From Personalization to Adaptivity: Creating Immersive Visits through Interactive Digital Storytelling at the Acropolis Museum

Storytelling has recently become a popular way to guide museum visitors, replacing traditional exhibit-centric descriptions by story-centric cohesive narrations with references to the exhibits and multimedia content. This work presents the fundamental elements of the CHESS project approach, the goal of which is to provide adaptive, personalized, interactive storytelling for museum visits. We shortly present the CHESS project and its background, we detail the proposed storytelling and user models, we describe the provided functionality and we outline the main tools and mechanisms employed. Finally, we present the preliminary results of a recent evaluation study that are informing several directions for future work

The Importance of Transparency and Willingness to Share Personal Information

This study investigates the extent to which individuals are willing to share their sensitive personal information with companies. The study examines whether skepticism can influence willingness to share information. Additionally, it seeks to determine whether transparency can moderate the relationship between skepticism and willingness to share and whether 1) companies perceived motives, 2) individual’s prior privacy violations, 3) individuals’ propensity to take risks, and 4) individuals self-efficacy act as antecedents of skepticism. Partial Least Squares (PLS) regression is used to examine the relationships between all the factors. The findings indicate that skepticism does have a negative impact on willingness to share personal information and that transparency can reduce skepticis

JNER at 15 years: analysis of the state of neuroengineering and rehabilitation.

On JNER's 15th anniversary, this editorial analyzes the state of the field of neuroengineering and rehabilitation. I first discuss some ways that the nature of neurorehabilitation research has evolved in the past 15 years based on my perspective as editor-in-chief of JNER and a researcher in the field. I highlight increasing reliance on advanced technologies, improved rigor and openness of research, and three, related, new paradigms - wearable devices, the Cybathlon competition, and human augmentation studies - indicators that neurorehabilitation is squarely in the age of wearability. Then, I briefly speculate on how the field might make progress going forward, highlighting the need for new models of training and learning driven by big data, better personalization and targeting, and an increase in the quantity and quality of usability and uptake studies to improve translation

Personalized medicine—a modern approach for the diagnosis and management of hypertension

The main goal of treating hypertension is to reduce blood pressure to physiological levels and thereby prevent risk of cardiovascular disease and hypertension-associated target organ damage. Despite reductions in major risk factors and the availability of a plethora of effective antihypertensive drugs, the control of blood pressure to target values is still poor due to multiple factors including apparent drug resistance and lack of adherence. An explanation for this problem is related to the current reductionist and ‘trial-and-error’ approach in the management of hypertension, as we may oversimplify the complex nature of the disease and not pay enough attention to the heterogeneity of the pathophysiology and clinical presentation of the disorder. Taking into account specific risk factors, genetic phenotype, pharmacokinetic characteristics, and other particular features unique to each patient, would allow a personalized approach to managing the disease. Personalized medicine therefore represents the tailoring of medical approach and treatment to the individual characteristics of each patient and is expected to become the paradigm of future healthcare. The advancement of systems biology research and the rapid development of high-throughput technologies, as well as the characterization of different –omics, have contributed to a shift in modern biological and medical research from traditional hypothesis-driven designs toward data-driven studies and have facilitated the evolution of personalized or precision medicine for chronic diseases such as hypertension

Developing consumer-based service brand equity via the internet: The role of personalization and trialability

The commercialization of the Internet has provided opportunities for building service brands in the minds of consumers. Services are characterized as intangible, heterogeneous, inseparable, and perishable features that often engender high information costs and, hence, low perceived value to potential consumers. When a service is available via the Interneta medium that can subdivide and rebuild the service into personalized offeringspotential consumers become better informed in advance of what the service provides. The Internet also permits most services to be trialable before consumption. These new features, empowered by the Internet, have important implications for what we call consumer-based service brand equity (CSBE), the value that potential consumers assign to a service brand. This article investigates the effects of service personalization and trialability on the development of CSBE of Internet banking service, a typical service available via the Internet. Results from a laboratory experiment indicate that both service personalization and trialability have significant positive influences on the development of the CSBE of an Internet banking service brand. While personalization was found to indirectly influence CSBE development by mediating the perceived benefits of the brand, trialability exerted both a direct and an indirect effect. Trialability developed the brand's CSBE by first mediating the information through gathering cost savings and then the perceived benefits of the brand. Implications of the study's results are discussed.published_or_final_versio

FATREC Workshop on Responsible Recommendation Proceedings

We sought with this workshop, to foster a discussion of various topics that fall under the general umbrella of responsible recommendation: ethical considerations in recommendation, bias and discrimination in recommender systems, transparency and accountability, social impact of recommenders, user privacy, and other related concerns. Our goal was to encourage the community to think about how we build and study recommender systems in a socially-responsible manner. Recommendation systems are increasingly impacting people\u27s decisions in different walks of life including commerce, employment, dating, health, education and governance. As the impact and scope of recommendations increase, developing systems that tackle issues of fairness, transparency and accountability becomes important. This workshop was held in the spirit of FATML (Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Machine Learning), DAT (Data and Algorithmic Transparency), and similar workshops in related communities. With Responsible Recommendation , we brought that conversation to RecSys

Evaluating the impact of physical activity apps and wearables: interdisciplinary review

Background: Although many smartphone apps and wearables have been designed to improve physical activity, their rapidly evolving nature and complexity present challenges for evaluating their impact. Traditional methodologies, such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs), can be slow. To keep pace with rapid technological development, evaluations of mobile health technologies must be efficient. Rapid alternative research designs have been proposed, and efficient in-app data collection methods, including in-device sensors and device-generated logs, are available. Along with effectiveness, it is important to measure engagement (ie, users’ interaction and usage behavior) and acceptability (ie, users’ subjective perceptions and experiences) to help explain how and why apps and wearables work. Objectives: This study aimed to (1) explore the extent to which evaluations of physical activity apps and wearables: employ rapid research designs; assess engagement, acceptability, as well as effectiveness; use efficient data collection methods; and (2) describe which dimensions of engagement and acceptability are assessed. Method: An interdisciplinary scoping review using 8 databases from health and computing sciences. Included studies measured physical activity, and evaluated physical activity apps or wearables that provided sensor-based feedback. Results were analyzed using descriptive numerical summaries, chi-square testing, and qualitative thematic analysis. Results: A total of 1829 abstracts were screened, and 858 articles read in full. Of 111 included studies, 61 (55.0%) were published between 2015 and 2017. Most (55.0%, 61/111) were RCTs, and only 2 studies (1.8%) used rapid research designs: 1 single-case design and 1 multiphase optimization strategy. Other research designs included 23 (22.5%) repeated measures designs, 11 (9.9%) nonrandomized group designs, 10 (9.0%) case studies, and 4 (3.6%) observational studies. Less than one-third of the studies (32.0%, 35/111) investigated effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability together. To measure physical activity, most studies (90.1%, 101/111) employed sensors (either in-device [67.6%, 75/111] or external [23.4%, 26/111]). RCTs were more likely to employ external sensors (accelerometers: P=.005). Studies that assessed engagement (52.3%, 58/111) mostly used device-generated logs (91%, 53/58) to measure the frequency, depth, and length of engagement. Studies that assessed acceptability (57.7%, 64/111) most often used questionnaires (64%, 42/64) and/or qualitative methods (53%, 34/64) to explore appreciation, perceived effectiveness and usefulness, satisfaction, intention to continue use, and social acceptability. Some studies (14.4%, 16/111) assessed dimensions more closely related to usability (ie, burden of sensor wear and use, interface complexity, and perceived technical performance). Conclusions: The rapid increase of research into the impact of physical activity apps and wearables means that evaluation guidelines are urgently needed to promote efficiency through the use of rapid research designs, in-device sensors and user-logs to assess effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability. Screening articles was time-consuming because reporting across health and computing sciences lacked standardization. Reporting guidelines are therefore needed to facilitate the synthesis of evidence across disciplines

Navigating Risk in Vendor Data Privacy Practices: An Analysis of Elsevier\u27s ScienceDirect

Executive Summary As libraries transitioned from buying materials to licensing content, serious threats to privacy followed. This change shifted more control over library user data (and whether it is collected or kept at all) from the local library to third-party vendors, including personal data about what people search for and what they read. This transition has further reinforced the move by some of the largest academic publishers to move beyond content and become data analytics businesses that provide platforms of tools used throughout the research lifecycle that can collect user data at each stage. These companies have an increasing incentive to collect and monetize the rich streams of data that these platforms can generate from users. As a result, user privacy depends on the strength of privacy protections guaranteed by vendors (e.g., negotiated for in contracts), and a growing body of evidence indicates that this should be a source of concern. User tracking that would be unthinkable in a physical library setting now happens routinely through such platforms. The potential integration of this tracking with other lines of business, including research analytics tools and data brokering services, raises pressing questions for users and institutions. Elsevier provides an important case study in this dynamic. Elsevier is many academic libraries’ largest vendor for collections, and its platforms span the knowledge production process, from discovery and idea generation to publication to evaluation. Furthermore, Elsevier’s parent company, RELX, is a leading data broker. Its “risk” business, which provides services to corporations, governments, and law enforcement agencies based on expansive databases of personal data, has surpassed its Elsevier division in revenue and profitability. For these reasons, it is important to carefully consider Elsevier’s privacy practices, the risks they may pose, and proactive steps to protect users. This analysis focuses on ScienceDirect due to its position as a leading discovery platform for research as well as the Elsevier product that researchers are most likely to interact with regularly. Based on our findings, many of ScienceDirect\u27s data privacy practices directly conflict with library privacy standards and guidelines. The data privacy practices identified in our analysis are like the practices found in many businesses and organizations that track and harvest user data to sustain privacy-intrusive data-driven business models. The widespread data collection, user tracking and surveillance, and disclosure of user data inherent to these business models run counter to the library\u27s commitment to user privacy as specified in the ALA Code of Ethics, Library Bill of Rights, and the IFLA Statement on Privacy in the Library Environment. Examples of current ScienceDirect practices found in our analysis that conflict with these standards include: • Use of web beacons, cookies, and other invasive web surveillance methods to track user behavior outside and beyond the ScienceDirect website • Extensive collection of a broad range of personal data (e.g., behavioral and location data) from ScienceDirect combined with personal data harvested from sources beyond ScienceDirect (i.e., third parties in and outside of RELX and data brokers as stated in Elsevier’s Privacy Policy and U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice) • Collection of personal data by third parties, including search engines, social media platforms, and other personal-data aggregators and profilers such as Google, Adobe, Cloudflare, and New Relic, through extensive use of third-party trackers on the ScienceDirect site • Disclosure of personal data to other Elsevier products and the potential for disclosure of personal data to other business units within RELX, including risk products and services sold to corporations, governments, and law enforcement agencies • Processing and disclosure of personal data (and personal data inferred from personal data) for targeted, personalized advertising and marketing In particular, ScienceDirect’s U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice, posted and updated in 2023, raises important concerns. The notice describes the disclosure of detailed user data—including geolocation data, sensitive personal information, and inference data used to create profiles on individuals—both for wide-ranging internal use and to external third parties, including “affiliates” and “business and joint venture partners.” The collection and disclosure of data about who someone is, where they are, and what they search for and read by the same overarching company that provides sophisticated surveillance and data brokering products to corporations, governments, and law enforcement should be alarming. These practices raise the question of whether simultaneous ownership of key academic infrastructure alongside sophisticated surveillance and data brokering businesses should be permitted at all—by users, by institutions, or by policymakers and regulatory authorities. Our analysis cannot definitively confirm whether personal data derived from academic products is currently being used in data brokering or “risk” products. Nevertheless, ScienceDirect’s privacy practices highlight the need to be aware of this risk, which is not mitigated by privacy policy revisions or potential verbal assurances concerning specific data uses. Privacy policies can be changed unilaterally, and denials are not legally binding. To be meaningful, any privacy guarantee a vendor makes must be durable, verifiable, and not limited to a particular jurisdiction. As many of the largest publishers reinvent themselves as platform businesses, users and institutions should actively evaluate and address the potential privacy risks as this transition occurs rather than after it is complete. In closely analyzing the privacy practices of the leading vendor in this transition, this report highlights the need for institutions to be proactive in responding to these risks and provides initial steps for doing so. This report underscores the significant expertise and capacity required for any institution to understand even one vendor’s privacy practices—and the power asymmetry this creates between vendors and libraries. Collaborative efforts, such as SPARC’s Privacy & Surveillance Community of Practice, can plan a key role in supporting future action to address the real privacy risks posed by vendors’ platforms. This report closes with options that institutions may consider to mitigate these risks over the short and longer term