No abstract

Three emerging themes were identified: deliberate procrastination, mindless procrastination, and strategic delay. For the form of procrastination we classified as deliberate procrastination, participants typically reported wilfully delaying their bedtime because they felt they deserved some time for themselves. For the category of mindless procrastination, a paradigmatic aspect was that participants lost track of the time due to being immersed in their evening activities. Finally, participants who engaged in strategic delay reported going to bed late because they felt they needed to in order to fall asleep (more quickly), which suggests that despite describing themselves as "procrastinating," their bedtime delay may actually be linked to undiagnosed insomnia. The conceptual distinctions drawn in this paper deepen our understanding of bedtime delay and may be helpful for designing effective interventions.

The ongoing digitalization and automation of coaching practices is rapidly changing the landscape of coaching and (health-related) self-improvement. The introduction of a new class of support technologies-"e-coaching systems"-promises to deliver highly personalized, timely, around-the-clock coaching in a wide variety of domains and to a broad audience. At the same time, the introduction of these systems raises a number of practical and ethical concerns regarding, for example, privacy and personal autonomy, that deserve careful consideration. Unfortunately, constructive conversations about these technologies are hindered by the lack of a precise understanding of what constitutes an e-coaching system and how e-coaching systems differ from other types of behavior change interventions. The broad and inclusive definitions that have been offered in the recent literature facilitate a systematic underestimation of the impact that the introduction of e-coaching systems will have, by allowing discussions to include examples of systems with which people are familiar but which lack the level of sophistication and independence needed for a genuine process of coaching. As a consequence, specific concerns that arise with sophisticated, adaptive systems that form their own perspective on a user's health and behavior and from that perspective shape persuasive interactions, remain out of focus. This paper aims to remedy this situation by proposing a more narrowly construed definition of e-coaching systems.

No abstract

Autonomous e-coaching systems offer their users suggestions for action, thereby affecting the user's decision-making process. More specifically, the suggestions that these systems make influence the options for action that people actually consider. Surprisingly though, options and the corresponding process of option generation-a decision-making stage preceding intention formation and action selection-have received very little attention in the various disciplines studying decision making. We argue that this neglect is unjustified and that it is important, particularly for designers of autonomous e-coaching systems, to understand how human option generation works. The aims of this paper are threefold. The first aim is to generate awareness with designers of autonomous e-coaching systems that these systems do in fact influence their users' options. The second is to show that understanding the interplay between a person's options and the e-coaching system's suggestions is important for improving the effectiveness of the system. The third is that the very same interplay is also crucial for designing e-coaching systems that respect people's autonomy.