Social Acceptability in HCI: A Survey of Methods, Measures, and Design Strategies

With the increasing ubiquity of personal devices, social acceptability of human-machine interactions has gained relevance and growing interest from the HCI community. Yet, there are no best practices or established methods for evaluating social acceptability. Design strategies for increasing social acceptability have been described and employed, but so far not been holistically appraised and evaluated. We offer a systematic literature analysis (N=69) of social acceptability in HCI and contribute a better understanding of current research practices, namely, methods employed, measures and design strategies. Our review identified an unbalanced distribution of study approaches, shortcomings in employed measures, and a lack of interweaving between empirical and artifact-creating approaches. The latter causes a discrepancy between design recommendations based on user research, and design strategies employed in artifact creation. Our survey lays the groundwork for a more nuanced evaluation of social acceptability, the development of best practices, and a future research agenda.

[1]  J. Wobbrock,et al.  Research contributions in human-computer interaction , 2016, Interactions.

[2]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Gesture and voice prototyping for early evaluations of social acceptability in multimodal interfaces , 2010, ICMI-MLMI '10.

[3]  Jesper Kjeldskov,et al.  A longitudinal review of Mobile HCI research methods , 2012, Mobile HCI.

[4]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Usable gestures for mobile interfaces: evaluating social acceptability , 2010, CHI.

[5]  Suranga Nanayakkara,et al.  EyeRing: a finger-worn input device for seamless interactions with our surroundings , 2013, AH.

[6]  Daniel Pohl,et al.  See what I see: Concepts to improve the social acceptance of HMDs , 2016, 2016 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR).

[7]  Allison Druin,et al.  Technology probes: inspiring design for and with families , 2003, CHI '03.

[8]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior , 2000, MIS Q..

[9]  Tovi Grossman,et al.  Candid Interaction: Revealing Hidden Mobile and Wearable Computing Activities , 2015, UIST.

[10]  Roderick Murray-Smith,et al.  The GAIME project: gestural and auditory interactions for mobile environments , 2009 .

[11]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Multimodal mobile interactions: usability studies in real world settings , 2011, ICMI '11.

[12]  Jun Rekimoto,et al.  GestureWrist and GesturePad: unobtrusive wearable interaction devices , 2001, Proceedings Fifth International Symposium on Wearable Computers.

[13]  Khubaib Amjad Alam,et al.  Measuring the Impact of Changing Technology in Mobile Phones on User Device Interaction Based on a Qualitative Survey , 2017, ICEEG 2017.

[14]  Raja S. Kushalnagar,et al.  “Wear It Loud” , 2018, ACM Trans. Access. Comput..

[15]  Barry A. T. Brown,et al.  Into the wild: challenges and opportunities for field trial methods , 2011, CHI.

[16]  Jonna Häkkilä,et al.  Design probes study on user perceptions of a smart glasses concept , 2015, MUM.

[17]  Tong Lu,et al.  iSkin: Flexible, Stretchable and Visually Customizable On-Body Touch Sensors for Mobile Computing , 2015, CHI.

[18]  Anders Bruun,et al.  Converging coolness and investigating its relation to user experience , 2017, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[19]  Steve Benford,et al.  Designing the spectator experience , 2005, CHI.

[20]  Apu Kapadia,et al.  Up to a Limit? , 2018, Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol..

[21]  Andrea Bunt,et al.  Performer vs. observer: whose comfort level should we consider when examining the social acceptability of input modalities for head-worn display? , 2018, VRST.

[22]  Tuuli Turja,et al.  Social Acceptance of Robots in Different Occupational Fields: A Systematic Literature Review , 2018, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[23]  Jon Froehlich,et al.  Investigating Microinteractions for People with Visual Impairments and the Potential Role of On-Body Interaction , 2017, ASSETS.

[24]  Marcos Serrano,et al.  Exploring the use of hand-to-face input for interacting with head-worn displays , 2014, CHI.

[25]  Stephen B. Gilbert,et al.  The WEAR Scale: Developing a Measure of the Social Acceptability of a Wearable Device , 2016, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[26]  Zhihan Lv,et al.  Touch-less interactive augmented reality game on vision-based wearable device , 2015, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[27]  Woohun Lee,et al.  One-key keyboard: a very small QWERTY keyboard supporting text entry for wearable computing , 2006, OZCHI '06.

[28]  Andrew Tokmakoff,et al.  Designing socially acceptable multimodal interaction in cooking assistants , 2011, IUI '11.

[29]  Andrés Lucero,et al.  NotifEye: using interactive glasses to deal with notifications while walking in public , 2014, Advances in Computer Entertainment.

[30]  B. Shneiderman,et al.  Social impact statements: engaging public participation in information technology design , 1996, CQL '96.

[31]  Bruce H. Thomas,et al.  Social weight: designing to minimise the social consequences arising from technology use by the mobile professional , 2003, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[32]  M. Guha APA Dictionary of Psychology , 2007 .

[33]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Capturing "cool": Measures for assessing coolness of technological products , 2014, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[34]  Maya Cakmak,et al.  Enabling building service robots to guide blind people a participatory design approach , 2016, 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[35]  Jesper Kjeldskov,et al.  Was it worth the hassle?: ten years of mobile HCI research discussions on lab and field evaluations , 2014, MobileHCI '14.

[36]  J. Russell,et al.  An approach to environmental psychology , 1974 .

[37]  Harry Hochheiser,et al.  Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Edition , 2017 .

[38]  Halley Profita,et al.  The AT Effect: How Disability Affects the Perceived Social Acceptability of Head-Mounted Display Use , 2016, CHI.

[39]  Björn J. E. Johansson,et al.  Acceptance of augmented reality instructions in a real work setting , 2008, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[40]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Gestures all around us: user differences in social acceptability perceptions of gesture based interfaces , 2009, Mobile HCI.

[41]  Niels Henze,et al.  Virtual reality on the go?: a study on social acceptance of VR glasses , 2018, MobileHCI Adjunct.

[42]  Lucy E. Dunne,et al.  The social comfort of wearable technology and gestural interaction , 2014, 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[43]  E. Goffman The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[44]  E. Thompson Development and Validation of an Internationally Reliable Short-Form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) , 2007 .

[45]  Markus Funk,et al.  Look, a guidance drone! Assessing the Social Acceptability of Companion Drones for Blind Travelers in Public Spaces , 2018, ASSETS.

[46]  Hsin-Liu (Cindy) Kao,et al.  Understanding social perceptions towards interacting with on-skin interfaces in public , 2019, UbiComp.

[47]  Andrea Bunt,et al.  Crowdsourcing vs Laboratory-Style Social Acceptability Studies?: Examining the Social Acceptability of Spatial User Interactions for Head-Worn Displays , 2018, CHI.

[48]  Brad A. Myers,et al.  Maximizing the guessability of symbolic input , 2005, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[49]  Anders Bruun,et al.  Measuring the coolness of interactive products: the COOL questionnaire , 2016, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[50]  Colin M. Gray "It's More of a Mindset Than a Method": UX Practitioners' Conception of Design Methods , 2016, CHI.

[51]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Towards usable and acceptable above-device interactions , 2014, MobileHCI '14.

[52]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Why It's Worth the Hassle: The Value of In-Situ Studies When Designing Ubicomp , 2007, UbiComp.

[53]  Wan Ling Chang,et al.  Steps Toward Participatory Design of Social Robots: Mutual Learning with Older Adults with Depression , 2017, 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI.

[54]  I Dexter,et al.  Worth the hassle. , 1995, Nursing times.

[55]  Jürgen Steimle,et al.  More than touch: understanding how people use skin as an input surface for mobile computing , 2014, CHI.

[56]  Mike Y. Chen,et al.  PalmType: Using Palms as Keyboards for Smart Glasses , 2015, MobileHCI.

[57]  Paul Dourish,et al.  How emotion is made and measured , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[58]  Julie Rico Williamson,et al.  User experience, performance, and social acceptability : usable multimodal mobile interaction , 2012 .

[59]  Sang Ho Yoon,et al.  TIMMi: Finger-worn Textile Input Device with Multimodal Sensing in Mobile Interaction , 2015, TEI.

[60]  Julian Frommel,et al.  2084 -- Safe New World: Designing Ubiquitous Interactions , 2016, CHI PLAY.

[61]  Theodore Kunin The Construction of a New Type of Attitude Measure , 1955 .

[62]  Stephen Lindsay,et al.  Cueing for drooling in Parkinson's disease , 2011, CHI.

[63]  Ian Oakley,et al.  Designing Socially Acceptable Hand-to-Face Input , 2018, UIST.

[64]  Scott W. Campbell Perceptions of Mobile Phone Use in Public Settings: A Cross-Cultural Comparison , 2007 .

[65]  Zhihan Lv,et al.  Finger in air: touch-less interaction on smartphone , 2013, MUM.

[66]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  Evaluating capacitive touch input on clothes , 2008, Mobile HCI.

[67]  Susanne Boll,et al.  Beyond LED Status Lights - Design Requirements of Privacy Notices for Body-worn Cameras , 2018, TEI.

[68]  Alan Borning,et al.  Next steps for value sensitive design , 2012, CHI.

[69]  James T. Miller,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[70]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  The Experience Sampling Method , 2014 .

[71]  Torben Wallbaum,et al.  Evaluating a Wearable Camera's Social Acceptability In-the-Wild , 2019, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[72]  Jesper Kjeldskov,et al.  Cross-device interaction with large displays in public: insights from both users' and observers' perspectives , 2017, OZCHI.

[73]  Nabil Alshurafa,et al.  I Can't Be Myself , 2018, Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol..

[74]  Antti Jylhä,et al.  Designing a Willing-to-Use-in-Public Hand Gestural Interaction Technique for Smart Glasses , 2016, CHI.

[75]  Alexandre N. Tuch,et al.  Does Herzberg's Notion of Hygienes and Motivators Apply to User Experience? , 2015, ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact..

[76]  Michael Rohs,et al.  ShoeSense: a new perspective on gestural interaction and wearable applications , 2012, CHI.

[77]  Michael Burmester,et al.  Hedonic and ergonomic quality aspects determine a software's appeal , 2000, CHI.

[78]  Pourang Irani,et al.  Are you comfortable doing that?: acceptance studies of around-device gestures in and for public settings , 2014, MobileHCI '14.

[79]  Daniel Vogel,et al.  Cito: An Actuated Smartwatch for Extended Interactions , 2017, CHI.

[80]  Susanne Boll,et al.  Your smart glasses' camera bothers me!: exploring opt-in and opt-out gestures for privacy mediation , 2018, NordiCHI.

[81]  Jennifer Pearson,et al.  It's About Time: Smartwatches as Public Displays , 2015, CHI.

[82]  Michael Burmester,et al.  Not Just About the User: Acceptance of Speech Interaction in Public Spaces , 2019, Mensch & Computer.

[83]  Christian Holz,et al.  Glabella: Continuously Sensing Blood Pressure Behavior using an Unobtrusive Wearable Device , 2017, Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol..

[84]  Ellen Yi-Luen Do,et al.  Don't mind me touching my wrist: a case study of interacting with on-body technology in public , 2013, ISWC '13.

[85]  Nikolaus Correll,et al.  Flutter: An Exploration of an Assistive Garment Using Distributed Sensing, Computation and Actuation , 2015, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[86]  R. Likert “Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes, A” , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[87]  Eric Paulos,et al.  HäirIÖ: Human Hair as Interactive Material , 2018, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[88]  Graham J Hole,et al.  How to Design and Report Experiments , 2002 .

[89]  Susanne Boll,et al.  Are you hiding it?: usage habits of lifelogging camera wearers , 2017, MobileHCI.

[90]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Charting Subtle Interaction in the HCI Literature , 2019, CHI.

[91]  Kai Kunze,et al.  Facial Expression Recognition in Daily Life by Embedded Photo Reflective Sensors on Smart Eyewear , 2016, IUI.

[92]  William W. Gaver,et al.  Design: Cultural probes , 1999, INTR.

[93]  Halley P. Profita,et al.  Designing wearable computing technology for acceptability and accessibility , 2016, ACM SIGACCESS Access. Comput..

[94]  Jan O. Borchers,et al.  Pinstripe: eyes-free continuous input on interactive clothing , 2011, CHI.

[95]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Mo!Games: evaluating mobile gestures in the wild , 2013, ICMI '13.

[96]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[97]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  User experience (UX): towards an experiential perspective on product quality , 2008, IHM '08.

[98]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[99]  Sarah Parker,et al.  Why are mobile phones annoying? , 2004, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[100]  Ying-Chao Tung,et al.  User-Defined Game Input for Smart Glasses in Public Space , 2015, CHI.

[101]  Niels Henze,et al.  Understanding the Social Acceptability of Mobile Devices using the Stereotype Content Model , 2019, CHI.

[102]  Wilko Heuten,et al.  All about Acceptability?: Identifying Factors for the Adoption of Data Glasses , 2017, CHI.

[103]  Keyur Sorathia,et al.  A Study for Investigating Suitable Gesture Based Selection for Gestural User Interfaces , 2015, IndiaHCI.

[104]  Schubert Foo,et al.  Ubiquitous shortcuts: mnemonics by just taking photos , 2013, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[105]  Enrico Costanza,et al.  Toward subtle intimate interfaces for mobile devices using an EMG controller , 2005, CHI.

[106]  Matthai Philipose,et al.  Courteous glass , 2014, UbiComp Adjunct.

[107]  Jacob O. Wobbrock,et al.  In the shadow of misperception: assistive technology use and social interactions , 2011, CHI.

[108]  Virpi Roto,et al.  User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs , 2010, NordiCHI.

[109]  Susanne Boll,et al.  (Un)Acceptable!?!: Re-thinking the Social Acceptability of Emerging Technologies , 2018, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[110]  Julie R. Williamson,et al.  PlaneVR: Social Acceptability of Virtual Reality for Aeroplane Passengers , 2019, CHI.

[111]  Yuta Sugiura,et al.  SenSkin: adapting skin as a soft interface , 2013, UIST.

[112]  Andreas Butz,et al.  Empowerment in HCI - A Survey and Framework , 2018, CHI.

[113]  Marion Koelle,et al.  Don't look at me that way!: Understanding User Attitudes Towards Data Glasses Usage , 2015, MobileHCI.

[114]  Dennis F. Galletta,et al.  Extending the technology acceptance model to account for social influence: theoretical bases and empirical validation , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[115]  Sandra G. Hart,et al.  Nasa-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 Years Later , 2006 .

[116]  Uran Oh,et al.  Design of and subjective response to on-body input for people with visual impairments , 2014, ASSETS.

[117]  Kamer Ali Yüksel,et al.  Designing mobile phones using silent speech input and auditory feedback , 2011, Mobile HCI.

[118]  Kiyoshi Murata,et al.  From a science fiction to reality: cyborg ethics in Japan , 2017, CSOC.

[119]  Fred D. Davis A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[120]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  The Interplay of Beauty, Goodness, and Usability in Interactive Products , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[121]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Technology Acceptance and User Experience , 2017, ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact..

[122]  Pattie Maes,et al.  eye-q: eyeglass peripheral display for subtle intimate notifications , 2006, Mobile HCI.

[123]  Tuan Q. Tran,et al.  Attractive phones don't have to work better: independent effects of attractiveness, effectiveness, and efficiency on perceived usability , 2010, CHI.

[124]  Alexa T. McCray,et al.  Principles for digital library development , 2001, CACM.

[125]  Hirotaka Osawa,et al.  iRing: intelligent ring using infrared reflection , 2012, UIST.

[126]  Tsutomu Terada,et al.  Designing gestures for hands and feet in daily life , 2011, MoMM '11.

[127]  Mitchell Harrop,et al.  Paradigms of games research in HCI: a review of 10 years of research at CHI , 2014, CHI PLAY.

[128]  Lars Botin,et al.  Context of use affects the social acceptability of gesture interaction , 2018, NordiCHI.

[129]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges , 2006, NordiCHI '06.

[130]  Sriram Subramanian,et al.  Would you do that?: understanding social acceptance of gestural interfaces , 2010, Mobile HCI.

[131]  M. Bradley,et al.  Measuring emotion: the Self-Assessment Manikin and the Semantic Differential. , 1994, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[132]  Julie Rico Williamson Send me bubbles: multimodal performance and social acceptability , 2011, CHI EA '11.

[133]  Jonna Häkkilä,et al.  Tap input as an embedded interaction method for mobile devices , 2007, TEI.

[134]  Tovi Grossman,et al.  Supporting Subtlety with Deceptive Devices and Illusory Interactions , 2015, CHI.