No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

There is increased interest in reducing sedentary behavior of office workers to combat the negative health effects of prolonged sitting. Walking meetings offer a promising solution to this problem as they facilitate a physically active way of working. To inform future development of technologies supporting these type of meetings, in-depth qualitative insights into people's experiences of walking meetings are needed. We conducted semi-structured walking interviews (N=16) to identify key drivers and barriers for walking meetings in a living lab setting by using the 'WorkWalk'. The 'WorkWalk' is a 1.8 km walking route indicated by a dotted blue line with outdoor meeting points, integrated into the room booking system. Our findings provide insights into how walking meetings are experienced and affect the setup and social dynamics of meetings. We offer design recommendations for the development of future technologies and service design elements to support walking meetings and active ways of working.

Background: There is increasing interest in the role that technology can play in improving the vitality of knowledge workers. A promising and widely adopted strategy to attain this goal is to reduce sedentary behavior (SB) and increase physical activity (PA). In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art SB and PA interventions using technology in the office environment. By scoping the existing landscape, we identified current gaps and underexplored possibilities. We discuss opportunities for future development and research on SB and PA interventions using technology. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in the Association for Computing Machinery digital library, the interdisciplinary library Scopus, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore Digital Library to locate peer-reviewed scientific articles detailing SB and PA technology interventions in office environments between 2009 and 2019. Results: The initial search identified 1130 articles, of which 45 studies were included in the analysis. Our scoping review focused on the technologies supporting the interventions, which were coded using a grounded approach. Conclusion: Our findings showed that current SB and PA interventions using technology provide limited possibilities for physically active ways of working as opposed to the common strategy of prompting breaks. Interventions are also often offered as additional systems or services, rather than integrated into existing office infrastructures. With this work, we have mapped different types of interventions and provide an increased understanding of the opportunities for future multidisciplinary development and research of technologies to address sedentary behavior and physical activity in the office context.

No abstract

Many methods and tools have been proposed to assess the User Experience (UX) of interactive systems. However, while researchers have empirically studied the relevance and validity of several UX evaluation methods, few studies only have explored expert-based evaluation methods for the assessment of UX. If experts are able to assess something as complex and inherently subjective as UX, how they conduct such an evaluation and what criteria they rely on, thus remain open questions. In the present paper we report on 33 UX experts performing a UX evaluation on 4 interactive systems. We provided the experts with UX Cards, a tool based on a psychological-needs driven approach, developed to support UX Design and Evaluation. Results are encouraging and show that UX experts encountered no major issues to conduct a UX evaluation. However, significant differences exist between individual elements that experts have reported on and the overall assessment they made of the systems.

No abstract