Control and Personalization:Younger versus Older Users' Experience of Notifications
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
With the increasing ubiquity of mobile technology, users are more connected than ever. Notifications facilitate prompt connections to friends, family and work, but also distract us from what we're doing. We investigated how older and younger users thought about, interacted with, and personalized their notifications. We took a qualitative approach, conducting semi-structured interviews primed through a notification categorization activity. We interviewed 20 participants with equal numbers of younger (19-30 years old) and older (48-74) adults. We extend and refine previous qualitative work and show that while enjoyment plays a minor role in the experience of notifications, urgency, directness and social closeness are far more important factors, though context remains a nuanced issue. We found that older users especially desired a sense of control over their notifications that was difficult to achieve with current technology. Lastly, we provide information about what “categories” of notifications users perceive and expand how that can be used in new personalization systems. These results lead us to advocate a number of fundamental changes to how notifications are personalized.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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