How Effective Are Social Influence Strategies in Persuasive Apps for Promoting Physical Activity?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of behavior change systems and persuasive technologies to promote desirable behavior is increasingly gaining attention. Most existing Persuasive Technologies (PTs) are targeted at promoting Physical Activity (PA) using three common socially-oriented persuasive strategies: competition, social comparison, and cooperation. This paper provides an empirical review of 19 years (54 papers) of literature on persuasive technology for physical activity promotion. The review aims to (1.) evaluate the effectiveness of PTs employing social influence strategies to promote PA; (2.) summarize and highlight trends in the outcomes and employed technological platforms; (3.) reveal some weaknesses of existing PTs for promoting PA; and finally, (4.) offer suggestions for improvements, and opportunities for future research in this area.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it