Tamara Denning
ABSTRACT
Augmented reality (AR) devices are poised to enter the market. It is unclear how the properties of these devices will affect individuals' privacy. In this study, we investigate the privacy perspectives of individuals when they are bystanders around AR devices. We conducted 12 field sessions in cafés and interviewed 31 bystanders regarding their reactions to a co-located AR device. Participants were predominantly split between having indifferent and negative reactions to the device. Participants who expressed that AR devices change the bystander experience attributed this difference to subtleness, ease of recording, and the technology's lack of prevalence. Additionally, participants surfaced a variety of factors that make recording more or less acceptable, including what they are doing when the recording is being taken. Participants expressed interest in being asked permission before being recorded and in recording-blocking devices. We use the interview results to guide an exploration of design directions for privacy-mediating technologies.
- Abowd, G. D., Hayes, G. R., Iachello, G., Kientz, J. A., Patel, S. N., Stevens, M. M., and Truong, K. N. Prototypes and Paratypes: Designing Mobile and Ubiquitous Computing Applications. IEEE Pervasive Computing 4, 4 (2005). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Adams, A. Multimedia Information Changes the Whole Privacy Ballgame. In Proc. Computers, Freedom and Privacy 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bailey, J. and Kerr, I. Seizing Control : The Experience Capture Experiments of Ringley & Mann. Ethics and Information Technology 9, 2 (2007). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barhm, M. S., Qwasmi, N., Qureshi, F. Z., and el-Khatib, K. Negotiating Privacy Preferences in Video Surveillance Systems. In Proc. Modern Approaches in Applied Intelligence 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bell, M. and Lovich, V. US Patent: 8254902 Apparatus and Methods for Enforcement of Policies Upon a Wireless Device. 2012.Google Scholar
- Bellotti, V. and Sellen, A. Design for Privacy in Ubiquitous Computing Environments. In Proc. CSCW 1993. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Besmer, A. and Lipford, H. R. Moving Beyond Untagging: Photo Privacy in a Tagged World. In Proc. CHI 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brassil, J. Technical Challenges in Location-Aware Video Surveillance Privacy. In Protecting Privacy in Video Surveillance, 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brocker, M. and Checkoway, S. iSeeYou: Disabling the MacBook Webcam Indicator LED. Dept. of Computer Science, John Hopkins University. Technical Report 13-02. 2013.Google Scholar
- Cheng, W. C., Golubchik, L., and Kay, D. G. Total Recall: Are Privacy Changes Inevitable' In Proc. CARPE 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Choe, E. K., Consolvo, S., Jung, J., Harrison, B., Patel, S. N., and Kientz, J. A. Investigating Receptiveness to Sensing and Inference in the Home Using Sensor Proxies. In Proc. UbiComp 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Jr., Hagman, J., Severson, R. L., and Gill, B. The Watcher and the Watched: Social Judgments about Privacy in a Public Place. HumanComputer Interaction 21, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self. Life as Theater: A Dramaturgical Sourcebook (2nd ed.), 2006.Google Scholar
- Google. Glass. http://www.google.com/glass/.Google Scholar
- Halderman, J. A., Waters, B. and Felten, E. W. Privacy Management for Portable Recording Devices. In Proc. WPES 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Harrison, S. and Dourish, P. Re-Place-ing Space: The Roles of Place and Space in Collaborative Systems. In Proc. CSCW 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Henne, B. Szongott, C. and Smith, M. SnapMe if You Can: Privacy Threats of Other Peoples' Geo-Tagged Media and What We Can Do About It. In Proc. WiSec 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Iachello, G., Truong, K. N., Abowd, G. D., Hayes, G. R. and Stevens, M. Prototyping and Sampling Experience to Evaluate Ubiquitous Computing Privacy in the Real World. In Proc. CHI 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., and Stone, A. A. A Survey Method for Characterizing Daily Life Experience: The Day Reconstruction Method. Science 306, 5702 (2004).Google Scholar
- Mancini, C., Rogers, Y., Bandara, A. K., Coe, T., Jedrzejczyk, L., Joinson, A. N., Price, B. A., Thomas, K., and Nuseibeh, B. Contravision: Exploring Users' Reactions to Futuristic Technology. In Proc. CHI 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mann, S. and Ferenbok, J. New Media and the Power Politics of Sousveillance in a Surveillance-Dominated World. Surveillance & Society 11, 1/2 (2013).Google Scholar
- Manweiler, J., Scudellari, R., Cancio, Z., and Cox, L. P. We Saw Each Other on the Subway: Secure, Anonymous Proximity-Based Missed Connections. In Proc. HotMobile 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Massimi, M., Truong, K. N., Dearman, D., and Hayes, G. R. Understanding Recording Technologies in Everyday Life. IEEE Pervasive Computing 9, 3 (2010). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Meta. SpaceGlasses. https://www.spaceglasses.com/.Google Scholar
- Nguyen, D. H., Bedford, A., Bretana, A. G., and Hayes, G. R. Situating the Concern for Information Privacy Through an Empirical Study of Responses to Video Recording. In Proc. CHI 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nguyen, D. H., Marcu, G., Hayes, G. R., Truong, K. N., Scott, J., Langheinrich, M., and Roduner, C. Encountering SenseCam: Personal Recording Technologies in Everyday Life. In Proc. Ubicomp 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Palen, L., Salzman, M., and Youngs, E. Going Wireless: Behavior & Practice of New Mobile Phone Users. In Proc. CSCW 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patel, S. N., Summet, J. W., and Truong, K. N. BlindSpot: Creating Capture-Resistant Spaces. In Protecting Privacy in Video Surveillance, 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schiff, J., Meingast, M., Mulligan, D. K., Sastry, S., and Goldberg, K. Respectful Cameras: Detecting Visual Markers in Real-Time to Address Privacy Concerns. In Protecting Privacy in Video Surveillance, 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., and Burke, S. J. Information Privacy: Measuring Individuals' Concerns about Organizational Practices. MIS Quarterly 20, 2 (1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Squicciarini, A. C., Xu, H., and Zhang, X. CoPE: Enabling Collaborative Privacy Management in Online Social Networks. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 62, 3 (2011). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Starner, T., Mann, S., Rhodes, B., et al. Augmented Reality Through Wearable Computing, 1997.Google Scholar
- Technical Illusions. CastAR. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/technicalillusions/castar-the-most-versatile-ar-and-vr-system.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- In situ with bystanders of augmented reality glasses: perspectives on recording and privacy-mediating technologies
Recommendations
Privacy-Enhancing Technology and Everyday Augmented Reality: Understanding Bystanders' Varying Needs for Awareness and Consent
Fundamental to Augmented Reality (AR) headsets is their capacity to visually and aurally sense the world around them, necessary to drive the positional tracking that makes rendering 3D spatial content possible. This requisite sensing also opens the door ...
Using Augmented Reality to Treat Phobias
Exposure in vivo and VR therapies have proven to be effective in the treatment of different psychological disorders such as acrophobia, claustrophobia, or phobia to small animals; however until now augmented reality (AR) has not been used in these ...
Exploring Expressive Augmented Reality: The FingAR Puppet System for Social Pretend Play
CHI '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWe present "FingAR Puppet", an Augmented Reality (AR) system enhancing social pretend play by young children. Unlike goal-oriented AR systems that augment reality with informative instructions, FingAR Puppet helps children associate expressive ...
Comments