|
| Research question | Answer/outcome | Recommendation |
|
| (1) What does DWB denote in HCI literature? | Our review identified three major groups of definitions.
(1) This group focuses on the user-technology relationship and can be represented in Floridi’s definition of the impact of digital technologies on “what it means to live a life that is good for humans” [26] and other definitions that include the impact of technologies on humans’ emotional [59], mental, physical, and social well-being [60, 61, 133].
(2) This group focuses on users’ needs and characteristics and is represented by the SDT [67, 68].
(3) This group uses Google’s well-being tools as a representation of DWB. | We support the holistic view of DWB where mental physical emotional and social well-being are addressed, such as in [25]. Moreover, we recommend stressing the important role of individuals (users), designers, HCI researchers, and society institutions in achieving and preserving the DWB of all.
In this suggestion, we aspire that the DWB definition should go beyond minimizing the negative impact of technology on humans’ well-being, to represent the ability of technology to contribute towards the motivation, productivity, and flourishing of individuals and societies. |
|
| (2) Is DWB part of the digital design process and how? | Two frameworks were identified in the reviewed papers:
(1) “Motivation, engagement and thriving in user experience” METUX model [101]
(2) IEEE P7010 well-being impact assessment [103] | As the two available frameworks depend on the assessment of the digital products, we recommend that designing for DWB should be an integral part in the designing phase, and before disseminating the product to be used by the users. Hence, having a DWB check within the guidelines, just as the guidelines for accessibility and usability should be a requirement (e.g., W3C and WCAG) |
|
| (3) How is DWB being measured? | Nine scales were identified in the reviewed papers, however, only one scale was identified as unique for DWB and the remaining scales were borrowed from well-being to measure different aspects of well-being such as satisfaction of life and health (see Table 4). | Measuring well-being should be done by designers and users. Designers by assessing whether DWB considerations have been accounted for during the design phase, and by users, through assessing the impact of using any digital product on their productivity, satisfaction, and flourish in general. Moreover, as explained in recommendation no.1, when DWB is a build-up process where its responsibility lies on the society as a whole, educational and legal institutions need to have indicators for applying DWB in the educational and judiciary systems. |
|
| (4) Are there any existing applications (interventions, artifacts) related to DWB? | This review identified 33 studies with interventions, where 80% were users focused which shows a biased perspective towards DWB responsibility. | We suggest a list of research directions that are user and designer focused with the support of societal institutions to balance the course of actions. This list can be a roadmap for HCI researchers to adjust the focus from being heavily placed on users’ behaviors to include users’ education and awareness and designers’ innovation and protection strategies as proactive steps to prevent the possible negative impact of the digital product during the design phase. |
|
