Smart Home User Perception in Canada: National Cross-Sectional Survey (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Smart Home Technology (SHT) encompasses Internet-connected interfaces, sensors, monitors, devices, and appliances, which are networked together to allow for automation as well as control of the home environment. They can facilitate tasks such as taking medication or send emergency fall alerts. However, their widespread use comes with concerns of power imbalances between users, technology companies, marketers, state actors, and others regarding data collection, its use and disclosure, as well as security issues such as the potential for data breaches. Despite this, little is known about how Canadians perceive and understand their SHTs. Given Canada’s unique demographic diversity and distinct context, examining Canadian perspectives is necessary to advancing this body of research. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This paper explores user perceptions of SHTs in Canada with a focus on four themes: privacy, purpose of data collection, risks and benefits, and safety. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> An online cross-sectional survey was conducted between March 7 – April 24, 2023 across Canada to collect self-reported demographic information and perceptions around the four aforementioned themes through multiple-choice and optional short response questions. The quantitative data was exported into SPSS and Python programming language for further analysis. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Survey data from a total of 881 SHT users was analysed. The presence of privacy cynicism was displayed via user mistrust (294/881, 33%), uncertainty (281/881, 32%), powerlessness (325/881, 37%), and digital resignation (232/881, 26%) as self-reported by users. Many users displayed a willingness to trade privacy for perceived benefits, such as convenience (503/881, 57%). Users also flagged enhanced safety and daily convenience as a beneficial feature of SHTs (492/881, 56%). Contrary to previous Internet or smart home research, most (801/881, 91%) participants reported having read their SHT Terms of Use documents upon setup. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> This study illustrates themes of privacy cynicism and digital resignation within Canadian users, which are prevalent within an emerging body of related literature on Internet platforms more generally, and highlights ways in which to mitigate these patterns. The gap between user privacy preferences and options underscores the need for stronger user-centric design and data protection regulation. These insights and suggestions provide valuable guidance for policymakers and industry stakeholders navigating the complex landscape of SHT adoption. </sec>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».