You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: Cross-device media: a review of second screening and multi-device television 
Chapter Title:  Extending the remote control 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  In this article we present the findings of two ethnographic studies embedded into two broader projects on interactive television in the home environment. Based on previous research on the home context and inspired by ongoing trends around interactive television, we explored basic concepts, such as the extended home, and new interaction techniques, in particular those related to future developments of the remote control. For the two studies we also developed two variations of the cultural probes method: creative probing and playful probing. This methodological approach proved to be appropriate for gathering in-depth data on participants' opinions, attitudes, and ideas in a way favorable to the participants. Overall, our results support existing research data on user media behavior and expectations and show trends in and beyond the living room, concerned with personalization, privacy, and security as well as communication. 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  Along with the development of Web 2.0, Internet users are gradually evolving from passive recipients of content to content creators. Considering recent technological advances and improved service designs, television (TV) content and its interactive methods have drastically changed. Moreover, various information devices ranging from wide-screen TVs in the living room to individual laptops or mobile phones have spread throughout the TV-watching environment. However, the increasing number of TV channels has given users a wider range of TV programs to choose from. Based on these issues, this paper proposes a social TV Electronic Programming Guide (EPG) interaction design under scenarios wherein users interact with a multi-screen TV, which aims at offering strengthened EPG services such as EPG navigation, EPG recommendation, and EPG searching, based on users' virtual social relationships. 
3. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB003):  Due to recent development of TVs in the direction of highly interactive multimedia platforms, interactive TV (iTV) applications gain popularity. In terms of control possibilities a variety of input modalities have become available, though effects on performance and user experience of different age groups when controlling different iTV applications remain unclear. We present an empirical investigation comparing three input modalities (tablet, freehand gestures, remote) for controlling two iTV applications (Photo Browser, Nutrition Tracker) used by older and younger adults. Results show that all three independent variables had significant influence on performance, while we did not find influence of age or application on user experience. Overall tablet input based on a mirrored TV screen showed the best performance and was preferred by both age groups. Older adults were overall slower and showed a particularly large performance gap with the remote in comparison to younger adults.

Literature Review:
Irrespective of the technological developments over the past 20 years in the television remote still sits at the centre of television interaction. They are cumbersome, inconsistent, and bound by their physical limitations (Fig. 2) , as discussed in more detail in Bernhaupt et al.'s 2008 ethnographic study of living room trends BIB002 . We now explore work that has used a secondary screen to interact with the television, favouring the fluidity that customisation that soft interfaces afford. There have been numerous tablet applications released that allow for the control of a television with a tablet or smartphone. As previously mentioned, work in this area and the ubiquitous adoption of smart devices has culminated in manufacturers creating second screen applications which act as remotes/EPGs-the LG TV Remote, the Samsung Smart View, and the Sony TV Sideview to name a few. We now briefly touch on academic literature to gain insight into the work done, and how we may design for such control-based interfaces. Work by Cruikshank et al. BIB001 explored what a customisable remote, such as a second screen PDA, can impart to the world of interactive television. They describe a solution that removes the interactive element from the television (or its remote) and transfers it to the a second screen (PDA). In doing this, the authors noted a 'dramatic improvement for effective interaction and navigation for iTV interfaces and services'. This delegation of interaction to a more suited device appears to not only allow improved interaction, but allows designers to save space on the main display to do what it does best: displaying. To further interaction in such scenarios, Bobeth et al. BIB004 studied methods for controlling a television app. They compared two alternatives to the remote control: air gestures and a tablet computer interface. Results implied that mirroring the television on a secondary device and allowing the users to interact with this provided a more intuitive experience than the remote and the in-air gestures. Again, allowing interaction to be undertaken by the secondary device was shown to be significantly beneficial. Interestingly, their study also showed that older users, who are typically less familiar with tablet computers, adapted to the concept of controlling the television adapted quickly to the concept. EPGs are a cornerstone around which other second screen functionality can be added on-for example, You et al. BIB003 explored the concept of designing a multi-screen EPG which linked other users in a similar style to a social network. Though it is clear that secondary screen applications allow designers to leverage greater interaction benefits than remotes, the real impact is made when we consider the needs of those who require some degree of customisation for the device to control the television content. As the buttons on remotes are immutable, they do not afford alteration of the interface. And, conversely, soft interfaces do. These benefits are made clear in the work of Barrett et al.   -the Universal Control API allows barriers to be broken in terms of how the interaction method with the television can be adapted. As the API allows any configuration of interface to be developed, or for external sensor technologies to be used, the control style to adapted to the specific needs of an individual.