skip to main content
10.1145/2998181.2998365acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Soylent Diet Self-Experimentation: Design Challenges in Extreme Citizen Science Projects

Published:25 February 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Quantified self-experimentation with personal diets is a popular activity among health enthusiasts, diagnosed patients, as well as "life hackers" pursuing self-optimization goals. In this paper, we reflect on self-experimentation practices in the context of amateur citizen science communities. We report findings from 11 month-long qualitative fieldwork in a community of nutrition hobbyists experimenting with a powdered food substitute "soylent". Our respondents customized the soylent powders to their personal needs, tracked their metabolic reactions to the diet, and discussed their findings with the online soylent user community. Although the data and knowledge sharing within the community positively impacted respondents' nutrition literacy, these activities created risks regarding their health safety and data privacy. We define soylent self-experimentation as a form of "extreme citizen science". Based on the limitations identified in the soylent community, we suggest a set of design recommendations for extreme citizen science projects.

References

  1. 2016 soylent Eaters Survey. 2016. Retrieved June 1, 2016 from http://www.ketosoy.com/blogs/news/results-of-the2016-soylent-eaters-surveyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. ACM digital library. 2016. "query": { keywords.author.keyword:(+citizen +science) }Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Earl R. Babbie, 1986. The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Kristen Barta and Gina Neff. 2016. Technologies for Sharing: lessons from Quantified Self about the political economy of platforms. Information, Communication & Society 19, 4, 518--531.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Michael Billig and Henri Tajfel. 1973. Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology. 3 (1): 27--52.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Chia-Fang Chung, Kristin Dew, Allison Cole, Jasmine Zia, James Fogarty, Julie A. Kientz, and Sean A. Munson. 2016. Boundary Negotiating Artifacts in Personal Informatics: Patient-Provider Collaboration with Patient-Generated Data. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 770--786. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. DIY soylent. 2016. Website. Retrieved May 26, 2016 from http://diy.soylent.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Markéta Dolejšová. 2016. Deciphering a Meal through Open Source Standards: Soylent and the Rise of Diet Hackers. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 436--448. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Markéta Dolejšová. 2015. A Taste of Big Data on the Global Dinner Table. Journal for Artistic Research, 9/2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Boka En and Mercedes Pöll. 2016. Are you selftracking? Risks, norms and optimisation in selfquantifying practices. Graduate Journal of Social Science April 2016, Vol. 12, Issue 2, pp. 37--57. ISSN: 1572-3763Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Google Trends. 2016. Explore: "Citizen Science". Retrieved May 22, 2016 from http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%22citizen %20science%22&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT-2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Muki Haklay. 2013. Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: Overview and typology of participation. In Crowdsourcing geographic knowledge Springer, 105--122.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Alan Irwin. 1995. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development . Psychology Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Ravi Karkar, James Fogarty, Julie A. Kientz, Sean A. Munson, Roger Vilardaga, and Jasmine Zia. 2015. Opportunities and challenges for self-experimentation in self-tracking. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (UbiComp/ISWC'15 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 991--996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Ian Kerridge. 2005. Altruism or reckless curiosity? A brief history of self experimentation in medicine", Internal Medical Journal, vol. 24, iss. 2, pp. 43--48,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Stacey Kuznetsov, Aniket Kittur, and Eric Paulos. 2015. Biological Citizen Publics: Personal Genetics as a Site of Public Engagement with Science. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jisoo Lee. 2013. Supporting self-experimentation of behavior change strategies. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publication (UbiComp '13 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 361--366. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Gina Neff & Dawn Nafus. 2016. The Self-Tracking: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Patients Like Me. 2016. Website. Retrieved May 26, 2016 from http://www.patientslikeme.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jurij Pfeiffer, Matthias von Entress-Fuersteneck, Nils Urbach, and Arne Buchwald. 2016. Quantify-Me: Consumer Acceptance of Wearable Self-Tracking Devices. Proceedings of the 24th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Istanbul, Turkey, 99. Paper, June 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jennifer Preece and Anne Bowser. 2014. What HCI can do for citizen science. In CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 10591060. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Quantified Self. 2016. Retrieved May 24, 2016 from http://quantifiedself.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Danial Qaurooni, Ali Ghazinejad, Inna Kouper, and Hamid Ekbia. 2016. Citizens for Science and Science for Citizens: The View from Participatory Design. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1822--1826. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Reddit soylent group. 2016. Retrieved May 26, 2016 from reddit.com/r/soylentGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Robert Rhinehart. 2013. How I Stopped Eating Food. (February 2013). Retrieved May 26, 2016 from http://robrhinehart.com/?p=298Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Soylent. 2016. Retrieved May 26, 2016 from http://www.soylent.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Soylent discourse. 2016. Retrieved May 26, 2016 from http://discourse.soylent.me/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Soylent discourse. 2016. Looking for volunteer Rails devs. Retrieved May 26, 2016 from https//discourse.soylent.com/t/looking-for-volunteerrails-devs/442Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Lara Spiteri Cornish, and Caroline Moraes. 2015. The impact of consumer confusion on nutrition literacy and subsequent dietary behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 32(5), 558--574.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Matthias Stevens, Michalis Vitos, Julia Altenbuchner, Gillian Conquest, Jessica Lewis, and Muki Haklay. 2014. Taking participatory citizen science to extremes. Pervasive Computing, IEEE, 13(2), 20--29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Melanie Swan. 2012. Health 2050: The realization of personalized medicine through crowdsourcing, the quantified self, and the participatory biocitizen. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 2(3), 93--118.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Melanie Swan. 2013. The quantified self: Fundamental disruption in big data science and biological discovery. Big Data 1, 2, 85--99.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. UCLA ExCiteS group. 2013. Projects. Retrieved May 24, 2016 from https://www.ucl.ac.uk/excites/projectsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Effy Vayena and John Tasioulas. 2015. "We the Scientists": a Human Right to Citizen Science. Philosophy & Technology 28, 3, 479--485.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Barry D Weiss, Mary Z Mays, William Martz, Kelley Merriam Castro, Darren A DeWalt, Michael P Pignone, . . . Frank A Hale. 2005. Quick assessment of literacy in primary care: the newest vital sign. The Annals of Family Medicine, 3(6), 514--522.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Peter West, Richard Giordano, Max Van Kleek, and Nigel Shadbolt. 2016. The Quantified Patient in the Doctor's Office: Challenges & Opportunities. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3066--3078. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Gary Wolf. 2011. What is the quantified self? Quantified Self. Retrieved September 12, 2016 from http:// quantifiedself.com/2011/03/what-is-thequantified-self/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. David Zeevi, Tal Korem, Niv Zmora, David Israeli, Daphna Rothschild, Adina Weinberger, Orly BenYacov, Dar Lador, Tali Avnit-Sagi, and Maya LotanPompan. 2015. Personalized nutrition by prediction of glycemic responses. Cell 163, 5, 1079--1094.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Soylent Diet Self-Experimentation: Design Challenges in Extreme Citizen Science Projects

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CSCW '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
      February 2017
      2556 pages
      ISBN:9781450343350
      DOI:10.1145/2998181

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 February 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CSCW '17 Paper Acceptance Rate183of530submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CSCW '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader