Site Logo
All articles
Commentary on News

Agency Matters: Epistemic Agency in Self-Tracking

Evidano7 min read

Evidano is an AI-powered qualitative data analysis platform that helps researchers analyze interviews, open-ended surveys, and documents. According to the Frontiers in Public Health review by Riggare et al. (published 18 August 2026), self-tracking literature spans a spectrum from low-agency data collection to high-agency personal science, and the distinction turns on “who owns the question.” The primary keyword for this post is epistemic agency in self-tracking: this article explains the review's methods and numbers, gives extractable checks for identifying high-agency personal science in qualitative data, and shows how AI-enabled qualitative research tools accelerate synthesis and reporting for researchers and patient-led projects.

Key Takeaways

According to the Frontiers in Public Health review by Riggare et al. (18 August 2026), an agency-based framework distinguishes low-agency measurement from high-agency personal science by asking who formulates the question and interprets results. See the original article at Frontiers in Public Health.

  • Riggare et al. searched Web of Science and PubMed in April–May 2025 and retrieved 721 records, of which 241 full papers were retained for analysis.
  • Riggare et al. classified 46 articles where self-tracking was the data-collection method: 17 low-agency, 10 mixed-agency, and 19 high-agency studies (analysis reported 18 August 2026).
  • Riggare et al. identified a peak in publications using the term “quantified self” in 2018 with 38 articles and reported an uptick in 2024 with 13 articles.

What happened: methods and definitions in the Frontiers review

Answer: Riggare et al. applied a four-phase framework (Questioning, Observing, Reasoning, Discovering) and three agency levels (low, mixed, high) to the quantified self literature to operationalize epistemic agency.

According to Riggare et al. (Frontiers in Public Health, 18 August 2026), the authors used Jaakkola's theory-synthesis approach to develop the analytic framework and searched Web of Science and PubMed for the exact phrase “quantified self” in April–May 2025, yielding 721 unique records.

According to Riggare et al., abstracts were screened to 241 full papers, and 46 primary research articles using self-tracking as the data-collection method were analyzed for which of the four inquiry phases the individual performed.

Riggare et al. defined agency levels conservatively: articles were assigned the lower level when evidence of individual participation in a phase was ambiguous, and in practice high-agency articles often showed the self-tracker as a co-author.

For conceptual clarity Riggare et al. borrow Catherine Elgin's definition of epistemic agency, quoting Elgin: "Epistemic agents should think of themselves as, and act as, legislating members of a realm of epistemic ends: they make the rules, devise the methods, and set the standards that bind them" (Elgin, quoted in Riggare et al., 2026).

Findings snapshot

Date / PeriodMetricValueImplication
April–May 2025Search results for "quantified self" (Web of Science + PubMed)721 recordsLarge heterogeneous literature; term returns diverse framings
April–May 2025Full papers retained after screening241 papersCorpus for conceptual/empirical mapping
April–May 2025Papers using self-tracking as data collection46 papersSubset analyzed for epistemic agency
18 August 2026Agency breakdown among 46 self-tracking studies17 low, 10 mixed, 19 highSubstantial presence of high-agency personal science in the literature
2018, 2021, 2024Count of papers using "quantified self" per year2018: 38; 2021: 14; 2024: 13Peak in 2018; modest resurgence by 2024

Implications for qualitative researchers studying personal science

Answer: The Riggare et al. framework gives qualitative teams a concrete rubric to code agency in self-tracking projects and to distinguish data contribution from knowledge production.

According to Riggare et al. (Frontiers in Public Health, 18 August 2026), the key diagnostic is authorial control: if the individual did Questioning, Observing, Reasoning, and Discovering, label the case high-agency personal science; if the individual only collected data, label it low-agency.

For qualitative research design, Riggare et al. recommend tracking who formulates the research question, who refines measurement definitions, who performs the analysis, and who authors dissemination. These four checkpoints map directly to common codebook categories used by qualitative software.

Using the framework helps avoid category errors: Riggare et al. show that many articles that use the phrase “quantified self” are actually low-agency studies in which participants function as sensor platforms rather than as knowledge producers.

Practical note: the review flags ethical and infrastructure gaps for personal science, including lack of formal oversight and the need for community documentation and data-security practices, aligning with citizen science discussions such as Den Broeder et al. (2016) on citizen science for public health.

How Evidano helps: mapping researcher needs to AI-enabled qualitative features

Problem: Hard to identify agency at scale

Solution: Evidano automates thematic and phase coding across transcripts and documents, enabling rapid detection of whether individuals performed Questioning, Observing, Reasoning, or Discovering.

Contextual link: See Evidano Features for thematic coding, cross-segment analysis, and visualizations.

Problem: Mixed data types slow synthesis (notes, device exports, forum posts)

Solution: Evidano ingests transcripts, PDFs, spreadsheets, and exported device logs, standardizes text with translation and transcription options, and produces combined qualitative and frequency analyses.

According to the platform documentation, Evidano supports transcription and translation workflows that preserve researcher dictionaries and redact PII, which speeds audits of self-tracking studies.

Problem: Demonstrating participant authorship and co-creation in publications

Solution: Evidano generates auditable codebooks, excerpted evidence tables, and verbatim quote reports to document participant-led Questioning or Discovering phases for methods sections and author contribution notes.

Practical result: these artifacts help verify claims like those Riggare et al. identify when they note that high-agency studies often list the self-tracker as co-author.

Problem: Rapid synthesis for funding or ethics review

Solution: Evidano produces executive summaries, frequency tables, and co-occurrence networks from qualitative data in hours rather than weeks, letting teams respond to ethics committees and funders with concrete evidence of participant agency.

FAQ: epistemic agency in self-tracking

What is epistemic agency in self-tracking?

Answer: Epistemic agency in self-tracking is the individual's capacity to pose questions, collect and analyze data, and articulate discoveries about their own health, as defined in Riggare et al.'s four-phase framework (Questioning, Observing, Reasoning, Discovering).

According to Riggare et al. (Frontiers in Public Health, 18 August 2026), epistemic agency is about being a producer of knowledge rather than merely a source of data.

How did Riggare et al. measure levels of agency in the literature?

Answer: They coded articles for who performed each inquiry phase and assigned low, mixed, or high agency conservatively when evidence was ambiguous.

According to Riggare et al., two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts; 13% of abstracts (n = 80) had reviewer disagreement resolved by group discussion, and 17% of categorization cases (n = 8) required author consultation.

What are concrete signs of high-agency personal science in a study report?

Answer: Concrete signs include the participant defining the research question, conducting or directing measurement, performing or co-performing analysis, and articulating and disseminating findings (often as co-author).

Riggare et al. observe that in high-agency cases the self-tracker commonly appears as an author and documents iterative method decisions and personalized reasoning steps.

Can AI tools support personal science without undermining agency?

Answer: Yes, when AI tools are used to augment participant-led analysis and to make documentation transparent rather than replace the person's role.

Riggare et al. warn about power asymmetries when researchers or platforms set goals; AI-enabled platforms like Evidano emphasize auditable codebooks, participant-controlled exports, and encryption so that analysis aids rather than displaces self-directed inquiry.

Conclusion & Next Steps

Riggare et al.'s Frontiers review (18 August 2026) shows that epistemic agency in self-tracking is measurable and consequential: among 46 self-tracking studies they found 17 low-agency, 10 mixed-agency, and 19 high-agency examples.

For qualitative researchers and patient-led projects, the practical test is simple: who owns the question, who interprets the data, and who authors the discoveries.

AI-enabled qualitative analysis platforms can accelerate coding, produce auditable evidence of participant agency, and streamline reporting to journals and ethics boards.

If you want to test how AI-assisted thematic and cross-segment analysis can reveal agency patterns in your corpus, Try Evidano for free.

Topics

  • epistemic agency in self-tracking
  • personal science analysis
  • qualitative analysis of quantified self
  • AI-enabled qualitative research

Keep reading

Browse all articles
Company
About
Newsletter

Product updates, research, and tips — straight to your inbox.

© Evidano, All Rights Reserved.