The workshop was held in two sessions - virtually in April
and in-person in May in New Orleans during the CHI 2022 main conference.   

Self-determination theory (SDT)—a multifaceted theory stating that people are motivated by innate and universal psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness—has become one of the most frequently used and well-validated theories used in HCI research, but its use often remains superficial and disjointed. This workshop therefore convenes researchers across application domains (games, health and wellbeing, learning, etc.) to co-create a research agenda on how SDT-informed HCI research can maximise its progress in the coming years.

Keynotes
    Richard Ryan - "The next 10 years of SDT research"
    Marc Hassenzahl - "Contextualising SDT in wider user experience and wellbeing-driven design'
    Yvonne Rogers - "The role and value of theory-related work in HCI" 

Note: keynote recordings are available here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1G38-T0i_II2RDNO9Af-sB_M_rJEybEs5 

Chairs

• Nick Ballou, Queen Mary University 
• Rafael Calvo, Imperial College London
• Sebastian Deterding, University of York
• Elisa Mekler, Aalto University 
• Dorian Peters, University of Cambridge 
• Selen Turkay, Queensland University of Technology
• April Tyack, Aalto University
• Gabriela Villalobos-Zúñiga, University of Lausanne

Download Workshop Description Paper [PDF]

Workshop Outputs
The results from virtual and on-site sessions will be integrated into a draft research agenda after the workshop that all accepted attendees are then invited to review and refine as co-authors. Accepted papers will remain available on the workshop site prior to the event and are invited to be submitted in extended form to a special issue with Interacting with Computers, which will also publish the resulting joint research agenda.

Accepted Position Papers
1. Beyond Intrinsic: Using the Quality of Extrinsic Motivation to Understand Effort in Virtual Rehabilitation and Exergames
Emil Rosenlund Høeg, Aalborg University, Denmark
Jolene Van Der Kaap-Deeder, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

2. Applying SDT to HCI - A personal journey from word processing to community informatics
John M. Carroll, The Pennsylvania State University, USA

3. Using Self-Determination Theory to Design to Support Young People’s Online Help-Seeking
Claudette Pretorius, School of Computer Science, University College Dublin, Ireland
David Coyle, School of Computer Science, University College Dublin, Ireland

4. Need Frustration in Video Games
Nick Ballou, Queen Mary University of London, UK

5. Embracing creativity: Designing Digital Health Behavior Change Interventions informed by Self-Determination Theory
Kathleen Ryan, S3 Connected Health; University College Cork, Ireland 
Eva Cooney, S3 Connected Health; National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland

6. Self-determination theory and competition in digital games-for-health: Need satisfaction, need frustration, and intrinsic motivation
Arlen C. Moller, Department of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology, USA
Rachel Kornfield. Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, USA 
Amy S. Lu, College of Arts, Media and Design, Bouvé College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, USA

7. Narrative in game research - Elaborating the role of narrative and Self Determination Theory (SDT) in game design research
Amy S. Lu, Health Technology Lab, College of Arts, Media and Design, Bouvé College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, USA
Arlen C. Moller, Department of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology, USA

8. Motivation through gamification: a Self-Determination Theory perspective for the design of an adaptive reward system
Brunella Botte, Department of Health and Life Sciences, Link Campus University; 
Utrecht Center for Game Research, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Henk Aarts, Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Sander Bakkes, Utrecht Center for Game Research, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Remco Veltkamp, Utrecht Center for Game Research, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

9. Activated Motivation: An Opportunity for HCI Research?
James R. Wallace, University of Waterloo, Canada

10. Paintings, not Noise - The Role of Variety and Self-Determination in Labeling Work and its Effects on Psychological and Performance Outcomes
Merlin Knaeble, Mario Nadj, and Alexander Maedche,
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany

11. Designing for Internalization: A Process-Oriented Approach Based on Organismic Integration Theory
Rebecca Eilert, University of Siegen, Germany
Marc Hassenzahl, University of Siegen, Germany

12. Social Media Affordances and Well-Being: An Integration with HCI-Research
Felix Dietrich, Department of Communication, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany
Leonard Reinecke, Department of Communication, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany

13. Novelty from the Self-Determination Theory Perspective in HCI and Games Research
Mehmet Kosa, Arizona State University, Department of Psychology, USA

14. Considering Fundamental Psychological Needs in Virtual Reality Experiences
Nadine Wagner, University of Bremen, Germany
Jasmin Niess, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
Yvonne Rogers, UCL Interaction Centre, UK

15. “Know Thyself”: SDT, self-relatedness, and the single player gaming experience
Tom Cole, Goldsmiths, University of London, UK

16. Self-Determination Theory & Onboarding Interactive Augmented Social Play Spaces
Danića Mast, Research Group Healthy Lifestyle in a Supporting Environment, The Hague University of Applied Science; Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, the Netherlands
Sanne I. de Vries, Research Group Healthy Lifestyle in a Supporting Environment, The Hague University of Applied Science, the Netherlands 

17. New Measures for Game Motivation - Potential scales for gamer identity, game amotivation, in-game advancement motivation, and solo relaxation-gameplay.
Ian S. Sturrock, Teesside University, UK

18. Designing to Support Autonomy and Reduce Psychological Reactance in Digital Self-Control Tools
Kai Lukoff, Dub, University of Washington, USA
Ulrik Lyngs, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, UK
Lize Alberts, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, UK

19. Reevaluating the Role of Relatedness in Single-Player Roleplaying Games
Katelyn M. Grasse, University of California, Santa Cruz
Max Kreminski, University of California, Santa Cruz
Noah Wardrip-Fruin, University of California, Santa Cruz
Michael Mateas, University of California, Santa Cruz
Edward F. Merlcer, University of California, Santa Cruz

20. Self-Determination Theory Applied to Long-Term Engagement With Technology
Bruna Oewel, University of California, Irvine, USA
Elena Agapie, University of California, Irvine, USA
Madhu Reddy, University of California, Irvine, USA

21. Interacting with Network Representations of the Self and Needs
Michael Hoeffer, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado Boulder, USA
Stephen Voida, Department of Information Science, University of Colorado Boulder, USA

Contact
For any questions, email us at [email protected]

Beyond ethical principles, tech makers need actionable methods that fit into their real world practice. We believe combining wellbeing-supportive design with methods for ethical analysis is a powerful way forward toward achieving more responsible and humane technology.

As part of our mission to bridge research to actionable practice, we propose an upgraded version of the design process that integrates ethics & wellbeing into its fabric.  

Our approach is to start with what designers already do (see the Design Council's double diamond), and integrate practices for ethical and wellbeing-supportive design to arrive at a future-ready process for beneficial technology: A responsible design process.  Read the full explanation on Medium or our academic journal paper in IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society.


Methods & ToolsWe maintain a searchable library of available methods and tools you can plug into this process at:
www.responsibletechdesign.com

When we talk about supporting wellbeing determinants and psychological needs it’s important to understand there are different spheres of experience in which these can be influenced. For example, a technology might be autonomy-supportive from the software interaction perspective but not in relation to the real-world activity it’s intended to support. This reference sheet can help keep team members on the same page in conversations to do with wellbeing support.
For details, see: The Six Spheres of Tech Experience at Medium.

The diagram of the spheres can be found in the following paper:
Responsible AI-Two Frameworks for Ethical Design Practice
Peters, D., Vold, K., Robinson, D., Calvo, R. A., & Member, S. (2020). Responsible AI-Two Frameworks for Ethical Design Practice. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1109/TTS.2020.2974991

The spheres concept was originally and fully described here:
Peters, D., Calvo, R. A., & Ryan, R. M. (2018). Designing for motivation, engagement and wellbeing in digital experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(MAY). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00797

Self-Determination Theory and Technology Design (Chapter in SDT Handbook)
Peters, D., & Calvo, R. A. (2023). Self-Determination Theory and Technology Design. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Self-Determination Theory (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197600047.013.49

Wellbeing Supportive Design – Research-Based Guidelines for Supporting Psychological Wellbeing in User ExperiencePeters, D. (2022). Wellbeing Supportive Design – Research-Based Guidelines for Supporting Psychological Wellbeing in User Experience. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 0(0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2089812

Responsible AI-Two Frameworks for Ethical Design Practice
Peters, D., Vold, K., Robinson, D., Calvo, R. A., & Member, S. (2020). Responsible AI-Two Frameworks for Ethical Design Practice. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1109/TTS.2020.2974991

Supporting human autonomy in AI systems
Calvo, R. A., Peters, D., Vold, K., & Ryan, R. M. (2020). Supporting human autonomy in AI systems: A framework for ethical enquiry. In C. Burr & L. Floridi (Eds.), Ethics of Digital Wellbeing: A multidisciplinary approach. Springer.

Motivation, Engagement and Thriving in User Experience (METUX model) Peters, D., Calvo, R. A., & Ryan, R. M. (2018). Designing for motivation, engagement and wellbeing in digital experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(MAY). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00797
An article on METUX which provides a framework and measures for applying psychological needs theory to the technology context.  METUX and foundations for many of the tools below are described in the paper, "Motivation, Engagement and Wellbeing in Digital Experience" in Frontiers in Psychology.  To develop METUX, we collaborated with wellbeing psychologist, Richard M. Ryan (originator of Self-Determination Theory).  The paper contains the first version of the "Spheres of Technology Experience" framework. The most recent version can be found here. 

Toolkit - Background ResearchPeters, D. (Submitted). Designing for psychological wellbeing Development of a research-based toolkit for wellbeing supportive technology design. [PhD Thesis]. University of Sydney.

​Peters, D., Ahmadpour, N., & Calvo, R. A. (2020). Tools for Wellbeing-Supportive Design: Features, Characteristics, and Prototypes. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 4(3), 40. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti4030040

Peters, D., & Ahmadpour, N. (2020). Digital wellbeing through design: Evaluation of a professional development workshop on wellbeing-supportive design. 32nd Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 148–157. https://doi.org/10.1145/3441000.3441008

Peters, D., Loke, L., & Ahmadpour, N. (2020). Toolkits, cards and games – a review of analogue tools for collaborative ideation. CoDesign, 0(0), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2020.1715444

Positive Computing from MIT Press was written by engineer and designer team,
Prof Rafael Calvo (Imperial College London) and Dr Dorian Peters (University of Cambridge).

Positive Computing is also available in:
Chinese (正版包邮积极计算),  |   Japanese (ウェルビーイングの設計論)  |   Korean (긍정컴퓨팅).

Praise for Positive Computing

"Positive Computing lays a solid theoretical foundation for designers of the next generation of user interfaces who will shape positive user experiences. It goes deeply into familiar territory of motivation, engagement, and flow, then all the way to mindfulness, empathy, and compassion."
     Ben Shneiderman - Distinguished University Professor, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park

"Few people think of technology as uplifting, delightful, and enjoyable. Sure, our stuff works, but far too often at the cost of increased anxiety, frustration, and a feeling of disempowerment. In Positive Computing, Calvo and Peters show how research in the psychological principles of enjoyment, engagement, and empowerment can be used to design technology that enhances our lives, creates more engagement and pleasure, and makes positive contributions to our emotional lives. Three cheers to Calvo and Peters for Positive Computing: It's about time."
     Don Norman - Director of the Design at UC San Diego Program; author of Emotional Design and The Design of Everyday Things

"Positive Computing by Rafael Calvo and Dorian Peters is a deep exploration of the theory, psychology, analysis, and passion around using computing to make a positive influence on the world. Every graduate student studying this new, multidisciplinary field should have a copy at his or her fingertips. Calvo and Peters leave no stone unturned in discussing the many facets around positive computing, and have sought out the broadest set of references. The book was written in an engaging and practical manner and was a pleasure to read. I know I will go back to my copy again and again for useful insights."
     Mary Czerwinski - Research Manager of the Visualization and Interaction (VIBE) Research Group, Microsoft Research"

"This book is an important contribution, providing excellent background on a complex emerging area that promises to be very significant from both a societal and scientific perspective."
     Steve Whittaker - Professor of Human Computer Interaction, UC Santa Cruz

"It's a call to action that Calvo and Peters are delivering to a wider audience, not just the innovators working under the shadows of Hangar One. And they are delivering it at a time when technologists have a big opportunity to rethink their approach to design. A new era of computing—wearable, integrated, ubiquitous—is fast approaching. Will it be good or bad for our wellness? If you believe in human agency, then the call to action is real. There's no time like today to plan for a future in which we can thrive, and not be the victims of our own design."
     Giovanni Rodriguez, Forbes

The Strategies cheatsheet (PDF) includes 30 design strategy examples that demonstrate various ways (almost design patterns) that the 15 Wellbeing Supportive Design heuristics can be supported within specific contexts.
How to: Consult when you're looking for design ideas to improve support for psychological needs in your technology.
> View Background research

The Motivation, Engagement and Thriving in User Experience (METUX) scales comprise 5 questionnaires for measuring basic psychological need satisfaction and frustration within 5 spheres of technology experience (adoption, interface, task, behavior, and life)(Peters, Calvo & Ryan, 2018). These scales consider both need satisfaction and frustration as part of user experience  and are designed to be applied at different granularities (spheres) of that experience. This is because satisfactions and frustrations can co-occur simultaneously within different spheres. The overall goal is to capture a sense of the impact of technology experience on wellbeing via psychological needs and can be used as a measure of user satisfaction, engagement and psychological impact.
How to: Use to measure the impact a technology is having on basic psychological needs (and therefore on wellbeing).