MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415590888 · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2573042

Becoming Your Quantified Self: A Study of the Effects of Personal Avatars in Self-Tracking Sports Apps

2025· article· en· W4415590888 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Birnstiel, S Reiss, Daniel Fernández Galeote, Burkhard Düemler, Benedikt Morschheuser

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
FundersAdidas
KeywordsClothingThe InternetPerspective (graphical)Avatar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the Quantified Self (QS) movement, sports apps increasingly adopt self-tracking technologies that offer data-driven insights into personal competencies to enhance self-efficacy. However, sustained engagement with QS technology remains challenging, as interpreting data is complex. One potential solution is to make QS data more meaningful to users. To address this, we present a player card feature within a QS sports app, incorporating a personalized avatar to enhance users’ enjoyment, data meaningfulness, and self-efficacy to promote continued use. We evaluate the app through a field experiment in a soccer context to examine the impact of the avatar feature. Results indicate that avatar identification positively affects self-efficacy, data meaningfulness, continued use intention, and enjoyment, though enjoyment did not impact continued use. Our findings suggest that (1) avatar identification can be enhanced through personalization, (2) personalized avatars effectively boost self-efficacy, and (3) sustained engagement may rely more on meaning than on enjoyment alone.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Human-Computer InteractionSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207