Abstract
Devices which automate or assist the completion of household tasks are increasingly incorporated into American homes, contributing to a growing Internet of Things (IoT). Many of these technologies intend to improve the quality of life of the users, through time-saving or effort-reducing features. Yet whether or not this improvement is actually achieved upon introduction of the device into the home is widely debated among economists and sociologists who study the topic. This misalignment between engineers’ design intentions and customers’ actual use and interpretation of home technology is a critical gap; engineering success in this domain isn’t just a measure of technological novelty, but agreement with the user’s desires. This body of work investigates and implements home technology which attempts to improve the quality of life of its user, illuminating how shared technological understanding across both engineers and consumers is critical to achieve this end.
The technical portion of my thesis produced the Garden Guard - a garden management device which measured soil conditions, deterred animals, and transmitted such information to the user’s home up to a mile away. The device is designed with the intention of helping the user, in a way that does not automate the gardening experience, but is in support of the gardener’s efforts. Users still check on, feed and water their plants, but can avoid animal destruction and have knowledge about the conditions of their garden at all times. This is a conscious design choice, as gardeners report enjoyment and mental health benefits while completing these tasks, noting pest destruction as a central detriment to their satisfaction. In this way, the Garden Guard reflects a user-centered design approach when building home technologies.
In my STS research, I explore the development of iRobot’s Roomba, a robotic vacuum, and how technological understanding differs between the company and users. Using a Social Construct of Technology (SCOT) analysis, I find that the original iteration of the product had reasonable alignment between the intended and actual user experience, resulting in the device’s popularity. However, as time passed, iterations no longer met user’s desires, with the company’s prioritization of novel features and advanced smart home integration rather than solutions to ongoing issues such as cliff detection. Ultimately, the declining popularity of the Roomba and bankruptcy of iRobot illustrate how gaps between designer and user understanding can result in poor outcomes for both producers and consumers of home technology.
Prior work demonstrates that introducing home technologies will likely not reduce work, but rather change it. As home technologies become more advanced, especially those that attempt task automation through AI, design philosophy needs to be more sensitive than ever to user desires. In a world where human action is replaceable, it is critical that we do not encroach on what humans want to do.
