Advertisement

Users’ Perceptions and Attitudes Towards Smart Home Technologies

  • Deepika SinghEmail author
  • Ismini Psychoula
  • Johannes Kropf
  • Sten Hanke
  • Andreas Holzinger
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10898)

Abstract

The concept of smart home is a promising and efficient way of maintaining good health, providing comfort and safety thus helps in enhancing the quality of life. Acceptability of smart homes relies on the users’ perceptions towards its benefits and their concerns related to monitoring and data sharing. Within this study, an online survey with 234 participants has been conducted to understand the attitudes and perceptions of future smart home users, followed by detailed analysis of their responses. In general, the users agree that the smart home technology would improve the quality of life to a greater extent and enhance the safety and security of residents. On the contrary, they raise several concerns such as the increased dependence on technology and the monitoring of private activities, which may be seen as perceived drawbacks. The obtained results show that the older adults (ages from 36 to 70 years) are more open to monitoring and sharing data especially if it useful for their doctors and caregivers while the young adults (ages up to 35 years) are somewhat reluctant to share information.

Keywords

Smart home Users’ perspective Acceptability Data sharing 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work has been funded by the European Union Horizon2020 MSCA ITN ACROSSING project (GA no. 616757). The authors would like to thank the participants and members of the project’s consortium for their valuable inputs.

References

  1. 1.
    Cheek, P., Nikpour, L., Nowlin, H.D.: Aging well with smart technology. Nurs. Adm. Q. 29(4), 329–338 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cook, D.J.: How smart is your home? Science 335(6076), 1579–1581 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chan, M., Campo, E., Estéeve, D., Fourniols, J.Y.: Smart homescurrent features and future perspectives. Maturitas 64(2), 90–97 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    AlAbdulkarim, L., Lukszo, Z.: Impact of privacy concerns on consumers’ acceptance of smart metering in the Netherlands. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC), pp. 287–292. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Demiris, G., Oliver, D.P., Dickey, G., Skubic, M., Rantz, M.: Findings from a participatory evaluation of a smart home application for older adults. Technol. Health Care 16(2), 111–118 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Visutsak, P., Daoudi, M.: The smart home for the elderly: perceptions, technologies and psychological accessibilities: the requirements analysis for the elderly in Thailand. In: 2017 XXVI International Conference on Information, Communication and Automation Technologies (ICAT), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Singh, D., Kropf, J., Hanke, S., Holzinger, A.: Ambient assisted living technologies from the perspectives of older people and professionals. In: Holzinger, A., Kieseberg, P., Tjoa, A.M., Weippl, E. (eds.) CD-MAKE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10410, pp. 255–266. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66808-6_17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coughlin, J.F., D’Ambrosio, L.A., Reimer, B., Pratt, M.R.: Older adult perceptions of smart home technologies: implications for research, policy & market innovations in healthcare. In: 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE on Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS 2007, pp. 1810–1815. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wilson, C., Hargreaves, T., Hauxwell-Baldwin, R.: Benefits and risks of smart home technologies. Energy Policy 103, 72–83 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ziefle, M., Rocker, C., Holzinger, A.: Perceived usefulness of assistive technologies and electronic services for ambient assisted living. In: 2011 5th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth), pp. 585–592. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deepika Singh
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Ismini Psychoula
    • 2
  • Johannes Kropf
    • 1
  • Sten Hanke
    • 1
  • Andreas Holzinger
    • 3
  1. 1.AIT Austrian Institute of TechnologyWiener NeustadtAustria
  2. 2.School of Computer Science and InformaticsDe Montfort UniversityLeicesterUK
  3. 3.Holzinger Group, HCI-KDD, Institute for Medical Informatics/StatisticsMedical University GrazGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations