News
EASST paper on everyday data practices in self-monitoring
2 August 2018
Last week, Kate and Catherine gave our first conference presentation from phase two of research from the Tracking Ourselves? project, at the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology (EASST) conference at Lancaster University.
The paper, 'Partial vistas: records, self-monitoring and everyday data practices', analyses data gathered from interviews with over 60 users of blood pressure and weight/BMI self-monitoring technologies. In it, we consider everyday tracking practices, focussing on record keeping, charting and visualising. Looking across the range and combinations of records people create and keep, and what they do not record, retain or review, we ask what is being made visible and to whom?
The presentation was part of a panel, organised by Minna Ruckenstein (University of Helsinki) and Dorthe Kristensen (University of Southern Denmark), called 'Seeing with data and devices'. It included papers from an international range of speakers exploring a really diverse set of topics from conceptualisations of customers through the commercial gathering of “loyalty” data (Markus Unternährer, University of Lucerne), to practices of data collection regarding pet dogs in Calgary, Canada (Morgan Mouton and Melanie Rock, University of Calgary, and Olga Solomon, University of Southern California).
Abstract
In this presentation, we discuss everyday practices of self-monitoring focussing particularly on record keeping, charting and visualising. We draw on a study focussed on two cases: blood pressure monitoring and BMI/weight monitoring. Looking across the range and combinations of digital and paper records people create and keep, we ask what is being made visible and to whom?
We are interested in the meaning of records made as well as those misplaced, forgotten or discarded, and readings not taken or recorded. We are also interested in practices of sharing in different ways.
In our research, we find people who keep no records, or make records but do not review them, and instances where people do not record unwanted or disappointing readings. We note also the continued role of paper charts and records even for those who track digitally. In thinking about the ‘partial vistas’ opened up through everyday tracking practices we extend the notion of ‘filtration work’ (Nielsen, 2015) to include not only what data is shared with others, but also which data is committed to record at all.
Further, in trying to understand instances where numbers are unremarkable, not recorded or reviewed, we pursue the idea that monitoring may provide information to be consumed rather than data to be tracked (Knorr Cetina, 2010). In elaborating what is and is not made visible in the local settings of health monitoring, we offer insights into what might remain inaccessible to companies in the digital economy.