Hey Siri

The Role of Perceived Humanness

in 'Smart Objects'
Written by Jessica Pålsson
The Internet of Things

TABLE OF
contents
Part l: Introduction Part ll: Application

4 Background: IoT & Smart

11 Simulating humanness in
Smart Objects
Objects

5 Theory: Object agency vs.

Human agency
12 Goal congruence: Aligning
object utility and human
values

6 Social Cognitive Theory

13 Trust: Making the rationale
behind object behavior
visible
8 Anthropomorphism

14 Affect: Incorporating
antrophomorphic cues

15 Ethical Considerations

16 Closing Remarks

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 01

 The shift toward the
“next-generation
Internet” promises
seamless interaction
between humans,
societies and 'Smart
Things' that spans every
aspect of our social
world.

Guo et al. on the Internet of Things

part l:
introduction
Background: IoT & Smart Objects
First coined by Kevin Ashton in 1999, the term “Internet of Things” (IoT) refers to the concept of
physical objects linked together and connected through the Internet.
While the idea of connecting objects through large
networks is now several decades old, it has only recently
become relevant in the practical world. Progress made in
hardware development has allowed for inexpensive
manufacturing of IoT-technology, and led to drastic
proliferation of the 'Smart Objects' that we now find in
our everyday lives. From smart watches and smart
phones, to smart homes and smart clothing, objects are
not only interacting with humans but also increasingly
connected with other objects.
At a basic level, IoT technology relies on the seamless
blending of sensors, connectivity, and actuators
(producing an action or change) – all embedded in
objects that work together to measure, understand and
infer environmental indicators without the need for
human intervention. A distinguishing feature is the
invisibility and autonomy of the system, with technology
disappearing from the consciousness of the user and
ultimately weaving itself into the fabric of everyday life.
Application areas to date include retail and supply chain
management, logistics, urban design, health care, home
equipment and energy consumption - spanning both
personal, commercial, private and public uses. As both
academia and industry turn increasing attention to IoT,
however, imaginative new forms of interaction and
sensor-driven applications for everyday objects are
bound to explode. The embedding of sensors in objects
does therefore not only present opportunities for
realising current ideas, but also serve as enablers for
(future) tasks and applications yet unthinkable.
HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS'
Neither the Internet nor the objects now becoming
connected and 'smart' are new, yet the development
of IoT marks a significant shift from the traditional web.
Traditionally, the Internet has been able to capture
online behavior in the digital world to the extent that
the individual actively interacts with the device
connecting them to the Web. With IoT, however, the
'smart' devices themselves monitor and retrieve data
on behavior in natural, non-digital environments,
where the individual does not have to actively
participate for data to be collected.
This development has meant that Smart Objects,
through IoT, have steadily progressed from being
passive to becoming agentic – that is: autonomous and
capable of acting by themselves as they continuously
capture, store and share information among objects,
and proceed to perform automated actions based
upon this information.
While it is proposed that these developments hold
great promise in relieving users from tedious or
superfluous modes of triggering action or instigating
input, little knowledge exists about how individuals
perceive and react to these agentic objects enabled by
IoT. Researchers in computing techniques, social
science and anthropology alike are therefore
increasingly turning attention to the need for re-
understanding human-object relationships, and
investigating the social and cognitive implications of
IoT as the locus of action and control shifts from the
self to the object.
PAGE 04
 Theory: Object agency
vs. Human agency
A fundamental property of Smart Objects and IoT is the ability of
the connected objects to actually think for themselves and act
autonomously on behalf of humans.

Yet, this very feature of Smart Objects threatens to disturb perceptions of human
agency: an individual’s capacity to herself exercise control over processes, choices
and actions involving the self, and thus remaining “author of her own life”.

Researchers Belk (1988) and Epley et al. (2008) both propose that there is an innate
human need to feel control over – rather than controlled by – objects in the
immediate environment. Similarly, in their study on consumer perceptions of IoT, Jia
et al. (2012) found that the invisibility and automaticity of “agentic” IoT objects
elicited feelings of incapability and vulnerability amongst the study’s participants.

For successful acceptance and adoption of Smart Objects to take place, it thus
appears crucial to understand how to influence the relationship between objects
and humans in ways that minimize negative perceptions of the object agency
inherent in IoT.

Over the next pages, theories of social cognition and the field of anthropomorphism
are put forward as offering valuable insight.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 05

social cognitive theory
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) proposes several theories of human agency that are
relevant to consider for counterbalancing perceptions of IoT object agency.

PROXY AGENCY SELF-EXPANSION THEORY SELF-EXTENSION THEORY

Proxy agency involves getting others
with resources or expertise to achieve
your own goals, with the internal locus
of causality remaining intact despite
the action being performed outside
one’s own immediate control. Here,
goal congruence directly affects the
degree of relatedness one perceives
in the proxy agent, as well as
willingness to depend on the other for
personal goal achievement. Ensuring
that both human and object are
moving towards accomplishing the
same goal will thus increase
perceptions of object actions as part
of one’s own power, and –
consequently – heighten feelings of
personal agency.
Self-expansion theory holds that people
are motivated to interact and form
relationships with objects because it
expands their ability to accomplish
goals beyond the self. This differs from
proxy agency in that it expands the
individual’s own capabilities and reach,
rather than having the object act as a
substituting deputy. Here, trust in the
system’s perceived ability and
competence to function as “an
extended arm” is key, with uncertainty
reduction and predictability in the
involvement with the object being
central to the individual’s sense of
control and efficacy. Furthermore,
Culley & Madhaven (2013) also suggest
that trust is likely to influence the
degree by which the individual is willing
to depend on an object-as-extension.
Self-extension theory posits that as
users starts to invest themselves and
attach meanings to an object, they also
begin extending their identities through
that object. Aspects of an object will
thus be absorbed into the self –
leading individuals to treat the
resources, capabilities and identities of
it as their own, ultimately embracing
aspects of objects inward into their
own identities. Since the functions and
outcomes of the object to some extent
become experienced as one’s own, the
user is found to be more likely to
nurture the object and ensure proper
maintenance of it (a behavior
exhibited, for instance, by car owners
carefully looking after their cherished
vehicles).

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 06

 let's break it
down...

PROXY AGENCY SELF-EXPANSION SELF-EXTENSION

Getting objects with resources or Expanding one’s own reach and Extending one’s own identity
EXPLANATION expertise to achieve one’s own goals capabilities through objects through an object

Goal congruence: The object and you Trust: The object is competent and Affect: The object is desired as
DETERMINANT share a common goal able to act as you “extended arm” part of identity

Smart Watch monitoring your Remotely controlling the heat Smart Jacket as your “second
IOT EXAMPLE heart rate of your home through Smart skin”
Home applications

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 07

anthropomorhpism
User perceptions of human/object agency are also closely associated with the human
tendency of anthropomorphism – ascribing human-like features to nonhuman entities.

By doing so, individuals start interacting with digital representations and physical objects as if
they were “beings” with a certain degree of personality. Apple’s natural language user interface
“Siri” (introduced with the iPhone 4S) is a contemporary example of this – despite being a
computer program, individuals interact with Siri socially, as if she where in fact a human personal
assistant. These social responses have been found to be triggered by “anthropomorphic cues”:
human attributes on the interface such as voice, face, personality and interactivity, which serve
to remind individuals of human agency as well as satisfying consumer need for social presence
(“being with an intelligent being”).

However, scholars have also found that – over time – even objects without an information
function (such as home appliances) may start to seem like social actors, with humans ascribing
both feelings and motivations to them. Hoffman & Novak (2015) – and several other scholars
along with them – propose that anthropomorphism will become key in facilitating and mediating
interactions between humans and smart objects, as consumers attempt to make the smart
objects surrounding them more “real” than they actually are.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 08

part ll:
application
 Simulating
humanness in
IoT objects
The way in which object vs. human agency is
balanced in smart objects will play an
increasingly important role in both developing
and designing features of IoT technologies. By
combining findings from existing research with
principles from social cognitive theory and
anthropomorphism, a discussion on how
“humanness” can be simulated in IoT objects is
presented in three parts.

Furthermore, a critical note on the ethics of

manipulating humanness in objects is also put
forward.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 11

 1
Goal congruence:
Aligning
object utility
and human values

To harness notions of proxy agency (which is dependent on perceived shared goals between the
human and object), the IoT enabled object must promise to deliver something that is of tangible
value to the consumer – making the outcome of object agency congruent with the human need.
This said, many fast-moving high-tech and knowledge-based industries are still struggling to
define the utility (goals to be achieved) for the consumer, and mainstream consumers are yet to
see the real value of IoT objects. Evans (2011) stresses the importance of IoT not becoming “the
advancement of technology for technology’s sake” – emphasizing that the industry must
demonstrate value in human terms. Yet consumer IoT, to date, has largely been concerned with
adding sleek technology to novelty items (such as wearables and funky home gadgets) than
providing solutions to “real problems”.

To achieve goal congruence, it is therefore suggested that developers develop a clear view of the
value creation process and the goal achievement an IoT object will bring to the consumer: what
can the object do, and how does this connect with achieving significant user outcomes? Here, it
should be emphasized that it is the user’s perception of value and goal achievement that matter,
even when these diverge from those intended by the developer.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 12

2
Trust:
Making the rationale
behind object
behavior visible

As with human-human relationships, human-object relationships also involve a degree of trust.

However, as IoT processes by large are invisible and autonomous, understanding of the system
and rationale behind an agent’s behavior becomes more important for increasing trust in the
capability of the agent to function as an extension of the self.

While users are unlikely to want to evaluate automated processes or intelligent algorithms in
depth, touch points where complex IoT processes are made tangible or easily comprehensive
are suggested for facilitating understanding for how an object comes to its conclusions. That
way, the tangible representations of automated processes serve as cues of object dependability,
predictability and trust in the objects perceived capability to achieve the individual’s goals –
enabling the user evaluate to the outcome of the promised performance. Furthermore,
incorporating a minimal but symbolic human trigger or input for action can also serve as a cue
for understanding the rationale behind object behavior. Here, any everyday movement can be
considered an input – such as holding a travel card to a scanner or driving through a tollbooth
(both triggering automatic payment). Instead of dismissing these representations of human
action as obsolete or “mere necessities of past shortcomings”, it is suggested that these symbolic
triggers can be leveraged as a source for instilling feelings of trust and human agency in the uses
of IoT.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 13

3
Affect:
Incorporating
antrophomorphic
cues

To elicit feelings of affect in IoT objects, it is proposed that IoT objects be designed as social
actors – a personal assistant or companion, rather than an alien intruder. Here, use of
anthropomorphic cues have been found to provide affect and a sense of relatedness between
the human and the object – for instance by simulating presence of an interactive or emotionally
intelligent agent.

From a design perspective, it is noteworthy that anthropomorphic cues do not have to be fancy
or even human in order to elicit anthropomorphic attributions. Reimer (2014), for instance,
describes how smart car developers have added personal character through merely animated
behaviors by having car headlights respond to the proximity of the key holder. This elicits
feelings of the object being smart and alive (similar to a dog responding to your presence) –
demonstrating that anthropomorphic cues do not necessarily need to simulate human behavior,
but can draw on any relatable animate behavior. More important, however, is the consideration
for contextual and culturally appropriate etiquette in the design of anthropomorphic cues;
tailoring them to best suit differences in communication patterns across diverse user
populations.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 14

 ethical considerations
Ethical considerations

While the case for softening perceived object agency and

introducing factors of humanness in Smart Objects is strong from a
developer point of view, it does come with ethical caveats.

First, the attempt to manipulate object features to gain greater

acceptance assumes a “pro-innovation bias” – the idea that innovations
(such as IoT) are beneficial and should be accepted and adopted by the
individual. There are however instances when adopter resistance acts as
a healthy mechanism for avoiding “bad inventions”; where an innovation
or technology application – due to faulty or undesired outcomes – is in
fact better off rejected or reinvented.

Secondly, perceptions of anthropomorphism may lead to the belief that

intelligent machines are friendly and “mean us no harm”. Individuals may
in these cases inappropriately assign these Smart Objects trust that is
based on an emotional connection with the anthropomorphic
agent rather than on actual system performance.

Finally, one may also ask whether it is desirable to further blur the line
between object and human. While this discussion is already very much
alive in the context of artificial intelligence, it is not far-fetched to assume
that it will move into the realm of consumer IoT as smart objects
increasingly are designed to take on human properties. As such,
simulating humanness in objects to overcome object agency resistance
becomes a two-sided coin. In the hands of insidious developers and
marketers, it may be used as a tool for manipulation and harmful
purposes – damaging rather than elevating the usefulness of IoT in
society. On the one hand, however, it may have great social impact if it
means that users are more likely to accept IoT objects that truly can
increase their quality of life (such as smart objects with health
applications or environmental benefits).

Let's make sure that we - as software developers, technology

architects and business leaders - pledge to always stick to the latter.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 15

Closing remarks
Connected objects are bound to give a new meaning to our social life and will play an
active role in the process of how we learn, think, and behave as social human beings.
Because of this, it is important that a more human-centric approach is taken towards
Smart Objects and IoT – one that (perhaps paradoxically) emphasizes the role of people
in the machine-to-machine connectivity that IoT technology promises. Social cognitive
theory proposes that the loss of human agency (i.e. loss of control over one's own
actions) may lead users to feel vulnerable as objects begin dictating automated and
invisible processes and actions.

To counter this, it is proposed that elements for perceived humanness are incorporated
into the smart, IoT enabled object. Here, anthropomorphic cues and design patterns
informed by social cognitive theory can be used to shape user expectations and build
trust, goal congruence and affect between humans and smart objects. Making smart
devices more human-like and understandable is suggested to facilitate adoption by
bringing social affect and affiliation into a mechanic process. Furthermore, the role of
human input for dictating the goal of interaction should not be discarded as obsolete in
a world of automation, but rather be seen as a mean to grant humans agency over
processes.

By converging anthropology, social science and computing techniques to understand

the interactions between humans and smart objects – and the underlying motives for
this interaction – perceptions of greater psychological empowerment can be granted
users in a time where the locus of control is shifting from the self to the object. This, it is
suggested, is key to propelling the development of IoT and gaining consumer
acceptance – the ultimate decisive factor of success.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 16

sources
Belk, R. W. (1988) Possessions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer Research 15(2), pp.139-168.

Connell, P. M. & Schau, H. (2012) Self-expansion and self-extension as distinct strategies. The Routledge companion to identity and
consumption 21.

Culley, K. E. & Madhavan, P. (2013) A note of caution regarding anthropomorphism in HCI agents. Computers in Human Behavior
29(3), pp. 577-579.

Criel, J., Vanderhulst, G., Kawsar, F. & Trappeniers, L. (2011) A co-creation platform for creative engagement of end-users in a
connected object space. In: Proceedings of the 2011 international workshop on Networking and object memories for the Internet of
Things, pp. 9-14.

Epley, N., Waytz, A., Akalis, S. & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008) When we need a human: Motivational determinants of anthropomorphism.
Social Cognition 26(2), pp. 143-155.

Evans, D. (2011). The Internet of Things: How the next evolution of the Internet is changing everything. CISCO White Paper.

Fleisch, E. (2010). What is the Internet of Things? An economic perspective. Economics, Management, and Financial Markets 2, pp.
125-157.

Formo, J., Laaksolahti, J., & Gårdman, M. (2011) Internet of things marries social media. In: Proceedings of the 13th International
Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, pp. 753-755.

Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S. & Palaniswami, M. (2013) Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future
directions. Future Generation Computer Systems 29(7), pp. 1645-1660.

Guo, B., Zhang, D., Wang, Z., Yu, Z. & Zhou, X. (2013a) Opportunistic IoT: Exploring the harmonious interaction between human and
the Internet of Things. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 36(6), pp. 1531-1539.

Guo, B., Zhang, D., Yu, Z., Liang, Y., Wang, Z. & Zhou, X. (2013b) From the Internet of Things to embedded intelligence. World Wide
Web 16(4), pp. 399-420.

Hagel & Seely Brown (2015) How The Internet Of Things Can Enhance Human Relationships. Forbes, [online] 4 February. Available at:
https://bit.ly/2XxIIz8 [Accessed 1 November 2015].

Jia, H., Wu, M., Jung, E., Shapiro, A. & Sundar, S. S. (2012) Balancing human agency and object agency: an end-user interview study of
the internet of things. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, pp. 1185-1188.

Kim, Y. & Sundar, S. S. (2012) Anthropomorphism of computers: Is it mindful or mindless? Computers in Human Behavior 28(1), pp.
241-250.

Mao, M. & Rau, P. L. P. (2014) Should the Internet of Things be Human-like? Exploring Social Media Users’ Acceptance on
Anthropomorphic Internet of Things. In: Pleasurable Design for Diverse Users in Asia, Held as Part of 5th International Conference on
Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE2014), Krakow, Poland, July 19-23, 2014.

Mejtoft, T. (2011) Internet of Things and Co-creation of Value. In: Internet of Things (iThings/CPSCom), 2011 International Conference
on and 4th International Conference on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing, pp. 672-677.

Perera, C. & Zaslavsky, A. (2014). Improve the sustainability of Internet of Things through tradingbased value creation. In: Internet of
Things (WF-IoT), 2014 IEEE World Forum on, pp. 135-140. Reimann, M. & Aron, A. (2009) Self-expansion motivation and inclusion of
brands in self. Handbook of brand relationships, pp. 65-81.

Reimer, R. A. (2014) Antropomorphism on the rise. Available at: https://bit.ly/3eOIpWD [Accessed 1 November 2015].

Rogers, E. M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn. New York: Free Press.

Weinberg, B. D., Milne, G. R., Andonova, Y. G. & Hajjat, F. M. (2015) Internet of Things: Convenience vs. privacy and secrecy. Business
Horizons 58, pp. 615-624.

Yen, N. Y., Kao, O., Jiang, H. & Hung, J. C. (2015) Emergence in User Experience and Quality of Service for Internet of Things.
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks 501.

HEY SIRI: THE ROLE OF PERCEIVED HUMANNESS IN 'SMART OBJECTS' PAGE 17

Written by Jessica Pålsson • BA. MSc.
www.jessicapalsson.com