GoalKeeper: Exploring Interaction Lockout Mechanisms for Regulating Smartphone Use
Abstract
Many people often experience difficulties in achieving behavioral goals related to smartphone use. Most of prior studies approached this problem with various behavior change strategies such as self-reflection and social support. However, little is known about the effectiveness and user experiences of restrictive and coercive interventions such as blocking. In this work, we developed "GoalKeeper," a smartphone intervention app that locks the user into the self-defined daily use time limit with restrictive intervention mechanisms. We conducted a four-week field experiment with 36 participants to investigate the effects and user experiences of varying intensities of restrictive interventions. The results showed that restrictive mechanisms are more effective than non-restrictive mechanisms such as warning. However, we found that restrictive mechanisms caused more frustration and pressure to the users, mainly due to diversity of usage contexts and needs. Based on our study results, we extracted practical implications for designing restrictive mechanisms that balance the intervention effectiveness for behavioral changes and the flexibility for user acceptability.
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?
Self-imposed time limits are often not respected by users.
“Similarly, multiple studies demonstrate that self-imposed time limits are often not respected by users (Kim et al., 2019; Nguyen, 2021).”
From Is life brighter when your phone is not? The efficacy of a grayscale smartphone intervention addressing digital well-being (2024) · cites this paper as Kim et al., 2019
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 65 · Cited by 84
- Authors
- Kim, J., Jung, H., Ko, M., & Lee, U.
- Affiliations
- Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
- Hanyang University (KR)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
- Published
- 2019-03-29
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-29
- ISSN
- 2474-9567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2925797295
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 7.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Research Foundation of Korea (2017M3C4A7083534)
- MSIT (2018R1C1B5044211)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Keywords
- restrictive practices, intervention intensity, user frustration, user acceptance, mobile health apps, behavior change
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