions different the between correlation significant any see not did We sfrprusvns in persuasiveness for As epne oqetosrltdt esaiees otdb re nwihte were they which in order by sorted persuasiveness, to related questions to Responses mean 4 = EX2 . 103 l epeta opee h nevninlkdJsfsap- Josef’s liked intervention the completed that people all , n o igease crn eo eta.W conclude We neutral. below scoring answer single a not and , 2 . 385 ρ = nasaefo o1,wee1wsvr ayto easy very was 1 where 10, to 1 from scale a on − 0 . 525 p , mean 0 = . 001 3 = ρ mean .W ol esnta the that reason would We ). = . 333 − 0 2 = . 639 nrsos o“Josef to response in . 795 p , Mean 2.795 3.333 4.103 2.385 .W interpret We ). 0 = . 000 EMean SE after ) 0.198 0.144 0.141 0.243 77 StDev 1.239 0.898 0.882 1.515 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 78 once oapstv etmn aigapstv au n od ihangtv sentiment negative a with words The and value positive value. The a negative having [138]. a sentiment ranking positive sentiment a emoji to and connected [137] wordlist score AFINN-165 the sentiment on based analysis the n h vrg sg ieo . iue e eso,w a ocueta epnet did respondents that conclude can we session, per minutes 5.4), 4.6 figure intended. of (see as answers time contemplate our text usage their with in average together words considered the 11.7 When of and 5.3). average figure an used (see respondents seconds that 38.24 observed observation we of open, answer intervention to our time with average window an browser their keeping while else something did fuesddcnepaeterrsoss rrs hog ihu iigte uhthought. much them giving without through rush or ( responses, outliers for their Filtering contemplate did users if h erc ehv ahrd oka h eea etmn forrsodnsadte combine then and experiment respondents an second our the for of at from allowing sentiment look answers general closer text, text the a in take at the will look answers we gathered, all have section, we this to In metrics access the otherwise. have time-intensive very further be We would metrics that detailed analysis track respondents. easily of can we number that any is therapists for human over Josef of advantage significant A Analysis Response 5.5 yield results. could compare to It interventions past computer. of desktop versions regular persuasive phones, more a feature create like on to time, exclusively that results working at exciting described possibilities or have the counters, we to restricted work lack step were related a unwieldy some the though which Consider even of negatives), 2.1, results. section (false the in work skewed not have did might persuasiveness mechanism of a that concluding wrongfully to color design, responsive our considering it make them), use between avatar. to to switch the affected time participants even and Josef the allowing (and choices, worth of like test, they was usability likability platform It up-front and the an use on chosen. doing have of by we ease persuasive background more the intervention theoretical much the how for see results to our surprised were we furthering PA, ertheless, do to reasons motivation. new internalized therefore finding and participants had behavior, to appearance the on linked Josef’s of perspectives is autonomy of new Josef gaining likability with Furthermore, and behavior reflection. use target furthering of the for ease goals the our on that affects follows positive It physical.” do to reasons aecniee e lentvst ypeiu hsclatvt hie. ( choices.” activity physical previous my to alternatives new considered have ie”as hwdasrn orlto of correlation strong a showed also tive.” 0 ( ( perspective.” new a from behavior activity physical my at ρ . 001 = o etmn nlsso h epne,w used we responses, the of analysis sentiment For uigteitreto s,w uoaial rce erc htwudalwu osee to us allow would that metrics tracked automatically we use, intervention the During ewudg sfra oseuaeta ako esaieesi nitreto ih lead might intervention an in persuasiveness of lack a that speculate to as far as go would We Nev- interventions. health digital for persuasiveness of importance the of aware were We eosre iia eaint eeto.Tees fuecreae ih“ aelooked have “I with correlated use of ease The reflection. to relation similar a observed We − .Rsosst h atrqeto locreae ih“ ilkdJsfsappearance.” Josef’s disliked “I with correlated also question latter the to Responses ). 0 . 449 p , ipae nfiue55 dstesoeo ahrcgie od ihwords with word, recognized each of score the adds 5.5, figure in displayed , 0 = . 001 N oprtv value comparative 6 = .“ aeloe tm hsclatvt eairfo e perspec- new a from behavior activity physical my at looked have “I ). iet answer to time , ρ ipae nfiue56 a i-on f0and 0 of mid-point a has 5.6, figure in displayed , 0 = > EX2 450 . 784 ihorosrain from observations our with eod) hc ih aeocre fusers if occurred have might which seconds), p , sentiment 0 = . 000 ρ 9] aacitlbayta does that library javascript a [95], ih“oe epdm n new find me helped “Josef with = − 0 . 530 p , ρ EX1 − = 0 . . − 001 0 . 499 ,ad“I and ), p , = Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. od uha go” bte” mtvto”adngtv od uha ltl” bd,or “bad”, “little”, as such words positive negative “think”, and or “motivation” occurrences “need” high “better”, “want”, with itself, “good”, words true “change” as as held as such well this such as result, words words the here, change at words or Looking change contemplative in of and sentiment. results contemplative negative as see and useful positive to of expectation not our are given which have “e.g.”, we and from “I’ll” cloud) “I’d”, word “I’m”, a like words common without responses. text for sentiment positive a towards tendency slight oprtv au of value comparative rudta rbe,bta tl erhn o ouin”hdasnietsoeof score away sentiment find a will had I get solution.” that I faith a losing exercise. for am don’t searching I just still healthier. I am be to but those want without problem, not I but that is though moving, around even This up, me otherwise. give keep rarely and and errands bored to, and too need work I when when bad activity physical so do I “Currently, response the mrvdqaiyo ie”hdasnietsoeo 1adacmaaievleof value comparative a and 11 stronger, negative of motivated, score and positive sentiment more a for better, had 5 “Feeling life.” negative response of and the quality positive improved example, be For to bounds respectively. lower sentiment and upper constrained a vrl,bt h etmn cr n h oprtv au hwdrslsidctn a indicating results showed value comparative the and score sentiment the both Overall, nfiue57w aecetdawr lu ftecendu epne ie,teresponses the (i.e., responses cleaned-up the of cloud word a created have we 5.7 figure In EX2 − 0 . 11 sn ulcyaalbewr lu eeao 9] nscin3.7, section In [94]. generator cloud word available publicly a using . iue5.3: Figure iet nwri seconds in answer to Time 1 . 22 − 7 while , n a and 79 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 80 worldwide available made scala- been already of has countries. advantage different work, the 20 this restate in of to used scale and small want target that the prominently that ways with most to in even but work available Josef, can bility. 2.3), human intervention section a computer-based a (see with how cannot sessions session about the humans talked therapy ways we a which 2.3, of in section know advantages In to group. the like make would We can therapist. Josef intervention. human our with a of with goal talking the over and Josef analysis to sentiment words, the negative of than results words the positive with and line change, in contemplative, is more which see we Overall, “can’t”. ehv eni h epne oteqetonie htortre ru rfre talking preferred group target our that questionnaires the to responses the in seen have We iue5.4: Figure ubro od sdi etanswers text in used words of Number Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. iue5.5: Figure etmn cr fsnietaayi o etanswers text for analysis sentiment of score Sentiment 81 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 82 iue5.6: Figure iue5.7: Figure oprtv au fsnietaayi o etanswers text for analysis sentiment of value Comparative odcodo etases xeietEX2 experiment answers, text of cloud Word Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. n ilpeetaciia oka u okadpitotislimitations. its out point chapter’s and The work overview. our perfor- conclusive at a the look give critical of to a a 3.2 viewpoint with present section the will continue in end from given will have intervention we we our that reflection, objectives at affected mance looking Josef before of discussion components reflection. topic-specific which as well considering as to MI & dition SDT of fields the persuasive for Josef’s regarding questions research, questions to of to correlation fields strong Answers other a our showed effect. to design about significant regards talked statistically In having a being. rather had with human persuasiveness agreed another likable slightly with be respondents than to so, Josef Josef more clear with found Even PA set Respondents use. goal, mood. to its positive easy communicated a very that and elicit sound to and designed animations was both and lacking expectations, robot a of image static their in words indicators change seen and have contemplative, positive, we answers. with Furthermore, dialogue answer another. to on as- respondents effects one elicited positive Josef have supporting that might how MI about & knowledge SDT provide of observed pect we may Nevertheless, that category. that correlations These of significant questions statistically for reflection. analysis t-test of paired levels a using as difference technology. well with reflection as support dimensions to how of on terms insights new in provide could reflect results to respondents help did otn eeto n ecie h opnnsrsligfo hmi eal okn tour at Looking sup- detail. at in aimed them decisions from design resulting experiment our components from elicit presented findings the to we described aims 4, and that chapter reflection intervention In porting computer-based which change. a in of behavior ways in PA effects the reflection the long-term regarding further considered discussion question to a research designed do Our components to worked. findings Josef our intervention computer-based contemplate our can we point, this At ocnie mlctosfrcmue-ae nevnin htcmieST&M nad- in MI & SDT combine that interventions computer-based for implications consider To a to restricted being by negative or limited, judgmental, as perceived being avoided Josef significant statistically a yield not did MI & SDT of combination the of trial empirical Our EX1 and EX2 ehv ensbtnilidctr htteedecisions these that indicators substantial seen have we , Discussion CHAPTER 83 6 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. nlsso h nevesof the interviews have the you of things analysis some with Like,... human.”. really robot. somehow it’s little here a But like makes brainwashed. that looks being nice, of he quite feeling it’s them. Like, “Yeah to interviews: relatable human. qualitative more the somehow during it it follows making as par- imagination, it like their put seemed with F It Josef Participant disbelief. from of of expected limitations have suspension the would further filled they to ticipants as seemed reactive therefore or and avatar, smart human-like as a not intervention the perceive might pants limited is it psychologist. that respondents experiment knowledgeable the a for of being expectations beginning than the set rather at ways, to clear closed many it Furthermore, in of makes itself forms limited. Josef feeling robot other answer the and of or correctly, needs response instead their multiple-choice the to wanted, of questions For they the instead interpret like to mood. questions possibility non-judgmental open the participants positive, use allowing overall answers, to with an opted symbiosis have we in to designed options, was dialogue robot and The colors animation. the or sound without robot, friendly-looking knowledgeable a and companion supportive a of blend a as therapist consultant. the describes style, apist and larger a to available sessions such of therapy advantages group. human the target a different of making possibly properties to same contribute the could of it some session, show could intervention computer-based our If Therapist a as Josef 6.1 eega oseta eee civdoeo h oesil fahmnM rciinrby practitioner MI human a of skills core 84 We the of respondents. robot one by a achieved way of even positive statements. image we a self-motivating eliciting static such that successfully a in see avatar, received to was non-anthropomorphic deliberate glad of sound, a were result and that the away, animations was see right both this expectations to Although lacking clear surprising mood. set was positive goal, a it its elicit design, communicated to that carefully robot designed a was and of picture a to restricted to order in adulthood.” fitness through throughout physical fit exercise and physically of exercise and benefits with healthy mental relationship and me better physical keep a the to that would receive develop and enough it to low, be too because want not likely change I diet are likely to poor levels adulthood. will want activity a pace physical “I having my happen.”, this and that this at know inactive make continuing I being to “Overall, from want or to life” 20lbs “I ready my this.”, gained am improve stop have and to myself I ready for am life. excuses and making active of more interven- tired a computer-based am living a “I as start were, even responses goal, example that Some achieved Josef tion. that indicators yielded 3.7, section lctn efmtvtn ttmnsi n ftecr klso nM rciinr[4.Our [24]. practitioner MI an of skills core the of one is statements self-motivating Eliciting partici- where problems avoided dialogue-system and design visual Josef’s of choice This a of picture a – form minimalistic very a use to opted we therapist, the for avatar an As ther- the for MI from draws which [108], Manual Therapy Enhancement Motivational The nsmay oe vie en ecie sjdmna,lmtd rngtv ybeing by negative or limited, judgmental, as perceived being avoided Josef summary, In EX1 n etrsossof responses text and EX2 hc ehv ie ndti in detail in given have we which , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. .Ec eso’ nwr n eeto et r grgtdadsoncoet h session’s the to close the shown answer) to client’s and (the aggregated presented overview. are . later . concise texts be. a When would reflection in the change and end to with answers ”. reasons . session’s recorded “Your . be. format Each is the would statement. change?” in “. change back to reflection played you to pre-defined is for it a reasons client, “Your reasons with be of answer would each statement “What record reflection question we the time, example, later For a to at session the summarize of to end the at recorded session. next between are provided the summaries are in client summaries back and Linked played dialogue, be session. the a to of add end to the questions at presented are session given own the their hear clients let to is or goal client The reluctance the of client. again. what the elements statements from of self-motivational as reaction reflection well negating extended as a prevent an statements to self-motivational as resistance, include session should a They of said. end has the toward particularly useful, are pragmatic a present [62]. and so facilitate, do to to facilitate aims way to dedicated autonomy-support help and that may process summarizing integrative facilitat- differently, the same self-awareness, Stated together increase the to draw decision-making. help and autonomous also link more statements to Such ing used discussed. are been statements sim- has Summary that produce facilitating material to listening. self-awareness, likely likely reflective increase is as is they summarizing benefits summarizing that Furthermore, ilar that in In [140]. argue listening decision-making [139]. reflective autonomous al. experiences as more client’s et Vansteenkiste benefits understanding, the SDT, convey similar on with they have light MI because to a combining affirming shining be of by sev- context can exploration together They the further pull invite that said. can reflections has that they being put person and essentially Rollnick a as and that it Miller things describing summaries. eral by were nutshell goal a that in towards mechanism used we mechanism One tion. the because regard that in listening heavily challenge reflective analyzed. main relying do unambiguously the of could be was choice cannot questions we Our responses closed like of answers. appear instead user’s to questions the way open of a on understanding find semantic to any had lacking we while Josef, picture For a the [108]. just allows empathy with that even system dialogue therapist, input. a a user and records as animation, and works questions or of Josef sound presentation how without robot, outlined friendly-looking have a we of section, last the Listening Reflective In and Empathy Expressing 6.2 ndti,tecletv umr eursrcrig ftecin’ vr nwr norder In answer. every client’s the of recordings requires summary collective the detail, In in answers client’s the of summaries Collective threefold. is summary-mechanism Josef’s Summaries Josef. in implemented be could summaries how identified we METM, the Using reflec- for designing by issue this tackling to approach our presented have we 4, chapter In express to interviewing motivational in skill key a as listening reflective states METM The h o elyusol tr ocag n httego hnsaotta would that about things good the its what exactly here is and But this change or to you, page. start think should one you you why just feel sum- exactly on is you whole this change why „Hey, see should like: to way you get a think in you always summarized Because you what too. of cool, mary was summary) automatic (the That 85 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 86 is summary client the – themselves. summary said automatic they what the see show to Josef. not get by happened. does They the misunderstood what Josef shown. them or of offers misrepresented session, feel interpretations It next they and Josef’s reasons. that thoughts For chance own own the their their eludes giving down largely and concept write fit This and see back they chance think way the to clients a gives choice in summary last session The the easier scratch. bit summarize from a to summary it a making with that, up this before coming in just to automation summary compared automatic no collective the is the presented there While automatically, Josef Nevertheless, session automatic. the fully step. during not created is are that one summaries only linked the the and is in summary be This would words. changing own his/her of benefits the negative about session possible last the about the about summary in words. linked asking own Josef a client’s after told provides has example, Josef client behavior, For PA the client’s what dialogues. the changing current not the of of consequences flow the to it aty utbfr oe’ lsn od,cinsaeakdfrasmayo h eso in session the of summary a for asked are clients words, closing Josef’s before just Lastly, link to said has client the what of parts relevant “remember” to used are summaries Linked ed. u,ta sco,bcueyuseyusl gi.Smaie,a said as other Summarized, the in again. not yourself yeah, my see But of you back change. because the to in cool, C) wanting And (Participant is on before. that ready. set actually But, already I’m be hey, head... to thought seem I it I over head read I when So sharp!” look . . “Hey,. like think you makes C) it (Participant and briefly summarized it’s And be.” hn Ya,ta’ re’adte o’etknb h adadakd’el what ’Well, asked and hand and the C) road by (Participant the taken say?’ on you’re do you already then How do you’re and say? because true.’ you great, that’s do that’s ’Yeah, what think ’Well, think like I it’s summary, that?’. you because the summarize that and you you like mirror then I the And this?’. get summarize good. only that’s you tell said not do and How yourself and want You matter? you mirror the ’Look. want, what’s the yourself you “Well, say in and tell ready you look you’re - close that, you want a Something tells you take else change!’. to somebody really time not you ’It’s - or yourself somehow... immediately start’ I to Because time because It’s that. ’ summarize?’ or like you change!’ would to ’How was need ’I with That wrote tricky week.”. was last that said think I I what is week the this of „Hey, end see the be to would D) bad it (Participant not me nice. for it’s think . . I it,. then C) about (Participant think and I positive. that’s if think because and good, would do!” was would I That I now said said again I you’ve that what what did read „See I would and I read I week. it and, then if did last motivated and I And „Yeah, really said exercised was summarized. I you say, yeah, or let’s what week.”, there I, last you great if shows was and it time, really know, that he don’t during Where exercised I if cool. And, really that’s think I Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ead oterP uigteqaiaieinterviews. qualitative the during the PA on their to impact regards emotional [143]. harmful profound be a to have potential can the has reflection therefore [143]. that and self-rejection before reflecting, and person observed self-disapproval been of even perpetual feelings a to has involve lead It can reflection” can Reflection of that [70]. side self-improvement costs “dark for unintended a need it suggested with al. bring et may Baumer reflectiveness [142], where benefits responses health have text does our experiences as did well we as Nevertheless, interviews session. qualitative every the throughout reflection. in during mood both positive responses a negative elicit encounter to designed was Josef Reflection of Repercussions 6.3 the in reflections offering by client a misunderstanding words. own summaries or client’s client misrepresenting and dialogue-flow, are of the summaries problems in Linked moments elude through summaries. fitting at automatic pre- reflection session as with the for back recorded throughout scaffold played are interwoven be answers to to Client how statements interviewing. motivational shown reflection of defined have spirit we the to Nevertheless, true summaries answers. client’s the of answer relevant. an most in as aspects interpreted certain have out to might pick designed therapist not are human can that a he However, questions that to change. answers of the aspects positive of more reflections elicit and summaries present to choose can place, every for in time, same any it. the at for therapy that ready not all do feels spanning can is client It memory circumstance and the his length. whenever accuracy, This unlimited reflect effectively perfect with cannot with answers not. therapist summarize for or sessions, and a reflect consciously that can others, what Truax Josef of over aspects on Josef. certain pass based highlight and to argue choose say, Therapists people [141]. al. says client et weight a diet, Miller everything summarize better a aspect. of another benefits the from have to ready for am life.” health and on emotional outlook while positive and a more for mental, and inactive loss, physical, been for exercise have to Need important I enough way. is the engaging me. active in mentally get “Being exercise I migraines migraines.”, of but change, routine, form less should exercise a for “Need I it.”, found to know never back have “I coming I me start:)”, but keep “Lets active, health.”, more routine mental out be PA. work to and my doing want physical increase for overall and reasons change my own to improve motivated their to very summarize “I’m some been: and have poten- behavior, responses into Example deeper their look changing others for statements, motivational barriers leave tial Some ways. different very in mary oersodnsbogtu aigagit osineo aigt etawae efin self weaker a beat to having or conscience guilty a having up brought respondents Some negative on reflecting even and beneficial universally almost as treated is reflection While understanding semantic any have not does Josef that 6.2 section in argued we summarize, To He summarize. and on reflect to what on judgment clinical a make however, cannot, He well as themselves summaries the to relevant is intervention, computer-based a being Josef sum- the using clients see we round, experiment second the from responses the at Looking 87 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 88 might and reflect to unchecked. lead up. left follow is if experience not respondent negative does the a to life, where lead of could Josef, it complexity with discrepancy, the this session respondent notice with next a confronted where the when scenario starting a but When imagine action, can We take prior the other, [145]. to in of choice consequence chooses al. that conscious the et were a be Ganglbauer waste than might food by rather of gap out moments, Occasions attributable pointed this waste. being was food for than observation negotiating rather reason This of environment context One motivation. the or in [144]. attitude embedded to action or directly take by determined not often do are decisions but choices explicit behavior develop people their where change phenomenon a to gap, intention-behavior an therapy of a because physical be for a designing of leaving importance and the up underlines context. further this getting simulated issue in to This mood the positive compared therapist. canceling human even effort a or any with postponing session hardly therefore is these and confronting session, app, avoid Josef. therapy to as an such out backgrounding interventions computer-based dropping or for them Leaving prominent to especially is lead situation might This experiences emotions. negative my “worsening such unhealthy”, not, run gain, or Weight a for conscious. go self to and wanting myself.” with Not gross relationship feel myself. poor I already about because worse gym “Feeling anything”, the do or didn’t “Bad, well: as oee,wyi tucmotbefrsm epnet orflc nterbhvo?I might It behavior? their on reflect to respondents some for uncomfortable it is why However, intervention the with continue should they if deciding of edge the on are respondents If repercussions negative of examples some had experiment second the from responses text The o aearal ulycncec fIdntd ntigtmro rtoday. or tomorrow anything do don’t I if A) conscience (Participant *laughing* guilty mean! really That’s do a “How have like C) I question (Participant Now first *laughing* the shit! in well right hm, like exercise?”... was your it about moment feel first you the you in but ’ C) . okay . (Participant It’s hmm. someone actually, ’Shit’. if think ’Hm, But you then then course! that?’ and of about think fine really think to I’m really have Well you No- do you’. sports’. ’What are to you ’How regards asks Instead: in you that! are asks ’How body like someone by approached never You’re ee— aehm thl atsxadZmasa ee.Ta’ h thought, I why That’s seven. at Zumba’s and the hap- What six to past message . . half a right. Yeah, at sent Zumba”. home I to came today it pened—I make two can past I today half “Yeah, group about [WhatsApp] uhm thought, (Participant I Wednesday then. This motivation the the summon for couldn’t had I much I that not that Well And anything. stress B) do the yeah? didn’t really of well, I because as that later, it, else less make got couldn’t that year, I school that whole was thing bad The and home come E) I (Participant Then thought appointment. sports. I another do nice—to something, Where be forgot would again. then—I it time today and yeah time *sigh* myself, problem to the were appointments other Sadly Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. na nnomdwyo ihu hoeia akrud edt leaigteradec.In audience. their alienating to lead background, employed theoretical if a that, without mechanisms or employ way can uninformed change an behavior in with help to designed Interventions Key is Reinforcement Positive 6.4 declared our against working change. drop-out case behavior high worst long-term to the is a lead in device) supporting might or of the intervention this goal the unchecked, aside of left setting persuasiveness are window, less reflection or a of rates out closing repercussions walking the app, human, If the a easy. backgrounding with very session (by therapy intervention traditional the a on have with can comparison it In intervention, risks. computer-based a considerable with especially Nevertheless, transformation. further initially. uncomfortable is expectations resolution it of their if violation strengthen even and the behavior, deeply on their more reflection change previously reflect to to This Josef they respondents session. lead answers [71]. might second themselves the process and set in they transformative summaries words more own respondents a their showing in to wrote by leading might this situation, 3.6, reflection puzzling furthered section through or in purposefully gap doubtful discussed intention-behavior a previously an to have with lead we confrontation reflection The of consideration. dimensions into walks the long of some one took Breakdown, I bad! “Not (probably stretches.” once.”, some else running did anything mentioned was “I do stressed.”, they “I to was before, need I too: week when don’t goals, home.” the I realistic at step on week own on a reflected this I up suppose that day respondents following weights “I whichever When lift ground”, on to Thursday?).”. walk sports be or could a the day Wednesday for at each go exercises of can end you some the “I do could at or and how minutes few walk and a a where spend my for be When, evening could go tuesday to “on could step. like you I specific goals for and reasonable small, step rather wife a next set respondents of the However, be think step?”. this. would that to to “What make attribute Try asking, could by goals benefits? realistic this those set for reach to help respondents rudimentary guiding provide to did regards Josef in support of lack a if hncnieigfrhrpsil esn o nitninbhvo a,w eepondering were we gap, intention-behavior an for reasons possible further considering When ntenx eto,w iltk lsrlo ttetpco eaiiyi interventions. in negativity of topic the at look closer a take will we section, next the In they that in effect positive a have could reflection of repercussions the even that conclude We take also should we reflection, of repercussions possible consideration into taking When a,ral,i hscs a,Imkakrd aet,Imsavn n fIeat I if and starving I’m to, F) have (Participant I Zumba. knackered, at puke I’m to have nah, I’ll case now something this in really, nah, enhr o as.I’ ieajaosgrfin,ta’ ie. o’entlooking not you’re C) (Participant like... haven’t app. that’s “You the girlfriend, of kicked jealous accusation I a this that. like – to It’s but forward This days”. okay you!”. was 3 miss it for after we – here notification] days, like been 3 [push always for was a here you” been appeared haven’t miss “You actually “we says there it Where where days. had, 3 every I that app this Well 89 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. aigte,isedo h neddproeo edn hmtwrsternx oku rmore or workout next their towards them leading of PA. demoti- purpose increased intended in the resulted of that instead messages them, receiving vating reported respondents two interviews, qualitative our oiei e amnapdslydi gr .,ta re oices h oiaino the of motivation the opposite: exact increase the achieved to but tried Saturdays, on that active 6.1, more bit figure a in be to displayed respondent Garmin-app her in notice 90 [35]. lead previously effect could this situation observed a regular Such a completely. established negativity. efforts yet change increased behavior not further their have or stop in they gap to if result them intention-behavior especially could their users action, this If notice of routine, they lack Josef. workout their when to about responses times bad the in feel as message already well misguided as injuries, interviews a mentioned qualitative presented respondents the respon- are Our in of even stress gap. environment and or intention-behavior the duties, an users how family for demotivating discussed responsible strongly previously be very have could We risk dents otherwise altogether. or away wisely, them so turning do must events adverse atcpn eotdbigbc naStra fe u n en rsne ihthe with presented being and run a after Saturday a on back being reported D Participant ihnSes nitreto hwn ap rsdfihsacrigt h Ao h user, the of PA the to according fishes sad or happy showing intervention an Fish’n’Steps, other and workouts, missed performance decreased about user the inform that Messages ornfrtreklmtr”o oehn.Btised eral esyuofi a in off you sees really have he you soon” instead, “Tomorrow you But like see not C) something. and (Participant And or way. you it”. positive kilometers” says help about three the he could think for said and “and I run I – hope to that back!” like I like come he, something here. back, or because been “Come – you’ve general, like that in were nice Josef far it’s well “Hey, so used he, I’ve Because [Apps] other’s cool. C) he’s (Participant it’s think rascal! because I you cool, tut that’s tut think tut I here, that been far.”. „Great, haven’t “You so back!”, like process you’re not this that and positive into nice, motivation „Hey, your like, it’s put Josef] you using [when here And I react that C) don’t more”. (Participant I happy made that. you conditions. just day’s time to the I’m last well with “but well different see you’re wanna that because don’t that, thought I like now, Something I kilo- right made two summary. I made “You’ve that the like those in something made said time” it last app more running a metres with time last like, Or huh wa h ek utcm akfo u.Wa’ htspoe to supposed that What’s run. a from D) back (Participant came demotivated. really just felt I I heck” mean. the “what thought I ipa hnterfihwsnthpypnsmn emdt euti avoiding in [35] result behavior. desired to the the seemed encouraging ignored happy—punishment than participants rather not some system was that the is fish work their our when to display relevance particular of finding A Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. o hne fwnigt prahta oi,i ol aet easse pcfial designed specifically system a be to have would mind. it in behav- PA topic, circumstances maintainable that these support approach with to to approach feasible wanting a If as change. it quan- ior support and to qualitative work our this both in from indication results titative no and background theoretical our from stemming relationships, with [104]. information helping threatening to potentially attributed to is openness furthering Affirming and defensiveness, positive. reducing the accentuate to interviewing: Want today! weather “Great interpreted be like could one positive that message more run?”. a a a of for be go instead could to and “It’s it Saturday.” in!”, be on could run it lazy kilometers “You’re time.” 3 respon- last as that aspects more got kilometers positive you two the made that “You’ve highlight great of older to Instead of rephrased achieve. levels to be activity want should increasing dents messages in Negative health”) worsen [147]. can adults enough framed walking negatively than “Not effective more (e.g., are messages health”) improve can “Walking (e.g., messages framed change behavior for principle a as neutral proposed in been exclusively has [43]. feedback decision technologies frame design to This UbiFit [34]. design ways positive to or decision their for [146] coach lifestyle osloe l hnde nlsosfo ihnSes[3,Hutn[2,adteHealthy the and [32], Houston [33], Fish’n’Steps from lessons on drew then al. et Consolvo hnloiga h rseto rvdn eaiefebc,w aefudn arguments no found have we feedback, negative providing of prospect the at looking When motivational in affirming of concept the at looking by topic the on guidance further get We Positively principle. this for accommodate to way easy an be can content feedback Framing iue6.1: Figure xml fitretoa ehns htuitninlydemotivates unintentionally that mechanism interventional of Example 91 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. i sncsayt eons htmn foratosaegvre yasto eif n values and beliefs This of following: set [148]. the environment” a in particular by illustrated the governed from is are assimilated actions unconsciously our almost of been many have which that which recognise for to transformation necessary perspective a is transformative, “it are reflections These reflections. R3 motivation. level internalized their than increase rather to motivation would efforts externalized it making in why them rooted in about are result think that could the to levels condition be stopped PA in This would have PA personally. they respondents them, doing that the for feeling be of vital a none should be have but PA, they they more that why doing gathers or off it PA, better interviews, qualitative about the think From actively place. to first seem not did PARespondents about Thoughts Gridlocked 6.5 ecnnwdsusi hc asJsfwre rmta viewpoint. that from worked outcomes. Josef per- behavioral ways our the which presented perform we in to model, discuss do now the to With can need We change. participants of what model defining logic objectives, our formance given have we 3.2, section In Objectives Performance 6.6 motivation. internalized furthering thus and autonomy, for need the supporting levels, oqeto hi iw bu A ngnrl h tiueo epnet oad Astayed PA towards respondents of attitude the general, 92 In PA. about views their question to oe a eindt e atcpnsepoeteronraosfricesn hi At aid to PA their increasing for reasons own their explore participants let to designed was Josef h rtpromneojciew aegvni eto . was 3.2 section in given have we objective performance first The PA their increase to reasons individual their finding with respondents assist to seemed Josef xriemr.N,adlk,t elbte.S culy oedel huh about thought deeply more should I F) actually, you (Participant So says now? better. really feel Everyone why to like, you. you and telling says No, I’m always more. exercise everyone Brainwashing, because best. actually more. at exercise thought, head I should the exercise, of to back reasons the Well,... at but is PA, weight more the loosing do Sure, to just need than C) that. I it (Participant something, about weight, to loose think of more to don’t less there’s have You are or that I those that. alright something, And about something, of shows asks more all. scales nobody do at And to about whatever. condition, wanting think Physical or for don’t the it. reasons usually to for good you more mean, really there’s stuff the me I is and for weight condition But, losing there. medical probably. Because... thinking people actually?”. most started “Why for really thinking really goal have was it’s I I think Because because I reasons. cool that’s idea. think No summer? I for model? D) shape (Participant a in again. get become feelings to own to my want me?”. want confirm I for to know, Because important important don’t so goal? I really this this I, achieve is Because to why want “Hey, know,... I then don’t do I And Why I,... six-pack. because or a weight have loose to to want want I “because wrote I assume Let’s PO1 etn respondents getting , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. n seto nte.I eea,i sqetoal ffcsn ndrcl uprigmultiple supporting directly on focusing if questionable is it supporting general, directly not In if another. even change, or behavior aspect PA consider towards one we approach results which helpful persuasiveness, our overall and in an reflection, show noticeable MI, to particularly & SDT was between effect correlation This the to regarding behavior. aimed the we research. of future that internalization for in furthering left topic is the topic with not this helped into did have further intervention might looking behavior, our Josef PA While with of internalization sessions topic. further two this tackle doing to of us scope allow limited our objective, performance nweg ht8%o epnet eyo hi oiaint tr on A ecnie our one. consider the promising we PA, a with doing aspects Combined multiple start of in to motivation motivation thought cues. that their have furthering external on they of rely or behavior approach respondents environments a of up given en- 82% pick on can that to knowledge and relying them behavior than external PA lead rather current on could their relying which themselves, to it, of alternatives doing instead new themselves motivators found vision internal have furthering respondents Some of perspective cues. the from goal this esnlga n etn smc xriea edd ihta nweg,spotn the supporting knowledge, objective. that worthwhile unexpectedly With an be needed. might as behavior exercise PA a much reaching of with as for competence help getting perceived results to PA and correlation considering surprising goal to see related personal did be While a to we seems one. ours, competence insignificant of Perceived statistically focus question. a a this not albeit PA, was objective preferred performance their this at good someone. feeling with behavior respondents their in this discussed fulfilled have intervention, otherwise persuasive not computer-based might that a group as with target Josef, than a rather as for Josef this PO with interpret PA We their discussing human. preferred a respondents most surprise, our To one. ttdta hi w oiainwstemi rge o on PA. 82% doing since for well, trigger fit main have the to was seems motivation own this improve their respondents, to that our order For stated in respondents behavior. of the motivation of internal self-regulation the their furthering at aimed rather objective. but performance directly particular this towards helpful being be time competence, could their perceived PA, in worth preferred increase being their the PA at Especially as PA. good doing such Josef, into with statements pressured session related less first feeling autonomy the ob- and after with This exercise more more need. agreeing done they having of as them because that exercise of use. much result find of the as to week be getting surprising could a with servation not for after more significant used was agree statistically only it did not was change, respondents were intervention Nevertheless, behavior questions our long-term related that at for Given more changes peers. self-reported targeted their was as and active week equally a or less be to selves stopped choices PA having their behavior, doing. to PA themselves alternatives envision new their can considered about even they Some think that successful behavior. was to PA intervention their encouraged about the being thought Nevertheless, with and Josef. agreed to people talking before that was in it as same the mostly vrl,Jsftcldtepromneojcie esi ietmne,btisedby instead but manner, direct a in less objectives performance the tackled Josef Overall, easrce oilfcosfrrgltn Abhvo with behavior PA regulating for factors social abstracted We edfie eeggn nP fe irpin as disruptions after PA in re-engaging defined We Towards epn epet tr on Atesle a h oi of topic the was themselves PA doing start to people Helping PO3 to regards In a ohl epewt eual hcigterP.W i o upr hsobjective this support not did We PA. their checking regularly with people help to was PO6 PO2 eln optn tdigP,w ecie lgtices fagreement of increase slight a perceived we PA, doing at competent feeling , oices aeieP,w bevdms epnet osdrn them- considering respondents most observed we PA, baseline increase to , PO7 hl ecnie hsaworthwhile a this consider we While . PO5 icsigP ihsome- with PA discussing , PO4 gi,w tackled we Again, . 93 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. hne nteqetosrgrigST&M,adta ih edt rn ocuin if conclusions wrong to lead significant 94 might statistically that any and see MI, not & did shortened value. SDT we The face regarding at why session taken weeks. in questions the 12 part the to under large in regards of a in changes time play three decisions completion than might our a shorter approach of with no 2-session some was sessions guided trial four which field stipulates [108], garden dialogues, METM UbiFit The the three over like sessions [34]. trials four weeks with shorter conducted even was Move and I [64], as such months work Related between. in break long not. entirely would going risk effort field the the respective without bears be the proportion. it could of of solution findings, out our experts interesting sophisticated that to how relevances limited lead it or case, Furthermore, aspects our in particular psychology. did, overlooking and fields design of background persuasive of as engineering combination such software this fields a complex While from multiple into coming deeper scratch venturing from meant Josef intervention the Creating Work the of Scope care. improvement with for handled room not most if the conclusions see wrong we to where lead aspects potentially the a could out take that point shall or and section work This our shortcomings. at without look not critical was intervention this of implementation Limitations The & Reflection Critical 6.7 was intervention our that see to a glad have were further did we aspect. persuasiveness so that Josef Josef’s in fields, found use. successful other and to the being Lastly, easy with very human correlation as reflection. another well considerable of than as levels rather appearance the Josef likable and of with statements. both dimensions talking self-motivating the preferred eliciting group both by target supporting practitioner our in MI succeed and an further needs, as psychological did innate ways We three promising the be- supporting in towards for worked take trend might slight Josef participants a steps see other did We support change. and havior kick-off to itself PA do to direct motivation and meaningfully aspects. change all other behavior do supporting to of for trying interventions aspect is of other one instead to that more support and users intervention situation, unsuccessfully, to another this motivation once of newfound use at aware or or be things behavior could friend wanted intervention a An the reminder with steps. translating workout actionable with further and a helping topic reflected add for the Having to suited about decide topic. better want They could talk the they will calendar, on topic, environment. people reflect their the and that their to on think imagine fitting perspective them to their ways, help changed straightforward to different hopefully is Josef multiple use environment It in example, the for change it. that could, in behavior and part their gap, large support intention-behavior a to the play about could worthwhile talked people a is previously of them have of We all in changes significant goal. of expectation the with objectives performance osdr o xml,teipeetto fJsfa w-eso prahwt week- a with approach two-session a as Josef of implementation the example, for Consider, internal supporting was argumentation of line that from on focused has Josef aspect one The Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ermna osm usin.I oe a aua agaepoesn aaiiiso even or the capabilities change to processing opportunities new language disproportionally of range natural responded whole or had a create all Josef would at it If analysis, understand sentiment not rudimentary questions. did users some if to detecting detrimental of way no cases. was these there in functionality useful “clarify” be a could more Providing bit emphasized. a in be question Nevertheless, the should dialogue elaborates words reflection. clear that and essential supporting succinct and with more used, path, well clear be goes a While should towards it guided design. invention’s or goal, be the should the minds respondents meet misses where their fully cases it not on like did to was answer seem the freedom what may if the this with even answer, cases, respond to some to wanted In they respondents what allowed intended. observed restrictions than we words differently without important and the questions missed answer design, users with interpreted we some the conversation or research, how with this questions the with helped 6.2 line in of work in section answers this understanding and in of an usability described good background had overall theoretical have it the we like While and seem user. dialogue, avatar written the made on nevertheless based primarily is Josef Understanding Semantic without Negativity even or an Misinterpretations form Handling to help could metrics these having effects. metrics. intervention’s by health the other gained of or be picture they rate, clearer count, can heart step that weight, e.g., user’s insights fitness, the additional of as aspect The such Running, one data Nike just further Garmin, on provide Fitbit, focusing potentially data as of can health such Instead platforms which apps in others. into other point many tap from central and also collected the iHealth, could is as serve phone one PA, platforms iOS/Android These an for from Fit. start Google reasonable change. or a behavior Health the be Apple of like could impact pedometer actual the a measuring using is While Josef from missing currently feature One issues Tracking the Impact interest, of aspects the mitigated. be of would implemented measurability section fully sharpening this the a a in towards as described with objectives Josef Combined of performance version insights. the a valuable of of yield results could the intervention with 12-week work four-session, this of results the comparing Josef’s for indicators stronger POs. provided the being have to with regards supposedly agree in would strongly effectiveness PA” to “Participants phrased chosen as POs their such work. investigating, in our are competent in we conclusions level” definite “low recommended more same the draw the below to target level” if Behavior “high PA too Baseline is “Increase PO reflection long- PO2 the on while levels,” influencing targeted example, focused in For intervention part PA. they a towards our that play attitude while could affecting in changes the change, level” behavior in behavior level” “high “low helpful of comparably term, them facets were considered observable they we immediate, intervention, While more the 3.2. of section phase in protocol design mapping intervention the of oe,i h urn eso,lce l eatcudrtnigo h ilge ssuch, As dialogue. the of understanding semantic all lacked version, current the in Josef, feedback, and results indicative our on based that, hypothesize can we considered, this All part as established we objectives performance the to related was scope of issue Another 95 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. osdrbengtvt.Wtotteesil,Jsfcudntspotcranuesweea with where met users is certain Josef support case not in could appropriately. supporting Josef intervened positively have skills, could more therapist these is human Without that path statements negativity. dialogue clarifying interweave considerable a could Josef with answers. respond the or to according dialogue the of direction 96 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. epdu omv rmamr btatbcgon ocnrt eindcsoso o an how of decisions design concrete to background abstract easier. more which maintained a SDT, being compliments from to that move approach itself to empiric lends us an turn, helped presented in how (MI) which, guided Interviewing behavior, that Motivational meta-framework of the internalization was support (SDT) to Theory Self-Determination intervention. field. the our in intervention decisions change inform behavior to our useful create be to will needed this steps hope in the we involved of that process account development holistic software a [20]. provide the apps to on change work behavior detail PA in-depth successful provided is the designing we combination for in took This Furthermore, necessary We reflection and account. relevant into further change. be design behavior to to persuasive PA considered and designed long-term change components behavior elicit progress health of To to of effects aims perspectives behavior. the that particular intervention on that computer-based focused of a environment we the goal, long- for maintainable, that fitting a towards create was to an and itself for behavior lent aimed PA that more we term background over “Josef,” effective theoretical intervention a be computer-based considered to the that degree create approach To necessary the 2.2). to (see change periods con- in behavior extended to PA especially seem of field, not environment the did Following that the of approaches background sider analyzed theoretical results. the the Furthermore, immediate respecting solutions. showing of consumer lack commercial over a change noticed we behavior notion, PA this maintainable after a soon creating quite vor drawer the in [19]. land [7] [17] which [16] wearables, apps ineffective as or solutions appeared new- purchase where have the market, behavior of consumer on PA maintainability the focus in long-term change This noticeable of to most cost [34]). is the effect [33], This at (e.g., however. come behavior, users to found suc- their seem were does greater of that change behavior offer interventions immediate PA multiple cheap, more short-term been the advantages, have increasing other There in amongst cessful scalable. advantages. are, incredibly promising they are offer and therapists, interventions anonymity, human computer-based to change, comparison behavior PA In of area the In h rtprpcie elhbhvo hne edu odsoe hoeia akrudfor background theoretical a discover to us lead change, behavior health perspective, first The fa- to designed was that intervention computer-based a of idea the on focused research Our Conclusion CHAPTER 97 7 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. increae oiieywt edns ocag.Teprevdcmeec npeerdPA preferred in competence 98 perceived The Never- change. internaliza- to 6. the Stronger chapter readiness topic. to in with this due detail positively for more be results correlated question in tion might between discussed result correlation have a This we discovered notion we a significance. theless, use, statistical intervention yield of not time limited did they SDT, support could and senti- contemplative of positive occurrence slightly high a a showed intended. responses with as the responded change-words of word-cloud overall a and at Looking intended, ment. as answers their contemplated second a data. ran quantitative and yielding prototype prototype conducting improved initial by an the data with for necessary experiment interviews the qualitative generated did We long- we increasing how research. at showed mixed-method aimed 3.7 are Section PA. that maintainable interventions computer-based term about more it. these discover support to how to flection particular, created in we that and, components work the this and reflection with to involved related decisions decisions design design the of account and detailed generated we cloud reason word average to the the us like did. allow analysis and we to advanced analysis time, important more sentiment very usage for the was allow total hand and answer, at findings responses to our all about time Having the responses. required text saved tracked change of Josef given, behavior length well. was about as statements that there make response advantages to clicks every offered or us technology page Nevertheless, allow a that consideration. to metrics up-front visits software tracking writing as regular button, straightforward data to a as frameworks, comparison be on might In language, tracking construction programming metric patterns. the where platforms, communication Towards projects, influencing of network problem. and actually choice concept, a of our persistence at chance documented technology higher we throwing a Josef, just has of the of that allows instead engineering something behavior software create aforementioned human since two to the decision However, needed manner. conscious are effective a very perspectives a was in rather delay solutions considered technical This were of aspects construction engineering work. software this the engineering that in software noted of late be perspective should the It where focus. phase, into implementation came the to transition reflection. could furthering we for relevant be detailed to a gave choices then particular We considered appear- platforms. we target the how and theme, system, of field. intervention dialogue account the selection, the in color choosing agent, work of the other of process for ance the reference the of documented documented points We have create we to Furthermore, “Josef”. detail more agent, in artificial decisions design persuasive involved a using offers intervention and computer-based MI of innate practice the recommended 2.3). of the (see one of interventions autonomy, our computer-based part for furthering of is potential in component SDT, vast role by core considerable presented a a needs as play psychological reflection could identified it then since We intervention, implemented. be could intervention h eut ehv ie n52hv hw ht hl eddfididctr htJosef that indicators find did we while that, shown have 5.2 in given have we users results The that 5.5 section in showed Josef of use the during given responses the of Analysis re- and MI, SDT, of background theoretical chosen our to respect a with giving Josef by analyzed questions We research our of part one answering to contributed 4 and 3 Chapters complete, intervention the of design the and established background theoretical the Having a to approach our translated we design, persuasive of perspective the of help the With Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. e u nevninspromneojcie esi ietmne,btisedb furthering by instead but 6.6). manner, section (see direct behavior a tack- the how Josef in of that considered less internalization found objectives we and Lastly, performance 6.5) reinforce- intervention’s section 6.4). (see positive our PA section to of led regards (see lead importance in intervention which thoughts the change gridlocked 6.3), confirm behavior had section respondents of to (see type and bad our gap feel in reflec- intention-behavior respondents ment this an making cases, consider of some In to that cost us 6.2). listening unintended section reflective the (see an simulate and answers had to of 6.1), tion succeeded understanding section semantic summaries (see a of without practitioners types even MI different of in providing succeeded skill of Josef core approach observations. a further statements, make both motivating might to this combined us eliciting-self we that considering allowed approach that that explorative results correlations an see quantitative using discovered and to results qualitative we our glad at that were Looking in we missed. fruitful Overall, otherwise us, have was For tech- perspectives [20]. change al. multiple negatives. behavior et from and false Thomson work design to by persuasive lead between out have disconnect pointed a could niques of could persuasiveness dangers but of the results lack confirms intended this A their achieve persuasion. not lacked did for re-run have had that to persuasiveness interventions results impact in significant computer-based substantial yield asked with the might we Given it studies questions that reflection. hypothesized with as we positively well intervention, correlated as computer-based rather our MI Josef Josef & of with SDT use behavior of PA of area their ease the about The talking preferred human. Josef group rated another the persua- larger Respondents than the us, the 5.4. of For and section consideration likable, in due [26]. very perceived taking as we work of intervention previous importance computer-based the by a was of out work siveness after pointed this field of reflection the part of researching surprising potential when most perceived the have how of we on aware need field becoming the and a from [26] reflection, examples support Fitzpatrick provide could further and decisions technology Fleck design from documented execution Our reflection an [71]. for documents Baumer methods approach support- evaluation evaluation in suggested Our is previously work thoughts. to of their failed more Josef structuring which and in in levels participants way higher reflection ing surprising on of A reflected levels to expected. regards participants the initially Furthermore, in than both dimensions participants support reflection. affected successfully provide of Josef did dimensions could how intervention the work of The and our account 5.3. our [65], section gave al. We in et reflection reference. Friedrichs of and PA by point computer-tailored Fruit study new web-based a long-term a a like related Move, interventions, I the or computer-based and [63] a intervention al. in that et work change Resnicow previous from behavior at Intervention for looking Vegetable fully when MI Especially been & not [25]. SDT have work combined previous characteristics by operational out where pointed additional interventions, as lend SDT aspect elucidated could of one results field These supporting the how others. to affect of could insights understanding intervention computer-based better a a in worth provide PA SDT considering could of as correlation well This as needed time. as exercise their much as getting self-reported with correlated 99 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. ytmi eyaatbe hrfr,i rsnsasldsatn on o uuewr otest to work future the for take point example, For starting interventions. solid computer-based a hypothesis. dialogue-driven following that presents of dialogue avatar area it Josef’s the likable Therefore, Furthermore, in a 5.4). hypotheses adaptable. (see with computers very intervention desktop is as computer-based well system easy-to-use as devices an mobile be on works to found was Josef Work Future 7.1 100 time, perspective. any technical at a worldwide, from available easily somewhat made In clients be relapsing. of could breaks/when number long support any after to this behavior even therapists, their and need, in human they respondents to whenever support comparison need, could could they dialogues change as reflect, long This people as so. change help doing to obviously approach without the varied structure following be therapy If repeatable a potential. Designing considerable change. offers behavior of guidance continuous providing for (see experienced have we issues more mitigate gain to to or fit discovered excellent 6). an we de- be correlations relevant could the each trials about at Micro-randomized knowledge option [149]. intervention given have an we assigning point randomly cision involves that approach an trials, anew. intervention in change work behavior future whole supporting for the and point create platforms starting to having straightforward multiple to more on comparison a available have being to as the mechanisms use such dialogue but advanced dialogues, capabilities with the UX combination change completely and in could avatar background one further, same theoretical step chosen one “healthy Going our with instead. researching dialogues topic that with Josef’s in started activity” get could, “physical One to of effort. eating” occurrence additional that every little Josef present replace of would example, variation topics for a change behavior creating health dialogue, other presenting about on talks approach our based primarily we Since found if considerably research research. up speed of could topic analysis persuasiveness, basis a for This for ensuring answers already. fitting export implementation, of to care software way taken work Design, a been have having this would and of file. collection, ones text answer the tracking, a of metric instead changing establishing dialogues above as new the easy uses to that as related Josef is topics of version other a and Creating outcomes, hypothesis. behavioral with satisfaction enjoyment, havior nte eerhopruiycudb omv oad h ogtr plcblt fJosef of applicability long-term the towards move to be could opportunity research Another micro-randomized run could work future particular, in approach, change behavior our For change. behavior PA to limited not is hypotheses other test to Josef using of option The be- about think respondents help that dialogues design could one hypothesis, this test To Eapehptei htlnsisl orsac nJsfsdaou ytm[53]) system dialogue Josef’s values. in and research beliefs to identity, itself their lends that with hypothesis behaviour (Example adopted experience newly individuals the satis- if the of enjoyment, or from behaviour congruence self-determination on than outcomes, focusing behavioural rather by with behaviour, example, faction new For the changing. en- enacting of they experience if from maintenance gratification for regular facilitating particularly able be to hypothesized are Motives Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 1 WHO, [1] 8 .B elr .Kana .E relc,adM .Bmn Mn h hoeia a:Interpret- Gap: Theoretical the “Mind Buman, P. M. and Froehlich, E. J. Klasnja, Sedentary P. Hekler, in B. Technology E. Fitness with Change “Behavior [8] Lachman, E. M. and Sullivan mobile N. top-ranked A. in techniques change “Behavior Maher, [7] P. J. and Yang, H. C. Conroy, E. D. [6] “https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/309656/umfrage/prognose-zur-anzahl- Inc., Statista, [5] 2019- Accessed: “https://www.statista.com/topics/1145/internet-usage-worldwide/.” Inc., “Computer- Statista, Carey, P. and Manuscript, A. Salovey, [4] P. Latimer, E. A. Rivers, E. S. Schmid, L. K. Organization, [3] Health World [2] 9 .Cnov,D .MDnl,adJ .Lna,“hoydie einsrtge o technologies for strategies design “Theory-driven Landay, a. J. and McDonald, W. D. Consolvo, S. [9] 1]S cope .Aly .VnLpeed,N .Ba,S .Wlim,M .Dna,adC Van- C. and Duncan, J. M. Williams, L. S. Bray, A. N. Lippevelde, Van W. Alley, S. Schoeppe, S. [13] Ac- “https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_adults/en/.” Organization, Health World [12] “https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/physical_activity_intensity/en/.” Organization, Health World [11] 1]B .Bdl,N ure n .Gorely, T. and Mutrie, N. Biddle, S. B. [10] n,Uig n eeoigBhvoa hoyi C Research,” HCI in Theory Behavioral Developing and Using, ing, Activity,” Physical Increasing 2017. January, for no. Evidence 4, the vol. of Review A Adults: 2014. activity,” physical for apps 2019-11-09. Accessed: der-smartphone-nutzer-weltweit/.” 11-09. Meta-Analysis A 2007,” – Reduction: 1988 Trials, Risk Controlled Behavioral Randomized and 75 of Promotion Health for Interventions Delivered nHmnfcosi optn ytm H 09 CHI - systems computing in life,” factors everyday Human on in change behavior support that 2013. 2013. eaot,“fcc fitretosta s pst mrv it hsclatvt n sedentary and activity physical tivity diet, review,” improve systematic to A apps use behaviour: that interventions of “Efficacy delanotte, 2019-11-09. cessed: 2019-11-09. Accessed: o.1,n.1 2016. 1, no. 13, vol. , ocmuial iessCutyPols2018 Profiles Country Diseases Noncommunicable mrcnJunlo rvnieMedicine Preventive of Journal American lblato lno hsclatvt 2018-2030 activity physical on plan action Global nentoa ora fBhvoa urto n hsclAc- Physical and Nutrition Behavioral of Journal International scooyo hsclActivity Physical of Psychology rceig fte2t nentoa conference international 27th the of Proceedings p 0–1,2009. 405–414, pp. , Epidemiology 2018. . Bibliography rc H 2013 CHI Proc. o.2,n.1 p 23,2009. 32–37, pp. 1, no. 28, vol. , o.4,n.6 p 649–652, pp. 6, no. 46, vol. , rnir nPbi Health Public in Frontiers o oebr2015, November No. . 2018. . p 3307–3316, pp. , 101 , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 2]S cope .Aly .L ea,M amn .A ry .VnLpeed,J .Gnam, P. J. Lippevelde, Van W. Bray, A. N. Hayman, M. Rebar, L. A. Alley, S. Schoeppe, S. [29] 102 Eccles, P. M. Hardeman, W. Francis, J. Abraham, C. Johnston, M. Richardson, M. Maastricht Michie, at S. Neuroscience and Psychology [28] of Faculty the of section Psychology Social Applied [27] Landscape,” Design a Framing reflection: on “Reflecting Fitzpatrick, G. and Fleck R. [26] and theory self-determination of role “The Vansteenkiste, M. and Palmeira, L. A. Teixeira, J. P. Miller, R. [25] W. and Rollnick S. [24] 2]R .Ra n .L ei Sl eemnto hoyadteFcltto fItiscMotivation, Intrinsic of Facilitation the and Theory Determination “Self Deci, L. E. and Ryan M. R. [23] 2]K onn n .OnsKkoe,“esaiesse design,” system “Persuasive Oinas-Kukkonen, H. “Creating and Morris, Torning and K. J. Mackrill, G., Ludden, [22] D., Lockton, S., Clune, R., Cain, K., Niedderer, A. [21] 2]C hmo,J ah n .Mee,“esaieDsg o eaiu hneAp:Issues Apps: Change Behaviour for Design “Persuasive Maeder, A. and Nash, J. Thomson, C. [20] 1]H e,“eiwo eerhso mrpoeapiain o hsclatvt rmto in promotion activity physical for applications smartphone on researches of “Review Jee, H. [19] 1]D oko,D arsn n .A tno,“oeso h sr einr’prpcie on perspectives Designers’ user: the of “Models Stanton, A. N. and Harrison, D. Lockton, D. [18] 1]C ae,J yn .Aboi n .Eny Ues xeine fwaal ciiytrackers: activity wearable of experiences “Users’ Edney, S. and Ambrosi, C. Ryan, J. Maher, C. [17] 1]P S .D,adV G Waal eie sfclttr,ntdies fhat eairchange,” behavior health of drivers, not facilitators, as devices “Wearable KG, V. and DA, A. MS, P. [16] 1]C .Dve,J .Sec,C adlnte .M aecin,adW .Mmey “Meta- Mummery, K. W. and Caperchione, M. C. Vandelanotte, C. Spence, C. J. Davies, A. C. [15] 1]R .Jsp,N .Drn,T .Bntz n .W emz,“nentBsdPyia Activity Physical “Internet-Based Pekmezi, W. D. and Benitez, J. T. Durant, H. N. Joseph, P. R. [14] aybhvori hlrnadaoecns eiwo ult,faue n eaiu change behaviour and features quality, seden- of and review activity A physical diet, adolescents: improve and techniques,” to children “Apps in Vandelanotte, behaviour C. tary and Direito, A. Bachert, P. p –0 2017. 1–10, pp. change hierarchically behavior 93 of of reporting (v1) the taxonomy for technique consensus change international behavior an interventions,” “The Building Wood, techniques: E. clustered C. and Cane, J. 2017-11-19. Accessed: “https://interventionmapping.com/.” University, 2012. 17, p. 1, to no. introduction 9, vol. an series,” health: and special activity, IJBNPA physical the nutrition, behavioral in interviewing motivational fte2n ofrneo h optrHmnItrcinSeilItrs ru fAustralia of Group Interest Special ’10 Interaction OZCHI - Computer-Human Interaction the Computer-Human of on Conference 22nd the of Being,” Well and Development Social utial noaintruhDsg o eaiu hne umr eot”2014. Report,” Summary Change: Behaviour for Design through Innovation Sustainable inlCneec nPrusv ehooy-Prusv ’09 Persuasive - Technology Persuasive on Conference tional Technologists Information and Scientists Designers,” for elh adults,” healthy nunigssanbebehaviour,” sustainable influencing rs-etoa study,” cross-sectional A JAMA a fBhvoa urto n hsclActivity Physical and Nutrition Behavioral levels,” of activity physical nal increase to interventions internet-delivered of analysis Interventions,” o.33 o ,p.4940 2015. 459–460, pp. 5, no. 313, vol. , nentoa ora fBhvoa urto n hsclActivity Physical and Nutrition Behavioral of Journal International naso eairlMedicine Behavioral of Annals mrcnJunlo ietl Medicine Lifestyle of Journal American rceig fteAna ofrneo h ot fia nttt fComputer of Institute African South the of Conference Annual the of Proceedings ora fEecs Rehabilitation Exercise of Journal M ulcHealth Public BMC nentoa ora fBhvoa urto n hsclActivity Physical and Nutrition Behavioral of Journal International hti oiainlInterviewing? Motivational is What ora fDsg Research Design of Journal mrcnPsychologiest American p 31-31,2016. 43:1—-43:10, pp. , o.1,n.1 p –,2017. 1–8, pp. 1, no. 17, vol. , o.4,n.1 p 19,2013. 81–95, pp. 1, no. 46, vol. , o oebr .26 2010. 216, p. November, no. , o.9 2012. 9, vol. , o.1,n.1 p –1 2017. 3–11, pp. 1, no. 13, vol. , o.8 o ,p.4–7 2014. 42–67, pp. 1, no. 8, vol. , o aur,p ,2009. 1, p. January, no. , o.5,n.1 p 87,2000. 68–78, pp. 1, no. 55, vol. , o.1,n.12 p –7 2012. 7–27, pp. 1-2, no. 10, vol. , o.2.1995. 23. vol. , rceig fte4hInterna- 4th the of Proceedings nentoa Jour- International o.1,n.1, no. 14, vol. , Proceedings , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 4]T rt n .Hag Prusv ehooyi h elwrd td fln-emueo activity of use long-term of study a world: real the in technology “Persuasive Huang, E. and Fritz T. [44] 4]D .Esen .H ag .R ia .Fgry n .A usn Rcnieigtedevice the “Reconsidering Munson, A. S. and Fogarty, J. Pina, R. L. Kang, H. J. Epstein, A. D. [43] 3]J .Ln .Mmkn,S idnr .Dlju,adH .Srb Fs’’tp:Encouraging “Fish’n’Steps: Strub, B. H. and Delajoux, G. Lindtner, S. Mamykina, L. Lin, J. J. [33] 3]S osloadD coad Atvt esn ntewl:afil ra fuitgarden,” ubifit of trial field a wild: the in sensing “Activity McDonald, D. and Consolvo S. [34] 3]B .Fg,“esaietcnlg:Uigcmuest hnewa etikaddo,” and think we what change to computers Using technology: “Persuasive Fogg, J. B. Accessed: [37] “https://www.imedicalapps.com/2015/09/ims-health-apps-report/.” iMedicalApps, [36] outcome “Preliminary Rodger, W. N. and Harris, B. S. Bell, C. R. Myers, M. A. Tudor-Locke, E. C. [30] 4]P .Si,K a,E .Poe .B osn n .M arl,“s n dpinChallenges Adoption and “Use Carroll, M. J. and Rosson, B. M. Poole, S. E. Han, K. Shih, C. P. [42] 4]S ledr .Cwun n .Fse,“nesadn atcpto nsotadpyia activity physical and sport in participation “Understanding Foster, C. and Cowburn, G. Allender, S. [40] 4]P S .D,adV G Waal eie sfclttr,ntdies fhat eairchange,” behavior health of drivers, not facilitators, as devices “Wearable KG, V. and DA, A. MS, P. [41] en- that technologies for requirements “Design Landay, J. and Smith, I. Everitt, K. Consolvo, S. [32] 3]S osloadP lsj,“lwr rarbtam? norgn wrns ciiywith activity & awareness encouraging army?: robot a or “Flowers Klasnja, P. and Consolvo S. [35] physical pedometer-based a of benefits “Health Tudor-Locke, C. and Ryan, A. D. Chan, B. C. [31] 3]T .Wb,J oeh .Yrly n .Mci,“sn h nentt rmt elhbehavior health promote to Internet the “Using Michie, S. and Yardley, L. Joseph, J. Webb, L. T. [39] Rodden, T. Fitzpatrick, G. Egglestone, Rennick S. Burridge, J. Mawson, S. Ricketts, I. Balaam, M. [38] 2016. ’16 UbiComp - Computing Ubiquitous esn eie o fitness,” for devices sensing hsclAtvt iha neatv optrGame,” Computer Interactive an with Activity Physical p 6–7,2006. 261–278, pp. 2019-11-27. fWaal ciiyTrackers,” Activity Wearable of mn hlrnadaut:Arve fqaiaiestudies,” qualitative of review A adults: and children among o ,p.8685 2006. 826–835, pp. 6, no. 2004. JAMA . . . the of ceedings activity,” physical courage ntedae, in drawer,” the in displays,” mobile personal, workers,” sedentary in intervention activity hne ytmtcrve n eaaayi fteipc ftertclbss s fbehavior of use basis, efficacy,” theoretical on of delivery impact of mode the and of techniques, meta-analysis change and review systematic A change: ’11 CHI - systems computing 2011. in factors 3073, mobility,” Human p. “Motivating on 2014, conference Harris, annual E. 2011 and the Axelrod, of L. ings Nind, T. Wilkinson, A. Hughes, A.-M. 2002. Dec. 2002, vol. vlaino h rtse rga:adiypyia ciiyitreto o niiul ihtype with individuals for intervention activity physical daily a diabetes,” 2 program: step first the of evaluation o.33 o ,p.4940 2015. 459–460, pp. 5, no. 313, vol. , ain dcto n Counseling and Education Patient rceig fte21 C nentoa on ofrneo evsv and Pervasive on Conference Joint International ACM 2016 the of Proceedings p 7710,2008. 1797–1806, pp. , rceig fteSGH . . . SIGCHI the of Proceedings rceig fte1t . . . 10th the of Proceedings rceig fte3n . . . 32nd the of Proceedings Cneec Proceedings iConference NwYr,NwYr,UA,p.8980 C Press, ACM 829–840, pp. USA), York, New York, (New , rvnieMedicine Preventive o.4,n.1 p 3–2,2002. 28, – 23 pp. 1, no. 47, vol. , ora fMdclItre Research Internet Medical of Journal p 46,2008. 54–63, pp. , 2014. , bCm 06 bqiosComputing Ubiquitous 2006: UbiComp o ,p.11,2015. 1–12, pp. 1, no. , p 5–6,2006. 457–466, pp. , elhEuainResearch Education Health o.3,n.6 p 25–1222, – 1215 pp. 6, no. 39, vol. , o January no. , Ubiquity Proceed- o.21, vol. , 2010. , Pro- 103 , , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 4]J osVlauv,M eu-óe,adM .Mríe-ozlz Rs fijr codn to according injury of “Risk Martínez-González, A. M. and Seguí-Gómez, M. Pons-Villanueva, J. [48] 104 5]J .N,N tuai,C hgre-tuai .L ei .M yn .L ua n .C. G. and Duda, L. J. Ryan, M. R. Deci, L. E. Reid, Thøgersen-Ntoumani, D. C. Ntoumanis, R. N. and Ng, Y. Kenny, J. P. G. Sigal, [58] J. R. Tulloch, H. Guérin, E. Fortier, S. M. Sweet, N. S. [57] tracking,” health personal in “Challenges Kay, M. [46] 5]W od .Tm n .G it Cagn icmtne,dsutn habits,” disrupting circumstances, “Changing Witt, G. M. and Tam, L. Wood, W. [52] 5]M .Sla .Mrln,E .Craa .N iia .R otno .S idrc,M G. M. Minderico, S. C. Coutinho, R. S. Vieira, N. P. CarraÇa, V. E. Markland, D. Silva, N. M. [56] examining experiments of review meta-analytic “A Koestner, R. and Ryan, M. R. Deci, L. E. [54] main- for explanations “Theoretical Sniehotta, F. and White, M. Dombrowski, U. S. Kwasnicka, D. [53] formation,” habit “Promoting Gardner, B. and Lally P. [49] 4]A .Riäe,J akai .Kroa n .Rmeä Aoecn hsclactivity-related physical “Adolescent Rimpelä, A. and Karhola, L. Parkkari, J. Räisänen, M. A. [47] 5]J ano .Kroe,K apie,O etä n .Jrie,“erighatyhbt iha with habits healthy “Learning Järvinen, J. and Kenttä, O. Kaipainen, K. Korhonen, I. Vainio, J. [51] S. A. Rickman, D. A. Helsel, D. Marcus, D. M. King, C. W. Rogers, J. R. Davis, K. K. Jakicic, M. J. [45] 5]P .Tier,E .Craa .Mrln,M .Sla n .M yn Eecs,physical “Exercise, Ryan, M. R. and Silva, N. M. Markland, D. Carraça, V. E. Teixeira, J. P. [55] Habits,” Consumer Create and Break to “Interventions Wood, W. and Verplanken B. [50] ilas Sl-eemnto hoyApidt elhCnet:AMeta-Analysis,” A Science Contexts: Psychological Health on to tives Applied Theory “Self-Determination Williams, inter- motivation,” exercise autonomous an and Medicine self-efficacy completing & of after model diabetes mediation 2 A type trial: with vention adults in activity physical “Understanding 2016. sep 1171, ao,L .Srih,adP .Tier,“xrieatnmu oiainpeit -rweight 3-yr predicts motivation autonomous “Exercise Teixeira, women,” J. P. in and loss Sardinha, B. L. Matos, motivation,” intrinsic on rewards extrinsic of effects the theories.,” behaviour of review systematic a view change: behaviour of tenance atcpto nseicpyia ciiis -erflo-po 436priiat ftesun the of participants 356 14 of follow-up 6-year a activities: cohort,” physical specific in participation activities,” physical 2016. time 1260786, leisure p. other 1, and no. 3, sports vol. school club, sports in injuries Students oaiyadSca Psychology Social and sonality Healthcare for Technologies ing self-intervention,” mobile Trial.,” Clinical Randomized Intervention Lifestyle IDEA a The With Combined Loss: Technology Weight Wearable Long-term of “Effect on Belle, H. S. and Wahed, urto n hsclActivity Physical review,” and systematic Nutrition A theory: self-determination and activity, 1999. 627–668, pp. 2013. SUPPL1, no. ulcPlc Marketing & Policy Public o.1,n.3 p 7–6 2016. 277–96, pp. 3, no. 10, vol. , o.2,n.2 p 23,2014. 32–37, pp. 2, no. 21, vol. , nentoa ora fEpidemiology of Journal International o.1,n.4 p 1–2,20.PI:19697252. PMID: 2009. 419–429, pp. 4, no. 14, vol. , eiieadSinei prsadExercise and Sports in Science and Medicine rceig fte8hItrainlCneec nPraieComput- Pervasive on Conference International 8th the of Proceedings o.2,n.1 p 013 2006. 90–103, pp. 1, no. 25, vol. , o.7 o ,p.3530 2012. 325–340, pp. 4, no. 7, vol. , o.9 o ,p 8 2012. 78, p. 1, no. 9, vol. , o.8,n.6 p 1–3,2005. 918–933, pp. 6, no. 88, vol. , p 5–5,2014. 150–157, pp. , o.3,n.2 p 8–8,2010. 580–587, pp. 2, no. 39, vol. , RS rsras h C aaiefor Magazine ACM The Crossroads, XRDS: scooia Bulletin Psychological elhPyhlg Review Psychology Health o.4,n.4 p 2–3,2011. 728–737, pp. 4, no. 43, vol. , nentoa ora fBehavioral of Journal International JAMA elhpyhlg re- psychology Health o.36 p 1161– pp. 316, vol. , scooy Health Psychology, oetMedicine Cogent o.15 o 6, no. 125, vol. , ora fPer- of Journal ora of Journal o.7, vol. , Perspec- , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 5]H arc n .C ilas Sl-eemnto hoy t plcto ohat eairand behavior health to application its theory: “Self-determination Williams, C. G. and Patrick H. [59] 6]D .Schön, A. D. Walker, D. and [67] Keogh, R. Boud, D. [66] 6]S .H reeih,A eea .Bla,adL ehe,“ogtr fet fself- of effects term “Long Lechner, L. and Bolman, C. Oenema, A. Friederichs, H. A. “I S. Lechner, L. and [65] Keulen, van M. H. Guyaux, J. Calvi, Bolman, J. C. Tolsma, Oenema, A. D. Friederichs, Shaikh, H. a. A. S. Strecher, V. [64] Konkel, J. Zhang, G. Davis, R. Resnicow, K. Inte- theory: good [63] a than practical more nothing “There’s Sheldon, M. K. and Vansteenkiste M. Inte- theory: good [62] a than and practical more Interviewing nothing “Motivational “There’s Sheldon, Rollnick, M. K. S. and Vansteenkiste and M. Tobin, [61] J. V. Ryan, M. R. Markland, D. [60] 6]J Moon, J. [68] 7]E .S amr RflcieIfrais:Cneta iesosfrDsgigTcnlge of Technologies Designing for Dimensions Conceptual : Informatics “Reflective Baumer, S. P. E. [71] 6]J Dewey, J. [69] 7]E ury .B elr .Adrsn .M oln,A oet,C ols .E iea .West, R. Rivera, E. D. Hollis, C. Doherty, A. Collins, M. L. Andersson, G. Hekler, B. E. Murray, E. [72] 7]E .Bue,V hvnky,M ates .Ryod,V cwnaSsk n .Gy “Re- Gay, G. and Sosik, Schwanda V. Reynolds, L. Matthews, M. Khovanskaya, V. Baumer, P. E. [70] 7]C re .Kih,S oeto,R htae,P dad,W hu .Rdes .Cairns, J. Rodgers, A. Zhou, W. Edwards, P. Whittaker, R. Robertson, S. Knight, R. Free, C. [73] opeetrt ihmtvtoa interviewing,” motivational with complementarity n hsclActivity Physical and eemnto hoyadmtvtoa neveigi e-ae hsclatvt intervention: activity physical web-based trial.,” a controlled in randomized interviewing motivational and theory determination 2014. intervention, 212, theory.,” activity p. self-determination physical 1, no. and tailored interviewing computer motivational web-based on a based of development systematic Move: 2008. 04 novel 159–69, on pp. intervention 35, vegetable vol. study,” and randomized fruit a a “Tailoring of Wiese, Results C. constructs: and motivational Anderson, P J. Alexander, G. theory,”chology self-determination and interviewing motivational grating theory,”chology self-determination and interviewing motivational grating 2005. 831, Theory,” Self–Determination ity ok,1984. Books, Reflection,” ae 1999. Page, ofrneo einn neatv ytm I ’14 DIS design,” - system interactive systems interactive in Designing reflection on of conference use the on reflection: viewing n .C yt,“vlaigDgtlHat nevnin:KyQetosadApproaches,” and Medicine Questions Preventive Key of Interventions: Journal Health ican Digital “Evaluating Wyatt, C. J. and .Knad n .Rbrs Soigcsainspotdlvrdvambl hn etmessag- text phone trial.,” mobile randomised via single-blind, delivered a support (txt2stop): cessation ing “Smoking Roberts, I. and Kenward, M. o.1,p 0,jn2015. jan 101, p. 12, vol. , o.4,n.1 p 38,2006. 63–82, pp. 1, no. 45, vol. , 2006. 63–82, pp. 1, no. 45, vol. , eeto nLann n rfsinlDvlpet hoyadPractice and Theory Development: Professional and Learning in Reflection o etik/b onDewey John by / think we How H 05 rsig,Sol Korea Seoul, Crossings, 2015, CHI h eetv rciinr o rfsinl hn naction in think professionals How practitioner: reflective The o.9 o ,p 8 2012. 18, p. 1, no. 9, vol. , ora fSca n lnclPsychology Clinical and Social of Journal h nentoa ora fbhvoa urto n hsclactiv- physical and nutrition behavioral of journal international The eeto:TrigEprec noLearning Into Experience Turning Reflection: o.5,n.5 p 4–5,2016. 843–851, pp. 5, no. 51, vol. , ..Hah&C otn 1910. Boston, Co & Heath D.C. . p 8–9,2015. 585–594, pp. , Lancet nentoa ora fBhvoa Nutrition Behavioral of Journal International p 312 2014. 93–102, pp. , o.38 o 75 p 95,2011. 49–55, pp. 9785, no. 378, vol. , rts ora fCiia Psy- Clinical of Journal British Psy- Clinical of Journal British M ulchealth public BMC o.2,n.6 p 811– pp. 6, no. 24, vol. , rceig fte2014 the of Proceedings o.52.Basic 5126. vol. , 1985. . o.14, vol. , Kogan . Amer- 105 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 7]Z hdeai .Mra,C eit .Hrly n .Gdry Cnsadaoecomputer- stand-alone “Can Godfrey, C. and Hartley, S. Hewitt, C. Murray, E. Khadjesari, Z. [76] 9]d.deig&ph mH hts/wwadornkito.ef. cesd 2019-11-27. 106 Accessed: “https://www.audiotranskription.de/f4.” eu GmbH, pehl in & education dresing dr. “Physical Katsarova, Ivana [91] Service, Research Parliamentary European | EPRS 2019-03-20. [90] Accessed: “https://www.typeform.com/.” S, TYPEFORM [89] education,” self-management diabetes to “Access Rubin, R. R. and Peyrot M. [77] 8]N atnadD mt,“eeto ntahreuain oad ento n implementation,” and definition Towards education: teacher in “Reflection Smith, D. and Hatton N. [88] 8]A .A l,H .A .Bian,S .G rti) ciiy n .R (Company), R. H. and Activity, Britain), G. C. S. Britain), G. A. E. H. plc, A. D. A. [82] “https://www.who.int/ncds/prevention/physical-activity/inactivity- Organization, Health World [81] 2019- Accessed: “https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/pa/en/.” Organization, Health World Fern?ndez, M. and [80] Gottlieb, N. Kok, G. Parcel, G. Eldredge, L. evidence-based [79] and theory- apply to How change behavior effective to guide practical “A Kok, G. [78] 7]J ars .Flx .Mnr,E ury .Mci,E egsn .Fe,K ok .Landon, J. Lock, K. Free, C. and Ferguson, Cassell, E. A. Michie, S. J. Murray, Peacock, E. R. Miners, A. Morris, Felix, W. L. R. Harris, Mercer, J. H. C. Rait, [75] G. Murray, E. Bailey, V. J. [74] 8]J .Wr n .S cotr Rflcina iil ucm o rsrieteachers,” preservice for outcome visible a as “Reflection McCotter, S. S. and Ward R. emerging J. difficulties and issues reflection: [87] learner “Promoting Jr., Bennet W. and Gustafson L. K. [86] 8]J uso n .Fet Rflcin a eAss t hudW sesIt?,” Assess We Should It? Assess We Can “Reflection: Fleet, A. and Sumsion J. [85] 8]P lsj,S oslo n .Pat Hwt vlaetcnlge o elhbhvo change behavior health for technologies evaluate to “How Pratt, W. and save Consolvo, to S. agent robotic Klasnja, P. a from feedback social [84] positive and negative “Using Ham, J. and Midden C. [83] ae nevnin eueachlcnupin ytmtcreview,” systematic a consumption? alcohol reduce interventions based col. E593.559. PE schools.” 267–282. pp. ecigadTahrEducation Teacher and Teaching lblhat-rbe/n. cesd 2019-01-04. Accessed: global-health-problem/en/.” 01-04. 2014. intervention,” 156–156, an pp. in methods change behavior cator n .Ewrs Aatv -erigt mrv itr eaiu:Asseai eiwadcost- and review systematic A behaviour: analysis,” dietary effectiveness improve to e-learning “Adaptive Edwards, P. and 2007. promotion,” health sexual for interventions computer-based “Interactive Nazareth, I. rmatreya td, 2002. study,” three-year a from nHIresearch,” HCI in 2009. 01 12, p. energy,” Findings Main the by : Commissioned Authority Levels, Education Fitness 1992. and Health Patterns and Activity Council on Sports Report A Survey: Fitness National Approach Mapping Intervention An grams: n ece Education Teacher and vlaini ihrEducation Higher in Evaluation o.3,n.1 p 09,20.PI:18267995. PMID: 2008. 90–97, pp. 1, no. 34, vol. , fteSGH ofrneo ua . . . Human on Conference SIGCHI the of . . . o.2,n.3 p 4 5,2004. 257, – 243 pp. 3, no. 20, vol. , elhTcnlg Assessment Technology Health o.2,n.2 p 2–3,1996. 121–130, pp. 2, no. 21, vol. , o.1,n.1 p 3–4,1995. 49, – 33 pp. 1, no. 11, vol. , ie,2011. Wiley, . h uoenHat Psychologist Health European The o.1,n.3,2011. 37, no. 15, vol. , p 0337,2011. 3063–3072, pp. , lnigHat rmto Pro- Promotion Health Planning elhEuainAuthority, Education Health . Addiction h ibtsEdu- Diabetes The o.16 o 2, no. 106, vol. , o.1,n.5, no. 16, vol. , lidDunbar Allied seset& Assessment Teaching Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 9]R .Sah MdaEuto:HwPol ra optr,Tlvso,adNwMdaLike Media New and Television, Computers, Treat People How Equation: “Media Soash, L. R. 1994. Interviews.Pdf,” Qual Strangers. From [97] “Learning Weiss, S. R. 2019-10-20. [96] Accessed: “https://github.com/thisandagain/sentiment.” Sliwinski, Andrew 2019-10-22. [95] Accessed: Davies. Jason 2019-11-27. [94] Accessed: “https://www.minitab.com/.” LLC, Minitab, 2019-11-27. Accessed: “https://www.audiotranskription.de/f4-analyse.” [93] GmbH, pehl & dresing dr. [92] 10 .Byo n .Km Terl fgne n tnct npdggclaetpreto pro- perception agent pedagogical in ethnicity and gender of role “The and Kim, presence Y. visual and of role Baylor : A. avatars and [100] agents virtual with motivation “Promoting Baylor, L. A. [99] Fogg, J. B. [98] 10 .P tibr n .R Miller, R. W. and Steinberg Ex- P. and M. Rationales Techniques: [110] and Strategies Interviewing “Motivational C., L. Sobell B. M. S. [109] 18 .R ilr .Zee,C .DCeet,adR .Rctrk Mtvtoa Enhancement “Motivational Rychtarik, G. R. and DiClemente, C. C. Zweben, A. Miller, R. W. [108] “https://motivationalinterviewing.org/motivational- Trainers, of Network Interviewing Motivational Integrity Treatment [107] Interviewing Motivational Scales: Global “Revised Martin, T. on and Moyers Study T. Exploratory An [106] : Technology Persuasive and “Personality Kientz, A. J. and Halko S. [105] 11 .E ukr Mtvtoa neveigPooe ain eairChange,” Behavior Patient Promotes Interviewing “Motivational Tucker, E. M. [111] 14 .R ilradS Rollnick, 1994. 394–409, S. pp. and 4, no. Miller 123, R. vol. Emotions,” W. on Color [104] of “Effects Mehrabian, A. and Valdez P. [103] Lockton, D. [102] learn- science in agents pedagogical animated of choice “Students’ Flowerday, T. and Moreno R. [101] mls”p.19 2008. 1–9, pp. amples,” elPol n Places,” and People Real oiainlitriwn. e ok Y S ulodPes 2015. Press, Guilford US: NY, York, New interviewing., motivational isb eeaigPicpe rmSca Psychology GAX98-02030. No. Social Order from UMI Principles Leveraging by gies ednso ol ofrneo -erigi corporate,” in e-learning on conference world of ceedings 2009. 3559–3565, pp. appearance,” dcto 2003 Education fPyiin AP nenlMedicine Internal (ACP) Physicians of hrp Manual,” Therapy 2018-09-19. Accessed: interviewing-resources.” 3.1.1),” (MITI 3.1.1 2014. 2010, June Exploratory no. An Applications,” Mobile : Technology Health-Promoting Persuasive on Study and Personality Applications Mobile Health-Promoting 2013. Press, Guilford US: NY, York, New interviewing., motivational of Applications change ethnicity,” and gender on hypothesis Psychology similarity-attraction tional the of test A ing: o a,2013. May, No. . hrsai optr:Cetn oeLkbeadPrusv neatv Technolo- Interactive Persuasive and Likable More Creating Computers: Charismatic einwt net einptentoktfrevrnetl&sca behaviour social & environmental for toolkit pattern design A Intent: with Design p 5310,0 2003. 01 1503–1506, pp. , o.3,p.1627 42006. 04 186–207, pp. 31, vol. , rjc AC oorp Series Monograph MATCH Project nvriyo e . . . New of University olcinManagement Collection oiainlitriwn:Hligpol hne r edition 3rd change, people Helping interviewing: Motivational oiainlitriwn ndaee care. diabetes in interviewing Motivational p –,2016. 1–3, pp. , o.1 o aur,p.12,2010. 1–29, pp. January, no. 1, vol. , o.2,n.34 p 1–1,2010. 310–311, pp. 3-4, no. 24, vol. , o.2 1994. 2, vol. , h hss tnod A S,1998. USA, CA, Stanford, thesis, PhD . oenet elhae n Higher and Healthcare, Government, otmoayEduca- Contemporary mrcnCollege American plctosof Applications 107 . Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 10 .R oes Rflcino elnsadtransference,” and feelings of “Reflection Rogers.,” Rogers, Carl R. of C. work the [120] in Tain its and listening Reflective mirror: the “Behind Arnold, K. [119] 18 .I tce,S .Cre,adE ngt Terl fsathnsi norgn physical encouraging in smartphones of role “The Knight, E. and Carter, W. S. Stuckey, I. M. [118] 108 2016-11-19. Accessed: “https://www.emberjs.com/.” INC., TILDE [128] W. D. Cho, B. Yun, M. J. Jung, K.-T. Joh, H.-K. Min, Y. H. Kwon, H. Chung, J. W. Park, H. J. [117] 11 .Ais .Ee,G ice,A omn n .Shrf Tasedn h niiulhuman individual the “Transcending Scharff, E. and Gorman, A. Fischer, G. Eden, H. Arias, E. [121] 17 .Pe,“eapten en o atrn h setaso esbeojc-retdde- object-oriented reusable of essentials the capturing for means A — patterns “Meta Pree, W. [127] 2019-03- Accessed: “https://github.com/kamranahmedse/developer-roadmap.” Ahmed, Kamran [126] 2019-03-17. Accessed: “https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018.” Inc., Exchange, Stack [125] Ac- “https://www.statista.com/chart/8180/blackberrys-smartphone-market-share/.” Ltd., Statista [124] “https://www.statista.com/statistics/271255/windows-phone-market-share-in-the- Ltd., public reflective Statista “Supporting [123] Bennett, L. and Borning, A. Freelon, D. Morgan, J. Kriplean, T. [122] 15 .P ign,“mrpoeApiain o ains elhadFitness,” and Health Patients’ for Health Applications Mobile-Phone “Smartphone of Higgins, P. Space J. the Mapping [115] Pocket: the in “Healthcare Pratt, W. and Klasnja P. [114] 16 .Krnnti .Dn,W .Mmey .Vlon .Hoe,P alr .S ot .M. C. Kolt, S. G. Taylor, P. Hooker, C. Viljoen, P. Mummery, K. W. Ding, H. Karunanithi, M. [116] Clough-Gorr, K. and Clough-Gorr, K. Caruso, L. Caruso, L. Bickmore, W. T. Bickmore, W. T. [113] 2019-03-15. Accessed: “https://fonts.google.com/specimen/roboto.” Robertson, Christian [112] ciiyi adults,” in activity uaitcPsychologist Humanistic p 5–6,Srne elnHiebr,1994. Heidelberg, Berlin Springer 150–162, pp. and smartcare through obesity reducing and trial,” randomized activity pilot physical A “Enhancing incentives: financial Shin, J.-H. and Shin, u.Interact. design,”Hum. collaborative through understanding shared mind—creating 1986. 377, in”in sign,” 17. 2019-03-17. cessed: 2019-03-17. Accessed: united-kingdom-uk/.” Work Cooperative in considerit,” with thought nevnin, o.2,n.1 p 58,2014. 85–89, pp. 1, no. 26, vol. Interventions,” .Nae,adM .Dna,“fetvns fawbieadmbl hn ae hsclac- the physical of findings based baseline phone and mobile protocol and Trial website males: Study,” middle-aged ManUp a Ellison, for of M. intervention “Effectiveness Maeder, nutrition A. Duncan, and George, J. tivity S. M. E. and Rosenkranz, Noakes, R. M. R. Tague, R. Vandelanotte, C. Caperchione, medicine of ’05 CHI - adults,” systems older computing urban in by factors interface Human agent on relational abstracts a of usability and “Acceptance betOine Programming Object-Oriented o.19 o ,p.1–9 2016. 11–19, pp. 1, no. 129, vol. , o.7 p 413 a.2000. Mar. 84–113, pp. 7, vol. , M ulcHealth Public BMC SW’2 NwYr,N,UA,p.2524 C,2012. ACM, 265–274, pp. USA), NY, York, (New ’12, CSCW , nentoa ora fGnrlMedicine General of Journal International o.4,n.4 p 5–6,2014. 354–369, pp. 4, no. 42, vol. , rceig fteAM21 ofrneo optrSupported Computer on Conference 2012 ACM the of Proceedings o.1,n.1 .1 2012. 1, p. 1, no. 12, vol. , M oooadR aeci d.,(eln Heidelberg), (Berlin, eds.), Pareschi, R. and Tokoro (M. Obesity o.2,n.2 p 0–1,2017. 302–310, pp. 2, no. 25, vol. , esnCnee Review Person-Centered .11,2005. 1212, p. , o.1,p.2333 2017. 293–303, pp. 10, vol. , h mrcnjournal American The C rn.Comput.- Trans. ACM H 0 extended ’05 CHI o.1 p 357– pp. 1, vol. , The Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 16 .Zraod n .Mdao,“tgarltdt epseigfo etlhat profes- health mental a from help-seeking to related “Stigma Madianos, M. and Zartaloudi A. [136] 2017-02-10. Accessed: “http://firebase.google.com/.” LLC, Google [135] 2019-03-20. Accessed: “https://mochajs.org/.” Holowaychuk, TJ 2019-03-20. [134] Accessed: “https://redux.js.org/basics/reducers.” Clark, Andrew Abramov, Dan 2019-03-17. [133] Accessed: “https://github.com/reduxjs/redux.” Clark, Andrew Abramov, Dan 2019-03-17. [132] Accessed: “https://redux.js.org/.” Clark, Andrew Abramov, Dan [131] 2017-02-10. Accessed: “https://reactjs.org/.” Inc., Facebook [130] 2016-12-14. Accessed: “https://github.com/voltrb/volt.” Stout, Ryan [129] 16 .Gse,D rdek .Dgn .Ltie,R ys n .Rihi,“esaieeso a of “Persuasiveness Reichlin, S. and Wyss, R. Luthiger, J. Degen, M. Brodbeck, D. Gasser, R. [146] 18 .Kme,“eemnn h ee frflcietikn rmsuet’witnjunl using journals written students’ from thinking reflective of level the “Determining Kember, D. [148] 18 .KajNvk .Smailovi J. Novak, Kralj P. [138] 2011. mar “Afinn,” Nielsen, Å. F. [137] 17 dmMsr ei ag,adDri .Yr,“oiiemsaigpooe akn nolder in walking promotes messaging “Positive York, M. Darrin and Range, Kevin Moser, Adam [147] 15 .Gnlae,G izarc,adR obr Ngtaigfo at:Uigapatc lens practice a Using waste: food “Negotiating Comber, R. and Fitzpatrick, G. Ganglbauer, E. [145] 19 .Kana .B elr .Sifa,A ouk,D lial .Twr,adS .Murphy, A. S. and Tewari, A. Almirall, D. Boruvka, A. Shiffman, S. Hekler, B. E. Klasnja, P. [149] 14 .Hcfr,R .Shne n .Srus eds., Strauss, B. and Schinke, J. R. Hackfort, D. [144] 13 .L ily Rflcigo eetv rcie’,” practice Reflective ‘ on “Reflecting Finlay, L. B. [143] 19 .Mle n .Rollnick, S. and Miller W. [139] 12 .W enbkradC .Cug Epesv rtn n t ik omna n hsclhealth,” physical and mental to links its and writing “Expressive Chung, K. C. and Pennebaker W. J. [142] 11 .R ilr .Zee,C .DCeet,adR .Rctrk Mtvtoa Enhancement “Motivational Rychtarik, G. R. and DiClemente, C. C. Zweben, A. Miller, R. Inte- W. theory: [141] good a than practical more nothing “There’s Sheldon, M. K. and Vansteenkiste M. [140] sional,” 2013. oielfsyecahn plcto sn oilfcltto, in facilitation,” social using application coaching lifestyle mobile oigshm ae ntewr fmezirow,” of work the on based scheme coding a o.1,n.1 p 83,1999. 18–30, pp. 1, no. 18, vol. McoRnoie ras nEprmna einfrDvlpn uti-ieAatv Inter- Adaptive Just-in-Time Developing ventions,” for Design Experimental An Trials: “Micro-Randomized Jsltin .A .d ot .Mde,B ge,adE a e oe,es) Bri,Heidel- (Berlin, eds.), Hoven, den van 2006. E. Heidelberg, and Berlin Eggen, Springer B. 27–38, Midden, pp. C. berg), Kort, de W. A. Y. IJsselsteijn, adults,” o.1,p.12,1 2015. 12 1–22, pp. 10, vol. 2019. oifr design,” inform to h xodHnbo fHat Psychology Health of Handbook Oxford The oiainlItriwn eis ulodPes 2012. Press, Guilford Series, Interviewing Motivational hrp Manual,” Therapy theory,”chology self-determination and interviewing motivational grating o.4,n.1 .7,2006. 76, p. 1, no. 45, vol. , elhSineJournal Science Health Bone elhPsychol Health o.2,n.1 p –,2008. 1–7, pp. 1, no. 23, vol. , rjc AC oorp Series Monograph MATCH Project C rnatoso optrHmnInteraction Computer-Human on Transactions ACM o.419 o ,p.12–28 2015. 1220–1228, pp. 0, no. 48109, vol. , oiainlItriwn:HligPol Change People Helping Interviewing: Motivational ,B lbn n .Mozeti I. and Sluban, B. c, ´ o.4 o ,p.7–3 2010. 77–83, pp. 2, no. 4, vol. , o.772 p 1–3,2011. 417–437, pp. 78712, vol. , itoayo pr Psychology Sport of Dictionary BLppr52 paper PBPL nentoa ora fLfln Education Lifelong of Journal International o.2 p 62,1994. 26–26, pp. 2, vol. , ,“etmn femojis,” of “Sentiment c, ˇ rts ora fCiia Psy- Clinical of Journal British esaieTechnology Persuasive o aur,p.12,2008. 1–27, pp. January, no. , o.2,n.2 p 1–25, pp. 2, no. 20, vol. , cdmcPress, Academic . plctosof Applications . LSONE PLOS W A. (W. 109 , , Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Appendix APPENDIX 111 A Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Univ.Prof. Betreuung der Diplomarbeit: Nagl Lukas Durchführung der Diplomarbeit: nachfolgend angeführten Personen. Durchführung betreffende Anliegen, kontaktieren Sie bitte jederzeit eine oder mehrere der Im Falle vonFragen, Rückmeldungen, Beschwerden oder sonstige die Arbeit bzw. deren Universitätsbibliothek der Technischen Universität Wien öffentlich einsehbar. Ihrer anonymisierten Daten beinhaltet, ist nach Fertigstellung über die gezogenPersonen werden können. Die Diplomarbeit, welche letztendlich mitunter Teile gewährleisten zu keine können, dass Rückschlüsse auf die Identität der teilnehmenden weitergegeben. Die Analyse und erfolgtAuswertung mit anonymisierten Daten, um ausschließlich fürdie vorliegende Arbeit verwendet undnicht an dritte Personen Jegliche im Zuge Ihrer Teilnahme erhobenen Daten werden vertraulich behandelt, Protokolle obliegt jedoch Ihnen. inwird, beschränktem Umfang, vondiesen selbst protokolliert. Die Übergabe dieser gegebenenfalls Bildmaterial, angefertigt werden. Die Nutzung der Applikationen an sich Mitwirkung an diesem Projekt betreffen Text- und Audioaufzeichnungen, sowie Bitte beachten vonGesprächen Sie, dass (Interviews, Rückmeldungen, etc.) die Ihre Rückschlüsse auf grundlegende das Potential der Ansätze ermöglichen. während dem Gebrauch der Applikationen sammeln, sollen dabei wertvolle Hinweise und um die körperliche Betätigung zu erhöhen. Die Erfahrungen undEindrücke, welche Sie Im Rahmen Ihrer Teilnahme sollen Prototypen erprobt werden, welche Ansätze verfolgen, ausschließlich für wissenschaftliche Zwecke. und Verwendung Ihrer Daten erfolgt nurnach Ihrer expliziten Einwilligung undist zu jedem Zeitpunkt, auch ohne die Nennung zu vonGründen, beenden. Die Aufzeichnung Ihre Teilnahme an diesem Projekt ist freiwillig. Weiters ist Ihnen es möglich Ihre Tei Universität Wien durch Lukas Nagl. Change“ angefragt worden. Die der DiplomarbeitAbfassung erfolgt an der Technischen Reflection in a Technological Intervention forMaintainable Physical Activity Behavior Sie als sind TeilnehmerIn und TesterIn in Bezug auf die Diplomarbeit „Designing for Informationsblatt für TeilnehmerInnen . Handout A.1 112 Geraldine Fitzpatrick , BSc. [email protected] , Phd. geraldine.fi[email protected], Phd. lnahme Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. . etro Agreement of Letter A.2 teilnahmeberechtigt zu sein. sein. zu teilnahmeberechtigt mit b zu „Ja“ Fragen alle Es erforderlich ist nicht wahrheitsgetreu. b und sorgfältig Fragen nachfolgenden alle Sie Bitte lesen Einverständniserklärung Datum, Unterschrift: Unterschrift: Datum, ______Autor Unterschrift: Datum, ______Vor- ______Nachname: und a. Ich habe das beigelegte Informationsblatt für Informationsblatt beigelegte das Ich habe TeilnehmerI a. b. Ich bin einverstanden, dass alle im Zuge meiner meiner im Zuge alle dass einverstanden, Ich bin Teilnahme e b. wird. angefertigt Bildmaterial dass einverstanden, Ich bin a. d. Ich bin einverstanden, dass von Gesprächen die meine Mitwirkung meine die Gesprächen von dass einverstanden, Ich bin d. c. Ich bin einverstanden, dass dass einverstanden, Ich bin Teile von Nutzungsverhaltens meines c. b. Ich bin mir der Möglichkeit bewusst, dass die im Rahmen meiner meiner im Rahmen die dass bewusst, Möglichkeit der mir Ich bin T b.

Ja [ ] Nein [ ] Nein Ja [ ] werden. genutzt Veröffentlichungenwissenschaftliche Präsentationen die sowie Form, für anonymisierter in Folge, weiterer in und ausgewertet Ja [ ] Nein [ ] Nein Ja [ ] [ ] Nein Ja [ ] werden. betreffenProjekt diesem Text- und angeferti Audio-Aufzeichnungen Ja [ ] Nein [ ] Nein Ja [ ] Weitergabe dieser obliegt. selbst mir Aufzeichnungen testenden werden, aufgezeichnet automatisiert Applikationen Ja [ ] Nein [ ] Nein Ja [ ] ausüben. Betätigung körperliche gewohnte testenden zu mei auf Einflussnahme gegebenenfalls Applikationen Ja [ ] Nein [ ] Nein Ja [ ] teilnehmen. we auf bis möchte und verstanden sowie gelesen vollinhaltlich

eantworten Sie diese diese Sie eantworten nnen erhalten, erhalten, nnen ______eantworten um um eantworten ______rhobenen Daten Daten rhobenen wobei die die wobei iteres iteres selbiger selbiger den zu zu den eilnahme eilnahme ne ne an an gt gt 113 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. . neve Guide Interview A.3 114 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 115 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. . pFotQuestionnaire Up-Front A.4 116 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 117 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. . oe eso 1 Session Josef A.5 118 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 119 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. . oe eso 2 Session Josef A.6 120 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 121 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. . otEprmn Questionnaire Post-Experiment A.7 122 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 123 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. 2. third parties. parties. third is kep data contact Personal of person. the identification an that th parties to third to ensure order extracts in in quoted In evaluated. and pseudonymised are data usage and results Survey Description Processing of Data Physical Maintainable Change”. Activity Behavior for Refle “Designing title the of part with as my thesis master of physica subject the on data) to usage as referred hereinafter resp as “Josef" (such of software the use the during is recorded which To "Jo of software the period experiment the during you contact Purpose Processing of Data • • • particular: in information, Personal proce be will you about information personal following The Type Processed of Data Personal environ groups change. behavior activity physical maintainable more target the of consideration with and theory on interven technological a how considers research Our results. long-term be activity physical of problem the at technology throwing Simply 2. a in for Reflection Designing Technological f Intervention 1. Subject Thesis of the Master’s 1. Responsible for the Data Processing Responsible Processing for the Data follows: as Protection Data General EU 13 § with accordance in you inform may the with accordance in be must data personal of processing The and collection the involves work of scientific this writing The Co Internet & Technology Engineering to "TU workin as IWien"), referred currently am (hereafter Software in degree master's my of part As . DRInformer GDPR A.8 124 age gender e-mail contact details details contact Description of the master’s thesis thesis of master’s the Description Title thesis of master’s the processin for data the responsible and of thesis master the Author [email protected] [email protected] Lukas Nagl Nagl Lukas Information for collection and processing of personal data (ENGLISH) or Maintainable Physical Physical Maintainable or Change Activity Behavior e resulting overall context of events cannot lead to lead cannot of context events overall resulting e ssed as part of my scientific work: of part as my scientific ssed t separate from usage data and inaccessible to inaccessible and data from usage t separate use of personal data. data. of personal use ction in a a in ction Technological for Intervention l activity and processing of the collected data data of collected the processing and activity l sef". Evaluation of surveys and research data data research and of surveys sef". Evaluation ment/social world, be designed to create a a create to designed be world, ment/social applicable data protection rules, therefore I therefore rules, protection data applicable havior change doesn’t achieve the wanted wanted the achieve doesn’t change havior the master thesis, answers are only only are answers thesis, master the Regulation (GDPR) on data processing processing data on (GDPR) Regulation g in terms of of § 4 clause 7 GDPR. 7 terms of in g of clause 4 § onse texts and response times times , response texts and onse g on my master's on thesis. g tion could look like that would, based based would, that like look could tion mputing at the Vienna University of of University Vienna the at mputing Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Storage PeriodStorage • • • • entitled are concerned person to the as GDPR, the you According Rights of the subject data accordance in out carried is and provisions statutory (FOG,Organisation Research Forschungsorganisationsgesetz Act) for ma a the by is and governed regulations protection data with compliance in done stored is procedure scientific the of documentation and recording o verifiability the for and practice scientific good of proof As • recipients: Your to transmitted may be or transmitted be will data personal master's the th supervising and of preparing course the in processed bound are who persons authorised only As matter a of principle, • 80ff§§ obligation. legal the UG represent A distinction is subject. responsible person the d personal of processing the regulates GDPR c lit 1 para. 6 Art. Thesis. Master’s Law) UG (University is data personal Art. this of processing the for basis legal The Legal Basis Data-Recipients and -TransfersData-Recipients of the for processing the justification protection data The [email protected] [email protected] To follows: as me contact please rights, your assert da of traceability separate a of data the rights to the protect order in only guaranteed that provides also GDPR 11 Article • • • • § 83 UG concerns dissertations (Art 6 para 1 lit c GDPR in conjunct c lit 1 GDPR (Artin para 6 dissertations UG concerns 83 § 1030 Vienna,1030 [email protected] e-mail: 152-0, 52 1 +43 telephone: to the submitted must be which of complaint, Right D Austrian cited. provisions the in described conditions the under (Art. rest GDPR) or (Art. 17 erasure GDPR) or 16 to rectification Right (Art. GDPR) 15 concerned data to personal of the access Right (TU Vienna), concerned to university the supervi the particular in c lit 1 GDPR (Artin theses para 6 bachelor the UG concerns 80 § provided by by provided Spain Barcelona, 08018 TYPEFORM,163, Roda SL, Bac de (https://www.privacyshield.gov/participant? Shield US Privacy id=a2zt0 1600 LLC, Google View, Mountain Pkwy Amphitheatre Californi and Firebase to Google Typeform st processing and for collecting UG §86 with conjunction GDPR in to the supervisor) the Library, National Austrian 1, 1 Josefsplatz as well as of student the (name theses master concluded successfully Law) (UG) (University Universitätsgesetz 86 § with conjunction Vienna, 4, 1040 Resselgasse of publication for purpose the of V the Library to University the theses master concluded successfully c lit 1 GDPR(Art theses master para 6 and diploma UG concerns 81 § is made according to the type of scientific work: to of type the scientific according is made subjects. subjects. data is not the consent of the data subjects. subjects. of data the consent the is not data f the chosen method and the results obtained, the the obtained, results the and method chosen the f 6 para. 1 lit c GDPR in conjunction with with conjunction 81 in Art. GDPR c lit 1 para. 6 according to according Art. c lit 1 GDPR in para. 6 v.at authority. supervisory competent the as inaccessible to third parties. Data storage is is storage Data parties. third to inaccessible the following recipients or categories of categories or recipients following the ata Protection Protection ata Authority, 40-42, Barichgasse ata in order to fulfil a legal obligation to which which to obligation legal a fulfil to order in ata to secrecy have access to the personal data data to personal the access have to secrecy on durable and secure data carriers. carriers. data secure and durable on is This a 94043. Google LLC complies to EU- the complies LLC Google 94043. a 015 Vienna,015 to according c lit 1 Art para 6 sor of the scientific work and his/her staff his/her and work of sor scientific the to the following rights: rights: to following the udy data. Google Firebase is provided by by is provided Firebase Google data. udy conjunction with § 80 UG); 80 § with conjunction esis, and only necessary.to extent the only and esis, ta to individuals does not have to be be to have not does individuals to ta ion with § 83 UG) 83 § with ion riction of processing (Art. GDPR) 18 of processing riction in conjunction with § 81 UG); 81 § with conjunction in title of the thesis and the name of name the and of thesis title the 00000001L5AAI). 00000001L5AAI). Typeform is ienna University of University ienna Technology, . ximum period of 30 years. years. of 30 period ximum with Section 2f (3) of the the of (3) 2f Section with 125 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. Change”. Change”. a Technological in Reflection dem Titel for “Designing Int D erhobenen der Verarbeitung und Betätigung körperliche Thema fortfolgende im Antwortzeiten, und Antworttexte beispielsweise Softw der Verwendung der während welche Forschungsdaten, sowie Software der mit Experiments des Dauer der während Kontaktaufnahme Datenverarbeitung der Zweck • • • persönliche insbesondere: nämlich Angaben, verarbeitet: Rahme im werden Person Ihrer zu Daten personenbezogene Folgende 1. Gegenstand Masterarbeit der 2. 1. Datenschutz 13 Verantwortliche_r für die Datenverarbeitung Art gemäß ich darf daher folgt: wie informieren Datenverarbeitung erfolgen, zu Entsprechung in hat Daten personenbezogener Verarbeitung Die verbunden. Daten u Erhebung der mit ist Arbeit wissenschaftlichen dieser Verfassen Das Comp Internet & Engineering arbe bezeichnet) „TU Wien“ kurz als Folge der (in Wien Universität Software Master-Studiums meines Rahmen Im Art der verarbeiteten personenbezogenen Daten verarbeiteten der Art Verhaltensänderung nachhaltigere eine erwirken.zu psychologische Verhaltens des Theorie Zie unserer Umfeld das sowie Inte technologische eine wie damit, sich beschäftigt Forschung Technologie das nicht scheint nachha um sein, zu Allheilmittel 2. a in for Reflection Designing Technological f Intervention 126 Alter Alter Geschlecht E-Mail Titel Masterarbeit der [email protected] Kontaktdaten Nagl Lukas Daten die für Verantwortliche_rDSGVO und Masterarbeit der Verfasser_in Beschreibung der Masterarbeit Masterarbeit der Beschreibung

Information zur Erhebung und Verarbeitung

personenbezogener Daten personenbezogener Daten (DEUTSCH) (DEUTSCH) or Maintainable Physical Physical Maintainable or Change Activity Behavior ervention for Maintainable Physical Physical Maintainable Behavior for Activity ervention ltig körperliche Betätigung zu steigern. Unsere Unsere steigern. zu Betätigung körperliche ltig rvention gestaltet werden könnte, welche die die welche könnte, werden gestaltet rvention n als Verwendungsdaten bezeichnet) zum zum bezeichnet) Verwendungsdaten als n -Grundverordnung (DSGVO) über die die über (DSGVO) -Grundverordnung ite ich gerade an meiner Masterarbeit. Masterarbeit. meiner an gerade ich ite der geltenden Datenschutzbestimmungen Datenschutzbestimmungen geltenden der aten im Rahmen meiner Masterarbeit mit mit Masterarbeit meiner Rahmen im aten lgruppe berücksichtigt, um dadurch um dadurch berücksichtigt, lgruppe are “Josef” aufgezeichnet werden (wie (wie werden aufgezeichnet “Josef” are nd Verwendung personenbezogener personenbezogener Verwendung nd n meiner wissenschaftlichen Arbeit Arbeit wissenschaftlichen meiner n “Josef”. Auswertung von Umfragen Umfragen von “Josef”. Auswertung verarbeitung iS von Art 4 Zif 7 7 Zif 4 Art von iS verarbeitung tn a dr Technischen der an uting Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. • • Daten zulässigerweise übermittelt oder können übermittelt werde übermittelt können oder übermittelt zulässigerweise Daten Empfänger_inne von Kategorien oder Empfänger_innen An folgende Umfang. erforderlichen dem in nur dies Speicherdauer Speicherdauer • • Jahren. Jahren. Forschungsorganisationsgesetz 3 Abs 2f § entsprechend erfolgt und richtet Datenspeicherung Die unzugänglich. Dritten die gegenüber und Protokollierung gespeich Datenträgern gesicherten die und haltbaren auf wird Vorgehens Ergebnisse, erzielten der und Nach die für sowie Praxis wissenschaftlichen guten der Nachweis Zum verp Verschwiegenheit zur und der Betreuung autorisierte und Erarbeitung nur haben Grundsätzlich • wird Es dar. Verpflichtung rechtliche die unterschieden: stellen UG 80ff §§ Verpflichtung, Verantwortliche die_der der unterliegt. Verarbeitungpersonenbezogene die normiert DSGVO c lit 1 6 Abs Art Verbindung UG dar. für Masterarbeiten mit 81 § D personenbezogenen dieser Verarbeitung zur Rechtsgrundlage Die Rechtsgrundlage Id Verwendung einer von zu werden aufbewahrt. nicht Kontaktdaten Ereignissen Personenbezogene von Gesamtzusammenhang Dritt gegenüber um zitiert, Ausschnitten in nur Antworten werden pseudonymisiert werden Verwendungsdaten sowie Umfrageresultate, Beschreibung Datenverarbeitung der • • Übermittlungsempfänger_innen Übermittlungsempfänger_innen und Drittstaatenübermittlungen Verarbeitung die Betroffenen. für Rechtfertigung datenschutzrechtliche Die Zwecke der Veröffentlichung der Zwecke gemäß Art 6 c lit Abs 1 DSGVO 86 iVm § de Universitäts-Bibliothek die an Masterarbeit beurteilte positiv Mitarbeiterstab dessen und der/dem insbesondere Wien), (TU Universität betroffene die an oge L etpih dm UU Piay hed (https: Shield Privacy EU-US Verfügungzur gestellt. dem Roda entspricht de Bac SL, Typeform id=a2zt000000001L5AAI). TYPEFORM, von wird LLC Google C View, Mountain Pkwy Amphitheatre 1600 LLC, Google von wird Fire Google Forschungsdaten, von Verarbeitung und Aufnahme Zur Art 6 c lit Abs 1 UG DSGVO iVm §86 Nationabiblioth Österreichische die an Betreuer_in) sowi der_des Name Studierenden der/des (Name Masterarbeiten beurteilte positiv § 80 UG betrifft80 § (Art 6 Bachelorarbeit die c lit Abs 1 DSGVO iVm § § 81 UG betrifft81 § (Art 6 Masterarbeiten und Diplom- c lit Abs 1 D § 83 UG betrifft83 § (Art 6 Dissertationen c lit Abs 1 DSGVO 83 iVm §

Masterarbeit Masterarbeit Zugang zu den verarbeiteten, personenbezogenen Daten, und und Daten, personenbezogenen verarbeiteten, den zu Zugang sich nach den gesetzlichen Bestimmungen Bestimmungen gesetzlichen den nach sich je nach Art der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit Arbeit wissenschaftlichen der Art nach je SGVO UG); 81 iVm § r TU Wien, Resselgasse 4, 1040 Wien, zum zum Wien, 1040 4, Resselgasse Wien, TU r sdaten getrennt für Dritte unzugänglich unzugänglich Dritte für getrennt sdaten n: entifizierung der Person führen kann. kann. führen Person der entifizierung der Daten ist nicht die Einwilligung der der Einwilligung die nicht ist Daten der ert. Dies erfolgt datenschutz-konform und und datenschutz-konform erfolgt Dies ert. en sicherzustellen, dass der entstehende entstehende der dass sicherzustellen, en

Betreuer_in der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit Arbeit wissenschaftlichen der Betreuer_in UG) 80 UG); 80 Dokumentation des wissenschaftlichen wissenschaftlichen des Dokumentation n werden Ihre personenbezogenen personenbezogenen Ihre werden n alifornia 94043 zur Verfügung gestellt. gestellt. Verfügung zur 94043 alifornia //www.privacyshield.gov/participant? //www.privacyshield.gov/participant? aten stellt Art 6 Abs 1 lit c DSGVO in in DSGVO c lit 1 Abs 6 Art stellt aten ek, Josefsplatz 1, 1015 Wien, gemäß gemäß Wien, 1015 1, Josefsplatz ek, r Daten zur Erfüllung einer rechtlichen rechtlichen einer Erfüllung zur Daten r base and Typeform. Google Firebase Firebase Google Typeform. and base (FOG) für die Dauer von maximal 30 30 maximal von Dauer die für (FOG) und ausgewertet. In der Masterarbeit Masterarbeit der In ausgewertet. und e Titel der Abschlussarbeit und der der und Abschlussarbeit der Titel e Universitätsgesetz (UG) Universitätsgesetz prüfbarkeit der gewählten Methode Methode gewählten der prüfbarkeit flichtete Personen im Zuge der der Zuge im Personen flichtete 163, 08018 Barcelona, Spain Spain Barcelona, 08018 163, 127 Die approbierte gedruckte Originalversion dieser Diplomarbeit ist an der TU Wien Bibliothek verfügbar. The approved original version of this thesis is available in print at TU Wien Bibliothek. • • Artikel 11 DSGVO sieht zudem vor, dass eine separate Rückführbarkeit Rückführbarkeit separate eine dass Betroffenenrechte die um muss, nur werden gewährleistet zu wahren vor, zudem sieht DSGVO 11 Artikel • betroffene als Ihnen DSGVO Gemäß der stehen R folgende Person Betroffenenrechte [email protected] [email protected] fo wie mich an sich Sie wenden Rechte Ihrer Zur Geltendmachung 128 Wien, Wien, Telefon: E-Mail: 152-0, 52 dsb@dsb.gv.at1 +43 zust als eabiug At 8 SV) ne dn n e angeführ den in den unter Beschwerde auf Recht DSGVO) 18 Voraussetzungen (Art Verarbeitung Recht auf auf Recht Recht auf auf Recht Auskunft Berichtigung über die betreffenden die über (ArtDSGVO) 15 Daten personenbezogenen (Art 16 DSGVO) oder oder DSGVO) 16 (Art , welche bei der Österreichischen Datenschutzbehörde, Barichgasse 40 Barichgasse Datenschutzbehörde, Österreichischen der bei welche , Löschung (Art 17 DSGVO) oder 1auf 1auf oder DSGVO) 17 (Art ändige ändige ist. einzubringen Aufsichtsbehörde lgt: lgt: echte zu: echte können. ten Bestimmungen beschriebenen beschriebenen Bestimmungen ten von Daten auf Personen nicht nicht Personen auf Daten von

Einschränkung -42, 1030 1030 -42, der der