Personalization Paradox in Behavior Change Apps:Lessons from a Social Comparison-Based Personalized App for Physical Activity

Social comparison-based features are widely used in social computing apps. However, most existing apps are not grounded in social comparison theories and do not consider individual differences in social comparison preferences and reactions. This paper is among the first to automatically personalize social comparison targets. In the context of an m-health app for physical activity, we use artificial intelligence (AI) techniques of multi-armed bandits. Results from our user study (n=53) indicate that there is some evidence that motivation can be increased using the AI-based personalization of social comparison. The detected effects achieved small-to-moderate effect sizes, illustrating the real-world implications of the intervention for enhancing motivation and physical activity. In addition to design implications for social comparison features in social apps, this paper identified the personalization paradox, the conflict between user modeling and adaptation, as a key design challenge of personalized applications for behavior change. Additionally, we propose research directions to mitigate this Personalization Paradox

Sex differences in the jealousy-evoking effect of rival characteristics

Four studies examined sex differences in the jealousy-evoking nature of rival characteristics. Study 1, among 130 undergraduates, made an inventory of all relevant rival characteristics that were spontaneously mentioned when asked about a rival to whom one's partner might feel attracted. On the basis of these findings, in Study 2, among 240 undergraduates, a questionnaire was constructed, containing 56 rival characteristics. A factor analysis distinguished five dimensions of rival characteristics, i.e. Social Dominance, Physical Attractiveness, Seductive Behaviors, Physical Dominance, and Social Status. In line with the predictions, men reported more jealousy when a rival was high in Social Dominance, Physical Dominance, and Social Status, whereas women reported more jealousy when a rival was high in Physical Attractiveness. Study 3 largely replicated these findings in a community sample of 144 heterosexuals. Study 4 showed that gay men (n = 80) reported more jealousy than lesbian women (n = 73) when the rival was high in Physical Dominance, and more jealousy than heterosexual men when the rival was high in Social Dominance. Lesbian women reported more jealousy than heterosexual women when the rival was high in Physical Attractiveness. In Studies 2-4, favorable rival characteristics evoked more jealousy among those high in Social Comparison Orientation, particularly among women. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd

Companionship and Support at Work: A Microanalysis of the Stress-Reducing Features of Social Interaction

To produce a more fine-grained analysis of the social interactions at work, the Daily Interaction Record in Organizations (DIRO) was developed that assesses daily the characteristics of social interactions, the number and nature of stressful events, and the affect experienced at the end of the day. Forty police officers daily filled in forms during the course of a week and completed a questionnaire on organizational stress. The main results were that (a) of all stressful events, interpersonal frustrations correlated highest with negative affect; (b) social interactions were characterized by three dimensions: intimate support, rewarding companionship, and instrumental support; (c) perceived support by superiors was related more closely to features of social interaction than perceived support by colleagues, whereas in both cases the highest correlations were found with rewarding companionship; (d) individuals experiencing negative affect received relatively more support, but were engaged in less rewarding companionship; (e) the quality of relationships at work reduced negative affect at the end of the workday. The discussion focuses on the role of support versus companionship in reducing stress, and the validity of self-report measures of social support

Social Comparison of Health Risks:Locus of Control, the Person‐Positivity Bias, and Unrealistic Optimism

People typically attribute lower health risks to themselves than to others, a phenomenon referred to as unrealistic optimism. The present study tested the person positivity bias as a previously unexamined explanation of the phenomenon and analyzed the relationship between unrealistic optimism and expectations of control. High-school students estimated their own and one of three other persons' (the average student's, a randomly chosen student's, or their best same-sex friend's) chances of getting health problems. They also filled out questionnaires measuring locus of control and health-protective behavior. In contrast with the person positivity explanation, unrealistic optimism was not restricted to the 'average other'' condition. However, unrealistic optimism was stronger in subjects with a more internal locus of control than in subjects with a rather external locus of control. An unpredicted effect of estimation order was observed: Unrealistic optimism was stronger in subjects who estimated the comparison person's risks first than in subjects who started with own risks. This effect can be understood in terms of Codol's observation that people perceive others as more similar to themselves than they themselves are to others