investigating receptiveness to sensing and inference in the home using sensor proxies
Post on 24-Feb-2016
27 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Investigating Receptiveness to Sensing and Inference in the Home Using Sensor Proxies
Eun Kyoung Choe, Sunny Consolvo, Jaeyeon Jung, Beverly Harrison, Shwetak N. Patel, Julie A. Kientz
TsungYun 20130701
Outline
• Introduction• Study Method• Analysis• Discussion• Conclusion
Introduction
• Recent technical advances accelerate the integration of sensors into consumer devices in the home– Full-body 3D motion capture in games– Facial/voice recognition capabilities– Energy sensing systems– Wearable RFID in security systems
But … is this a good thing? Privacy problem?
Introduction
• Sensing and inference data captured in the home could be highly sensitive– Intimacy/secretive activities– Confidential conversations– Innocuous activities : cooking and eating [4]
• Multiple stakeholders may have different perspectives on what is acceptable– Stakeholder: both householders and visitors
Introduction
• This study investigates householders’ receptiveness to various sensing technologies
• Offer a number of design insights which designers can use to reduce some concerns observed in the study
Study Method
• Three phase– Initial in-lab session– Four weeks using sensor proxies in-situ– Exit interviews
• Participants– 11 households (10 females, 12 males, aged 28-54)– various levels of education, occupation– owned a desktop/laptop with an average of 2.5
computers per household (min=1, max=5)
Study Method
• (I) In-lab session– General population is not familiar with how
sensing technologies work and what might be logged
– Background survey and technology education session
– Four sensing data: video, audio, electricity use, and movement
Study Method
• (I) In-lab session– Encouraged participants to brainstorm possible
application scenarios for each sensing technology– Consider the trade-offs (benefits/risks)– If participants were too positive about the sensors
or applications, we probed about potential risks and vice versa
Study Method
• (II) In-situ Phase– Cultural Probes method [7]• A technique used to inspire ideas in a design process• Probes : small packages that can include any sort of
artifact (like a map, postcard, camera or diary)• participants record specific events, feelings or
interactions using probes– Take-home packages
Study Method
Study Method
• (II) In-situ Phase– 4 weeks– kitchen, master bedroom, family room, and child’s
or guest bedroom/study room– not to turn on the sensor proxies during the first
week– sensor light turned on whenever motion was
detected
Study Method
Study Method
• (III) Exit Interview– Ask participants about…• perceptions toward different sensing data• utility of the potential applications• issues regarding data access• issues regarding notification methods
Analysis
• Perceived benefits and risks– Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing
• Tensions regarding sensing and inference– Tensions between couples– Tensions between parents and children– Tensions between householders and visitors
Analysis
• Perceived benefits and risks– Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing
• Tensions regarding sensing and inference– Tensions between couples– Tensions between parents and children– Tensions between householders and visitors
Analysis
• Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– People may be willing to accept invasive
technologies if perceived benefits outweigh potential risks [19]
– Applications directly related to household members’ health and safety
– Monetary benefits and incentives
Analysis
• Applications directly related to household members’ health and safety–
–
Analysis
• Still many participants were reluctant to the use of home automation systems–
–
Analysis
• Monetary benefits and incentives–
–
Analysis
• Perceived benefits and risks– Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing
• Tensions regarding sensing and inference– Tensions between couples– Tensions between parents and children– Tensions between householders and visitors
Analysis
• Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing applications– Private Nature of the In-home Sensing and
Inference Data – Unintended Consequences of Recording and
Playback– Possibility of Data Leaks: Security and Data
Storage
Analysis
• Private Nature of the In-home Sensing and Inference Data–
Analysis
• Unintended Consequences of Recording and Playback–
–
Analysis
• Possibility of Data Leaks: Security and Data Storage–
Analysis
• Perceived benefits and risks– Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing
• Tensions regarding sensing and inference– Tensions between couples– Tensions between parents and children– Tensions between householders and visitors
Analysis
• Tensions between couples–
–
Analysis
• Tensions between couples–
Analysis
• Perceived benefits and risks– Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing
• Tensions regarding sensing and inference– Tensions between couples– Tensions between parents and children– Tensions between householders and visitors
Analysis
• Tensions between parents and children–
–
Analysis
• Tensions between parents and children– Not everyone agreed on including their child’s
opinion in deciding whether to adopt sensing and inference systems
–
Analysis
• Perceived benefits and risks– Perceived benefits of in-home sensing applications– Perceived risks and concerns of in-home sensing
• Tensions regarding sensing and inference– Tensions between couples– Tensions between parents and children– Tensions between householders and visitors
Analysis
• Tensions between householders and visitors–
Analysis
• Tensions between householders and visitors– Participants had different strategies for how they
communicate an in-home sensing to a visitor– Depending on the relationship between the
householder and visitor
Analysis
• Tensions between householders and visitors–
Discussion
• Mechanisms to Reduce Privacy Risks– Limited capability sensors for the home• A new microphone-based cough sensor that only sends
the relevant features of coughing sounds• Non-invertible audio processing techniques• Convert a general-purpose camera into a single event
detector, e.g., fall detector
Discussion
• Mechanisms to Reduce Privacy Risks– Context-aware sensing• Switch back and forth between high-fidelity (e.g., raw
video) and low-fidelity (e.g., blurred video) sensing• High-fidelity when they are not at home and low-
fidelity when they are at home• Automatically switch
Discussion
• Mechanisms to Reduce Privacy Risks– Secure recording with limited playback• Enforce recorded data to be automatically deleted after
a certain time period• To be viewed only a pre-specified number of times
Discussion
• Tensions between Aesthetics and Visible Notification – Participants did not like to have sensing devices be
visibly installed in their home– System sometimes needs to be hidden (e.g.,
supervising service people and babysitters)– Designing a gentle notification system (e.g., a
location-based reminder on a cell phone) warrants future research efforts.
Conclusion
• While in-home sensing and inference systems can provide numerous benefits, privacy risks and concerns exist
• Conduct in-lab activities and four-weeks in situ with a cultural probe that used sensor proxies with 22 participants
Conclusion
• Gather contextualized feedback on participants’ perceived benefits and risks of in-home sensing applications
• Provide design insights to alleviate perceived privacy concerns and tensions
Q&A
Thanks for your listening
top related