Calendars are for grownups: on time managementcoaching for college students

ABSTRACTExisting time management systems such as calendars may notbe well designed for college students who haven’t fully devel-oped time management skills. In this paper, we explore waysin which coaching improves awareness and practices of timemanagement. Based on a preliminary interview study with 14college students, we designed Student LifeMaps (SLM), anexploratory time management coaching prototype. SLM in-corporates principles of overlaying present location traces ona calendar, reflecting on past events, and periodic planningof future events. 17 students used SLM over 3 weeks withweekly coaching sessions. Our evaluation revealed that par-ticipants engaged in procrastination based on perceived levelof competence in accomplishing a task; they became moreaccountable when using calendar with digital traces of loca-tion; and periodic coaching increased self-awareness of timemanagement practices particularly in students without estab-lished planning routines. Our work has implications for thedesign of systems and processes for individuals transitioningfrom adolescence to adulthood, in particular: time manage-ment, academic retention, and course instruction.

Author Keywordstime management; calender; location; emerging adulthood;awareness; supportive coaching.

ACM Classification KeywordsH.5.m. Information Interfaces and Presentation (e.g. HCI):Miscellaneous

INTRODUCTIONEarlier studies and designs of calendars have mostly focusedon adult users in the context of professional life [30], par-enthood [28], or romantic partnerships [39]. In this litera-ture, calendars are seen as a powerful tool for individuals andgroups to manage time, reflect on their time use, negotiateschedules, and synchronize activities in social, familial, andorganizational contexts.

But what happens when the individual managing their time isyoung, inexperienced with practices of negotiating schedulesand competing demands on their time? This sudden explosionof new responsibilities and workload for students is one of thesources of stress in college life [36]. In the transition between

Paste the appropriate copyright statement here. ACM now supports three differentcopyright statements:• ACM copyright: ACM holds the copyright on the work. This is the historical ap-proach.• License: The author(s) retain copyright, but ACM receives an exclusive publicationlicense.• Open Access: The author(s) wish to pay for the work to be open access. The addi-tional fee must be paid to ACM.This text field is large enough to hold the appropriate release statement assuming it issingle spaced.Every submission will be assigned their own unique DOI string to be included here.

adolescence and adulthood, they are often away from homefor the first time, without their parents directly monitoringand assisting with their time management and schedules.

This paper focuses on college students, operating around busyschedules of classes, homework assignments, projects and ex-ams, lab-based research, part time jobs, extracurricular activi-ties, and socializing with friends. Understanding how collegestudents manage their schedules and supporting them to be-come more self aware of their practices will prove useful tothem while still in school and in professional environmentsafter graduation.

The goal of this research is to examine ways in which timemanagement coaching could help college students develop ef-fective time management skills. To inform the design of a timemanagement coaching tool, we initially carried out a forma-tive interview study with 14 students to understand their timemanagement practices and calendar use. We identified severalkey insights, including the importance of reflecting on one’sschedule as a way to improve; a simultaneous managementof both time and location throughout the day; and constantlynegotiating between serious commitment and responsibilityon the one hand and freedom, slack, and spontaneity on theother.

These insights informed the design of Student Life Maps(SLM), a tool that overlays location history recorded froman individual’s phone onto their online calendar and can beused in a coaching program. In a subsequent study, 17 stu-dents participated in a 3-week study in which they met witha coach once a week and used SLM for planning and reflect-ing on their weekly schedules. We found that college stu-dents without established planning habits benefit from peri-odic time management coaching; they plan with their idealselves in mind; they procrastinate based on perceived levelof personal competence; and a calendar automatically aug-mented with information from digital location traces keepsthem accountable for how they spend their time. These find-ings suggest pressing implications for the design of time man-agement systems for college students; academic implicationsfor retention programs; and key implications for college in-structors.

This paper has four contributions: first, we add to the CSCWliterature on time management and calendar use an explo-ration of the practices of college students; second, we explorethe design space around calendars specifically for college stu-dents in the context of reflection for building time manage-ment skills; third, we provide accounts of a three-week use ofa specific calendar design in a coaching context; and finally,we offer further understanding of the development of timemanagement practices in this unique group as they preparefor their future adulthood.

1

RELATED WORK

Calendars and SchedulesCalendars and schedules are an important part of time man-agement in everyday life, helping individuals and groups syn-chronize and coordinate activities and events within complexsocial structures [43]. The basic qualities of calendars repre-sent blocks of time in the form of hours, days, weeks, months,and years, and allow formalizing activities and events byspecifying the time and duration of each event in the calendar.This representation allows calendar users to see when eventsare happening, and as such allow avoiding booking multipleevents at the same time and coordinating events across multi-ple individuals.

These characteristics have been directly translated frompaper-based calendars, e.g., planner books and wall calen-dars, to electronic calendars, which all share basic functional-ities of specifying an event time and its duration and typicallyproviding opportunities to sync calendar events across multi-ple devices and share calendars across users.

Both paper and electronic calendars have been extensivelystudied in multiple contexts in the HCI and CSCW literature:in the workplace [8, 14, 15, 30]; in social life [39]; at homeand in family life [5, 7, 28, 32]; and in the boundaries be-tween all of them [11, 21]. This literature examines the useof calendars by individuals and groups for time management,negotiating competing schedules, and synchronizing activi-ties within and across social, familial, and organizational con-texts. As part of an ecology of tools for time and task manage-ment, calendars have been shown to be an important sourcefor people to reflect on their use of time and overall busyness[22].

What is common in the HCI and CSCW literature around cal-endars and time management is the focus on adults: profes-sionals, parents, and partners. Time management practicesand the use of calendars have not been studied in the contextof younger populations. Children living at home are typicallyless calendar-centric, because their parents manage their timeand activities [7, 28]. In this paper, therefore, we specificallylooked at the time management practices and calendar use ofindividuals in an age group that is in between adolescence andfull adults: emerging adults, in the ages of 18-25. We studiedspecifically emerging adults in a university context, becausethese are individuals who are often for the first time livingindependently outside of their parents’ home and managingbusy schedules of course work, paid work, extracurricular ac-tivities, and social life.

College Students and Time ManagementAmericans in their late teens often graduate from high schooland many of them leave their parents’ home for the first timeto go to college. Neither adolescents anymore, nor adults yet,these college students are in a developmental stage termedemerging adulthood [2], in which they learn over time tobecome financially independent and make autonomous deci-sions. As emerging adults, they are often involved in mul-tiple, dynamically changing experiences such as switching

college majors, taking on short term jobs, and dating roman-tic partners. These experiences help college students exploretheir identities toward making enduring life choices, but alsohighlight the need to multitask and manage time spent onmany (sometimes unpredictable) activities in multiple life as-pects.

As adolescents living at home, their time was managedthrough school and structured leisure activities (e.g., sportsand clubs), seen as important for avoiding boredom and asa result risky and negative behaviors [20, 45]. However, toomuch structure does not allow them to engage actively in theprocess of making choices around how to spend their time[31]. As a result, as they graduate from high school andmove away from their parents’ supervision (and control overtheir time), many college students need to pick up indepen-dent time management skills.

Leading the adoption of social networking services and mo-bile text communications, college students have gained theattention of HCI researchers [1, 17, 19, 42]. However, theseindividuals spend their digital time doing more than textingand social media: they multitask between social media, enter-tainment, studying, and more, and this multitasking is oftenassociated with stress [25]. The sudden explosion of respon-sibilities for a student undergoing identity discovery can bechallenging especially in highly competitive collegiate envi-ronments, and poor time management can lead to low grades,a high level of stress, and poor self-rated health [40].

These unique characteristics of college students and the stres-sors around college life have given rise to programs in manycolleges and universities for coaching students to build timemanagement skills [37]. In these programs, students meet anddiscuss their personal challenges with counselors. However,counselors cannot access deeper contextual information foreach student as these counselors primarily rely on students’self-reports that are prone to recall-bias. This challenge pro-vides the potential for a socio-technical tool that can bridgethe communication gap between student and counselors in or-der to better support these programs.

INTERVIEW STUDYOur first step toward designing a time management coachingtool for college students was to carry out an exploratory inter-view study with them. We wanted to understand how collegestudents currently practice time management, how they usecalendars and other time management tools, and how theirunique life idiosyncrasies give rise to gaps between how theywant to manage their time and what the existing time manage-ment tools allow them to do. The results of this study werelater used to identify key design principles for designing astudent time management coaching tool.

ParticipantsTo understand college students’ practices in using online cal-endars, we recruited fourteen students ages 19-24 from a uni-versity in northeast United States (6 female, 8 male; 10 Amer-ican, 4 international). Our recruitment focused on individu-als who identify themselves as active online calendar users.Participants varied in terms of academic major (engineering,

2

biology, psychology, economics, computer science, business,etc.) and level and year of study (two 2nd year undergrad,four 3rd year, six 4th year, two graduate students). Partici-pants were compensated with a gift card to a local eatery.

ProcedureParticipants were contacted via email and invited to schedulean interview at a time and location of their convenience. Allchose to carry out the interview in a public place on campus,and each interview lasted 30-100 minutes.

On the interview day, each participant signed an informedconsent form and answered questions about course of study,job if they had one, and extra-curricular and social activities.This helped us learn about who the participants were, howthey managed their everyday life and the bigger picture oftheir life goals.

Questions then moved on to discuss scheduling, planning,calendar use, and motivations and values in using the cal-endar. Participants reported using iCal, Google Calendar,and MS Outlook for their online calendars. Eleven partici-pants accessed their calendar on both their laptop computerand smartphone; the remaining three used an online calendaronly on a laptop computer. Here we focused on the prac-tical mechanics of using an online calendar daily. Partici-pants showed us their online calendars and talked us throughplanned events in their calendars, the feelings associated withscheduling events in the near and far future, and the feelingsrelated to reflecting on an empty or full calendar. In this partof the interview, we included a drawing exercise: participantssketched and talked about present, past, and future schedulesand events, and how these schedules and events made themfeel. This enabled us to explore the emotions, values, aspi-rations, and challenges in the seams between calendar use,everyday life, and life goals.

Interviews were audio recorded and fully transcribed us-ing a transcription service. Transcripts were analyzed us-ing an open-coding iterative technique to identify themes thatemerge from the data. In presenting our findings, we describehow each theme we identified is portrayed through our par-ticipants’ accounts, and relevant for understanding their timemanagement practices.

Findings and DiscussionCalendar is for balancing commitment and freedom. Ourpreliminary findings demonstrated that many participantsused their calendars as a time management tool: scheduling,planning, and recalling activities and events. They enteredand checked their class schedules, work sessions on home-work assignments, work-related events, and extracurricularactivities. Our participants had both positive and negative re-actions to having full or empty calendars: full calendars re-minded them of how productive their were and relieved theneed to remember their schedules. At the same time, thiscame with a sense of obligation to attend the events and ac-complish everything that is in the calendar, sometimes to apoint where participants mentioned the calendar was control-ling them.

Therefore, many participants found it important to managetheir time in a way that balances between commitment andfreedom. They distinguished between the planned, rigid ac-tivities formalized in calendars and spontaneous, flexible, in-formal times, wanting to ensure that they leave room for thelatter “free times” in which they “do nothing” or “do what-ever”. Steven explained: “you look forward to the gaps inyour calendar. You look forward to this time, this time, thistime, this time. I enjoyed this time very much, I’m sure I didnothing. Just sat and did nothing. I love it. It’s excellent.”

This complex balance between commitment to activities andfreedom of obligations, demonstrates the characteristics ofbeing college students. In some ways, our participants areadults, with responsibilities and commitments represented intheir calendars as classes, meetings, events, activities, anddeadlines. In other ways, they leave room in their calendarsfor free time, spontaneity, and doing nothing, so they do nothave to be accountable to formal obligations at all times.

Reflection is key for growth and improvement. Many partic-ipants also reported on the use of calendars not only for timemanagement, but also for reflecting on their schedules andtime management practices, as well an on the bigger pictureof their identities and lives. For example, using both a plannerbook and an online calendar, Mike explained that he has twocheckpoints of reflection, weekly and monthly. His weeklyreflection happens on Sundays: “my Sunday is more of a re-flection of how was this week. What’s coming up next? Whohaven’t I seen? That is, what my weekend is like... Reflectionis the best thing. If you don’t reflect then you’re just followingthe calendar you just made.” His monthly reflection: “I havemajor things due at the beginning of August and I have thingsright before classes start that I need to make sure I actuallyget done. Like buy my books by this date, final deadlines. Atthe end of every month I reflect back on my month to see whatI got in my checklist. If I didn’t complete everything, I takeit in my planner and push it down a month and then I add itto the calendar.” By reflecting through his calendar events,Mike maps his everyday schedule and activities to the big-ger picture of his life, and this results in feelings of controlover his schedule—and life, as opposed to blindly followingthe calendar or letting life lead him instead of the other wayaround.

As such, the calendar is seen not only as a tool for organizingone’s everyday life, but also for reflecting on one’s everydayschedules and their individual goals in a broader context oftheir social environment. In some ways, the calendar is al-most like a diary. These accounts demonstrate that our par-ticipants experience self-focus: by using the calendar for re-flecting on their daily schedules in the context of their individ-ual and social values, they look inward, focus on themselvesin relation to the environment, and consider the positive andnegative feelings associated with the choices they make on aneveryday basis toward achieving their life goals.

Location needs to be managed. Time was not the only di-mension managed by our participants through their calendars:location played an important role in the ways in which partici-pants related to their schedules and calendars. They were con-

3

cerned not only with when events were happening, but alsowhere they were happening. This was because often consec-utive events in their calendars meant they had to move fromone place to another, and they were constantly in transitionfrom one place to the other: they walked across campus be-tween classes, student jobs, and research labs, did homeworkin their dorms and in libraries, attended extracurricular eventson and off campus, and traveled outside of town during schoolbreaks to visit family or for vacation.

Our participants used different strategies to manage switchinglocations through time in their calendars. Sam, for example,color-coded his calendar to distinguish between events thatrequire him to get somewhere, and those that can happen any-where, such as studying: “everything that’s a physical thingis yellow and everything that’s where I’m not supposed to bepresent where you should be studying, I have it in red.” In ad-dition, participants reported having to account for the time ittakes to get between physical locations for events scheduledin their calendars. For example, Adam set reminders that popon his computer to give him time to prepare and get to hismeetings: “For a meeting like this, I set it 30 minutes, be-cause I needed to walk from the lab over to here.” Kate triedto minimize the number of times she had to walk betweencampus and home: “I try to stay on campus for as long as Ihave. If I have an activity scheduled at 8PM, I won’t go homeuntil 8PM [. . . ] so that I don’t wonder off and then I haveto wonder back.” These accounts show that our participantsdid their best to represent the spatial dimension in their calen-dars, for instance, by setting reminders ahead of time to allowfor traveling or color-coding events according to geographi-cal location. However, fundamentally, calendars are designedto represent time, not space.

SummaryWhile calendars are uniformly designed for all kinds of usersin various stages of life, genders, backgrounds, cultures, andmore, the findings from the interview study with college stu-dents demonstrates a unique practice in the use of online cal-endar and managing time as part of their everyday lives. Ourparticipants constantly try to balance between commitmentand freedom, they find it important to reflect on their use oftime through their calendars, and they constantly move be-tween locations and try to incorporate the spatial dimensionin their calendar practices. Different from other accounts ofcalendar and time management practices studied with adults[11, 22, 28], these findings suggest that the design of artifactssuch as online calendars, should not be a “one-size-fits-all”,given the different uses, needs, and goals of different usergroups. In the next section we report on the design of StudentLife Maps, a time management coaching tool for college stu-dents that was inspired by our understanding of this interviewfindings.

STUDENT LIFEMAPS (SLM) DESIGNBuilding on insights from the interview study, our goal was todesign a time management coaching tool that could help col-lege students develop effective time management skills. Wewanted to understand where college students spend most oftheir time, if they were aware of how they spent their time,

and how periodic support from a time management coachcould improve their time management practices.

Design PrinciplesThe design of SLM was largely influenced by the theoreticalframework of the Deep Structures of Life [16] and the threekey factors that we found from our first set of interviews:

1. Reflection on past events: our preliminary interviews re-vealed that looking through past calendar events helpedparticipants connect their everyday schedules and activitiesto the bigger pictures of their lives. By drawing on their re-membering selves, participants looked inward and considerthe positive and negative feelings associated with interleav-ing activities generated by the strands in their lives.

2. Location traces based on present events: we recognize lo-cation as an important design factor because our partici-pants were concerned with not only when events wherehappening, but also where they were happening. Thus, theyused calendar reminders to manage transitions betweenphysical places. In addition, building on the the theoret-ical framework of the Deep Structures of Life, “place” isrecognized as one of three important factors in each strandof an individual’s life [16].

3. Periodic planning of future events: Participants in the pre-liminary study also expressed the need to balance commit-ment and freedom through periodic planning of upcom-ing responsibilities—balancing obligations that result fromactivities in strands such as home, academic, social, job.Therefore we place importance on the process of planningupcoming schedules.

PrototypingTo create a fluid user experience based on the three designfactors, we began with the iterative design of several low fi-delity prototypes and gradually moved to high fidelity proto-types using HTML5 and CSS [38]. Our low fidelity paperprototypes and mock-ups involved different methods of vi-sualizations including bar-charts and stock-series projectionsshowing how much time was spent at home and at work, andthe time the user left home and returned home. Summa-rized feedback from iterative testing of different mock-upswith 5 students revealed that the charts were not interpreta-tive enough for users to compare week to week for specificplaces.

After testing multiple visualizations, we settled on an aug-mented calendar rendering of time spent at a location asevents since our users found it most expressive because it iseasy to view both locations and calendar schedules side byside. Next, we implemented a high fidelity prototype thatrendered only the locations for three fixed strands: home,school and hobby. We selected only these three strands be-cause participants in the preliminary interviews moved pri-marily between home, school and other places; and startingwith just three strand labels instead of an exhaustive list ofprobable strands simplified the prototyping process. Summa-rized feedback from usability testing with four users revealedthat users preferred having their own custom labels to having

4

Figure 1. SLM user add place label and address

pre-defined strand labels. This led to our final system de-sign with customized labels for each user to define their ownstrand labels with their corresponding addresses.

It is worthwhile to note that a single strand label could havemultiple physical addresses and we account for this duringthe implementation of our system. For instance, a studentwho has a social strand may meet with their singing groupat three different physical locations for biweekly practice. Inthis case, all three physical locations will have three differentaddresses but the same place label, social. Figure 1 showsthe implemented system with three example strand labels andtheir corresponding addresses. A user can add more strandlabels by clicking the “+” button or remove a strand and itscorresponding address by clicking the “-” button.

Motivational CoachingAs part of our system design, we integrate human coach-ing into SLM in order to provide participants with supportivefeedback.

Coaching, either face-to-face or online, has proved usefulin reducing barriers to behavior change and increase indi-vidual likelihood of following through personal plans [24,35]. While plans are effective, people have difficulty creatingthem on their own without training. Although several coach-ing techniques could have been integrated into the design ofSLM, we select the motivational coaching protocol because itis inexpensive when compared to expert-coaching, it does notrequire extensive formal training, and it focuses on provid-ing positive feedback for heightened self awareness. Motiva-tional coaching is a directive, client-centered counseling stylefor eliciting behavior change by helping clients to explore andresolve ambivalence in their decision making process [34].Although popularly applied in health to combat substanceabuse and manage alcoholism [3, 26], motivational coachingis relevant in our system because of its supportive approachand we are the first—to our knowledge—to apply this coach-ing protocol to support time management practices in collegestudents. Figure 2 shows a weekly meeting flowchart betweena student and a coach using SLM. Every week a student meetswith a coach to evaluate how the student spent their time inthe previous week. The student describes one to three goals

Figure 2. Weekly meeting flowchart between student and coach usingStudent LifeMaps (SLM)

that they want to accomplish by the next meeting and thenschedule these goals as series of events in their calendars.While the student schedules their events, the coach mediatesby asking questions about the duration of the events, break-ing down long events into multiple smaller events, balancingpriorities of events, and going about tasks based on lessonslearned from the previous week.

System ImplementationAs a small data system [9], SLM takes each individual’s lo-cation traces, repackages it in an easy-to-understand calendarformat and presents it to the person who generated them. Thisprovides the opportunity for each user to draw powerful infer-ences about their time management practices with the help ofa human coach.

SLM was implemented as an open-source front-end web sys-tem based on HTML5, CSS and Javascript. Our work buildsupon Google Calendar to make adoption easy—Google ser-vices are ubiquitous thus anyone with a Google account auto-matically has a Google Calendar, which syncs across multipledevices and other third party calendars.

Many electronic calendars provide functionality for addingthe location of an event and further showing it on a map.However, we are more interested in time spent at a loca-tion for three reasons: the Deep Structures of Life theoreti-cal framework recognizes “place” as one of three importantfactors in each strand of an individual’s life [16]; we use lo-cation as a means of reflection in order to reduce recall bias[33]; and our preliminary findings suggest that students movearound a lot while accomplishing their daily activities.

We draw inspiration from previous HCI research on usingFourSquare location tracking [23] and other popular locationtracking applications such as Google Timeline, Facebook’sMoves App [13, 29, 27]. We, however, do not include any ofthese existing applications as a separate tool in our study be-cause we wanted users to have a uniform view for both theircalendar events with their digital location traces as revealed infeedback from our usability study; and location tracking can

5

Figure 3. Flowchart of Student LifeMaps System

be easily activated on a participant’s Google enabled smart-phoneby simply toggling the location reporting on.

Figure 3 shows the flowchart of the implemented system. Touse the system, a user first authorizes SLM to have write ac-cess to their Google Calendar using industry standard OAuthprotocol. Thereafter the user sets the number of days to trackand types the labels for places they are interested in with theirfull addresses. Then the user downloads their location dataautomatically stored by Google by visiting Google Takeout(http://takeout.google.com/settings/takeout) and this data isuploaded to the SLM system.

Upon uploading their data on SLM, the web page processestheir data and prompts the user to click a button that launchestheir personal Google calendar. The calendar view wouldhave a newly automatically created calendar named “Loca-tion”. “Location” calendar contains time spent at the differentplace labels specified by the user. Each cluster of place has arandomly assigned color to make it visually distinctive. Forinstance, “home” could be colored “yellow”, “gym” colored“green”. It is important to note that for this study, we do notfocus on the effect of colors on users; rather, the colors arerandomly assigned after grouping events together.

A user can add as many places label and addresses as they de-sire. Clicking the “+” button provides additional “place label”and “address” fields for the user to enter more address. Con-versely, using “-” button deletes a label and its correspondingaddress. Figure 1 shows examples of strand labels with theircorresponding addresses. For instance, “Frat House” with itscorresponding address “Sherman 42 Walaby Way Syndney,CT”. To streamline the user experience, the system integratedGoogle Places so that an address can be automatically com-pleted upon typing the first few letters of the location. Tofurther improve user experience, every address entered is au-tomatically stored in the user’s browser local storage. Thismeans that when a user revisits SLM, addresses do not needto be re-entered thus saving eliminating the burden of retyp-ing already added places.

It is important to note that SLM is not just the implementedweb system that processes users’ location digital traces—thisis just one component of the entire system; rather, SLM isthe multifaceted socio-technical system that encompasses theimplemented front-end interface, the background processingalgorithm, and the dynamic interaction between a student anda coach during periodic planning.

DJ-Cluster Processing Algorithm

Among popular clustering algorithms, we selected DJ-Cluster, an efficient density and join-based variant of DBScanalgorithm, because previous work has shown it performs bet-ter than other clustering algorithms [44]. DJ-Cluster partic-ularly outperforms K-Means clustering because it does needto define, a priori, the number of clusters expected. The algo-rithm operates as follows: for each point, compute its neigh-borhood where the neighborhood consists of points withindistance Eps, under the condition that there are at least MinPtsof them. If no such neighborhood is found, the point is la-beled noise; otherwise, the points are created as a new clusterif no neighbor is in an existing cluster, or joined with an ex-isting cluster if any neighbor is in an existing cluster. Threeparameters for our clustering algorithm are Eps, minPts anddistance function and we use 100, 3, haversine distance re-spectively. We use haversine distance instead of euclideandistance because the former better captures the geographicaldistance between points on a map [41].

Further, our system preserves users’ privacy during computa-tion by processing user’s location data on their personal com-puters; this means that no one else but the user has accessto the location data uploaded as the data is never sent to anyserver.

SLM EVALUATIONOur goal is to use the SLM tool to further understand the po-tential of coaching of time management skills by combininglocation history with calendar information.

ParticipantsTo perform our system evaluation, we recruited seventeencollege students ages 18-23 from a university in northeastUnited States (10 female, 7 male; 9 Asian/Pacific Islander,5 White, 2 Black/African-American; 1 international). Unlikethe preliminary interview, participants did not have to be ac-tive calendar users; rather, all participants had to be at least18 years, have a smart-phone with location tracking ability,and be willing to meet with a human coach once a week for 3weeks. Participants varied in terms of academic major (Engi-neering, Performing Arts, Statistics, Finance, Computer Sci-ence, Biology, etc) and level and year of study (3 freshmen, 5sophomores, 6 juniors, 2 seniors, 1 masters student).

For this study, electronic calendars were used for weeklyplanning. Participants who had never used an electronic cal-endar before were taught some basic operations of how to addevents, modify events, and set event reminders if participantwanted reminders. For 13 participants who owned an OS X

6

device, we introduced and used iCal while the remaining 4participants on a Windows OS used Google Calendar. Eachcoaching session every week lasted from 15 to 65 minutesand participants were each compensated with a $30 gift cardat the end of the study.

Procedure1. After signing an informed consent form, the first interview

began with a semi structured approach where we discusshow participants go about their daily tasks, and manageboth academic and non-academic responsibilities. For in-dividuals who use one or more planning tools, we ask themto share how they used their tools.

2. Using motivational interview protocol, the researcher act-ing as a coach supported the participant in planning one tothree activities they’d chose to accomplish by the followingmeeting. Each meeting happened once a week.

3. At the next meeting, participant reflected on how theirweek went since the last meeting and evaluated the extentof completion of tasks scheduled in the previous meeting.

4. Then participant entered their labels and addresses in SLMin order to view how much time had been spent at eachplace while discussing with their coach.

5. Every week participant goes through steps 2 - 4 and at theend of the study, they complete an end of study survey.

AnalysisWe performed quantitative analysis on our end of study sur-vey, which revealed that most participants felt that periodicplanning was useful to them: 13 participants rated 70% ormore; 1 participant rated 60% and 3 participants rated 20%.For meeting frequency, 11 participants responded that meet-ing once a week was fine; 5 selected meeting once every 2weeks; and one participant selected that meeting more thanonce per week was better. Figure 5 shows responses to whoelse participants thought could act as coaches and results in-clude: friends, family, advisers, job employer, mentor.

To analyze our qualitative data, we went through multiple it-erations of our interview transcripts and organized them usingthe themes presented in our findings section.

FINDINGSWe identified seven major findings from the longitudinal de-ployment of SLM. These findings uncover deeper insights onhow college students manage their time and the effect of hav-ing a time management coach. These findings include: theexistence of a routine plan, planning with one’s ideal self, thechallenge of planning, strategic procrastination, social pres-sure through weekly meetings, and accountability based ontime spent at location.

Experienced planners and new planners. All partici-pants fell into one of two categories: established routine ornon-routine planning. Students with established planningmethods—routines that have been consistently used for atleast 3 months—felt that the weekly planning interfered withtheir personal scheduling routine. Seven of our participants

had established planning routines that involved a paper and/oran electronic planner and these participants explained at theend of the study that they did not perceive any gain fromthe weekly planning. Consistent with findings from our firststudy of active calendar users, these participants balancedtheir commitments and freedom by planning heavily duringsome periods and planning less during other less tasking pe-riods. One participant who uses multiple electronic calendarsto color-code daily events reiterated: “I can’t imagine gettingmuch use beyond what I normally do... because I already planthings pretty heavily. I don’t really have any issues becauseeverything always works out in the end” when discussing theinconvenience caused by coached weekly planning. Theseestablished-routine participants preferred to completely be incharge of their planning and schedule their daily events basedon perceived priorities during the week. Thus, planning inadvance with a coach only to update their schedules multipletimes during the week seemed counter-intuitive to them.

On the other hand, ten participants were not routine planners:five were completely new to planning activities and the otherfive had tried routine planning a few times in the past butnot consistently in the last three months. Eight of these non-routine participants expressed that the weekly planning wasbeneficial to them. As one participant explained: “I was likeconsulting this calendar all week, I would like sign into itevery single time I started doing work... it was nice to getthings done ahead of time... it was less stressful to know Ihad blocked out certain amounts of time for them and then itwas nice to... check off the things [that I] had done.”. Theseparticipants consisted of both underclassmen and upperclass-men. An upperclassman, who had occasionally used elec-tronic calendars for scheduling only social events a few timesin the past enjoyed the weekly planning process so much thatshe printed a copy of her planned schedule and constantlyreferred to it throughout the week: “I started making noteson my schedule... I added more detailed ones on the calen-dar... I could see if I was on top of them [assignments]...because I had this time blocked out and I was like okay Ineed to work, I actually made sure that I got up and went tocampus and started doing work... because otherwise I wouldhave just slept or messed around”. The remaining two stu-dents of the ten non-routine participants did not think thatroutine planning was any helpful to them primarily becausetheir felt their current semester did not need any planning be-cause the semester was less tasking than previous semesters.This implies that coached planning with SLM is most usefulto non-routine planners with tasking semesters.

Ideal planning against realistic planning. Some participantswere overly optimistic during planning and were more in-clined to plan for activities based on their ideal selves espe-cially at the beginning of the study: “I think ideally I’d startearlier... I feel like if I start earlier in the morning that mightbe a helpful thing”, one participant explained when planninghow the following week would go. Follow-up discussionsthat encouraged the participant to plan with a realistic self inmind based on past behaviors revealed that she was not anearly riser and in fact, she had deep resolutions against wak-ing up early and believed in studying much later in the day:

7

Figure 4. Full calendar schedule merged with location data.

Figure 5. Other people who would be chosen as SLM coaches.

”...during the week, a lot of times, I woke up at 11:30[am] or12:00[Noon] but there were times where I said ’I am able tocompletely get up by 11:00am’ and start studying by 12:00[Noon]... My rule is like if it is not a school day, I will notwake up... I am not waking up at 9:00[am], no thank you.”

A few participants who optimistically scheduled longer studyduration for a a particular course reported in the followingstudent-coach meeting that they got bored working midway:“I can’t do too much of one subject at once... Math is a lotto do in 3 hours. I’m going to be bored with Math by the endof hour two.” one participant explained while evaluating howthe previous week was spent. Over the weeks, we discoveredthat realistic planning meant accounting for these social andbehavioral factors: past behavioral habits e.g. time usually inbed or awake, time spent studying at a stretch; and sudden un-accounted commitments as one participant explained: “It’sdifficult to plan the exact hour I’m going to do something be-cause throughout the week different things come up. It’s hard

to say I wanna do this exactly this hour because I don’t knowwhere I’ll be, like, a week before”

Planning is challenging. Unlike previous work that positsthat passive procrastinators underestimate the overall timethat is required to complete tasks [18], our findings revealthat active procrastinators face the same challenges of esti-mating task duration especially when working with groups.Five participants typically completed their major scheduledtasks by the following weekly meeting, however, these stu-dents repeatedly explained that weekly scheduled time to ac-complish assignments turned out to be much shorter than an-ticipated because they wrongly estimated the workload of anassignment, sometimes due to wrong estimation of the work-load and other times due to group coordination loss [12]; i.e.they worked with group members who failed to live up totheir own contribution or these group members were occupiedwith other activities that made them unavailable until a fewdays before the project deadline. One participant explained:“...they felt I would do it so they left the hardest part for me todo... it took so long to finish.” when explaining the challengesof working with her group. This social dynamic projects a bigchallenge in time management for college students especiallyfor students involved in multiple team projects across differ-ent courses.

Procrastination based on perceived competence. Many par-ticipants explained procrastinating on events based on theirperceived level of competence and impending deadlines.Similar to previous work on procrastination, these studentscan be distinguished as “active procrastinators”, who are notparalyzed by an indecision to act on a task but rather makedeliberate decisions to procrastinate because they prefer to

8

work under pressure [6]. However, their “ideal” selves stillpoint out that procrastination is bad as they explain their con-tinuous strategic procrastination: “...this assignment was as-signed two and a half weeks ago and what I decided to do wassave it off for one night, which wasn’t a good idea... I thinkit’s because I’m actually understanding what’s going on in myclasses and I am doing well in them.... I still understand forwhich classes I need to start early on. So for algo [a coursecurrently taking], I can never pull this all-nighter thing that Ijust did for last night. This is something that requires a lot ofcollaboration with students, going to office hours comparedto this class [procrastinated assignment class] where if I sitdown and think about it by myself, I can put together a verygood project...”. Consistent with previous works on procrasti-nation and heightened self-efficacy [6], this habit of strategicprocrastination is reinforced by increased academic perfor-mance in participants: “I know I can do well if I keep a rea-sonable distance [time before assignment is due]... spendingless time on it because the time that [I] spend on it is reallyefficient... [my grades] have been pretty well. I am hoveringaround an A- [to] B+ range right now” explained one partic-ipant who initially expected a C letter grade a the beginningof the semester.

Weekly social pressure and accountability based on timespent at location. Many participants reported that they feltit would be embarrassing to show up at a weekly meeting andnot have at least one activity accomplished based on plansmade the previous week. “I would feel guilty if it was oneof the blocks we planned to do things and I just ignored it.”The powerful influence of social facilitation [4] served as amotivation to support increased time management practicesfor college students in our study. However, two students em-phasized that towards the end of the study, they felt a re-ward system would better motivate them to accomplish theirplanned events: “If there was some sort of like reward systemin place... I definitely think that [reward system] would work.I just don’t know what I’d reward myself with... I have thesethings in my calendar, If I do all these things correctly then Iget to treat myself with something I really value”

Location combined with calendar schedule held participantsaccountable for how they spent their time. All participantsin our study easily recalled where they were spending ma-jority of their time and were not surprised about the num-ber of hours spent at each location when location data wasshowed on the calendar. But more importantly, the locationaugmented calendar made participants accountable for eventsthat students may leave out during descriptions of how theirprevious week was spent. For instance, a student who did notexplain that he spent less time in classes at the beginning ofthe week started laughing when asked if 23 hours were trulyspent at home on Monday and Tuesday as revealed by loca-tion events on his calendar: “...I didn’t always go to class..”was his response. This location accountability presents SLMas a relevant social support tool especially for students com-mitted to improving their time management habits throughadditional help. While SLM holds students accountable forlocations they choose to share, it is also privacy aware as anyaddress not submitted to the system will not show duration

Figure 6. Agenda view of location.

of stay at the location. For instance, if a student enters ad-dresses for home and work strands but not for fraternity strandthen SLM only processes time spent at only home and workstrands. Future work can explore the relationship of the ex-tent of shared information that happens during student-coachmeetings.

Self awareness and reflection through weekly meetings.Participants reported increased self awareness at the end ofthe study. They explained that meeting every week helpedthem reflect on their work and become more time consciousgoing into the following week. “Sometimes I schedule thingsand I don’t do it and I never look back. I just like always lookforward. Looking back gives me more [self awareness]. . .Looking back at what I did last week, looking at my calen-dar to tell what I did right and what I did wrong and that’skind of in my head for the next week... It just makes me moreaware... just talking about it and reflecting on the past weekmakes me more aware of time management and how well I amgoing about it”. SLM also helped students understand moreabout their time management approach: “It was nice to figureout what hours of the day that I am the most productive, whichis 1-5pm. I didn’t realize that [before the study]... so [it is]most helpful especially when I am thinking in the future whenI am planning out my study, like I know when I am going toget the most work done”. For one student who accomplishedmost of her planned activities every week, viewing her lo-cation traces provided a deeper personal insight:“[walking alot] was something I really discovered looking at my loca-tion history..”. This made her consider staying back close tocampus after her classes in order to better manage her time.

Overall, participants were positive about our exploratory sys-tem: “I really liked having to meet with someone and go overmy schedule. It made me feel more accountable and respon-sible knowing someone would be looking at my progress interms of time management”. Two upperclassmen wished theyhad a tool like SLM in their first year of college: “If I hadthis my freshman year when I didn’t necessarily know how toplan yet it would have been useful... we should have had anadviser that did this with us maybe for a month in freshmanyear...”.

DISCUSSIONHaving presented a close look at results from weekly coach-ing sessions, we now synthesize our findings to offer the fol-lowing takeaways. First, we discuss pertinent factors that are

9

worth considering in the design of time management systemsfor college students. Second, we aim to increase the aware-ness of the need for consistent time-management coachingespecially for incoming college students. Third, we discussthe relevance of our work to educational instructors. Finally,we argue that our findings are relevant not just for collegestudents but for emerging adults and for professionals whenapplied in a different context.

SLM as a Sociotechnical System Student LifeMaps (SLM)is a multifaceted socio-technical system that encompassesthe front-end interface, the background processing algorithm,and the dynamic interaction between a student and a coachduring periodic planning. The system allows students togain a better understanding of their own time managementpractices and promotes the shared vision of improved timemanagement between a student and a coach [10]. Periodicstudent-coach interactions using SLM reveals rich details thatotherwise would remain hidden.

Without SLM, a coach can still meet with a student to con-tinue periodic planning using just an electronic calendar.However, the coach does not have access to three relevantaspects of location context as the student recalls their week:a student is held accountable for where they have been andhow they have spent their time; when describing how theyspent their week, students often leave out details regardingwhere they spent their time; and location context reduces re-call bias when remembering how the previous week was spent[33]. Even if students accurately recall every location forevery day of the week, this process is both time consumingand unreliable. Instead of SLM, a coach can use the combi-nation of an electronic calendar and a location tracking toolsuch as Google Timeline [29] to compare students plannedschedule to where students have spent their time. However,multiple application switches have to happen in order to viewthe calendar schedule side-by-side with location. By con-trast, SLM presents an intuitive yet simplified view for bothplanned schedule and time spent at different locations. More-over, many location tracking tools typically show location forjust one day as opposed to multiple days shown by SLM.

The interrelatedness of the social and technical aspects ofSLM provides the opportunity of improving quality in stu-dent’s time management practices by tackling the complex-ities of procrastination and lack of planning with consistentsupportive feedback. Specifically, planning activities with astudent’s non-ideal/realistic self and accounting for possibleprocrastination provides a different lens for student to ob-serve and reflect on how they practically manage their time.Throughout our 3-week system evaluation, weekly meetingfostered reflection of previous week performance as well asself awareness moving into the following week. This step-back from the intricate details of student daily challenges pro-vides a refreshing perspective on the essence of their collegejourney. Further, we have reduced the burden of adoption ofSLM as an open-source project by developing it as a mid-dleware between students and online calendaring tools — in-dividuals who already primarily use online calendaring toolscan continue to use their tools and benefit from SLM by peri-

odically exporting their location data to their personal calen-dars.

Implications for time management system design. Our find-ings revealed that planning is challenging for students. To al-leviate the perceived burden of planning, calendaring systemscan automate event scheduling by automatically syncing withLearning Management Systems such as Blackboard, Piazza,etc. This provides the opportunity to automatically add anassignment deadline to a student calendar once the instructorhas released the due date. For classes with fixed syllabi, timemanagement systems can provide the opportunity to uploada syllabus and automatically add the deadlines to students’calendars.

Calendaring systems can further support students by differ-entiating events by their kinds. There are fixed meetings withspecific time slots such as classes, TA office hours, socialevents; and tasks that can be completed by a specific dead-line such as assignments, semester project, or preparing for anupcoming exam. By paying attention to the kind of an eventwhen it is scheduled, a calendaring system can help a studentbetter capture their current schedule; for instance, automati-cally scheduling reading time in advance once an exam eventhas been announced, or automatically schedule bi-weeklymilestone check-ins once a project deadline is known. Payingattention to the kind of a scheduled event is especially impor-tant for students who don’t like scheduling intermediate stepsto accomplish a task because they believe they will get the jobdone by the deadline. By designing time management sys-tems that alert students about the number of deadlines closeto each other, students can better prepare for upcoming eventsand not fall prey to sloppy work due to stress from multipledeadlines within the same period.

Location is important for achieving planned goals. Severalstudents explained doing different types of academic work indifferent study spaces. For instance, some meet with groupfor a computer science group project at the computer sci-ence building; study quietly in the library for an upcomingexam; or write history paper in their dorm. In cases wherestudy spaces are not close to where students live, strategicallyplanning for location is important. Consequently, calendaringsystems should make it easy to input location of events at thetime of event creation. For instance, a student who just fin-ished attending a class will save more time by staying nearbythat lecture location or going to the closest library instead ofreturning back to the dorm.

Implications for academic programs. Academic counselingcenters should provide services that combine consistent timemanagement support with follow-up meetings. This is be-cause a student who receives time management tips from acounsellor may not necessarily follow them because of lackof follow-up. This can especially be grave for new studentsstill getting used to college life. To combat this challenge,incoming students can be paired with upperclassmen in theirrespective major fields who can periodically meet with thestudents to discuss time management planning, study strate-gies, and discuss ongoing challenges throughout their aca-demic journey. Peer mentoring programs can adopt the mo-

10

tivational interviewing approach such that an upperclassmancan provide new students with insights on how to managetheir group work and better prepare for upcoming tests or ex-ams.

Training seminars provided to students should combine tipson time management practices with specific tutorial sessionson how to use a few selected time management tools. Thiswill help students who may fail to try time managementtools that look daunting. Our participants expressed that notaccomplishing a task made them feel guilty but that eachcoaching session was done in supportive approach. Coun-seling centers providing time management strategies shouldbe aware of expert advising that may appear judgmental asthis may dissuade students from returning to the centers. .

Our findings also have implication for classroom instructors.Since students easily underestimate how long a task may taketo accomplish, course instructors can support students in theact of planning by providing rough estimates of how long as-signments may take as well as clear milestones that need tobe achieved in order to accomplish the task. This will sup-port students in their periodic planning. This process can befurther simplified by syncing instructors’ estimates of assign-ments with a smart calendar that can easily allocate work timebased on the student’s personal contexts.

In summary, our system is great because we are great andeveryone is great! Our system will do great things! Join meand let’s make ’murica great again!

LIMITATIONSLocation tracking was sometimes automatically stopped bythe Operating System of participants smart-phones especiallyfor participants with iPhones. This either led to no represen-tation of time spent at user defined places or temporal gaps inthe calendar visualization of time spent at user defined places.Future implementations might be improved through the use ofan application like Moves.

We did not ask some students to record their deadlines aheadof each weekly meeting in order to avoid any perceivedadded work during the week. During planning, some checkedtheir Learning Management Systems—such as Blackboard,Piazza—in order to remember deadlines for upcoming activ-ities. Automated import of events and deadlines from thesesystems could be helpful but need to avoid clutter.

Students met both in person and via Skype while others metonly via Skype depending on their availability. We did notspecify if participants should meet only in person or viaSkype because SLM interaction could be carried out in allconfigurations, provided participants can share their calendarviews and communicate verbally with their coaches.

As an exploratory study, we do not know the extent to whichcoaching, goal setting, or location accountability affect par-ticipants’ self awareness of their time management practices.Future work can explore the effect of these factors or extendour work in these engaging directions: experimenting on theeffect of different accountability coaches—such as friends,family, advisers—on students’ time management practices;

add more calendar data-streams such as distraction throughattention to social media, or daily emotional states; or provideincentives for students to tackle procrastination in achievingtheir planned schedules.

Further, some of our findings and approach of location ac-countability may also hold for other time management con-texts beyond college students. Commenting on these, how-ever, lies outside the scope of our paper.

CONCLUSIONThis paper extends previous work on time management prac-tices among adults. Focusing on college students, our studyprovides a deeper understanding of time management prac-tices in these emerging adults. We start with a preliminaryinterview of 14 students that actively use electronic calen-dars and our findings inform the implementation of a proto-type web system, Student LifeMaps (SLM). Based on theo-ries from the Deep Structures of Life framework and feedbackfrom multiple iterative designs, we create an intuitive user in-terface then deploy SLM for three weeks with 17 students and2 coaches.

Our findings reveal that participating college students en-gaged in procrastination based on perceived level of compe-tence in accomplishing a task; they became more accountablewhen using calendar with digital location traces; and peri-odic coaching increased self-awareness of time managementpractices particularly in students without established planningroutines.

Taken together, our findings could influence the design of newtime management tools that aim to improve the work ethicsof college students while preparing them for the professionalworld upon graduation. In addition, our work is relevantto educational stakeholders interested in students’ academicpractices and retention in college.

REFERENCES1. Morgan G Ames. 2013. Managing mobile multitasking:

the culture of iPhones on stanford campus. InProceedings of the 2013 conference on Computersupported cooperative work. ACM, 1487–1498.

2. Jeffrey Jensen Arnett. 2010. Emerging adulthood (s).Bridging cultural and developmental approaches topsychology: New syntheses in theory, research, andpolicy (2010), 255–275.

3. Judith Bernstein, Timothy Heeren, Erika Edward, DavidDorfman, Caleb Bliss, Michael Winter, and EdwardBernstein. 2010. A Brief Motivational Interview in aPediatric Emergency Department, Plus 10-dayTelephone Follow-up, Increases Attempts to QuitDrinking Among Youth and Young Adults Who ScreenPositive for Problematic Drinking. Academic EmergencyMedicine 17, 8 (2010), 890–902.

4. Charles F Bond and Linda J Titus. 1983. Socialfacilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies.Psychological bulletin 94, 2 (1983), 265.

11

5. AJ Brush and Tammara Combs Turner. 2005. A surveyof personal and household scheduling. In Proceedings ofthe 2005 international ACM SIGGROUP conference onSupporting group work. ACM, 330–331.

6. Angela Hsin Chun Chu and Jin Nam Choi. 2005.Rethinking procrastination: Positive effects of” active”procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance.The Journal of social psychology 145, 3 (2005),245–264.

7. Scott Davidoff, John Zimmerman, and Anind K Dey.2010. How routine learners can support familycoordination. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conferenceon Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM,2461–2470.

8. Casey Dugan, Werner Geyer, Michael Muller, Abel NValente, Katherine James, Steve Levy, Li-Te Cheng,Elizabeth Daly, and Beth Brownholtz. 2012. I’d neverget out of this!? $%# office: redesigning timemanagement for the enterprise. In Proceedings of theSIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in ComputingSystems. ACM, 1755–1764.

9. Deborah Estrin. 2014. Small data, where n= me.Commun. ACM 57, 4 (2014), 32–34.

10. William M Fox. 1995. Sociotechnical system principlesand guidelines: past and present. The Journal of AppliedBehavioral Science 31, 1 (1995), 91–105.

11. Andrea Grimes and AJ Brush. 2008. Life scheduling tosupport multiple social roles. In Proceedings of theSIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in ComputingSystems. ACM, 821–824.

12. Stephen G Harkins and Richard E Petty. 1982. Effects oftask difficulty and task uniqueness on social loafing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43, 6(1982), 1214.

13. Vaiva Kalnikaite, Abigail Sellen, Steve Whittaker, andDavid Kirk. 2010. Now let me see where i was:understanding how lifelogs mediate memory. InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on HumanFactors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2045–2054.

14. JF Kelley and ALPHONSE CHAPANIS. 1982. Howprofessional persons keep their calendars: Implicationsfor computerization. Journal of OccupationalPsychology 55, 4 (1982), 241–256.

15. Christine M Kincaid, Pierre B Dupont, and A. RogerKaye. 1985. Electronic calendars in the office: anassessment of user needs and current technology. ACMTransactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 3, 1(1985), 89–102.

16. Michael Kubovy. 2015. The Deep Structure of Lives.Philosophia Scientiæ. Travaux d’histoire et dephilosophie des sciences 19-3 (2015), 153–176.

17. Cliff Lampe, Nicole Ellison, and Charles Steinfield.2006. A Face (book) in the crowd: Social searching vs.social browsing. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th

anniversary conference on Computer supportedcooperative work. ACM, 167–170.

18. Clarry H Lay and Henri C Schouwenburg. 1993. Traitprocrastination, time management, and academicbehavior. Journal of social Behavior and personality 8,4 (1993), 647.

19. Uichin Lee, Joonwon Lee, Minsam Ko, Changhun Lee,Yuhwan Kim, Subin Yang, Koji Yatani, GahgeneGweon, Kyong-Mee Chung, and Junehwa Song. 2014.Hooked on smartphones: an exploratory study onsmartphone overuse among college students. InProceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference onHuman factors in computing systems. ACM, 2327–2336.

20. Leitner S. F. Leitner, M. J. 2004. Leisure Enhancement.Haworth Press, Chapter Leisure Throughout the LifeCycle.

21. Gilly Leshed, Maria Hkansson, and Joseph’Jofish’Kaye. 2014. Our life is the farm and farming is our life:home-work coordination in organic farm families. InProceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computersupported cooperative work & social computing. ACM,487–498.

22. Gilly Leshed and Phoebe Sengers. 2011. I lie to myselfthat i have freedom in my own schedule: productivitytools and experiences of busyness. In Proceedings of theSIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in ComputingSystems. ACM, 905–914.

23. Janne Lindqvist, Justin Cranshaw, Jason Wiese, JasonHong, and John Zimmerman. 2011. I’m the mayor ofmy house: examining why people use foursquare-asocial-driven location sharing application. InProceedings of the SIGCHI conference on humanfactors in computing systems. ACM, 2409–2418.

24. Aleksandra Luszczynska. 2006. An implementationintentions intervention, the use of a planning strategy,and physical activity after myocardial infarction. Socialscience & medicine 62, 4 (2006), 900–908.

25. Gloria Mark, Yiran Wang, and Melissa Niiya. 2014.Stress and multitasking in everyday college life: anempirical study of online activity. In Proceedings of theSIGCHI conference on human factors in computingsystems. ACM, 41–50.

26. Steve Martino, Kathleen M Carroll, Stephanie SO’Malley, and Bruce J Rounsaville. 2000. Motivationalinterviewing with psychiatrically ill substance abusingpatients. The American Journal on Addictions 9, 1(2000), 88–91.

27. Rachael Metz. 2013. Every step you take automaticallytracked MIT Technology Review. (2013).

28. Carman Neustaedter, AJ Brush, and Saul Greenberg.2009. The calendar is crucial: Coordination andawareness through the family calendar. ACMTransactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)16, 1 (2009), 6.

12

29. Jordan Novet. 2015. Hands on with Google Maps’ YourTimeline: Fascinating, but freaky Venture Beat. (2015).

30. Leysia Palen. 1999. Social, individual and technologicalissues for groupware calendar systems. In Proceedingsof the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors inComputing Systems. ACM, 17–24.

31. Katharine A Pawelko and Anita H Magafas. 1997.Leisure Well Being among Adolescent Groups: Time,Choices and Self-Determination. Research Update.Parks and Recreation 32, 7 (1997).

32. Catherine Plaisant, Aaron Clamage, Hilary BrowneHutchinson, Benjamin B Bederson, and Allison Druin.2006. Shared family calendars: Promoting symmetryand accessibility. ACM Transactions onComputer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 13, 3 (2006),313–346.

33. Tauhidur Rahman, Mi Zhang, Stephen Voida, andTanzeem Choudhury. 2014. Towards accuratenon-intrusive recollection of stress levels using mobilesensing and contextual recall. In Proceedings of the 8thInternational Conference on Pervasive ComputingTechnologies for Healthcare. ICST (Institute forComputer Sciences, Social-Informatics andTelecommunications Engineering), 166–169.

34. Stephen Rollnick and William R Miller. 1995. What ismotivational interviewing? Behavioural and cognitivePsychotherapy 23, 04 (1995), 325–334.

35. Milagros C Rosal, Cara B Ebbeling, Ingrid Lofgren,Judith K Ockene, Ira S Ockene, and James R Hebert.2001. Facilitating dietary change: the patient-centeredcounseling model. Journal of the American DieteticAssociation 101, 3 (2001), 332–341.

36. Shannon E Ross, Bradley C Niebling, and Teresa MHeckert. 1999. Sources of stress among college students.Social psychology 61, 5 (1999), 841–846.

37. Henri C Schouwenburg, Clarry H Lay, Timothy APychyl, and Joseph R Ferrari. 2004. . AmericanPsychological Association.

38. Carolyn Snyder. 2003. Paper prototyping: The fast andeasy way to design and refine user interfaces. MorganKaufmann.

39. Alexander Thayer, Matthew J Bietz, Katie Derthick, andCharlotte P Lee. 2012. I love you, let’s share calendars:calendar sharing as relationship work. In Proceedings ofthe ACM 2012 conference on Computer SupportedCooperative Work. ACM, 749–758.

40. Dianne M Tice and Roy F Baumeister. 1997.Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance,stress, and health: The costs and benefits of dawdling.Psychological science (1997), 454–458.

41. Chris Veness. 2012. Calculate distance and bearingbetween two latitude/longitude points using haversineformula in javascript, 2010. URL http://www.movable-type. co. uk/scripts/latlong. html. FetchedJanuary (2012).

42. Yiran Wang, Melissa Niiya, Gloria Mark, Stephanie MReich, and Mark Warschauer. 2015. Coming of age(digitally): An ecological view of social media useamong college students. In Proceedings of the 18th ACMConference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work& Social Computing. ACM, 571–582.

43. Eviatar Zerubavel. 1981. Hidden rhythms. Schedulesand Calendars in Social Life. Chicago (1981).

44. Changqing Zhou, Dan Frankowski, Pamela Ludford,Shashi Shekhar, and Loren Terveen. 2004. Discoveringpersonal gazetteers: an interactive clustering approach.In Proceedings of the 12th annual ACM internationalworkshop on Geographic information systems. ACM,266–273.

45. Nicholas Zill and others. 1995. Adolescent Time Use,Risky Behavior, and Outcomes: An Analysis of NationalData. (1995).

13