Is There a Color to Context?: Exploring Domain Associations in Wearable Technology

Abstract

Studies have found significant impact of domain, or context-of-use, on the social acceptance of wearable technology (Bodine & Gemperle, 2003; Herath et al., 2011; Van Heek, Schaar, Trevisan, Bosowski, & Ziefle, 2014). Therefore, factors which influence domain perceptions are relevant to wearables research. Correspondingly, anecdotal evidence has pointed to the influence of color (e.g. color associations) on wearable technology domain perceptions (Häkkilä, Vahabpour, Colley, Väyrynen, & Koskela, 2015; Starner, Rhodes, Weaver, & Pentland, 1999), yet thorough investigation and empirical evidence of these findings is lacking in the literature. For these reasons, the purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of color and body-worn form on wearable technology domain and function observations. This study used a mixed methods approach to assess the perceived domains of different colored wearable technology products by third party (limited information) observers. Six different products (three arm-worn and three face/head worn) were pilot tested, ultimately leading to the presentation of an armband, eyewear, and headband product in ten different colors. One of each product was randomly selected and presented to 1,413 (131 to 151 per product) non-colorblind Millennial age Mechanical Turk Workers, 522 of which also answered additional, open-ended questions to probe their selection answers. Participants were asked to assess the different colored stimuli and select the domain(s) in which, in their opinion, the product most likely belonged. T-tests were used to compare the counts of domain selections. Open-ended questions asked participants to first name what they believed the device to be and do, then describe if and why the product was recognized, and finally, to comment on the recognizability of the term wearable technology and its relationship to the presented stimuli. The clearest and most dominant results were found in the observed influence of product form and body location on perceived domain: Within each product (across colors), there were consistently observed product domain selections, and in open-ended responses there were consistently referenced products and guessed functions. Consistent domain selections regardless of color were seen in both highly recognized products (e.g. armband) and unrecognized products (e.g. headband). Conjointly, there were similar domain selections between comparable product types (e.g. Gaming & Entertainment in smart glasses and in an HMD) and between comparable body locations (e.g. Health & Wellness in arm-worn products). Other information offered by participants in the product discernment process were possible users and use-case scenarios. This study did not find strong, conclusive results that color significantly altered domain perceptions of unidentified products. Certain trends indicated that color had some influence in domain selection. For example, Medical ratings were consistently high when the product color was beige—however, results and count were not often significant. While color may have been a feature utilized in perception, its influence was not dominant; results primarily point to dominant product and body location function associations, in the minds of American Millennials, and highlight the salient interrelationship of both in product discernment. The results and supporting open-ended responses also speak to what is perceived as common—and potentially acceptable. Finally, the results of this study point to the need for more research on color associations and color influence in wearable technology perception. Study limitations are discussed in depth, and suggestions for future research are described.