Technology Acceptance of Augmented Reality and Wearable Technologies

Augmented Reality and Wearables are the recent media and computing technologies, similar, but different from established technologies, even mobile computing and virtual reality. Numerous proposals for measuring technology acceptance exist, but have not been applied, nor fine-tuned to such new technology so far. Within this contribution, we enhance these existing instruments with the special needs required for measuring technology acceptance of Augmented Reality and Wearable Technologies and we validate the new instrument with participants from three pilot areas in industry, namely aviation, medicine, and space. Findings of such baseline indicate that respondents in these pilot areas generally enjoy and look forward to using these technologies, for being intuitive and easy to learn to use. The respondents currently do not receive much support, but like working with them without feeling addicted. The technologies are still seen as forerunner tools, with some fear of problems of integration with existing systems or vendor-lock. Privacy and security aspects surprisingly seem not to matter, possibly overshadowed by expected productivity increase, increase in precision, and better feedback on task completion. More participants have experience with AR than not, but only few on a regular basis.

[1]  Alexander Brem,et al.  Who will buy smart glasses? Empirical results of two pre-market-entry studies on the role of personality in individual awareness and intended adoption of Google Glass wearables , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[2]  Fridolin Wild,et al.  The GhostHands UX: telementoring with hands-on augmented reality instruction , 2015, Intelligent Environments.

[3]  Virpi Roto,et al.  Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: a survey approach , 2009, CHI.

[4]  Jens Grubert,et al.  Augmented reality browsers: essential products or only gadgets? , 2013, CACM.

[5]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology , 2012, MIS Q..

[6]  Kaisa Väänänen,et al.  Expected user experience of mobile augmented reality services: a user study in the context of shopping centres , 2011, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[7]  Heidi Krömker,et al.  A framework to measure user experience of interactive online products , 2010, MB '10.

[8]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[9]  I. Ajzen The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[10]  Fridolin Wild,et al.  A Multidimensional Evaluation Framework for Personal Learning Environments , 2015 .

[11]  Timothy Teo,et al.  Explaining the Intention to Use Technology among Student Teachers: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) , 2010 .

[12]  Virpi Roto,et al.  Tracing links between UX frameworks and design practices: dual carriageway , 2014 .

[13]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions , 2008, Decis. Sci..