skip to main content
10.1145/2370216.2370226acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Investigating receptiveness to sensing and inference in the home using sensor proxies

Published: 05 September 2012 Publication History

Abstract

In-home sensing and inference systems impose privacy risks and social tensions, which can be substantial barriers for the wide adoption of these systems. To understand what might affect people's perceptions and acceptance of in-home sensing and inference systems, we conducted an empirical study with 22 participants from 11 households. The study included in-lab activities, four weeks using sensor proxies in situ, and exit interviews. We report on participants' perceived benefits and concerns of in-home sensing applications and the observed changes of their perceptions throughout the study. We also report on tensions amongst stakeholders around the adoption and use of such systems. We conclude with a discussion on how the ubicomp design space might be sensitized to people's perceived concerns and tensions regarding sensing and inference in the home.

References

[1]
Bellotti, V., & Seilen, A. (1993). Design for privacy in ubiquitous computing environments. ECSCW '93, 11--92.
[2]
Boehner, K., Vertesi, J., Sengers, P., Dourish, P. (2007). How HCI interprets the probes. CHI '07, 1077--1086.
[3]
Caine, K. E., et al. (2010). DigiSwitch: design and evaluation of a device for older adults to preserve privacy while monitoring health at home. IHI '10, 153--162.
[4]
Choe, E. K., Consolvo, S., Jung, J., Harrison, B., & Kientz, J. A. (2011). Living in a glass house: a survey of private moments in the home. UbiComp '11, 41--44.
[5]
Edwards, K., & Grinter, R. (2001). At home with ubiquitous computing. UbiComp '01, 256--272.
[6]
Froehlich, J., et al. (2009). HydroSense: infrastructure-mediated single-point sensing of whole-home water activity. UbiComp '09, 235--244.
[7]
Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Cultural probes, interactions, 6(1), 21--29.
[8]
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Transaction.
[9]
Gupta, S., Reynolds, M. S., & Patel, S. N. (2010). ElectriSense: single-point sensing using EMI for electrical event detection and classification in the home. UbiComp '10, 139--48.
[10]
Hayes, G. R., et al. (2004). The personal audio loop: Designing a ubiquitous audio-based memory aid. Mobile HCI '04, 168--179.
[11]
Hayes, G. R., & Abowd, G. D. (2006). Tensions in designing capture technologies for an evidence-based care community. CHI '06, 937--946.
[12]
Hayes, G. R. et al. (2007). Physical, social, and experiential knowledge in pervasive computing environments. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 6(4), 56--63.
[13]
Hong, J. I., Ng, J. D., Lederer, S., & Landay, J. A. (2004). Privacy risk models for designing privacy-sensitive ubiquitous computing systems. DIS '04, 91--100.
[14]
Iachello, G., & Abowd, G. D. (2005). Privacy and proportionality: adapting legal evaluation techniques to inform design in ubiquitous computing. CHI '05, 91--100.
[15]
Iachello, G, Truong, K. N., Abowd, G. D., Hayes, G. R., & Stevens, M. (2006). Prototyping and sampling experience to evaluate ubiquitous computing privacy in the real world. CHI '06, 1009--1018.
[16]
Jacobs, A. R., & Abowd, G. D. (2003). A framework for comparing perspectives on privacy and pervasive technologies. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2(4), 78--84.
[17]
Klasnja, P., et al. (2009). Exploring privacy concerns about personal sensing. PERVASIVE '09, 176--183.
[18]
Kuhn, M. (2004). Electromagnetic eavesdropping risks of flat-panel displays. Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, 23--25.
[19]
Ladd, J. (1991). Computers and moral responsibility: a framework for ethical analysis. In C. Dunlop & R. Kling (Eds.), Computerization and controversy: value conflicts and social choices (pp. 664--675). Academic Press Inc.
[20]
Langheinrich M. (2001). Privacy by design---principles of privacy-aware ubiquitous systems. UbiComp '01, 273--291.
[21]
Langheinrich M. (2002). A privacy awareness system for ubiquitous computing environments. UbiComp '02, 237--245.
[22]
Larson, E. C., Lee, T, Liu, S., Rosenfeld, M., Patel, S. N. (2011). Accurate and privacy preserving cough sensing using a low-cost microphone. UbiComp '11, 375--384.
[23]
Leonardi, C, Mennecozzi, C., Not, E., Pianesi, F., Zancanaro, M., & Gennai, F. (2009). Knocking on elders' door: investigating the functional and emotional geography of their domestic space. CHI '09, 1703--1711.
[24]
Massimi, M., Truong, K. N., Dearman, D., Hayes, G. R. (2010). Understanding recording technologies in everyday life. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 9(3), 64--71.
[25]
Molina-Markham, A., Shenoy P., Fu, K, Cecchet, E. & Irwin, D. (2010). Private memoirs of a smart meter. BuildSys '10, 61--66.
[26]
Neustaedter, C., Greenberg, S., & Boyle, M. (2006). Blur filtration fails to preserve privacy for home-based video conferencing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interactions, 13(1) (Mar 2006), 1--36.
[27]
Nguyen, D. H., Kobsa, A., & Hayes, G. R. (2008). An empirical investigation of concerns of everyday tracking and recording technologies. UbiComp '08, 182--191.
[28]
Palen, L., & Dourish, P. (2003). Unpacking "privacy" for a networked world. CHI '03, 129--136.
[29]
Patel, SN., et al. (2007). At the flick of a switch: detecting and classifying unique electrical events on the residential power line. UbiComp '07, 271--288.
[30]
TV's Next Wave. (2011). http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704288304576171251689944350.html
[31]
Wyatt, D., Choudhury, T., & Blimes, J. (2007). Conversation detection and speaker segmentation in privacy sensitive situated speech data. Interspeech '07, 586--589.
[32]
Xbox Kinect. http://www.xbox.com/en-US/kinect.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
UbiComp '12: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing
September 2012
1268 pages
ISBN:9781450312240
DOI:10.1145/2370216
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 05 September 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. accelerometer
  2. cultural probes
  3. diary study
  4. domestic computing
  5. energy monitoring
  6. inference
  7. interview
  8. microphone
  9. privacy
  10. qualitative methods
  11. sensing
  12. video camera

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

Ubicomp '12
Ubicomp '12: The 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing
September 5 - 8, 2012
Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh

Acceptance Rates

UbiComp '12 Paper Acceptance Rate 58 of 301 submissions, 19%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 764 of 2,912 submissions, 26%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)27
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media