4.7 Article

Perceived creepiness in response to smart home assistants: A multi-method study

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102720

关键词

Technology resistance; Perceived creepiness; Smart home technology; Smart home assistants; Smart product; Multi-method study

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research addresses the gap in previous studies on resistance and creepiness towards smart home assistants (SHAs). By using a multi-method research design, it explores the inhibiting effect of creepiness on SHAs, analyzes the triggers and mechanisms behind it, and provides design recommendations to mitigate users' perceptions of creepiness associated with SHAs.
Smart home assistants (SHAs) have gained a foothold in many households. Although SHAs have many beneficial capabilities, they also have characteristics that are colloquially described as creepy - a fact that may deter potential users from adopting and utilizing them. Previous research has examined SHAs neither from the perspective of resistance nor the perspective of creepiness. The present research addresses this gap and adopts a multi-method research design with four sequential studies. Study 1 serves as a pre-study and provides initial exploratory insights into the concept of creepiness in the context of SHAs. Study 2 focuses on developing a measurement instrument to assess perceived creepiness. Study 3 uses an online experiment to test the nomological validity of the construct of creepiness in a larger conceptual model. Study 4 further elucidates the underlying behavioral dynamics using focus group analysis. The findings contribute to the literature on the dark side of smart technology by analyzing the triggers and mechanisms underlying perceived creepiness as a novel inhibitor to SHAs. In addition, this study provides actionable design recommendations that allow practitioners to mitigate end users' potential perceptions of creepiness associated with SHAs and similar smart technologies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据