{"resourceId":"childs-wearables-info-flow-sportshci-2025","versions":[{"version":"external-3c51094a43cc226436c7ac2be50fb4df5710a35c0a83c3640c8cf28f8879c57d","resource":{"id":"childs-wearables-info-flow-sportshci-2025","title":"SportsHCI study maps seven continuous-wearable information flows in NCAA DI and flags intrusive sleep/recovery auto-share","organization":"University of Florida / SportsHCI 2025 (ACM)","sector":"Collegiate sports science / SportsHCI privacy","geography":"United States (NCAA Division I interview sample)","publishedAt":"November 17–19, 2025 (SportsHCI 2025 proceedings)","publicationDate":"2025-11-17","eventDate":"2025-11-17","sourceName":"SportsHCI 2025 / ACM","sourceLabel":"Peer-reviewed qualitative conference paper (author PDF)","sourceUrl":"https://www.cise.ufl.edu/~k.childs/Papers/Wearable_security_Privacy.pdf","evidenceClass":"academic-research","outcomeClass":"cautionary","topics":["data-security","governance-procurement","operating-model","accessibility-workforce"],"finding":"Childs, Brewer, Thomas et al. analyzed 15 semi-structured interviews with elite U.S. collegiate student-athletes using contextual integrity and identified seven information flows for continuous wearable data among coaches, athletes, teammates/peers, family, and others. Athletes described need-to-know and coach-requested sharing of physiological metrics, automatic post-workout uploads via platforms such as Garmin Clipboard, and stronger discomfort with automatic sleep/recovery sharing (e.g., WHOOP). Authors recommend aligning privacy protections with sport-tech adoption; limitations include organic (not wearable-focused) prompts and a single DI context with women’s-sport skew.","sledRelevance":"Why now: After 2026-10-01/10-02 wearable-injury ML caution and NCAA performance-tech governance coverage, this previously unarchived SportsHCI paper supplies athlete-side sharing norms that operationalize consent, purpose limits, and selective mute—directly informing DI wearable AI deployments.","evidence":"Opened author PDF reports methods (15 interviews; contextual integrity coding), seven flows (coach/athlete/network receivers), automatic workout upload (TP4) vs intrusive recovery/sleep concerns, limitations section, and NSF/UF AI-Powered Athletics funding acknowledgments. DOI 10.1145/3749385.3749387.","architectureImplications":"Team wearable hubs must separate workout auto-upload from continuous recovery/sleep streams, expose athlete mute/hide, and log coach views rather than assuming always-on dashboards.","governanceImplications":"Write purpose statements per metric; treat sleep/recovery auto-share as high-risk; involve SAAC when peer WHOOP/Strava groups create secondary audiences.","securityPrivacyImplications":"Continuous physiological and sleep data are sensitive; prefer need-to-know transmission; constrain vendor secondary use; enable revoke without leaving the roster tool.","caveats":"Qualitative n=15; single DI program ecology; wearable mentions emerged organically; not a security penetration test; preprint-marked author PDF mirrored to ACM proceedings.","streamIds":["college-athletics"],"roles":{"sales":"Sales framing: Athletic departments buying continuous wearables and recovery platforms need athlete-accepted sharing rules, not only accuracy claims. Lead with a consent and sharing-map workshop that documents need-to-know vs automatic coach uploads (Garmin Clipboard/WHOOP-style) before expanding dashboards. Bound value to reduced privacy friction and clearer practice-planning use. Unsupported: guaranteed performance lift, blanket coach access to sleep/recovery, or NCAA-wide transfer from one DI interview sample.","engineering":"Engineering framing: Fit is contextual-integrity controls on continuous wearable telemetry—athlete-initiated share, coach-request flows, and one-time workout auto-upload with revoke. Architecture: device vendor → team hub → RBAC coach views; separate sleep/recovery streams with default-off auto-share. Prerequisites: written purposes per metric, athlete UX for mute/hide, logging of who viewed what. Constraints: single-program qualitative n=15, women’s-sport skew, organic not wearable-focused interview prompts. Security: minimize always-on coach push of recovery/sleep. Proof of value: documented flow inventory plus athlete opt-out completion time.","delivery":"Delivery framing: Inventory current wearable vendors and which metrics auto-flow to coaches; rewrite consent for sleep/recovery vs workout load; train staff not to equate red recovery with playing-time judgment. Dependencies: sports science, compliance/privacy, coaching staff, vendor CSMs. Ownership: athletics performance + privacy office jointly own sharing policy. Skills adoption: teach need-to-know conversations. Governance checkpoints: quarterly flow review; stop auto-share of sleep if athletes report intrusion. Risks: silent surveillance norms and inequitable pressure to keep devices on."},"roleDetails":{"sales":{"customerProblem":"Wearable vendors push always-on coach dashboards while student-athletes report intrusive sleep/recovery sharing and unclear purposes.","stakeholders":["Sports science","Head coaches","Student-athlete advisory","Privacy/compliance","Vendor CSM"],"discoveryQuestions":["Which metrics auto-upload today?","Can athletes mute sleep/recovery without leaving the team system?","What purpose statement exists for resting HR requests?"],"valueHypothesis":"Mapping and constraining wearable information flows can reduce privacy friction while preserving coach-mediated load decisions if sleep/recovery are not default-shared.","potentialEngagement":"Two-week information-flow inventory and consent redesign for one DI program’s wearable stack.","unsupportedClaims":["Performance guarantees","One-size NCAA policy","That athletes want coaches to see all WHOOP streams"]},"engineering":{"fit":"Privacy/control layer over continuous wearables in NCAA DI—not a new sensor.","architectureIntegration":"Vendor APIs → team hub with per-metric sharing flags, purpose tags, and athlete mute; coach RBAC; audit log.","prerequisites":["Vendor share controls","Written purposes","Athlete UX","Staff training"],"constraints":["n=15 interviews","One DI context","Women’s-sport skew","Organic wearable mentions"],"security":"Default-deny continuous recovery/sleep to coaches; encrypt biometrics; revoke on roster exit.","proofOfValue":["Completed flow map","Mute latency <60s","Athlete-reported clarity of purpose"]},"delivery":{"work":"Catalog flows, update consent, configure vendor defaults, coach briefing, athlete Q&A.","dependencies":["Vendor admin access","Privacy counsel","SAAC input","S&C buy-in"],"ownership":"Performance director owns operational sharing; privacy office owns policy.","skillsAdoption":"Train coaches to request metrics with stated purpose and accept athlete-initiated need-to-know shares.","governanceCheckpoints":["Consent approval","30-day athlete feedback","Quarterly flow audit"],"acceptanceCriteria":["Written flow inventory","Sleep/recovery default-off or documented exception","Athlete mute path tested"],"risks":["Culture of forced always-on","Punishment for muting","Peer dashboard pressure"]}},"retrievedAt":"2026-10-03T22:16:20-05:00","enrichedAt":"2026-10-03T22:18:14-05:00","enrichmentBasis":"retrieved source","accessibilityWorkforceImplications":"Controls and mute UX must be usable under practice time pressure; staff need privacy literacy alongside sports-science literacy.","procurementImplications":"Score wearable vendors on per-metric sharing defaults, mute, and audit logs—not only recovery-model marketing claims.","operatingModelImplications":"Shifts performance ops from ambient surveillance toward purpose-bound coach requests and athlete-initiated shares.","sourceVerification":{"responseId":"curl-childs-wearables-20261003T221620","openedUrl":"https://www.cise.ufl.edu/~k.childs/Papers/Wearable_security_Privacy.pdf","referenceExcerpt":"We highlight seven key descriptions of how data is being shared","promptVersion":"sled-research-v4.0","model":null,"basis":"agent-reported inspection"}}}]}