interactive furniture: evaluation of smart interactive textile interfaces for home environments

RWTH Aachen University, Human-Computer Interaction Center

Interactive FUrniTUREEvaluation of Interactive Textiles Interfaces

for Home Environments

Philipp Brauner0,1, Julia van Heek0,1, Martina Ziefle0,1

Nur Al-huda Hamdan0,2, Jan Borchers0,2

ACM ISS 2017 IN BRIGHTON, UK

Interactive Spaces and Surfaces

0 Human-Computer Interaction

Center at RWTH Aachen University1 Chair of Communication Science

RWTH Aachen University2 Chair for Media Informatics

RWTH Aachen University

Philipp Brauner, Julia van Heek, Martina Ziefle, Nur Al-huda

Hamdan, and Jan Borchers. 2017. Interactive FUrniTURE:

Evaluation of Smart Interactive Textile Interfaces for Home

Environments. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International

Conference on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces (ISS '17).

ACM, New York, NY, USA, 151-160.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3132272.3134128

https://doi.org/10.1145/3132272.3134128


Textiles as Part of Human History &

Computers in the 21st Century

■ Increased penetration of computing technology– Controllable light bulbs, smart heating

– Robotic vacuum cleaners

– Ubiquitous connectivity between devices

■ But: Current computing devices are…– Plastic, metal, or glass

– Stiff and cold

■ Humanity uses textiles for over 30,000 years– Perceived as warm, fashionable, pleasurable

– Various forms, materials, functions, sizes, colors

⇒ Intuitex:

Interdisciplinary project on interactive textiles

page 2

Interactive FUrniTURE — Evaluation of Smart Interactive Textile Interfaces

for Home Environments | ISS 2017, Brighton, UK

Internet of

Things


Interdisciplinary Team from Academia & Industry

Iterative and Human-centered Development Process

Engineering

Psychology Design

■ Iteration through different scenarios and demonstrators

■ Better understanding

– Sensing technologies & algorithms

– textile surfaces & embroidery patterns

– Perception of users’

■ Feedback integration & continuous improvement

– Respect peoples‘ wants and needs, wishes and fears

– Engineering

– Design & marketing

page 3




Three Areas of Interest and

Research Challenges

Extended areaNear field Surrounding space

e.g., Jacket e.g., Relaxing armchair e.g., Curtain

Challenges:

■ Reliable Gesture Detection

– Detect gestures & activation

– Prevent accidental activation

■ Discoverability, Learnability,

Acceptance

– Intuitive gestures

– Visual and haptic design

– Usability, User Experience

– Overall acceptance

page 4




Near Field:

Jacket

■ Integration in sleeves of jacket

■ Conductive yarn in inner layer

■ 2-dimensional Interface

– Rollable fold

– Different angles and sizes

■ Usable as an input device

– Media control

– Take phone calls

page 5




Surrounding Space:

Smart Curtain

■ Concept:

– Conductive yarn integrated into curtain fabric

(either embroidered or weaved)

– Gestures parallel to curtain movement

■ Experiment:

– Opening and closing the curtain

■ Results:

– High discoverability and learnability

– High ease of use

– Limited usefulnes (small demonstrator)

page 6




Extended Area:

Textile Interfaces for Furnitures

What drives peoples‘ acceptance?

page 7




Four interaction modes investigated…

■ Conductive yarn and sensors

integrated into textile surface

■ Two interaction areas:

– Stiched texture or fold

– Each representing chair‘s appearance

■ Two interaction modes:

– Touching or bending

– Stitched texture touchable

– Fold touchable or bendable

■ Current actions:

– Linked to motors of the armchair

(back/footrest up/down)

– Possible to link to smart home etc.

page 8




Evaluation of the Interfaces

What drives peoples‘ Acceptance?

■ Myriads evaluation criteria

− ISO 9142/10:

Efficiency, effectivity, satisfaction

− AttrakDiff, UEQ:

Hedonic and pragmatic qualities

− Technology Acceptace Model:

Usefulness, Ease of Use

Perceived

Usefulness

Perceived

Ease of Use

Usage

IntentionActual Use

Davis’ TAM

UX

Hedonic

quality

Pragmatic

quality

Efficiency

Attractiveness

NoveltyStimulation

PerspicuityDependability Schrepp et al. UEQ

page 9



Efficiency

Effectivity

Satisfaction

ISO 9241


Extended Environment

Study on Usability and Acceptance

■ Experiment in living room scenario

− Task: Relaxation!

− Move chair to relaxing positions

■ Explanatory variables:

− Age, Gender

− Attitude towards technology / textiles

■ Independent variable: Interaction mode (within-subj.)

■ Dependent variables (for each mode):

− Efficiency, Perspicuity, Dependability (from UXQ)

− Intention To Use (6pt scale)

■ Dependent variables (overall):

− Novelty, Stimulation, Attractiveness (from UXQ)

− Intention To Use (forced-choice)

page 10




Description of the Sample

■ 20 participants

− 10 male, 10 female; 23–60 years (M=33.0±9.7)

− 16 right handed, 2 left handed, 2 ambidextrous

− Rather educated

(90% bachelor‘s degree or higher)

■ Atttiudes and previous experiences

− High Attitude Towards Technology (M=80±15%)

− Neutral Attiude Towards Textiles (M=57±22%)

− No or limited experience with adj. reclinder

armchair and with remote control from study

− Obviously, high experience with remote controls

page 11




Results:

Quotes form the participants…

„I am used to the principle of a remote control – I‘ve known it for

years and thus, fast and efficient interaction is nothing

surprising.“

„The buttons of the remote control

are familiar, clear, and understand-

able.“

„Due to the fact that I am familiar

with a remote control, I can forsee the functions of

buttons and respective interactions.“

page 12



„It is a cold element“

„It is an ugly unappealing design“

„Then, you have to get up from the chair … if you

imagine older people, this is really a big problem.“


Results:

Quotes form the participants…

page 13



„I really like that I can feel directly what I

have to do — for me, it is

obvious that I have to bend the

fold up and down in order to

operate the chair‘s footrest.“

Bend the fold...

Touch the stitches...

„I rather prefer this less visible

design using only stitches and

not a fold.“

„I don‘t understand what I jave to do —

should I bend it?“

Touch the fold...

„The shape and arrangement of the

stitches imply how to control the chair“

Textile interface in general…


Evaluation of the four modes

■ Effect of Interaction Mode on all

Pragmatic Dimensions

– Efficiency [F3,17=4.392, p<.05]

– Perspicuity [F3,17=3.981, p<.05]

– Dependability [F3,17=2.972, p=.061, n.s.]

■ Ranking

1. Conventional remote control (highest)

2. Bend the fold

3. Touch stitches

4. Toching the fold (lowest)

⇒ Old, boring interface rated highest

but...

50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

plasticremotecontrol

touchingthefold

bendingthefold

touchingthestitches

Pragmaticqualitydimensionsofthearmchair

dependability perspicuity efficiency

page 14




Evaluation of the four interaction modes

■ Intention to Use from TAM (6pt Likert):

1. Bending fold highest

2. touching stitches

3. plastic remote

4. touching fold

■ Forced Choice:

– Touching fold and conventional remote (n=2)

– Bending fold and touching stitches (n=8)

⇒ Despite highest pragmatic evaluation,

conventional remote control was rated lowest

⇒ Toching the fold consistently rated low0 2 4 6 8 10

plasticremotecontrol

touchingthefold

bendingthefold

touchingthestitches

Numberofchoices(n=20)

Preferredinteractiondeviceafterexperiment(singlechoice)

page 15




Overall Evaluation of the Armchair

Links to Intention To Use

page 16



■ Limited influence of explanatory user factors

– Women report higher usage intention

– No further effects (but: small sample)

■ Interconnection of UEQ variables

– Pragmatic scales interconnected (ϱ>.633, p<.001)

– Hedonic scales less connected

– All positively linked to Intention To Use

■ What is most decisive for Intention To Use?

– MLR (r2=.460, 46%, β=.700)

– Attractiveness → ItU

(Attractiveness is key for acceptance)


Smart Interactive Textiles in Furnitures

Discussion and Conclusion

page 17



■ Integration of Interactive Textiles in furnitures possible

■ Textile interfaces prefered over conventional control

(despite lower pragmatic properties)

■ Overall User Experience and Acceptance determined by

hedonic properties, such as Attractiveness

■ Limitations

– Small sample, limited input & control space

– Part of evaluation for whole demonstrator


Funded by the Federal

Ministry of Education and

Research (#16SV6270).

Summary and Outlook

Thank you. Questions?

■ Smart Textiles next frontier of Ubiquitous Computing

■ Project Intuitex– Participatory, agile, multi-disciplinary, and multi-methodological

■ Smart armchair: Evaluation of four input modes(touch/bend fold, touch stiches, conventional)

– Textile integration very appreciated

■ Limitations– Small sample / limited input & control space

– Part of evaluation for whole demonstrator

■ Conclusions

– Hedonic aspects very important

– Iterative, agile development process lead to usable products

– Integration of users’ perspective vital for products’ success

Contact: Dr. Philipp Brauner

[email protected]

Human-Computer Interaction Center

RWTH Aachen University, Germany

page 18



Some graphics are a curtesy of BraunWagner