Can Less be More?: Contrasting Limited, Unlimited, and Automatic Picture Capture for Augmenting Memory Recall
Abstract
Today's abundance1 of cheap digital storage in the form of tiny memory cards put literally no bounds on the number of images one can capture with one's digital camera or smartphone during an event. However, prior work has shown that taking many pictures may actually make us remember less of a particular event. Does automated picture taking (lifelogging) help avoid this, yet still offer to capture meaningful pictures? In this work, we investigate the effect of capture modality (i.e., limited, unlimited, automatic, and no capture) on people's ability to recall a past event – with and without the support of the pictures captured through these modalities. Our results from a field experiment with 83 participants show that capturing fewer pictures does not necessarily lead to the capture of more relevant pictures. However, when controlling for number of pictures taken, our results show that having a limited number of pictures to capture may lead to pictures with increased memory value. At the same time, automated capture failed to produce pictures that would help remember the past experience better.
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?
Manually taken photos already have a meaning when being taken, whereas automatically recorded photos taken with lifelogging cameras appear more random and only acquire meaning insofar as they offer access to aspects of one's life that one would otherwise not think about.
“In this context, it has been argued that manually taken photos already have a meaning when being taken (because individuals usually have reasons for taking them); in contrast, automatically recorded photos taken with lifelogging cameras such as SenseCam or Narrative Clip appear more random and only acquire meaning insofar as they offer access to aspects of one's life that one would otherwise not”
From Understanding Autobiographical Memory in the Digital Age: The AMEDIA-Model (2024) · cites this paper as Niforatos et al., 2017
Cites
Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips
Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1207745 · Cited by 1,762 · cited 2× · see citing works
“We consider memory loss an indicator of memory deterioration due to the manual capture of pictures (i.e., "photo-taking impairment” effect [12]) and/or due to relying on pictures captured as an external memory prosthesis [27,28].”
BackgroundPrécis of Elements of episodic memory
Tulving, E. (1984) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0004440x · Cited by 809 · see citing works
Conway, M. A. (2009) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.02.003 · Cited by 519 · see citing works
Do life-logging technologies support memory for the past?: an experimental study using sensecam
Sellen, A. J., Fogg, A., Aitken, M., Hodges, S., Rother, C., & Wood, K. (2007) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1240624.1240636 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding Autobiographical Memory in the Digital Age: The AMEDIA-Model
Hutmacher, F., Appel, M., & Schwan, S. (2024) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2024.2384125 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Niforatos, E., Cinel, C., Mack, C. C., Langheinrich, M., & Ward, G.
- Affiliations
- Università della Svizzera italiana (CH)
- University of Essex (GB)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
- Published
- 2017-06-30
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-22
- ISSN
- 2474-9567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2730609101
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Seventh Framework Programme (612933)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
- Keywords
- lifelogging, event memory, digital photography, smartphone photography, memory aids
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