The following paper „Understanding and Evaluating User Centred Design in Wearable Expressions“ by Jeremiah Nugroho and Kirsty Beilharz from the University of Technology Sydney was presented at the 2010 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME). This paper describes the multi-dimensional design factors needed to create and evaluate what the authors define as „Wearable Expressions“.1
The authors differentiate between the following terms: Wearable Computing, Wearable Art, and Wearable Expression. According to the authors, Wearable Computing describes pocket-sized and portable computing systems that don’t necessarily have to be worn on the user’s body. These systems follow the principles of traditional screen-based desktop computing. Apart from that, the purpose of wearable art is mainly recognized as purely aesthetic, supported by technology. The authors introduce the term Wearable Expressions, which are the focus of their paper, defined as „smart gadgets or devices“ that users wear on their bodies and that contain “ certain computing intelligence“ to serve specific user tasks.
Given that this paper was written in 2010, at an early stage for consumer-ready wearable devices, it makes sense to sharpen the blurred lines between these terms to emphasize the focus on the user’s perspective rather than pure technology or art. Three years earlier, in 2007, Apple Inc. introduced the first iPhone as a wearable mobile device designed to fit in consumers‘ pockets.2 At the time, wearable technology was not as common as it is today.
Further the authors point out the lack of acceptance of wearable devices at the time. They cite the negative example of the Oakley THUMB Pro. At the time, these earphone-embedded sunglasses had several problems for users, such as low battery capacity and high market prices, as well as the common user habit of holding a phone to the ear. Issues such as cost, comfort, appearance, ergonomics, usability, and aesthetics had prevented the public from adopting new designs.
Compared to user habits and the industry’s technical capabilities in 2010, today’s device landscape is much more divers, which goes hand in hand with greater receptivity and adoption by potential users. Not only are products coming in more affordable price points, they are also becoming more trendy. One example is Bluetooth in-ear headphones, which seem to be the iconic everyday objects of the 2020s.
The authors state 12 shaping factors for wearable expressions:
- Size / dimensions
- Device positions
- Power source
- Heat
- Weight
- Durability / resistance
- Washability
- Enveloping / fabrication
- Functionality
- Usability
- Sensation
- Social connectivity
According to the authors, size, device position, power source, and weight are fundamental and highly interrelated factors. These aspects can affect the user’s comfort, appearance, perception, and interaction with the device. Therefore, designs should meet the user’s expectations and ergonomics in relation to their anatomy. Depending on the context of use, considerations such as whether a power source should be corded or cordless, as well as the overall weight of the device, strongly influence aspects such as mobility and muscular effort.
Compared to the past, best practices and standards seem to have been established. The authors already mentioned the wristwatch as one of the simplest attachments to the human body. Today, we see a range of smartwatches, fitness bands, health trackers, which are even implemented in their brand’s own technological ecosystem and communicate with each other. However, it seems that other forms of wearables, such as head-mounted displays or smart glasses, have not entered our everyday lives yet.
With the technological advances of the last 14 years, the mentioned issues of size, power source and weight of the hardware may not be a problem anymore. The possible range of functionality and features, both on the software and hardware side, seems to be less limited to a single device than it used to be. At the same time, today’s devices are more advanced than ever when it comes to durability and washability of hardware materials. As defined in the paper, these factors require design considerations for multi-contextual use, such as flexibility, absorbency (the body’s natural excretion), or heat distribution.
Instead, in relation to today’s technological possibilities, the focus of design must shift to the core of useful and user-centered concepts by ensuring the quality of usability, which is manifested, for example, in effortless navigation, and by reducing the total number of selected features. Higher relevance for users and their engagement can be achieved by truely enabling them to enhance their physical capabilities through the integration of sensations such as hearing or touch, on the one hand, and to connect with each other socially, on the other.
In summary, it is noticeable that this paper is at an early stage of research on consumer-ready wearable technology. This is not only because the authors emphasize that their research started with this paper and further steps are planned, but it is also recognizable when it comes to hardware issues preventing Wearable Expressions to be well designed, which we mainly do not need to face in the present time. Provided that the authors made a serious contribution to the state of the art at the time, it is important and right to start with a paper like this. Taking a position for a more human-centered approach at that time turned out to be groundbreaking for how technology should be designed today in an increasingly technological world. Some parts of this paper may be outdated, but other parts are still more important than ever.
Resources
- Jeremiah Nugroho, and Kirsty Beilharz. 2010. Understanding and Evaluating User Centred Design in Wearable Expressions. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1177867 ↩︎
- Wikipedia. (2024). Apple Inc. In Wikipedia. Retrieved April 20, 2024, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple ↩︎
