Keywords

1 Introduction

Recently, a new trend in digital media technologies typified as wearable technologies (hereafter: wearables), including iWatch, Fitbit, and Pebble, has received a great deal of attention in the digital media industry. Prior research has found that the proliferation of diverse wearables affects the ways in which people communicate with others and view the world [2, 4]. Some scholars argue that these wearables will significantly change our perception of body awareness by providing hands-free features, ubiquitous computing, and real-time biofeedback [2]. Despite the increasing scholarly and industrial focus on novel user experiences enabled by wearables, few empirical studies have been conducted to investigate the interactions between the human body and the technologies attached to it. Our knowledge about how the specific technological functions of wearables influence our body concept remains limited. This research thus seeks to shed light on emerging issues regarding the influences of wearables on body awareness from a body-tool relationship perspective.

2 Literature Review

2.1 The Body–Tool Relationship

In the present study, the body–tool relationship is framed using Heidegger’s philosophical illumination of the “disappearance of a tool”: when people skillfully manipulate a tool, that tool disappears from their perception during use, which makes them more focused on the task rather than the tool [5, 8]. In this study, “disappearance of a tool” refers to the extent to which a tool becomes an extension of the human body, disappearing from them in their perception [1]. Unlike unwearable technologies, such as computers and hand-held devices, the most distinctive characteristic of wearables is their close proximity to the body, which can make users unconsciously forget their existence. Even though users perceive wearables as having disappeared, they still receive informational feedback that introduces real-time computation to the body. However, when the tool fails to function as expected, it re-appears as an object in people’s perception. Hence, it is important to understand how people perceive breakdown when using wearables.

  • RQ1: How does the use of wearable technologies influence the body-tool relationship?

2.2 Body Awareness and Wearable Technologies

Leder argues that our bodies experience a “disappearance” from our perception [6]. For example, we gaze at the world, but we rarely notice the existence of our own eyes until we experience pain in them [6]. In light of Leder’s notion, body awareness can be defined as the reflection of the body’s condition, here used to explore how the use of wearables influences this “awareness.” Scholars assert that wearables will significantly change our perceptions of our bodies because we are reminded of our bodily state through reviewing the information the wearables record [2]. In this research, body awareness refers to humans’ perception of bodily states, processes, and actions [7]. Given that users’ body awareness could be influenced by interacting with wearables [8], it is important to understand the specific functions of wearables and their roles in shaping users’ body awareness.

  • RQ2: How do specific technological functions of wearable technologies influence body awareness?

3 Methods

This study employs a qualitative approach to answer the questions. In-depth interviews were used to ascertain participants’ experience of using wearables. At the preliminary stage, 10 users of wearable technologies who were using different kinds of wearable devices for fitness (e.g., iWatch, Fitbit, Pebble, Misfit Shine, and Mi Band) were recruited as interviewees. The rationale for the inclusion of diverse wearables was to generate a comprehensive understanding of user experience. All of the interviewees were members of an online wearable technologies forum (age range: 20–30 years old). Interviews with participants were conducted individually using online chat software with audio chat function, Tencent QQ, which is similar to Skype. Each interview lasted for approximately 30 min. All of the interviewees were active users who used wearables daily and for almost 24 h per day. They had an average of more than six months of user experience.

4 Findings

4.1 Perceptual Properties and Body–Tool Relationship

A perceptual property refers to how humans sense artifacts using bodily sensory systems [3]. Based on the interviews, we extracted four perceptual properties of wearables that influenced users’ perception of the body–tool relationship.

Materials. Participants indicated that the materials used to make wearables, such as mental, silicon rubber, and fluoroelastomer, influenced their perception of the body–tool relationship. For example, participant A stated the following: “Sometimes I forget that I am wearing the device. However, I develop skin allergies after wearing the device for a long time because of the materials used to make it. Then my attention will be drawn by the wearable device.” Participant G added, “You won’t intentionally notice the existence of the device when you are using it. It is part of the body, and it is very comfortable to wear. But I still remember that one time it caused an allergy on my left wrist, so I had to move it to my right wrist.”

Weight. Participants emphasized that the weight of the wearable was important in eliciting the disappearance experience. Participant E stated the following: “I treat [my] wearable device as my extended body, especially when I use Fitbit Flex. As it is very light, most of the time I don’t realize I am wearing it. However, it is very powerful in providing body information.” On the contrary, participant H reported the following: “Fitbit Surge is too heavy and too big to be forgotten, especially when I am wearing clothes that have tight sleeves. I feel uncomfortable during the night and sometimes it disturbs my sleep. Thus, I don’t think it is a part of my body.”

Battery life. The interview results implied that battery life affected whether the users perceived wearables as disappearing. Participant D explained this: “When I need to recharge my wearable, I treat it as an object rather than a part of my body.” Participant J added, “The battery of Jawbone Up is short and the charging method is stupid: I have to use an audio cable. It is so inconvenient that I never consider it as disappearing. However, I do not need to charge Misfit Shine for several months because the battery life is very long. It is also waterproof. I wear it every day for 24 h and I don’t feel it. It disappears. I feel that it is like a part of my own body.”

Vibration. Vibration also influenced users’ perception of the body–tool relationship. Participant I explained this: “Well, our own organs will not vibrate, so when the device starts to vibrate, it attracts my attention and I do not consider it as my body.” Participant J added, “Vibration of wearables seems like a reminder that enables your communication with your body and forms an information loop. Although it makes you realize the existence of the tool, you still feel it is powerful, like a cyborg plug-in that extends your abilities.”

4.2 Motor-Activity Properties and Body Awareness

A motor activity property is defined as what humans do with their bodies in order to interact with an artifact [3]. Based on the interview results, we identified three motor activity properties that affected users’ body awareness.

Monitoring. Monitoring functions of wearables enhanced the users’ body awareness. Participant G stated the following: “The heart rate monitoring function is quite useful. I was sick one time; however, I didn’t realize that I was running a low-grade fever until I found that my heart rate was abnormal, which was 180 times/min from the data on the wearable device.” Participant B added, “Wearables can record my sleep quality in detail. For instance, it provides information about how many times I have woken up or turned over as well as the length of deep sleep time. I have never learned about these data before. Being aware of the above-mentioned data totally changes my understanding and my behavior about my own body.” Participant C remarked, “I think the most useful function is heart rate monitoring, which helps me to learn about the physical changes of my body. Previously, when I was running, sometimes I felt that my heart was uncomfortable. Since I started using the wearable device, I was able to better control my exercise intensity based on my heart rate.”

Tracking. Activity-tracking functions also enhanced their body awareness. Participant E said, “Previously, it took five minutes for me to run one kilometer. I felt extremely uncomfortable during running. After using the wearable device, I set up a lot of plans for exercise. I have improved my vital capacity, physical stamina and running speed (as shown by the wearable device data). Wearable devices are able to record my activities during a long period and display the data with a tendency chart. Given the improvement of my body condition, which is implied by the data, I am motivated to continue exercising in order to sustain the condition.” Participant I added, “The activity-tracking function of wearable devices is very useful because it helps to record users’ activities over a long period of time. It is difficult for us to memorize our activities one month ago, or even one week ago. Wearable devices store all of our data, which is accessible whenever and wherever we like. It makes us learn more about our bodies in the long term.”

Real-time feedback. Our findings implied that real-time feedback enhanced users’ body awareness. Participant A said, “I can receive real-time feedback from my body, informing me of how many miles I have walked or run and how many calories I have burned. The more I know about my own body, the more I want to set up a goal to maintain a healthy lifestyle.” Participant D added, “It is very helpful when my iWatch recommends some activity to me, which reminds me of my body condition. Normally, I would follow the recommendation and do some exercise, such as standing for a while.” Participant B remarked, “I feel very happy when I receive real-time feedback about achieving a specific goal (e.g., competing 10,000 steps per day). It seems like I am healthier than before.”

To sum up, our findings indicate that perceptual and motor activity properties need to be considered when designing a wearable in order to provide an enhanced user experience.