skip to main content
10.1145/2370216.2370224acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Long-term effects of ubiquitous surveillance in the home

Published:05 September 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Helsinki Privacy Experiment is a study of the long-term effects of ubiquitous surveillance in homes. Ten volunteering households were instrumented with video cameras with microphones, and computer, wireless network, smartphone, TV, DVD, and customer card use was logged. We report on stress, anxiety, concerns, and privacy-seeking behavior after six months. The data provide first insight into the privacy-invading character of ubiquitous surveillance in the home and explain how people can gradually become accustomed to surveillance even if they oppose it.

References

  1. Acquisti, A., and Grossklags, J. Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security & Privacy 3, 1 (2005), 26--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Altman, I. The Environment and Social Behavior: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory, and Crowding. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Monterey, CA, 1975.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Barkhuus, L., and Dey, A. Is context-aware technology taking control away from the user? Three levels of interactivity examined. Proc. UbiComp, Springer-Verlag (2003), 149--156.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Barkhuus, L. The mismeasurement of privacy: Using contextual integrity to reconsider privacy in HCI. Proc. CHI'12, ACM (2012), 367--376. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Beaudin, J., Intille, S., and Morris, M. To track or not to track: User reactions to concepts in longitudinal health monitoring. Journal of Medical Internet Research 8, 4 (2006).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Berendt, B., Günther, O., and Spiekermann, S. Privacy in e-commerce: Stated preferences vs. actual behavior. Communications of the ACM 48, 4 (2005), 101--106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Caplan, B. Rational ignorance versus rational irrationality. Kyklos 54, 1 (2001), 3--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Choe, E. K., Consolvo, S., Jung, J., Harrison, B., and Kientz, J. A. Living in a glass house: A survey of private moments in the home. Proc. UbiComp'11, ACM (2011), 41--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Consolvo, S. et al. Location disclosure to social relations: Why, when, & what people want to share. Proc. CHI'05, ACM (2005), 81--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Fox, C., and Tversky, A. Ambiguity aversion and comparative ignorance. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110, 3 (1995), 585--603.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., and Straub, D. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly 27, 1 (2003), 51--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Gill, M., Bryan, J., and Allen, J. Public perceptions of CCTV in residential areas: "It Is Not As Good As We Thought It Would Be." International Criminal Justice Review 17, (2007), 304--324.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Goldberg, D., and Williams, P. A user's guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Holi, M., Marttunen, M., and Aalberg, V. Comparison of the GHQ-36, the GHQ-12 and the SCL-90 as psychiatric screening instruments in the Finnish population Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 57, 3 (2003), 233--238.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Iachello, G., and Hong, J. End-user privacy in human--computer interaction. Foundations and Trends in Human--Computer Interaction 1, 1 (2007), 1--137. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Klasnja, P. et al. Exploring privacy concerns about personal sensing. Proc. Pervasive'09, Springer-Verlag (2009), 176--183. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Mancini, C. et al. In the best families: Tracking and relationships. Proc. CHI'11, ACM (2011), 2419--2428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Marshall, N. Privacy and environment. Human Ecology 1, 2 (1972), 93--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Massimi, M., Truong, K., Dearman, D., and Hayes, G. Understanding recording technologies in everyday life. IEEE Pervasive Computing 9, 3 (2010), 64--71. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Nguyen, D., and Hayes, G. Information privacy in institutional and end-user tracking and recording technologies. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 14, 1 (2010), 53--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Nguyen, D., Bedford, A., Bretana, A., and Hayes, G. Situating the concern for information privacy through an empirical study of responses to video recording. Proc. CHI'11, ACM (2011), 3207--3216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. O'Donnell, A., Jetten, J., and Ryan, M. Who is watching over you? The role of shared identity in perceptions of surveillance. European Journal of Social Psychology 40, 1 (2010), 135--147.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Oulasvirta, A., Perkio, J., Hietanen, H., & Tamminen, S. Rethinking ethical practices for the Helsinki Privacy Experiment. A paper presented at the Ethics Workshop of CHI 2011, Vancouver, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Palen, L., and Dourish, P. Unpacking privacy for a networked world. Proc. CHI'03, ACM (2003), 129--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Partonen, T., and Pandi-Perumal, S. Seasonal Affective Disorder: Practice and Research. Oxford University Press, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Pedersen, D. Psychological functions of privacy. Journal of Environmental Psychology 17, 2 (1997), 147--156.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Pevalin, D. J. Multiple applications of the GHQ-12 in a general population sample: An investigation of long-term retest effects. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 35, 11 (2000), 508--512.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Raij, A., Ghosh, A., Kumar, S., and Srivastava, M. Privacy risks emerging from the adoption of innocuous wearable sensors in the mobile environment. Proc. CHI'11, ACM (2011), 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Ray, D. Data Gathering in Digital Homes. An unpublished master's thesis submitted to the Department of Computer Science at the University of Helsinki (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith, H., Milberg, S., and Burke, S. Information privacy: Measuring individuals' concerns about organizational practices. MIS Quarterly 20, 2 (1996), 167--196. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Troshynski, E., Lee, C., and Dourish, P. Accountabilities of presence: Reframing location-based systems. Proc. CHI'08, ACM (2008), 487--496. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Long-term effects of ubiquitous surveillance in the home

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          UbiComp '12: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing
          September 2012
          1268 pages
          ISBN:9781450312240
          DOI:10.1145/2370216

          Copyright © 2012 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 5 September 2012

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          UbiComp '12 Paper Acceptance Rate58of301submissions,19%Overall Acceptance Rate764of2,912submissions,26%

          Upcoming Conference

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader