Researchers have studied how people use self-tracking technologies and discovered a long list of barriers including lack of time and motivation as well as difficulty in data integration and interpretation. Despite the barriers, an increasing number of Quantified-Selfers diligently track many kinds of data about themselves, and some of them share their best practices and mistakes through Meetup talks, blogging, and conferences. In this work, we aim to gain insights from these "extreme users," who have used existing technologies and built their own workarounds to overcome different barriers. We conducted a qualitative and quantitative analysis of 52 video recordings of Quantified Self Meetup talks to understand what they did, how they did it, and what they learned. We highlight several common pitfalls to self-tracking, including tracking too many things, not tracking triggers and context, and insufficient scientific rigor. We identify future research efforts that could help make progress toward addressing these pitfalls. We also discuss how our findings can have broad implications in designing and developing self-tracking technologies.

Objective: To review sleep related consumer technologies, including mobile electronic device "apps," wearable devices, and other technologies. Validation and methodological transparency, the effect on clinical sleep medicine, and various social, legal, and ethical issues are discussed. C onsumer sleep technologies (CSTs) are increasingly popular computer-based systems available to the general public for the purpose of improving or self-monitoring sleep. Their primary goals include sleep induction, wake induction, selfguided sleep assessment, entertainment, social connection, information sharing, and sleep education. There is scant literature discussing these technologies.1,2 Despite a paucity of clinical validation with traditional sleep technologies (e.g., polysomnography (PSG), multiple sleep latency testing (MSLT), and clinical-grade actigraphy), CSTs are here to stay because of their innovative nature, convenience, and affordability.Although adoption rates are not available, sleep-tracking products such as Fitbit and Jawbone are top sellers in consumer health products.3,4 The highest-funded health device on Kickstarter was a sleep monitor, which garnered more than $2.4 million in fi nancial backing. 5 A recent search for "sleep" in the Apple iTunes app store returned over 500 different sleep related applications, or "apps," available for download 6 ; similar searches on Android and Microsoft's app stores return hundreds of results. 7,8 Certain apps boast more than fi ve million downloads; one of the top fi ve paid apps in 2014 on iTunes was a sleep tracker and alarm clock. 9 We use the metaphor "over-the-counter" to describe these CSTs, because they are mostly available without a prescription or clinical guidance. Clinical sleep specialists should be aware of these increasingly popular technologies, as patients may request interpretation of derived data. This paper aims to provide a general overview of CSTs and their potential social, ethical, legal, and clinical effect. Although rapid development of these technologies obviates an exhaustive review, we outline some of the more popular, illustrative, or innovative technologies to give sleep specialists an idea of the recent landscape. Consumer Sleep Technologies: A Review of the Landscape METHODSWe searched PubMed and the digital libraries of the Association for Computing Machinery and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (where technology developers publish peer-reviewed articles), with search terms including "sleep technology," "sleep app," and "sleep monitoring." We eliminated articles that were not relevant to sleep (e.g., applications for controlling a computer's hibernation mode). We ran similar searches on Google, specifi cally focusing on consumer technology-related websites such as MIT Technology Review, 10

Abstract. Smartphone users visit application marketplaces (or app stores) to search and install applications. However, these app stores are not free from privacy-invasive apps, which collect personal information without sufficient disclosure or people's consent. To nudge people away from privacy-invasive apps, we created a visual representation of the mobile app's privacy rating. Inspired by "Framing Effects," we designed semantically equivalent visuals that are framed in either a positive or negative way. We investigated the effect of the visual privacy rating, framing, and user rating on people's perception of an app (e.g., trustworthiness) through two experiments. In Study 1, participants were able to understand the intended meaning of the visual privacy ratings. In Study 2, we found a strong main effect for visual privacy rating on participants' perception of an app, and framing effects in a low privacy rating app. We discuss implications for designing visual privacy ratings, including the use of positive visual framing to nudge people away from privacy-invasive apps.