What is it about?

In our busy lives, reflecting on our thoughts and actions is important for personal growth and well-being. We wanted to find out the best way to encourage people to self-reflect: using digital tools (like apps), traditional methods (like paper and pen), or a mix of both. We conducted a study with 48 participants who used one of three tools for six weeks: a smartphone app, a set of physical cards, or a combination of both. We also had a control group that didn’t use any tools. Participants took surveys before and after the study to measure changes in their self-reflection habits. Our findings showed that people using the hybrid tool (both the app and cards) improved their self-reflection the most. Those using just the app also showed significant improvements. The physical cards were helpful but not as effective as the other methods. We concluded that while digital tools can support self-reflection, combining digital and traditional methods works best. This approach offers flexibility, allowing people to choose what works best for them in different situations, leading to better and more consistent self-reflection practices.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Our research is unique because it explores the effectiveness of different self-reflection tools—digital, analog, and hybrid—during a time when technology is deeply integrated into our daily lives. Unlike previous studies that often focused on either digital or traditional methods alone, our study compares these methods side by side and introduces a hybrid approach, which is particularly relevant as people increasingly seek flexible and adaptive solutions. The timely nature of our work lies in addressing the growing concerns about the impact of constant digital engagement on mental health. By investigating whether digital tools can match or surpass traditional methods of self-reflection, we provide insights that are crucial in a world where technology plays a dominant role in personal and professional lives. The potential impact of our study is significant. Our findings suggest that combining digital and traditional methods can enhance self-reflection more effectively than using either method alone. This hybrid approach offers a balanced solution, leveraging the convenience of digital tools and the tactile, mindful experience of analog methods. This could lead to the development of more effective mental health and well-being applications, ultimately helping people to better manage their thoughts and emotions in a fast-paced, technology-driven world. By offering a flexible and adaptive self-reflection tool, our work could influence the design of future well-being interventions, making them more user-friendly and effective for a broader audience. This relevance and practical application can attract readers who are interested in the intersection of technology, mental health, and personal development.

Perspectives

In a world increasingly dominated by digital interactions, I often find myself questioning how these tools impact our deeper, introspective moments. This research allowed me to delve into these questions systematically. What I found particularly fascinating was the balance that the hybrid approach struck. It became evident that while digital tools offer unparalleled convenience and accessibility, there is still a significant, almost irreplaceable value in the tactile, mindful engagement that analog methods provide. Seeing participants benefit from a combination of both digital and traditional methods was incredibly rewarding. It reinforced my belief that the future of mental health support lies in flexibility and personalization. By allowing individuals to choose the method that best suits their current context, we can foster more consistent and effective self-reflection practices. This project has also highlighted the importance of adaptability in designing tools for well-being. People’s needs and preferences are diverse and ever-changing, and our tools should reflect this reality. The positive feedback from participants who could switch between digital and analog methods without losing the thread of their introspective journey was a testament to the power of this approach.

James Arnéra
Universite de Lausanne

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Digital, Analog, or Hybrid: Comparing Strategies to Support Self-Reflection, July 2024, ACM (Association for Computing Machinery),
DOI: 10.1145/3643834.3661558.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page