Intentions to Use Smart Textiles in AAL Home Environments: Comparing Younger and Older Adults

  • Martina ZiefleEmail author
  • Philipp Brauner
  • Julia van Heek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9754)


The vision of ubiquitous computing is increasingly picking up pace. An increasing number of everyday objects are equipped with smart technology and start to form the Internet of Things. Yet, interacting with these devices is based on conventional surfaces made of glass, metal, or plastic. We believe that textile interaction surfaces will be the next frontier of ubiquitous computing and identified many blank spots in the research landscape. Peoples’ perception and acceptance of smooth and soft interaction surfaces is insufficiently understood. In this paper we present a study in which 90 people of a wide age range evaluated the suitability of smart textiles in different usage scenarios in the home environment. Overall, a solid willingness to use smart textiles as input devices was found, even though there were conditional acceptance criteria which should be given before participants would be willing to buy them. In contrast to many other technology contexts, however, age is not decisive in the evaluation of the usefulness of smart textiles. Younger and older adults seem to have a quite similar evaluation, hinting at a quite generic acceptance pattern.


Smart textiles Age AAL Technology acceptance User diversity 



This project is funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research under the reference number 16SV6270.


  1. 1.
    Weiser, M.: The computer for the 21st century. Sci. Am. 265, 94–104 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caceres, R., Friday, A.: Ubicomp systems at 20: progress, opportunities, and challenges. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 11, 14–21 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Robinson, S.: History of Dyed Textiles. MIT Press, Cambridge (1970)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kvavadze, E., Bar-Yosef, O., Belfer-Cohen, A., Boaretto, E., Jakeli, N., Matskevich, Z., Meshveliani, T.: 30,000-year-old wild flax fibers. Science 325, 1359 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schaar, A.K., Ziefle, M.: Smart cloths: perceived benefits vs. perceived fears. In: 5th ICST/IEEE Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare 2011, pp. 601–608 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ziefle, M., Brauner, P., Heidrich, F., Möllering, C., Lee, K., Armbrüster, C.: Understanding requirements for textile input devices individually tailored interfaces within home environments. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (eds.) UAHCI 2014, Part III. LNCS, vol. 8515, pp. 587–598. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hildebrandt, J., Brauner, P., Ziefle, M.: Smart textiles as intuitive and ubiquitous user interfaces for smart homes. In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) Human Computer Interaction International - Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population, pp. 423–434. Springer, Switzerland (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ziefle, M., Röcker, C.: Acceptance of pervasive healthcare systems: a comparison of different implementation concepts. In: 4th ICST Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare 2010, pp. 1–6 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heidrich, F., Golod, I., Russell, P., Ziefle, M.: Device-free interaction in smart domestic environments. In: Proceedings of Augmented Human 2013, pp. 65–68. ACM Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Katterfeldt, E.-S., Dittert, N., Schelhowe, H.: Textiles as ways of relating computing technology to everyday life. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 9–17. ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leonhardt, S.: Personal healthcare devices. In: Mekherjee, S., et al. (eds.) Malware, Hardware Technology Drivers of AI, pp. 349–370. Springer, Dordrecht (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheermesser, M., Kosow, H., Rashid, A., Holtmann, C.: User acceptance of pervasive computing in healthcare: main findings of two case studies. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, Tampere, pp. 205–213 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Park, S., Jayaraman, S.: Enhancing the quality of life through wearable technology the role of a personalized wearable intelligent information infrastructure in addressing the challenges of healthcare. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. 22(3), 41–48 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ziefle, M., Wilkowska, W.: Technology acceptability for medical assistance. In: 4th ICST Conference Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, pp. 1–9 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilkowska, W., Ziefle, M.: User diversity as a challenge for the integration of medical technology into future home environments. In: Ziefle, M., Röcker, C. (eds.) Human-Centred Design of eHealth Technologies. Concepts, Methods and Applications, pp. 95–126. IGI Global, Hershey (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dewsbury, G., Edge, M.: Designing the home to meet the needs of tomorrow… today: smart technology, health and well-being. Open House Int. 26(2), 33–42 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mynatt, E.D., Melenhorst, A.-S., Fisk, A.D., Rogers, W.A.: Aware technologies for aging in place: understanding user needs and attitudes. Pervasive Comput. 3(2), 36–41 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nehmer J., Becker M., Karshmer A., Lamm R.: Living assistance systems: an ambient intelligence approach. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 43–50. ACM, Shanghai (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Strese, H., Seidel, U., Knape, T., Botthof, A.: Smart Home in Deutschland - Untersuchung im Rahmen der wissenschaftlichen Begleitung zum Programm Next Generation Media (NGM) des Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft und Technologie [Smart Home in Germany, Study accompanying the program Next generation Media of the German Ministry of Economics and Technology] (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Klack, L., Schmitz-Rode, T., Wilkowska, W., Kasugai, K., Heidrich, F., Ziefle, M.: Integrated home monitoring and compliance optimization for patients with mechanical circulatory support devices. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 39(12), 2911–2921 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee, M.: Embedded assessment of wellness with smart home sensors. UbiComp 2010, Copenhagen, 26–29 September 2010Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eloy, S., Plácido, I., Duarte, J.P.: Housing and information society: integration of ICT in the existing housing stock. In: Braganca, et al. (eds.) SB 2007, Suistainable Construction, Materials, Practices. IOS Press, Portugal (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mann, W.C. (ed.): Smart Technology for Aging, Disability, and Independence: The State of the Science. Wiley, Hoboken (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stronge, A.J., Rogers, W.A., Fisk, A.D.: Human factors considerations in implementing telemedicine systems to accommodate older adults. Telemed. Telecare 13, 1–3 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ziefle, M., Himmel, S., Wilkowska, W.: When your living space knows what you do: acceptance of medical home monitoring by different technologies. In: Holzinger, A., Simonic, K.-M. (eds.) USAB 2011. LNCS, vol. 7058, pp. 607–624. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Holzinger, A., Searle, G., Auinger, A., Ziefle, M.: Informatics as semiotics engineering: lessons learned from design, development and evaluation of ambient assisted living applications for elderly people. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) Universal Access in HCI, Part III, HCII 2011. LNCS, vol. 6767, pp. 183–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Beier, G.: Kontrollüberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik [Locus of control when interacting with technology]. Rep. Psychol. 24, 684–693 (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Woolham, J., Frisby, B.: Building a local infrastructure that supports the use of assistive technology in the care of people with dementia. Res. Policy Plann. 20(1), 11–24 (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cvrcek, D., Kumpost, M., Matyas, V., Danezis, G.: A study on the value of location privacy. In: Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, pp. 109–118. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wilkowska, W., Ziefle, M., Himmel, S.: Perceptions of personal privacy in smart home technologies: do user assessments vary depending on the research method? In: Tryfonas, T., Askoxylakis, I. (eds.) HAS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9190, pp. 592–603. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martina Ziefle
    • 1
    Email author
  • Philipp Brauner
    • 1
  • Julia van Heek
    • 1
  1. 1.Human-Computer Interaction CenterRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations