Outcomes of training in smart home technology adoption: a living laboratory study

David Wright Missouri University of Science and Technology ; Daniel B. Shank Missouri University of Science and Technology ; Thomas Yarbrough Missouri University of Science and Technology

Abstract

While various forms of smart home technology have been available for decades, they have yet to achieve widespread adoption. Although they have risen in popularity during recent years, the general public continue to rate smart home devices as overly complex compared to their benefits. This article reports the results of an eight-month study into the effects of training on smart home technology adoption. Building upon the results of a previous study, and using the same living laboratory approach, we studied the effects of training on the attitudes of a group of residents toward use of smart home technology. Results show that training influences those attitudes toward smart home technology, including increased confidence in future use, and increased actual use of more complex smart home features. Results also indicate that users tended to seek out other users rather than training materials for advice, and that privacy concerns were not a deterrent to using smart home devices.

Journal
Communication Design Quarterly
Published
2021-09-01
DOI
10.1145/3468859.3468861
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
OA PDF Gold
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Technical Communication Quarterly

References (71) · 1 in this index

  1. W. Braud & R
  2. Retrieved
  3. 10.1111/ijcs.12217
  4. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.043
  5. 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.043
Show all 71 →
  1. 10.4018/978-1-61692-852-0.ch606
  2. 10.1145/1978942.1979249
  3. 10.1145/2750858.2807554
  4. 10.1109/mc.2012.328
  5. Is smart home a necessity or a fantasy for the mainstream user? A study on users' expecta…
    International Journal of Design
  6. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
  7. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
  8. 10.1080/095373203000136006
  9. Retrieved
  10. 10.2991/ict4s-env-15.2015.14
  11. 10.1109/percomw.2017.7917634
  12. Merging qualitative and quantitative data in mixed methods research: How to and why not
    Ecological and Environmental Anthropology
  13. Technology acceptance model as a predictor of using information systems to acquire inform…
  14. 10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y
  15. 10.1111/1475-6773.12117
  16. 5 Reasons why our homes are still dumb and one big thing to do about it. Forbes. Retrieved
  17. 10.24006/jilt.2020.18.1.049
  18. 10.23919/mipro.2017.7973622
  19. 10.1080/095373203000136060
  20. F. Piazolo & S
  21. The two faces of the smart city
  22. Business Insider. Retrived
  23. 10.1007/978-3-319-68018-7
  24. 10.1080/09613218.2017.1286882
  25. 10.1080/08874417.2016.1230725
  26. 10.1108/imds-01-2015-0028
  27. 10.1108/ejm-12-2016-0794
  28. 10.1145/3287049
  29. 10.3102/0013189x033007014
  30. 10.24059/olj.v16i2.240
  31. 10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
  32. 10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.07.025
  33. Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology. Issues in educational research, 16…
  34. 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004
  35. 10.1007/978-3-030-29374-1_25
  36. 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.015
  37. 10.1177/0149206306292388
  38. 10.19030/rbis.v12i2.4384
  39. 10.1007/978-3-642-31205-2_10
  40. 10.1145/2971648.2971757
  41. 10.19030/rbis.v23i1.10335
  42. 10.1016/j.iot.2018.08.009
  43. 10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.12.013
  44. 10.1016/j.tele.2013.11.002
  45. 10.1016/j.tele.2019.101283
  46. 10.1109/jiot.2017.2750765
  47. 10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.005
  48. 10.2139/ssrn.1434247
  49. 10.1108/00012530910973776
  50. 10.1080/10447318.2020.1857135
  51. Shank D. B. Wright D. Nasrin S. & White M. (under review). Unadoption practices: Restriction rejection and ot…
  52. 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.029
  53. 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.01.003
  54. 10.5902/1983465932624
  55. 10.1080/17483107.2018.1425748
  56. Takahashi D. (2017 January 31). PwC: 81% of consumers are aware of smart homes but only 26% want one. Venture…
  57. 10.1145/3214287
  58. 10.1007/s00779-014-0813-0
  59. 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.047
  60. 10.1002/9781118886373.ch1
  61. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  62. 10.1108/IMDS-01-2016-0017
  63. 10.5555/3235924.3235931
  64. Can teacher technology integration training alone lead to high levels of technology integ…
    Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education
  65. 10.1109/mcom.2017.1600267cm
  66. 10.1145/3274469