[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Context-based Automated Responses of Unavailability in Mobile Messaging

  • ECSCW Contribution
  • Published:
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

People are not always able to respond immediately to incoming messages on their mobile devices, either due to engagement in another task or simply because the moment is inconvenient for them. This delay in responding could affect social relationships, as there are often expectations associated with mobile messaging and people may experience a lingering pressure to attend to their messages. In this work, we investigate an approach for generating automated contextual responses on behalf of message recipients when they are not available to respond. We first identify several types of contextual information that can be obtained from a user’s smartphone and explore whether those can be used to explain unavailability. We then assess users’ perception of the usefulness of these sensor-based categories and their level of comfort with sharing such information through a Mechanical Turk survey study. Our results show emergent groups with varying preferences with regards to the usefulness and comfort in sharing two types of contextual information: user state and device state. Further, we also observed a strong influence of message context (i.e., message urgency and social tie strength) in users’ perceptions of these auto-generated messages. Our research provides understanding of users’ perceptions of sharing context through an autonomous agent that can help design and create effective approaches towards enabling communication awareness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. WhatsApp, https://www.whatsapp.com/

  2. Facebook Messenger, https://www.messenger.com/

  3. Instant Messaging Statistics Report, https://www.radicati.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Instant_Messaging_Statistics_Report,_2019-2023_Exceutive_Summary.pdf

  4. Gallup report, https://news.gallup.com/poll/179288/new-era-communication-americans.aspx

  5. GfK MRI Study, https://www.gfk.com/en-us/insights/press-release/smartphone-users-spend-as-much-time-on-entertainment-as-texting-gfk-mri-study/

  6. Flowroute Survey, https://www.flowroute.com/press-type/flowroute-survey-finds-consumers-overwhelmingly-prefer-sms-to-email-and-voice-for-business-interactions/

  7. In terms of collaborative context, our survey did not provide any explicit information in terms of locality and synchronicity of communication to the respondents. It can be inferred from the examples in the survey that communication is taking place asynchronously in a remote setting.

  8. Survey link: https://people.cs.pitt.edu/~pranut/messaging_study/mstudy_survey.pdf

  9. http://crowdsourcing-class.org/readings/downloads/platform/demographics-of-mturk.pdf

  10. https://www.cloudresearch.com/resources/blog/the-new-new-demographics-on-mechanical-turk-is-there-still-a-gender-gap/

References

  • Abdul, A.; Jo, V.; Wang, D.; Lim, B.Y.; and Kankanhalli, M. (2018). Trends and trajectories for explainable, accountable and intelligible systems: an HCI research agenda. In: CHI ’18. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Montreal, pp. 1–18.

  • Andone, I.; Błaszkiewicz, K.; Eibes, M.; Trendafilov, B.; Montag, C.; and Markowetz, A. (2016). How Age and Gender Affect Smartphone Usage. In: UbiComp ’16. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct. Heidelberg, pp. 9–12.

  • Avrahami, D.; and Hudson, S.E. (2004). Qna: Augmenting an Instant Messaging Client to Balance User Responsiveness and Performance. In: CSCW ’04. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Chicago, pp. 515–518.

  • Avrahami, D.; Gergle, D.; Hudson, S.E; and Kiesler, S. (2007). Improving the match between callers and receivers: a study on the effect of contextual information on cell phone interruptions. Behaviour & Information Technology, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 247–259.

  • Awad, N.F.; and Krishnan, M.S. (2006). The personalization privacy paradox: an empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 13–28.

  • Bailey, B.P; Konstan, J.A; and Carlis, J.V (2001). The Effects of interruptions on task performance, annoyance, and anxiety in the user interface. In: INTERACT ’01. Human-computer interaction: IFIP TC13 international conference on human-computer interaction, pp. 593–601.

  • Bardram, J.E; and Hansen, T.R (2010). Context-based workplace awareness. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 105–138.

  • Bates, E.; and Wiest, L.R. (2004). Impact of personalization of mathematical word problems on student performance. The Mathematics Educator, vol. 14, pp. 17–26.

  • Becker, D.; Bremer, V.; Funk, B.; Asselbergs, J.; Riper, H.; and Ruwaard, J. (2016). How to predict mood? delving into features of Smartphone-Based data. Twenty-second Americas Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–10.

  • Begole, J. ”Bo”; Matsakis, N.E.; and Tang, J.C. (2004). Lilsys: Sensing unavailability. In: CSCW ’04. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Chicago, pp. 511–514.

  • Begole, J. ”Bo”; and Tang, J.C. (2007). Incorporating Human and Machine Interpretation of Unavailability and Rhythm Awareness Into the Design of Collaborative Applications. Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 22, no. 1-2, pp. 7–45.

  • Bellotti, V.; and Bly, S. (1996). Walking away from the desktop computer: Distributed collaboration and mobility in a product design team. In: CSCW ’96. Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Boston, pp. 209–218.

  • Bennett, P.N.; White, R.W.; Chu, W.; Dumais, S.T.; Bailey, P.; Borisyuk, F.; and Cui, X. (2012). Modeling the impact of short- and Long-Term behavior on search personalization. In: SIGIR ’12. Proceedings of the 35th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Portland, pp. 185–194.

  • Boyle, M.; Neustaedter, C.; and Greenberg, S. (2009). Privacy factors in video-based media spaces, Media Space 20+ Years of Mediated Life. Springer, pp. 97–122.

  • Braunstein, A.; Granka, L.; and Staddon, J. (2011). Indirect content privacy surveys: Measuring privacy without asking about it. In: SOUPS ’11. Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security. Pittsburgh, pp. 1–14.

  • Brown, B.; and Barkhuus, L. (2007). Leisure and CSCW: Introduction to special edition. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 16, no. 1-2, pp. 1–10.

  • Buchenscheit, A.; Könings, B.; Neubert, A.; Schaub, F.; Schneider, M.; and Kargl, F. (2014). Privacy implications of presence sharing in mobile messaging applications. In: MUM ’14. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. Melbourne, pp. 20–29.

  • Buschek, D.; Hassib, M.; and Alt, F. (2018). Personal mobile messaging in context: Chat augmentations for expressiveness and awareness. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1–33.

  • Caird, J.K.; Johnston, K.A.; Willness, C.R.; Asbridge, M.; and Steel, P. (2014). A meta-analysis of the effects of texting on driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 71, pp. 311–318.

  • Chang, Y.-J.; and Tang, J.C. (2015). Investigating mobile users’ ringer mode usage and attentiveness and responsiveness to communication. In: MobileHCI ’15. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Copenhagen, pp. 6–15.

  • Chang, Y.-J.; Chung, Y.-J.; and Shih, Y.-H. (2019). I think it’s her: Investigating smartphone users’ speculation about phone notifications and its influence on attendance. In: MobileHCI ’19. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Taipei.

  • Chen, Z.; Mu, L.; Chen, F.; Lane, N.D.; Cardone, G.; Wang, R.; Li, T.; Chen, Y.; Choudhury, T.; and Campbell, A.T. (2013). Unobtrusive sleep monitoring using smartphones. In: PervasiveHealth ’13. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare. Venice: BEL, pp. 145–152.

  • Cho, H.; Oh, J.; Kim, J.; and Lee, S.-J. (2020). I Share, You Care: Private Status Sharing and Sender-Controlled Notifications in Mobile Instant Messaging. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW1), 1–25.

  • Church, Karen; and Oliveira, Rodrigo de (2013). What’s up with whatsapp? comparing mobile instant messaging behaviors with traditional SMS. In: MobileHCI ’13. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Munich, pp. 352–361.

  • Consolvo, S.; Smith, I.; Matthews, T.; LaMarca, A.; Tabert, J.; and Powledge, P. (2005). Location disclosure to social relations: Why, when, & what people want to share. In: CHI ’05. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Portland, pp. 81–90.

  • Dabbish, L.; and Kraut, R.E. (2004). Controlling interruptions: Awareness displays and social motivation for coordination. In: CSCW ’04. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Chicago, pp. 182–191.

  • Dey, A.K (2001). Understanding and using context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 4–7.

  • De, Guzman; Edward, S.; Sharmin, M.; and Bailey, B.P. (2007). Should I call now? understanding what context is considered when deciding whether to initiate remote communication via mobile devices, GI. In: ’07. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2007. Montreal, pp. 143–150.

  • Difallah, D.; Filatova, E.; and Ipeirotis, P. (2018). Demographics and dynamics of mechanical turk workers. In: WSDM ’18. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. Marina Del Rey, pp. 135–143.

  • Dourish, P.; and Bly, S. (1992a). Portholes: Supporting awareness in a distributed work group. In: CHI ’92. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Monterey, pp. 541–547.

  • Dourish, P.; and Bellotti, V. (1992b). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In: CSCW ’92. Proceedings of the 1992 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Toronto, pp. 107–114.

  • Dourish, P. (2004). What we talk about when we talk about context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 19–30.

  • Earle, K.K. (2018). Attributions online: an examination of time stamps, read receipts and ellipses in Text-Based communication. Ph.D. thesis, North Dakota State University.

  • Fischer, J.E.; Yee, N.; Bellotti, V.; Good, N.; Benford, S.; and Greenhalgh, C. (2010). Effects of content and time of delivery on receptivity to mobile interruptions. In: MobileHCI ’10. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Lisbon, pp. 103–112.

  • Griggio, C.F.; Nouwens, M.; McGrenere, J.; and Mackay, W.E. (2019). Augmenting Couples’ Communication with “Lifelines” Shared Timelines of Mixed Contextual Information. In: CHI ’19. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Glasgow, pp. 1–13.

  • Guyon, I.; and Elisseeff, A. (2003). An introduction to variable and feature selection. Journal of machine learning research, vol. 3, pp. 1157–1182.

  • Hancock, J.; Birnholtz, J.; Bazarova, N.; Guillory, J.; Perlin, J.; and Amos, B. (2009). Butler lies: Awareness, deception and design. In: CHI ’09. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Boston, pp. 517–526.

  • Handel, M.; and Wills, G. (2000). TeamPortal: Providing team awareness on the web. In: ACM CSCW 2000 Proceedings of the International Workshop on Awareness and the WWW. Philadelphia, pp. 3–12.

  • Handel, M.; and Herbsleb, J.D. (2002). What is chat doing in the workplace? In: CSCW ’02. Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. New Orleans, pp. 1–10.

  • Harrison, S. (2009). Media Space 20+ Years of Mediated Life. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 1st edn.

  • Hassib, M.; Buschek, D.; Wozniak, P.W.; and Alt, F. (2017). HeartChat: Heart Rate Augmented Mobile Chat to Support Empathy and Awareness. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 2239–2251.

  • Horvitz, E.J; and Apacible, J.T (2009). Use of a bulk-email filter within a system for classifying messages for urgency or importance. US Patent 7,565,403.

  • Hoyle, R.; Das, S.; Kapadia, A.; Lee, A.J.; and Vaniea, K. (2017). Was my message read? privacy and signaling on facebook messenger. In: CHI ’17. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Denver, pp. 3838–3842.

  • Isaacs, E.; Walendowski, A.; Whittaker, S.; Schiano, D.J.; and Kamm, C. (2002). The character, functions, and styles of instant messaging in the workplace. In: CSCW ’02. Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. New Orleans, pp. 11–20.

  • Jacoby, J.; and Matell, M.S. (1971). Three-Point Likert scales are good enough. Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 495–500.

  • Jain, P.; Farzan, R.; and Lee, A.J. (2019a). Adaptive Modelling of Attentiveness to Messaging: A Hybrid Approach. In: UMAP ’19. Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization. Larnaca, pp. 261–270.

  • Jain, P.; Farzan, R.; and Lee, A.J. (2019b). Are You There? Identifying Unavailability in Mobile Messaging. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Glasgow, pp. 1–6.

  • Kang, R.; Brown, S.; Dabbish, L.; and Kiesler, S. (2014). Privacy Attitudes of Mechanical Turk Workers and the U.S. Public. In: SOUPS ’14. Proceedings of the Tenth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security. Menlo Park, pp. 37–49.

  • Khalil, A.; and Connelly, K. (2006). Context-Aware Telephony: Privacy preferences and sharing patterns. In: CSCW ’06. Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Banff, pp. 469–478.

  • Kim, B.; Shin, K.-S.; and Chai, S. (2015). How People Disclose Themselves Differently According To The Strength Of Relationship In SNS? Journal of Applied Business Research, vol. 31, no. 6, p. 2139.

  • Knittel, J.; Shirazi, A.S.; Henze, N.; and Schmidt, A. (2013). Utilizing contextual information for mobile communication. In: CHI ’13 Extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. Paris, pp. 1371–1376.

  • Lampinen, A.; Tamminen, S.; and Oulasvirta, A. (2009). All my people right here, right now: Management of group Co-Presence on a social networking site. In: GROUP ’09. Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work. Sanibel Island, pp. 281–290.

  • Lantz, B. (2013). Equidistance of Likert-type scales and validation of inferential methods using experiments and simulations. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 16–28.

  • Liang, K.-Y.; and Zeger, S.L. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models, Vol. 73.

  • Lin, R.; and Utz, S. (2017). Self-disclosure on SNS: Do disclosure intimacy and narrativity influence interpersonal closeness and social attraction? Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 70, pp. 426–436.

  • Mai, L.M.; Freudenthaler, R.; Schneider, F.M.; and Vorderer, P. (2015). “I know you’ve seen it!” Individual and social factors for users’ chatting behavior on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 49, pp. 296–302.

  • Malhotra, N.K.; Kim, S.S.; and Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 336–355.

  • Marreiros, H.; Tonin, M.; Vlassopoulos, M.; and Schraefel, M.C. (2017). “Now that you mention it”: A survey experiment on information, inattention and online privacy. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 140, pp. 1–17.

  • McDuff, D.; and Czerwinski, M. (2018). Designing emotionally sentient agents. Communications of the ACM, vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 74–83.

  • Mehrotra, A.; Musolesi, M.; Hendley, R.; and Pejovic, V. (2015). Designing Content-driven Intelligent Notification Mechanisms for Mobile Applications. In: UbiComp ’15. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. Osaka, pp. 813–824.

  • Mehrotra, A.; Pejovic, V.; Jo, V.; Hendley, R.; and Musolesi, M. (2016). My phone and me: Understanding people’s receptivity to mobile notifications. In: CHI ’16. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. San Jose, pp. 1021–1032.

  • Montag, C.; Błaszkiewicz, K; Sariyska, R.; Lachmann, B.; Andone, I.; Trendafilov, B.; Eibes, M.; and Markowetz, A. (2015). Smartphone usage in the 21st century: who is active on WhatsApp?. BMC Research notes, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 331.

  • Nardi, B.A.; Whittaker, S.; and Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction: Instant messaging in action. In: CSCW ’00. Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Philadelphia, pp. 79–88.

  • Niemantsverdriet, K.; Van Essen, H.; Pakanen, M.; and Eggen, B. (2019). Designing for awareness in interactions with shared systems: the DASS framework. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1–41.

  • O’Day, D.R; and Calix, R.A (2013). Text message corpus: applying natural language processing to mobile device forensics. In: ICMEW 2013. IEEE International conference on multimedia and expo workshops. San Jose, pp. 1–6.

  • Pejovic, V.; and Musolesi, M. (2014). Interruptme: Designing Intelligent Prompting Mechanisms for Pervasive Applications. In: UbiComp ’14. Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. Seattle, pp. 897–908.

  • Pekár, S.; and Brabec, M. (2018). Generalized estimating equations: a pragmatic and flexible approach to the marginal GLM modelling of correlated data in the behavioural sciences. Ethology, vol. 124, no. 2, pp. 86–93.

  • Perry, M.; O’hara, K.; Sellen, A.; Brown, B.; and Harper, R. (2001). Dealing with mobility: understanding access anytime, anywhere. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 323–347.

  • Pielot, M.; de Oliveira, R.; Kwak, H.; and Oliver, N. (2014). Didn’t you see my message? predicting attentiveness to mobile instant messages. In: CHI ’14. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Toronto, pp. 3319–3328.

  • Pielot, M.; Cardoso, B.; Katevas, K.; Serrà, J; Matic, A.; and Oliver, N. (2017). Beyond interruptibility: Predicting opportune moments to engage mobile phone users. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1–25.

  • Pielot, Martin; Dingler, Tilman; Pedro, Jose San; and Oliver, Nuria (2015). When attention is not scarce - detecting boredom from mobile phone usage. In: UbiComp ’15. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. Osaka, pp. 825–836.

  • Retore, Ana Paula; and Almeida, Leonelo Dell Anhol (2019). Understanding Appropriation Through End-User Tailoring in Communication Systems: A Case Study on Slack and WhatsApp. In , SCSM 2019. Social Computing and social media. design, Human Behavior and Analytics. Cham, pp. 245–264.

  • Reynolds, L.; Smith, M.E.; Birnholtz, J.P.; and Hancock, J.T. (2013). Butler lies from both sides: Actions and perceptions of unavailability management in texting. In: CSCW ’13. Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. San Antonio, pp. 769–778.

  • Rosenthal, S.; Dey, A.K.; and Veloso, M. (2011). Using Decision-Theoretic experience sampling to build personalized mobile phone interruption models. In: Pervasive’11. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Pervasive Computing. San Francisco, pp. 170–187.

  • Salovaara, A.; Lindqvist, A.; Hasu, T.; and Häkkilä, J (2011). The phone rings but the user doesn’t answer: Unavailability in mobile communication. In: MobileHCI ’11. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Stockholm, pp. 503–512.

  • Schildt, Emily; Leinfors, Martin; and Barkhuus, Louise (2016). Communication, coordination and awareness around continuous location sharing. In: GROUP ’16. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Supporting Group Work. Sanibel Island, pp. 257–265.

  • Schmidt, Kjeld (2002). The problem with awareness’: Introductory remarks onawareness in CSCW’. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 11, no. 3-4, pp. 285–298.

  • Sullivan, G.M.; and Anthony, Jr, RA. (2013). Analyzing and interpreting data from Likert-type scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 541–542.

  • Tam, K.Y.; and Ho, S.Y. (2006). Understanding the impact of web personalization on user information processing and decision outcomes. MIS Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 865–890.

  • Tang, J.C (2007). Approaching and leave-taking: Negotiating contact in computer-mediated communication. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 5–es.

  • Tang, JC.; Yankelovich, N.; Begole, J.; Van, K.M.; Li, F.; and Bhalodia, J. (2001). Connexus to Awarenex: Extending Awareness to Mobile Users. In: CHI ’01. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Seattle, pp. 221–228.

  • Teevan, J.; and Hehmeyer, A. (2013). Understanding how the projection of availability state impacts the reception incoming communication. In: CSCW ’13. Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. San Antonio, pp. 753–758.

  • Thayer, A.; Bietz, MJ.; Derthick, K.; and Lee, CP. (2012). I love you, let’s share calendars: Calendar sharing as relationship work. In: CSCW ’12. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Seattle, pp. 749–758.

  • Tyler, JR.; and Tang, JC. (2003). When Can i expect an email response? a study of rhythms in email usage. In: ECSCW 2003. Proceedings of the 2003 European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Dordrecht, pp. 239–258.

  • Voida, A.; Newstetter, WC.; and Mynatt, ED. (2002). When conventions collide: The tensions of instant messaging attributed. In: CHI ’02. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Minneapolis, pp. 187–194.

  • Walther, JB.; and Burgoon, JK. (1992). Relational communication in Computer-Mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 50–88.

  • Wang, M.; Cho, S.; and Denton, T. (2017). The impact of personalization and compatibility with past experience on e-banking usage. International Journal of Bank Marketing, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 45–55.

  • Wiberg, M.; and S. Whittaker (2005). Managing availability: Supporting lightweight negotiations to handle interruptions. ACM transactions on computer-human interaction (TOCHI), vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 356–387.

  • Wiese, J.; Kelley, P.G.; Cranor, L.F.; Dabbish, L.; Hong, JI.; and Zimmerman, J. (2011). Are you close with me? are you nearby? investigating social groups, closeness, and willingness to share. In: UbiComp ’11. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. Beijing, pp. 197–206.

  • Yuan, F.; Gao, X.; and Lindqvist, J. (2017). How busy are you?: Predicting the interruptibility intensity of mobile users. In: CHI ’17. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Denver, pp. 5346–5360.

  • Yáñez Cortés, R (1975). The problem of interpretation in psychology. Acta Psiquiatrica y Psicologica de America Latina, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 84—89.

  • Zhao, C.; Hinds, P.; and Ge, G. (2012). How and to whom people share: The role of culture in Self-Disclosure in online communities. In: CSCW ’12. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Seattle, pp. 67–76.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under awards CNS–1253204 and CNS–1814866.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Pranut Jain, Rosta Farzan & Adam J. Lee

Authors
  1. Pranut Jain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rosta Farzan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adam J. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pranut Jain.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jain, P., Farzan, R. & Lee, A.J. Context-based Automated Responses of Unavailability in Mobile Messaging. Comput Supported Coop Work 30, 307–349 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-021-09399-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-021-09399-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation