Impediments

Icon of a hand giving a stop gesture

Design Hypothesis 5: Marginalization creates impediments that limit the users’ ability to perform the health behavior.

Even though many factors can support health behaviors, people often face barriers that make it harder to do the behavior. Our studies showed that these challenges were often socially produced, not just based on the user’s personal traits. Personal informatics tools would be less effective when the users are facing these barriers.

We use the term impediments to make the framework consistent with SCT literature on health (Bandura, 1998).

Process

A chart that shows Marginalization create Impediments, which in turn limit Action.

Systemic marginalization cascades into impediments that limit the users’ ability to perform the actions and the behavior.

Design Recommendations

Recommendation 5.1. Identify and address inequities that can make personal health informatics systems less effective
We included impediments in our Socio-Cognitive Framework so that future personal informatics tools are sensitive to and seek to address impediments caused by marginalization. We recommend designing systems that actively tackle these barriers, recruiting diverse participants to capture a wide range of experiences, and reporting detailed demographic data in studies. Future tools should be tested to see how well they help users overcome these challenges, aiming to make health technologies more equitable for all groups.

Recommendation 5.2. Develop personal informatics systems with the communities who will use the systems
Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) involves co-designing technology with the community and emphasizes mutual learning and capacity building. By involving communities in system development, CBPR helps restore power and skills taken away through marginalization, offering a way to reduce barriers and promote equity.

References

  • A. Bandura. 1998. Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory. Psychology and Health 13, 4 (1998), 623–649. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449808407422