research-article

Open access

User Experiences with Online Status Indicators

Authors:

Tadayoshi Kohno,

Alexis HinikerAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Pages 1 - 12

https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376240

Published: 23 April 2020 Publication History

All formats PDF

Abstract

Online status indicators (OSIs) improve online communication by helping users convey and assess availability, but they also let users infer potentially sensitive information about one another. We surveyed 200 smartphone users to understand the extent to which users are aware of information shared via OSIs and the extent to which this shapes their behavior. Despite familiarity with OSIs, participants misunderstand many aspects of OSIs, and they describe carefully curating and seeking to control their self-presentation via OSIs. Some users further report leveraging OSI-conveyed information for problematic and malicious purposes. Drawing on existing constructs of app dependence (i.e., when users contort their behavior to meet an app's demands) and app enablement (i.e., when apps enable users to engage in behaviors they feel good about), we demonstrate that current OSI design patterns promote app dependence, and we call for a shift toward OSI designs that are more enabling for users.

References

[1]

Daniel Avrahami and Scott E. Hudson. 2006. Responsiveness in Instant Messaging: Predictive Models Supporting Inter-personal Communication. In CHI.

[2]

James "Bo" Begole, Nicholas E. Matsakis, and John C. Tang. 2004. Lilsys: Sensing Unavailability. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '04).

[3]

James "Bo" Begole, John C. Tang, Randall B. Smith, and Nicole Yankelovich. 2002. Work Rhythms: Analyzing Visualizations of Awareness Histories of Distributed Groups. In CSCW.

Digital Library

[4]

Michael Benisch, Patrick Gage Kelley, Norman Sadeh, and Lorrie Faith Cranor. 2011. Capturing Location-privacy Preferences: Quantifying Accuracy and User-burden Tradeoffs. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. (2011).

[5]

Michael S. Bernstein, Eytan Bakshy, Moira Burke, and Brian Karrer. 2013. Quantifying the Invisible Audience in Social Networks. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13).

Digital Library

[6]

Igor Bilogrevic, Kévin Huguenin, Berker Agir, Murtuza Jadliwala, and Jean-Pierre Hubaux. 2013. Adaptive Information-sharing for Privacy-aware Mobile Social Networks. In UbiComp.

[7]

Sara A. Bly, Steve R. Harrison, and Susan Irwin. 1993. Media Spaces: Bringing People Together in a Video, Audio, and Computing Environment. Commun. ACM 36, 1 (Jan. 1993).

Digital Library

[8]

Matthias Böhmer, Brent Hecht, Johannes Schöning, Antonio Krüger, and Gernot Bauer. 2011. Falling Asleep with Angry Birds, Facebook and Kindle: A Large Scale Study on Mobile Application Usage. In MobileHCI.

[9]

Andreas Buchenscheit, Bastian Könings, Andreas Neubert, Florian Schaub, Matthias Schneider, and Frank Kargl. 2014. Privacy Implications of Presence Sharing in Mobile Messaging Applications. In MUM.

[10]

Matthew Carrasco and Andruid Kerne. 2018. Queer Visibility: Supporting LGBT+ Selective Visibility on Social Media. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18).

Digital Library

[11]

Camille Cobb. 2019. User-to-User Privacy in Social and Communications Applications. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Washington.

[12]

Camille Cobb and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2017. How Public Is My Private Life?: Privacy in Online Dating. In WWW.

[13]

Sunny Consolvo, Ian E. Smith, Tara Matthews, Anthony LaMarca, Jason Tabert, and Pauline Powledge. 2005. Location Disclosure to Social Relations: Why, when, & What People Want to Share. In CHI.

[14]

Edward S. De Guzman, Margaret Yau, Anthony Gagliano, Austin Park, and Anind K. Dey. 2004. Exploring the Design and Use of Peripheral Displays of Awareness Information. In CHI EA.

[15]

Trinh Minh Tri Do, Jan Blom, and Daniel Gatica-Perez. 2011. Smartphone Usage in the Wild: A Large-scale Analysis of Applications and Context. In ICMI.

[16]

Howard Gardner and Katie Davis. 2013. The app generation: How today's youth navigate identity, intimacy, and imagination in a digital world. Yale University Press.

Digital Library

[17]

Erving Goffman. 1949. The presentation of self in everyday life. Amer. J. Sociology (1949).

[18]

Saul Greenberg. 1996. Peepholes: Low Cost Awareness of One's Community. In Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '96).

Digital Library

[19]

Tamy Guberek, Allison McDonald, Sylvia Simioni, Abraham H. Mhaidli, Kentaro Toyama, and Florian Schaub. 2018. Keeping a Low Profile?: Technology, Risk and Privacy Among Undocumented Immigrants. In CHI.

[20]

Shion Guha and Jeremy Birnholtz. 2013. Can You See Me Now?: Location, Visibility and the Management of Impressions on Foursquare. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human-computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '13).

Digital Library

[21]

Jeff Hancock, Jeremy Birnholtz, Natalya Bazarova, Jamie Guillory, Josh Perlin, and Barrett Amos. 2009. Butler Lies: Awareness, Deception and Design. In CHI.

Digital Library

[22]

Stacie Hibino and Audris Mockus. 2002. handiMessenger: Awareness-Enhanced Universal Communication for Mobile Users. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction (Mobile HCI '02).

[23]

Eric Horvitz, Paul Koch, Carl Myers Kadie, and Andy Jacobs. 2013. Coordinates: Probabilistic Forecasting of Presence and Availability. CoRR abs/1301.0573 (2013).

[24]

Roberto Hoyle, Srijita Das, Apu Kapadia, Adam J. Lee, and Kami Vaniea. 2017. Was My Message Read?: Privacy and Signaling on Facebook Messenger. In CHI.

[25]

Leslie K John, Alessandro Acquisti, and George Loewenstein. 2011. Strangers on a plane: Context-dependent willingness to divulge sensitive information. Journal of consumer research (2011).

[26]

Maritza Johnson, Serge Egelman, and Steven M. Bellovin. 2012. Facebook and Privacy: It's Complicated. In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS '12).

Digital Library

[27]

Scott Lederer, Jennifer Mankoff, and Anind K. Dey. 2003. Who Wants to Know What When? Privacy Preference Determinants in Ubiquitous Computing. In CHI EA.

Digital Library

[28]

Heather Richter Lipford, Andrew Besmer, and Jason Watson. 2008. Understanding Privacy Settings in Facebook with an Audience View. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Usability, Psychology, and Security (UPSEC'08).

Digital Library

[29]

Yabing Liu, Krishna P. Gummadi, Balachander Krishnamurthy, and Alan Mislove. 2011. Analyzing Facebook Privacy Settings: User Expectations vs. Reality. In IMC.

[30]

M. Madejski, M. Johnson, and S. M. Bellovin. 2012. A study of privacy settings errors in an online social network. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops.

[31]

Alice Marwick. 2012. The Public Domain: Surveillance in Everyday Life. Surveillance Society 9 (06 2012).

[32]

Alice E. Marwick and danah boyd. 2011. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society (2011).

[33]

Alice E Marwick and danah boyd. 2014. Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society (2014).

[34]

Bonnie A Nardi, Steve Whittaker, and Erin Bradner. 2000. Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. In CSCW.

[35]

Sarita Schoenebeck, Nicole B. Ellison, Lindsay Blackwell, Joseph B. Bayer, and Emily B. Falk. 2016. Playful Backstalking and Serious Impression Management: How Young Adults Reflect on Their Past Identities on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '16).

[36]

Katherine Strater and Heather Richter Lipford. 2008. Strategies and Struggles with Privacy in an Online Social Networking Community. In Proceedings of the 22Nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction Volume 1 (BCS-HCI '08).

[37]

Eran Toch and Inbal Levi. 2013. Locality and Privacy in People-nearby Applications. In Ubicomp.

[38]

Jessica Vitak, Stacy Blasiola, Eden Litt, and Sameer Patil. 2015. Balancing Audience and Privacy Tensions on Social Network Sites: Strategies of Highly Engaged Users. International Journal of Communication 9 (05 2015).

[39]

Jessica Vitak, Cliff Lampe, Rebecca Gray, and Nicole B. Ellison. 2012. "Why Won't You Be My Facebook Friend?": Strategies for Managing Context Collapse in the Workplace. In iConference.

[40]

Jusik Woo. 2006. The right not to be identified: privacy and anonymity in the interactive media environment. New Media & Society (2006).

Cited By

Kurzweg MWolf K(2022)Body Language of Avatars in VR Meetings as Communication Status Cue: Recommendations for Interaction Design and Implementationi-com10.1515/icom-2021-003821:1(175-201)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2021-0038
Chou YChien YLin YLin KShih FChang Y(2022)Because I’m Restricted, 2 – 4 PM Unable to See Messages: Exploring Users’ Perceptions and Likely Practices around Exposing Attention Management Use on IM Online StatusProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517616(1-18)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517616
Lee SEl Ali AWijntjes MCesar P(2022)Understanding and Designing Avatar Biosignal Visualizations for Social Virtual Reality EntertainmentProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517451(1-15)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517451
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

User Experiences with Online Status Indicators
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
  2. Ubiquitous and mobile computing
    1. Ubiquitous and mobile devices
      1. Smartphones
2. Security and privacy
  1. Human and societal aspects of security and privacy
    1. Social aspects of security and privacy
    2. Usability in security and privacy

Recommendations

User-centric Android flexible permissions
ICSE-C '17: Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion

Privacy in mobile apps is a fundamental aspect to be considered, particularly with regard to meeting end user expectations. Due to the rigidities of the Android permission model, desirable trade-offs are not allowed. End users are confined into a ...
Investigating Users’ Experiences and Attitudes Towards Mobile Apps’ Reviews
Human-Computer Interaction. Interaction in Context
Abstract
One of the daily routines of the smartphone users is using the mobile applications. Individuals explore the app stores and select a potential app. The selection procedure is affected by the information that the app stores display for each app. ...
Studying the consistency of star ratings and the complaints in 1 & 2-star user reviews for top free cross-platform Android and iOS apps

How users rate a mobile app via star ratings and user reviews is of utmost importance for the success of an app. Recent studies and surveys show that users rely heavily on star ratings and user reviews that are provided by other users, for deciding ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 2020

10688 pages

ISBN:9781450367080

DOI:10.1145/3313831

General Chairs:
Regina Bernhaupt
Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
,
Florian 'Floyd' Mueller
Monash University, Australia
,
David Verweij
Newcastle University, UK
,
Josh Andres
RMIT, Australia
,
Program Chairs:
Joanna McGrenere
University of British Columbia, Canada
,
Andy Cockburn
University of Canterbury, New Zealand
,
Ignacio Avellino
University of Maryland Baltimore County, USA
,
Alix Goguey
Grenoble Alpes University, France
,
Pernille Bjørn
University of Copenhagen, Denmark
,
Shengdong (Shen) Zhao
National University of Singapore, Singapore
,
Briane Paul Samson
Future University Hakodate, Japan & De La Salle University, Philippines
,
Rafal Kocielnik
University of Washington, USA

Copyright © 2020 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 23 April 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CHI '20

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI '20: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 25 - 30, 2020

HI, Honolulu, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

10
Total Citations
View Citations
2,572
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1,030
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)77

Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Kurzweg MWolf K(2022)Body Language of Avatars in VR Meetings as Communication Status Cue: Recommendations for Interaction Design and Implementationi-com10.1515/icom-2021-003821:1(175-201)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2021-0038
Chou YChien YLin YLin KShih FChang Y(2022)Because I’m Restricted, 2 – 4 PM Unable to See Messages: Exploring Users’ Perceptions and Likely Practices around Exposing Attention Management Use on IM Online StatusProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517616(1-18)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517616
Lee SEl Ali AWijntjes MCesar P(2022)Understanding and Designing Avatar Biosignal Visualizations for Social Virtual Reality EntertainmentProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517451(1-15)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517451
Wu YEdwards WDas S(2022)SoK: Social Cybersecurity2022 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP)10.1109/SP46214.2022.9833757(1863-1879)Online publication date: May-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/SP46214.2022.9833757
Obada-Obieh BHuang YBeznosov KChiasson S(2021)Challenges and threats of mass telecommutingProceedings of the Seventeenth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3563572.3563607(675-694)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3563572.3563607
Namara MSloan HKnijnenburg B(2021)The Effectiveness of Adaptation Methods in Improving User Engagement and Privacy Protection on Social Network SitesProceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies10.2478/popets-2022-00312022:1(629-648)Online publication date: 20-Nov-2021
https://doi.org/10.2478/popets-2022-0031
Kurzweg MReinhardt JNabok WWolf K(2021)Using Body Language of Avatars in VR Meetings as Communication Status CueProceedings of Mensch und Computer 202110.1145/3473856.3473865(366-377)Online publication date: 5-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3473856.3473865
Pang CCollin Wang ZMcGrenere JLeung RDai JMoffatt KKitamura YQuigley AIsbister KIgarashi TBjørn PDrucker S(2021)Technology Adoption and Learning Preferences for Older Adults:Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3411764.3445702(1-13)Online publication date: 6-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3411764.3445702
Wu TChien YLee HChang YKitamura YQuigley AIsbister KIgarashi TBjørn PDrucker S(2021)IM Receptivity and Presentation-type Preferences among Users of a Mobile App with Automated Receptivity-status AdjustmentProceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3411764.3445209(1-14)Online publication date: 6-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3411764.3445209
Jiang HShen XLiu D(2021)PupilMeter: Modeling User Preference with Time-Series Features of Pupillary Response2021 IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)10.1109/ICDCS51616.2021.00102(1031-1041)Online publication date: Jul-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDCS51616.2021.00102

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents