Table 7.

Interview case studies of the ‘dystopian’ versus the ‘indifferent’.

	The Dystopian Case	The Indifferent Case
Social	Used Google calendar to log previously Specific app was recommended through online forum	Did not track her cycle previously Recommended by mother to track irregular periods
Data sharing	App was recommended through online forum	Did not share data
Relationship with app and body	Developed strange relationship with body: ‘I felt like I was constantly under surveillance to a point where … I was just a bit obsessed with the fluctuations, with the accuracy of my temping, it just brought me into line with my bodily functions a little bit too closely to the point where it just wasn’t enjoyable at all’	No comment
Stopped use	‘It was completely disempowering!’ Deleted app after husband’s recommendation: ‘I have stopped all monitoring now’	Kept forgetting to enter data and did not see the need for it so stopped using
Evidence-based science	‘I do think it’s based on the 28-day model still and a lot of the things are … it’s just a really imperfect science and it makes you invest and trust it when actually I’m not the best person to be monitoring those things’	No comment
Trust and scepticism	Would purposely enter data wrong e.g. round up temperature data ‘’cause I wanted to see my graph peak so then you think I’m not ever recording accurate data here, I want to see an ovulation and was being incredibly emotional in my use of the technology’	Was not able to predict irregularity accurately
Emotion and attitude towards apps	Thought it was ‘so unethical and not very scientific’ ‘I think the kind of production of data on the body is problematic and I think it makes trying for a baby a lot harder.’	Nonchalant, not bothered that it did not work for her Would laugh and refer to herself as too forgetful
Can see the benefit	‘I imagine that if you use them and become pregnant in the start of your journey then they’re great’	Can see why it is helpful but was not for her