Cited by 164Innovative Human-Technology InteractionUsability and User Interface DesignInteractive and Immersive Displays

A tool to assess the comfort of wearable computers

Knight, James F., Baber, Chris·2005·Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Abstract

Wearable computer comfort can be affected by numerous factors, making its assessment based on one value with one scale inappropriate. This paper presents a tool that measures wearable comfort across six dimensions: emotion, attachment, harm, perceived change, movement, and anxiety. The dimensions for these comfort rating scales were specifically developed for wearable equipment assessment by applying multidimensional scaling to a comfort term association matrix developed using the results of groupings of wearable computer comfort terms. Testing the scales on four different types of wearable computer showed that the scales can be used to highlight differences in comfort between different types of technology for different aspects of comfort. An intraclass correlation of .872 suggested that the scales were used with a high level of reliability. A second study showed that modifications made to a wearable computer resulted in improvements in comfort, although they were not significant (p > .05). A potential application for this research is as an aid to designers and researchers for assessing the wearability, in terms of comfort, of wearable computer devices and to determine the effectiveness of any modifications made to the design of a wearable device.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1518/0018720053653875

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Knight, J. F., & Baber, C.
Affiliations
University of Birmingham (GB)
Venue
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2005-03
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
77-91
ISSN
  • 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-8181
OpenAlex
W2128810251
Cited by
164
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
Keywords
wearable computers, comfort evaluation, emotions, attachment, harm, perceived change, movement, anxiety, wearability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude to Computers, Equipment Design, Equipment Safety, Female, Humans, Ergonomics, Male, Microcomputers, Personal Satisfaction, Probability, Research Design, Stress, Mechanical, Computers, Handheld

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review