Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reconsidering the user in IoT: the subjectivity of things

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This essay develops an interdisciplinary framework for understanding the relationship between “the person” and “the user” in the Internet of Things (IoT) by exploring a similarly troubled dyadic discourse: the thing. The goal is twofold: first, to provide a critical framework for scholars studying the humanistic and social implications of IoT; second, to broaden the scholarly discussion of IoT beyond an increasingly standard set of topics that includes usability, security, and privacy. I focus on the role of the subject in comprising things and things’ social role in constructing the placeness of the home. By considering “smart” and “unsmart” objects through the lens of an advertisement for Sony’s smart home ecology, I demonstrate that “unsmart” objects frame smart devices in a historical materiality that, paradoxically, allows for an overly technical approach to IoT devices. Such an approach risks effacement of the social, subjectival makeup of things in which the human is primarily framed within the ontology of the object rather than that of the agential subject. Where things are ubiquitously understood as objects, we are primed to understand people as users rather than humans.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. If this sounds strange, consider Shoshanna Zuboff’s [47] work on surveillance capitalism: humans are already becoming objects of our designed, computational infrastructures. Garnet Hertz [31] has done some very provocative and worthwhile artistic/designerly work that illustrates this, as well.

  2. Originally published at https://www.sony.com/regional/smart-home, these videos are no longer publicly available in their original location. They were, however, archived by archive.org and can be accessed at the following URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20170519071859/http://www.sony.com/regional/smart-home .

  3. Few scholars, if any, have done more to examine the role that objects play in the realm of literature than Bill Brown [7, 8]. Rather than speaking through examples found in those works, I hope to add to them.

  4. For the purposes of shoring up any problems arising from the conceptual space between owning books and collecting books, I contend that the combination of “media center” and “book” constitutes a collection—to have a place designed for housing a particular type of artifact is at least tentative evidence towards collection.

  5. This is perhaps not unlike the experience of an IoT-focused technologist approaching a discussion of books.

  6. One is reminded, too, of John Cusack’s character in the film, “High Fidelity,” who undergoes an autobiographical reorganization of his record collection [23].

  7. The work of Bertrand Russell [39, 40] has also addressed this problem through the lens of what he refers to as “knowledge by acquaintance” and “knowledge by description.” As embodied agents, humans are naturally acquainted with phenomena. Through the scientific lens, phenomena are described, and in description they are objectified.

References

  1. Ashton K (2009) That ‘internet of things’ thing. RFiD Journal 22:97–114

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bardzell J, Bardzell S (2015a) Humanistic HCI. Morgan & Claypool Publishers

  3. Bardzell J and Bardzell S 2015b The user reconfigured: on subjectivities of information. In: Proceedings of The Fifth Decennial Aarhus Conference on Critical Alternatives, Aarhus, Denmark, 17 August 2015, pp 133–144. CA ’15. Aarhus University Press. https://doi.org/10.7146/aahcc.v1i1.21298

  4. Bell G, Dourish P (2007) Yesterday’s tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing’s dominant vision. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 11(2):133–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-006-0071-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Benjamin W (1969) Unpacking my library: a talk about book collecting. In: Illuminations. New York: Schocken Books, p. 288. Available at: http://townsendlab.berkeley.edu/fetishist-collector-hoarder/files/walter-benjamin-unpacking-my-library-talk-about-book-collecting (accessed 30 September 2013)

  6. Bowker GC, Star SL (2000) Sorting things out: classification and its consequences. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown B (2010) A sense of things: the object matter of American literature. University of Chicago Press

  8. Brown B (2016) Other things. University of Chicago Press

  9. Calvino I (2012) If on a winter’s night a traveler. Harcourt, Houghton Mifflin

    Google Scholar 

  10. Camus A (1955) The myth of Sisyphus and other essays. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, New York

  11. Capote T (2001) In cold blood. Vintage

  12. Cetina KK (1991) Epistemic cultures: forms of reason in science. History of Political Economy 23(1):105–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cetina KK (1999) Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press

  14. Cheon E and Su NM (2017) Configuring the user: ‘Robots have Needs Too’. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, Portland, Oregon, USA, 25 February 2017, pp 191–206. CSCW ’17. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998329

  15. Cooper G, Bowers J (1995) Representing the user: notes on the disciplinary rhetoric of human-computer interaction. In: Thomas PJ (ed) The social and interactional dimensions of human-computer interfaces. Cambridge Series on Human-Computer Interaction. Cambridge University Press

  16. Derrida J (1998) Archive fever: a Freudian impression. University Of Chicago Press, Chicago

  17. Derrida J (2003) The work of mourning. Brault P-A and Naas M (eds). University Of Chicago Press, Chicago

  18. Drucker, J. (2014). Graphesis: visual forms of knowledge production. Harvard University Press.

  19. Finn E (2017) What algorithms want: imagination in the age of computing. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Fogliano J, Smith L (2018) A house that once was. Roaring Brook Press

  21. Foucault M (1972) The archaeology of knowledge. Reprint. Pantheon Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Foucault M (2002) The birth of the clinic. Routledge

  23. Frears S (2000) High fidelity. Touchstone Pictures

  24. Glaessgen E, Stargel D (2012) The digital twin paradigm for future NASA and U.S. Air Force Vehicles. In: 53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference<BR>20th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference<BR>14th AIAA, Honolulu, Hawaii, 23 April 2012. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2012-1818

  25. Grudin J (1990) The computer reaches out: the historical continuity of interface design. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, Washington, USA, 1 March 1990, pp 261–268. CHI ’90. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/97243.97284

  26. Haggerty KD, Ericson RV (2000) The surveillant assemblage. The British Journal of Sociology 51(4):605–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071310020015280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies 14(3):575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Harrison S, Tatar D and Sengers P (2007) The three paradigms of HCI. In: Alt. Chi. Session at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems San Jose, California, USA, pp 1–18

  29. Heidegger M (1968) What is a thing? H. Regnery Co.

  30. Heidegger M (1971) The thing. In: Poetry, language, thought. Harper Colphon Books, New York, p 229

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hertz G (2019) Experiments in surveillance capitalism. Available at: http://conceptlab.com/surveillancecapitalism. Accessed 3 Feb 2020

  32. Kling R (1999) What is social informatics and why does it matter? D-Lib Magazine 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1045/january99-kling

  33. Lamb R, Kling R (2003) Reconceptualizing users as social actors in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 27(2):197–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Latour B (1993) We have never been modern. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  35. Law J (1991) A sociology of monsters: essays on power, technology and domination. Routledge London. Available at: http://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/clc/1900885 (accessed 5 November 2013)

  36. Malafouris L, Renfrew C (2010) The cognitive life of things: archaeology, material engagement and the extended mind. In: The Cognitive Life of Things: Recasting the Boundaries of the Mind. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, pp 1–12

  37. Norberg PA, Horne DR, Horne DA (2007) The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs 41(1):100–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Peters JD (2015) The marvelous clouds: toward a philosophy of elemental media. University Of Chicago Press, Chicago, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Russell B (1951a) Knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description. In: Mysticism and Logic. Barnes & Noble Books, Totowa, New Jersey, pp 152–167

    Google Scholar 

  40. Russell B (1951b) The relation of sense-data to physics. In: Mysticism and Logic. Barnes & Noble Books, pp 108–131

  41. Shklovski I, Mainwaring SD, Skúladóttir HH, et al. (2014) Leakiness and creepiness in app space: perceptions of privacy and mobile app use. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 26 April 2014, pp 2347–2356. CHI ’14. Association for computing machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557421

  42. Smith S (2017) The internet of risky things: trusting the devices that surround us. O’Reilly Media, Inc.

  43. Sterling B (2014) The epic struggle of the Internet of Things. Strelka Press

  44. United States (ed.) (2015) Internet of Things: hearing before the subcommittee on courts, intellectual property, and the internet of the committee on the judiciary, house of representatives, one hundred fourteenth congress, first session, July 29, 2015. Washington: U.S. Government Publishing Office

  45. Watson SM (2014) Data Doppelgängers and the Uncanny Valley of Personalization. Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/06/data-doppelgangers-and-the-uncanny-valley-of-personalization/372780/ (accessed 2 July 2019)

  46. Woolgar S (1990) Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. The Sociological Review 38(S1):58–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1990.tb03349.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zuboff S (2019) The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Public Affairs

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics, Indiana University, Bloomington, 47405, USA

    John S. Seberger

Authors
  1. John S. Seberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John S. Seberger.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

John S. Seberger is a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Informatics at the Luddy School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering at Indiana University, Bloomington. He received his PhD in Information and Computer Sciences from University of California, Irvine, and is a former Graduate Fellow of the Intel Science and Technology Center for Social Computing.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seberger, J.S. Reconsidering the user in IoT: the subjectivity of things. Pers Ubiquit Comput 25, 525–533 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01513-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01513-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation