Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42018983›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2026

Personalizing Mobile Apps for Health Behavioral Change According to Personality: Cross-Sectional Validation of a Preference Matrix.

Laetitia Gosetto, Gilles Falquet, Frederic Ehrler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Laetitia GosettoResearch Institute for Statistics and Information Science, Geneva School of Economics and Management, University of Geneva, 40 Boulevard du Pont-d'Arve, Geneva, 1211, Switzerland, 41 3726288.ORCID 0000-0002-9432-2160
Gilles FalquetResearch Institute for Statistics and Information Science, Geneva School of Economics and Management, University of Geneva, 40 Boulevard du Pont-d'Arve, Geneva, 1211, Switzerland, 41 3726288.ORCID 0000-0002-1401-5110
Frederic EhrlerInformation Systems Directorate, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-9734-3242

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) apps are increasingly used to support healthy lifestyle behaviors through features such as health tracking and personalized reminders. Personalized messaging, tailored to users' profiles, has been shown to improve engagement and retention in health-related contexts. Prior research has linked personality traits, based on the Big Five model, to preferences for specific app mechanisms, leading to the development of a preference matrix for personalizing mHealth apps. This matrix comprises 15 mechanisms derived from behavior change techniques and gamification elements, intended to guide developers in optimizing engagement according to user profiles. Objective: This study aimed to validate this preference matrix by examining whether the associations between mechanisms and Big Five personality traits reported in the literature align with user preferences observed in an experimental setting. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey that collected demographic data, mHealth app usage, and personality traits. Participants were presented with mockups illustrating 15 mechanisms and were asked to select their preferred options. Logistic regression and ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to examine associations between personality traits, mechanism selection, and motivation scores. All analyses were adjusted using the Bonferroni correction to account for multiple comparisons. Results: A total of 214 participants completed the survey (mean age 29.42, SD 10.41 y; n=118, 55.1% women; n=89, 41.6% men; n=5, 2% identifying as other; and n=2, 1% nonrespondents). Higher conscientiousness significantly increased the likelihood of selecting the collection mechanism (eg, collecting badges or points; odds ratio [OR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.27-2.75). For competition (eg, competing with other users), conscientiousness (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.73-6.00) and agreeableness (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.08-3.45) were significant predictors. Preferences for rewards (eg, virtual incentives such as points or virtual currency) were associated with conscientiousness (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.53-3.63) and neuroticism (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.36-2.86). Additionally, 4 mechanisms-self-monitoring, progression, challenge, and quest-were selected by more than half of the participants, independent of personality traits. Conclusions: The findings partially validate the proposed preference matrix. Conscientiousness consistently emerged as a key predictor of preference across multiple mechanisms, highlighting its central role in engagement with gamified mHealth features. While some mechanisms appear to have universal appeal, others show personality-specific preferences, underscoring the value of combining baseline mechanisms with targeted personalization strategies in mHealth app design.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorMobile ApplicationsPersonalityAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineYoung Adultbehavior change techniqueBig FivemHealthmobile healthpersonalitypersonalization

Identifiers

PMID42018983
PMCPMC13102323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.