“Get that Camera Out of My House!” Conjoint Measurement of Preferences for Video-Based Healthcare Monitoring Systems in Private and Public Places

  • Katrin ArningEmail author
  • Martina Ziefle
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9102)


Facing the healthcare challenges of an aging society, the expansion of AAL system implementation in private and public environments is a promising way to improve healthcare in future smart homes and cities. The present study evaluated preferences for different video-based medical monitoring scenarios, which comprised the attributes medical safety (improved detection of medical emergencies), privacy (handling of video information), type and location of camera in a conjoint analysis. Medical safety was identified as key driver for preferences. Acceptance for video-based medical monitoring systems in public places was comparably high, given that privacy was protected. In contrast, acceptance for video-based monitoring in smart home environments was rather low due to privacy concerns. Based on the findings, recommendation for AAL system design and implementation were derived.


Medical monitoring Video cameras Smart homes Smart cities Acceptance Privacy Medical safety Conjoint analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    World Health Organization (WHO): The European Health Report 2012: Charting the Way to Well-being. World Health Organization (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leonhardt, S.: Personal healthcare devices. In: AmIware Hardware Technology Drivers of Ambient Intelligence, pp. 349–370. Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosenbloom, S.: Sustainability and automobility among the elderly: An international assessment. Transportation. 28, 375–408 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denning, P.J.: The Invisible Future: The Seamless Integration of Technology into Everyday Life. McGraw-Hill, Inc (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rubenstein, L.Z.: Falls in older people: epidemiology, risk factors and strategies for prevention. Age Ageing. 35, ii37–ii41 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gurley, R.J., Lum, N., Sande, M., Lo, B., Katz, M.H.: Persons found in their homes helpless or dead. N. Engl. J. Med. 334, 1710–1716 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gururajan, R., Murugesan, S., Soar, J.: Introducing mobile technologies in support of healthcare. Cut. IT J. 18, 12–18 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Memon, M., Wagner, S.R., Pedersen, C.F., Beevi, F.H.A., Hansen, F.O.: Ambient Assisted Living Healthcare Frameworks, Platforms, Standards, and Quality Attributes. Sensors. 14, 4312–4341 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cardinaux, F., Bhowmik, D., Abhayaratne, C., Hawley, M.S.: Video based technology for ambient assisted living: A review of the literature. J. Ambient Intell. Smart Environ. 3, 253–269 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leijdekkers, P., Gay, V., Lawrence, E.: Smart homecare system for health tele-monitoring. In: ICDS 2007. First International Conference on the Digital Society, 2007, pp. 3–3 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fleck, S., Strasser, W.: Smart Camera Based Monitoring System and Its Application to Assisted Living. Proc. IEEE. 96, 1698–1714 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen, B.-W., Chen, C.-Y., Wang, J.-F.: Smart Homecare Surveillance System: Behavior Identification Based on State-Transition Support Vector Machines and Sound Directivity Pattern Analysis. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 43, 1279–1289 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yu, M., Rhuma, A., Naqvi, S.M., Wang, L., Chambers, J.: A Posture Recognition-Based Fall Detection System for Monitoring an Elderly Person in a Smart Home Environment. IEEE Trans. Inf. Technol. Biomed. 16, 1274–1286 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aghajan, H., Augusto, J.C., Wu, C., McCullagh, P., Walkden, J.-A.: Distributed vision-based accident management for assisted living. In: Okadome, T., Yamazaki, T., Makhtari, M. (eds.) ICOST. LNCS, vol. 4541, pp. 196–205. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Patton, J.W.: Protecting privacy in public? Surveillance technologies and the value of public places. Ethics Inf. Technol. 2, 181–187 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilkowska, W., Ziefle, M.: Privacy and data security in E-health: Requirements from the user’s perspective. Health Informatics J. 18, 191–201 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rogers, E.: Diffusion of Innovations. NY Free Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 319–340 (1989)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yarbrough, A.K., Smith, T.B.: Technology Acceptance among Physicians A New Take on TAM. Med. Care Res. Rev. 64, 650–672 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kowalewski, S., Arning, K., Minwegen, A., Ziefle, M., Ascheid, G.: Extending the Engineering Trade-Off Analysis by Integrating User Preferences in Conjoint Analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 40, 2947–2955 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arning, K., Gaul, S., Ziefle, M.: ``Same Same but Different’’ how service contexts of mobile technologies shape usage motives and barriers. In: Leitner, G., Hitz, M., Holzinger, A. (eds.) USAB 2010. LNCS, vol. 6389, pp. 34–54. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Luce, R.D., Tukey, J.W.: Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. J. Math. Psychol. 1, 1–27 (1964)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Arning, K., Ziefle, M., Kowalewski, S.: Health concerns vs. mobile data needs: Conjoint measurement of preferences for mobile communication network scenarios. Int. J. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Orme, B.: Interpreting the Results of Conjoint Analysis, Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research. Res. Publ. LLC Madison WI. 77–89 (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chrzan, K., Orme, B.: An overview and comparison of design strategies for choice-based conjoint analysis. Sawtooth Softw. Res. Pap. Ser. (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Orme, B.K.: SSI Web v7. 0 Software for web interviewing and conjoint analysis. Sequim: Sawtooth Software. Inc (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Orme, B.: Market simulators for conjoint analysis. Get. Started Conjoint Anal. Strateg. Prod. Des. Pricing Res. Second. Ed Madison Res. Publ. LLC (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Computer Interaction Center (HCIC)RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations