Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Perceptions on Augmented Reality Glasses and the Recording Feature


Perceptions on Augmented Reality Glasses and the Recording Feature

Written by Dan Cyr

In a recent field study conducted by the University of Washington, researchers performed 23 sessions with 31 participants over a 3 and a half month time period. These in promptu, qualitative sessions in a local café in Seattle yielded interesting results[1].
Prior to the interviews, a researcher would sit in the café with a pair of augmented reality glasses on. After a while, the research team would sit and interview various individuals asking them questions like “Did you notice the glasses that he or she was wearing” and “Did you know that those glasses can video record actions?” The results from the field study provided rather interesting conclusions.

11 of the 31 participants didn’t even notice someone was wearing augmented reality glasses in the café. Another interesting note is that 28 of the 31 participants either acted indifferent or negative to this type of technology. People were concerned with being recorded and privacy but mentioned how they are being recorded at all times. They mentioned CCTV and traffic cameras. Being in Seattle, there are CCTV’s all around. One participant mentioned, “It’s a bit like Big Brother but we accept it as a society, and it’s not like you’re in a house.” Are people really starting to accept what the future has in store for products like Google Glass?
Taking a look at the data a little deeper, the place in which a person is wearing the glasses plays an integral role. The difference between a “private” and “public” place is a fine line. Participants mentioned places like the bathroom and other people’s homes as not being suitable places to film which coincide with legal restrictions. The perception of the recorder or person with the glasses was interesting as well. If they looked “normal” to the bystander then they were fine. If they looked like a “pervert” in their eyes then it was a negative connotation. Other factors like being identified if they are a foster child or person in protective custody and proximity to the recorder also played an important role.

Many other interesting insights were gleaned from the field study around buying a product to block recording and design considerations for augmented reality glasses. More of this study can be read here.



[1] Denning, T. et al. 2014. In Situ with Bystanders of Augmented Reality Glasses: Perspectives on Recording and Privacy mediating Technologies. Proceedings of the 32Nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New York, NY, USA, 2014), 2377–2386.

No comments:

Post a Comment