What Does All This Data Mean for My Future Mood? Actionable Analytics and Targeted Reflection for Emotional Well-Being
Abstract
We explore the Examined Life, informing the design of reflective systems to promote emotional well-being, a critical health issue. People now have increasingly rich, digital records of highly personal data about what they said, did, and felt in the past. But social science research shows that people have difficulty in tracking and regulating their emotions. New reflective technologies that promote constructive analysis of rich personal data potentially offer transformative ways that individuals might better understand themselves and improve well-being. However, there are important system design challenges in supporting effective reflection about personal data. We explore fidelity in recording and representing past personal mood data, and forecasting future actions, feelings, and thoughts. Much prior personal informatics work has been dedicated to past-centric tools for recording and capture. In contrast, forecasting examines how we might use such past data to inform and motivate our future selves, providing recommendations about remedial actions to improve future well-being. Fidelity addresses both how and what reflective systems should show people about their pasts, in particular whether we should filter negative past experiences. To inform reflective system design, we examine forecasting and fidelity in controlled field trial interventions that explore two novel system designs for presenting and reflecting on mood data. We detail findings from 165 participants, 4,693 participant logfiles, 65 surveys, and 15 user interviews. Our novel forecasting system, EmotiCal, uses past mood data to model and visualize future user moods with the goal of encouraging participants to adopt remedial new behaviors to regulate negative moods before they occur. Such forecasting both improved mood and subsequent emotional self-awareness compared with controls who simply monitored their past. Consistent with system goals, interview responses also indicated that participants generated important insights into behaviors that affect their moods. Our second intervention examined filtering; it assessed the impact on well-being of recording and revisiting past experiences containing negative emotions. We compared participants who were encouraged to record and reflect on positive versus negative experiences. Long-term measures of happiness and ruminative behaviors improved by recording and reflecting on positive but not negative experiences, although this depended on the intensity of the negative experience. We discuss general design and theory implications for future systems that support monitoring, reflection, and forecasting to facilitate productive examination of our emotional lives.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Although users generated their own data in the system, results were not directly used to inform other aspects of the user's personal behavior, so the costs of system errors were low.
“while users generated their own data in our system, results were not directly used to inform other aspects of the user's personal behavior, as in Hollis et al. [38], so the costs of system errors were low.”
From Progressive Disclosure: When, Why, and How Do Users Want Algorithmic Transparency Information? (2020) · cites this paper as [38]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 116 · Cited by 103
- Authors
- Hollis, V., Konrad, A., Springer, A., Antoun, M., Antoun, C., Martin, R., & Whittaker, S.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- Venue
- Human–Computer Interaction
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-03-16
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 208-267
- ISSN
- 0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7051
- OpenAlex
- W2568165966
- Cited by
- 103
- References
- 116
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 13.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (IIS- 1321102)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
- Keywords
- examined life, emotional well-being, reflective systems, personal data, emotional self-awareness, rumination, positive and negative experiences, behavior change, happiness, personal informatics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review