Human-computer interaction (HCI) is a multidisciplinary field that explores the interaction between humans and computers, emphasizing especially the design and use of computer technology. Within this domain, the notion of sense of agency, usually defined as the users perceiving their actions as influencing the system, is of crucial importance. Another central notion is that of socio-technical systems, referring to the interplay between social and technical elements. In this work, we delve into users’ perceptions of their interactions with smart devices, drawing insights from a dataset collected during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020.

The dataset, gathered through an expansive survey, was distributed in professional and personal networks, offers a window into the perspectives of 587 respondents, predominantly highly educated professionals with significant technological familiarity. While the sample’s specificity limits the generalizability of findings, it offers valuable insights into how tech-savvy users perceive their interactions with smart devices, illuminating the nuanced dynamics of HCI within socio-technical contexts.

One of the survey’s notable aspects was its focus on users’ choice of a single smart device to consider throughout their responses. This deliberate framing encourages a deeper exploration of users’ relationships with specific technologies, shedding light on the intricacies of their interactions. For respondents who did not own multiple smart devices, the instruction was to choose their primary device, such as a computer or mobile phone, thus ensuring consistency in the examination of user experiences.

Within the dataset, various dimensions of users’ interactions with smart devices emerged, encompassing cognitive, emotional, and behavioral aspects. Users’ perceptions of agency, defined as their sense of control and influence over the device, are particularly intriguing. Analysis of the dataset reveals diverse manifestations of agency, ranging from feelings of empowerment and efficiency to frustrations stemming from perceived limitations or complexities in device operation.

Moreover, the socio-technical lens allows us to delve deeper into the contextual factors shaping users’ interactions. The dataset captures not only users’ individual experiences but also the broader socio-cultural and technological landscapes influencing these interactions. Factors such as educational background, professional expertise, age, and gender are among the variables examined, offering insights into how these socio-demographic factors intersect with users’ perceptions of smart device interactions.

The dataset’s utilization in previous research endeavors underscores its significance in advancing our understanding of human-computer interaction, user behavior analysis, and agency. By building upon existing research and leveraging the data available, researchers can uncover deeper insights into the complexities of smart device interactions and contribute to the development of more user-centered technologies.

The COVID-19 context during which the data were collected adds another layer of complexity to the analysis. Due to the increased time spent at home and the increase in remote work, the global pandemic catalyzed increased reliance on technology for work, education, and socialization. Understanding users’ interactions with smart devices within this unique context provides valuable implications for designing technologies that accommodate evolving user needs and preferences.

In conclusion, users’ notions of their interactions with smart devices offer a rich tapestry of insights that intersect with key concepts in HCI, including agency and socio-technical systems. Through the analysis of a dataset collected during the COVID-19 pandemic, we gain valuable insights into users’ perceptions, behaviors, and experiences with smart devices within the context of a rapidly evolving technological landscape. This dataset serves as a springboard for further exploration in the field, driving forward our understanding of human-computer interactions in an increasingly digital world.

Where to find more:

• Agency in Human-Smart Device Relationship: A work in progress description of a research done with this dataset

Initial call for collecting the responses

Link to the dataset (Open Access)

https://doi.org/10.3390/data9040056

https://doi.org/10.34894/traony

Main Personal Related Publication

https://doi.org/10.3390/fi16030090

The post Understanding Users’ Experiences of Interaction with Smart Devices: A Socio-Technical Perspective appeared first on Francesco Lelli.

Abstract:
With technology in reach of everyone and the technology sector in ascendance, it is central to investigate the relationship people have with their devices. We use the concept of agency to capture aspects of user’s sense of mastery and control in relation
to their device. This study gives preliminary evidence of the existence of two dimensions of agency for modelling the interaction between humans and smart devices: (i) user agency and (ii) device agency. These constructs emerged from an exploratory factorial analysis conducted on a survey data collected from 587 participants. Mapping the users’ dynamics with their devices into user agency and device agency advances our understanding of how digital technology shapes human cognition and emotion and how
users interact with technology. This approach can assist in designing interfaces that match the beliefs users have regarding their capabilities and the capacities of their devices.

Key words: Agency, Human-Computer Interaction, smart devices, user agency, device agency, exploratory factorial analysis, survey.

we show that agency in human-smart device interactions is a twofold and graded construct, consisting of user agency and device agency. The attributing of agency to themselves and to their device frames how the users are perceiving and leveraging the affordances of the smart device. The attribution of user and device agency can be used as a measure for understanding if the user masters the device’s potentials to the fullest or not. Thus, user agency and device agency can be used as proxies for understanding how users experience their relationships with their devices.

The conceptualization of agency proposed here should be further refined in relation to other existing constructs. We should investigate whether user and device agency act as mediators for other factors of human-device interaction such as anthropomorphism and other concepts mentioned in this article. Furthermore, our exploratory study should be developed further to a point where we can perform confirmatory factor analysis. As the next step, an expert panel will be summoned to review the items used in this study, in preparation for refining the survey before collecting new data for the second set of statistical analyses. Furthermore, we should continue exploring the nuances of agency in different contexts of smart device use, such as work vs. personal.
Brad Pitt as Tyler Durden in Fight Club (1999) states that “the things you own end up owning you”. In the context of smart devices, this is true only if we are unaware of the agency we attribute to our devices and to ourselves. Perhaps the secret of a balanced relationship with our gadgets is in making an aware decision of when and how to be “owned” by the device and when not.

Full article available at this link.

Check out the presentation:

Your help in sharing the idea is very welcome!

Agency in Human-Smart Device Relationships: An Exploratory Study #HCI #IoT #smarthome #homeautomation #survey #softwaredevelopment #softwareengineering
Share on X

Cite this paper as:

Toivonen, Heidi and Lelli, Francesco, “Agency in Human-Smart Device Relationship: an Exploratory Study” (2021). PACIS 2021 Proceedings. 145. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2021/145

Check out the Related Dataset: Lelli, Francesco; Toivonen, Heidi, 2021, “A Survey for investigating human and smart devices relationships“,  https://doi.org/10.34894/TRAONY, DataverseNL, V1

• Full list of Articles
• Full list of Conference Publications

The post Agency in Human-Smart Device Relationships: An Exploratory Study appeared first on Francesco Lelli.

How to write a survey for scientific research? I am writing this article because several students ask me to supervise their master thesis using survey as a research methodology. Sometimes they see it as an “easy way out” of their thesis. In this article I am summarizing some of the core messages of an old article from Alain Pinsonneault and Kenneth L. Kraemer in the hope that it clarifies some aspects of this method of conducting research. Maybe you will use these suggestions when writing your research proposal or when conducting your study. Independently on the stage of your research, you could use them to critically assess the quality of what you are doing and use the feedback in the next iteration.

Most common problems in a survey research include:

1. Use of a single-method design where multiple methods are needed.
2. Use of an unsystematic and/or inadequate sampling procedure.
3. Low response rates.
4. Inadequate alignment/linkage between units of analysis and respondents.
5. Over-reliance on cross-sectional surveys where longitudinal surveys are really needed.

What is a survey for scientific research?

You can define it as “the act of gathering information about the characteristics, actions, or opinions of a large group of people referred to as a population.” In other words, your ultimate goal is to advance scientific knowledge. Moreover, doing a research survey is different from other types of surveys such as marketing surveys, opinion surveys and political polls.

Survey conducted for research purposes has three distinct characteristics:

• The purpose is to produce quantitative descriptions of the phenomena that you want to observe in the population
• Structured and predefined questions are the main way of collecting this information
• You collect this information by sampling your population in a way that is sufficient for generalizing the findings of your study

The research that you are conducting must have very clearly defined independent and dependent variables as a specific model of the expected relationships that are tested against the observations of the phenomena. Consequently, you should consider a survey research when:

• The central question is “what/how/why is happening?”
• Controlling the variable is not possible or desirable
• You want to study the phenomena in its natural setting
• The phenomena occur in current time or happened recently

What is the purpose of a survey for scientific research?

Normally, your research belongs to one of the 3 following categories: exploration, description or explanation.

• Exploration refers to the act of becoming more familiar with the topic or trying out preliminary concepts. Put careful attention on discovering/defining what concepts to measure and how to measure them best. In other words, it is a way to elicit a wide variety of responses from individuals with varying viewpoints in a loosely structured manner as the basis for designing a refined version of your research.
• Description refers to survey as a way to discover what situations, events, attitudes, or options are present in a population. The main concern of the researchers is to describe a distribution and to compare it with distributions of subgroups of the population. Usually you use this technique to ascertain facts instead of testing theories. In other words, you would like to understand whether common perceptions of the facts are or are not at odds with reality.
• Explanation refers to the act of testing a theory or a causal relation. In other words, you are interested in the relationships between variables. Consequently, you should be able to form theoretically grounded expectations about the relationships between variables. For example, you will be able to say that A influences B in a positive or a negative manner. A more refined survey may also try to establish why the relationship exists.

How do you consider time in designing your research survey?

In short, cross-sectional surveys explicitly exclude the time dimension in the investigation. At the same time, longitudinal surveys do exactly the opposite. You may want to use a cross-sectional approach if you can safely generalize findings and extend them in time. On the other hand, if you are considering examining a dynamic process or a particular event, a longitudinal design is more appropriate.

Who/what is your unit of analysis?

In other words, who or what are you addressing in the survey? Maybe it is an individual or a group or a department or an organization etc. People are not necessarily the only unit of interest, but you may also consider an application, a system, a group of applications, or phases of a development project. Finally, in some cases multiple units of analysis may co-exist and you may need different questions per different unit.

What is your sampling procedure?

When you are analyzing a particular population you want to be sure that the units that you are selecting do not introduce biases into your study. In other words, it is the choice of the sample frame that constitutes a representative subset of the population that you are considering. This video gives a set of examples of the common mistakes when considering sampling:

How are you collecting your data?

In a survey for scientific research, individuals that respond to the questionnaire are your units of analysis. However, in some cases, you may need to aggregate people into groups, departments etc. Therefore, you must decide a proper criteria that takes into account that this macro unit represents the opinions of multiple people. You may also want to put attention to the data collection method as different methods trigger different response rates as well as different kind of responses. Therefore, extra attention to how data have been gathered is important in order to ensure that you are actually comparing “apple with apple”.

#HowtoPerfect a #survey for #scientific #research . These #Tips could save your master thesis!
Share on X

In summary

I hope that these points will be helpful for self-reflecting when you will need to decide what your research is going to cover and if a survey is actually what you would like to do. Do now choose a survey for the wrong reasons (i.e. an “easy way out” of a master thesis). It is not as easy as it may look like. There are several common pit falls, and I hope that you will now be able to recognize them and act accordingly.

This article (Get the basic of doing a survey for scientific research purposes) is part of the miniseries on how to do a good thesis, you can see the full list of posts at the following links:

The post Get the basics of doing a survey for scientific research purposes appeared first on Francesco Lelli.

At a first look these questions look really obvious, to the point that they do not really need to be answered. However, “the obvious” is what most often shapes our behavior without us being aware of it. In particular, our relation with the objects around us, from an anthropological perspective, is what literally allowed us to become humans and helped us in interacting and modifying the surrounding environment.

This study intends to provide an introspective analysis of the way we approach the relationship we have with “things”. As a result, this study may foster a deeper understanding of ourselves and help us in prioritizing what we need, what we want and what we desire in life.

Dr. Heidi Toivonen and me decided to develop a multidisciplinary research on human-smart devices interaction that will try to answer some of these questions in a scientifically sound manner.  

In this respect we need your help! In particular, we are inviting you to take part in a little survey regarding your relationship with smart devices. In taking this survey, you will be able to reflect on how you relate to technology. At the same time you will be contributing to a study that aims to foster a deeper understanding of human interaction with personal smart devices that are becoming a more and more pervasive element of our everyday life. 

We sincerely appreciate your support and collaboration. 

Completing the survey will take you no more than 5 minutes.

Follow this link to the Survey:
Human-Smart Device Interaction

You are also welcome to extend this invitation to anybody you think may be interested in participating in this research. Please share this link and help us spread the voice!

Participate to a scientific #research that will #help #understanding the #interactive #relationships between #humans and smart devices. It takes only 5 minutes of your time! #IoT #HCI #psychology #AI #BigData
Share on X

You can contact us if you have any questions or feedback to share. In addition, if you have done work that you believe is relevant for this research, we look forward to learning from you! 

Thanks for your contribution to science!

The post Human and Smart Device Interaction: Help Wanted appeared first on Francesco Lelli.