Digital Voice Assistants (DVAs) like Google Home provide automated news, media and other content directly into the home. In this article, we outline how Google Home’s content delivery can support the wellbeing and independence of older people. We argue that automated media provided by DVAs enrols older people in a dialectic relationship with the automated content and feminised conversation they deliver, uniquely performed within people’s own everyday life circumstances. We demonstrate this by drawing on ethnographic insights generated during a trial of smart home technologies with older Australian households who are ‘ageing in place’ in regional New South Wales. For most participants, the trial was their first encounter with DVAs and the modes of media and content delivery including for music, news, weather, trivia, jokes, facts and images. While DVAs bring new experiences via content, communication and companionship, they are also subverted, ignored or transformed as people improvise to make them ‘fit’ within their homes and lives. These dynamics underpin how DVAs, automated content delivery and user’s interactions can support people’s sense of wellness and their independent daily practices at home.
AstellAMaloneBWilliamsG, et al. (2014) Leveraging everyday technology for people living with dementia: a case study. Journal of Assistive Technologies8(4): 164–176. DOI: 10.1108/JAT-01-2014-0004
2.
AtkinsonPBarkerR (2020) ‘Hey Alexa, What did I forget?’: networked devices, internet search and the delegation of human memory. Convergence27(1): 52–65. DOI: 10.1177/1354856520925740
3.
BaileyCForanTGNi ScanaillC, et al. (2011) Older adults, falls and technologies for independent living: a life space approach. Ageing and Society31(5): 829–848. DOI: 10.1017/S0144686X10001170
4.
BergenH (2016) ‘I’d blush if I could’: digital assistants, disembodied cyborgs and the problem of gender. Word and TextVI(1): 95–113.
5.
CouldryNMarkhamT (2008) Troubled closeness or satisfied distance? Researching media consumption and public orientation. Media, Culture & Society30(1): 5–21. DOI: 10.1177/0163443707084347
6.
CouldryN (2012) Media, Society, World: Social Theory and Digital Media Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
7.
ChoMLeeSSLeeKP (2019) Once a kind friend is now a thing: understanding how conversational agents at home are forgotten. In: DIS 2019–Proceedings of the 2019 ACM designing interactive systems conference, San Diego CA USA, 23–28 June 2019, pp. 1557–1569. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI: 10.1145/3322276.3322332
8.
DemirisGHenselBK (2008) Technologies for an aging society: a systematic review of “smart home” applications. Yearbook of medical informatics17(1): 33–40.
9.
DuqueMPinkSSumartojoS, et al. (2019) Homeliness in health care: the role of everyday designing. Home Cultures16(3): 213–232. DOI: 10.1080/17406315.2020.1757381
10.
DoyleJBaileyCNi ScanaillC, et al. (2014) Lessons learned in deploying independent living technologies to older adults’ homes. Universal Access in the Information Society13(2): 191–204. DOI: 10.1007/s10209-013-0308-1
11.
ForsVPinkSBergM, et al. (2020) Imagining Personal Data: Experiences of Self-Tracking. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
12.
GershonI (2017) Language and the newness of media. Annual Review of Anthropology46(1): 15–31. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-anthro-102116-041300
13.
GibsonGDickinsonCBrittainK, et al. (2019) Personalisation, customisation and bricolage: how people with dementia and their families make assistive technology work for them. Ageing and society39(11): 2502–2519. DOI: 10.1017/S0144686X18000661
14.
GodwinB (2012) The ethical evaluation of assistive technology for practitioners: a checklist arising from a participatory study with people with dementia, family and professionals. Journal of Assistive Technologies6(2): 123–135. DOI: 10.1108/17549451211234975
15.
HargreavesTWilsonC (2017) Smart Homes and Their Users. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
16.
IngoldT (2000) The Perception of the Environment. London: Routledge.
17.
KowalskiJJaskulskaASkorupskaK, et al. (2019) Older adults and voice interaction. In: Extended abstracts of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 4–9 May 2019, pp. 1–6. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery.
18.
LangstrupH (2013) Chronic care infrastructures and the home. Sociology of Health & Illness35(7): 1008–1022. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.12013
19.
LatimerJLópez GómezD (2019) Intimate entanglements: affects, more-than-human intimacies and the politics of relations in science and technology. The Sociological Review (Keele)67(2): 247–263. DOI: 10.1177/0038026119831623
20.
LiuLStrouliaENikolaidisI, et al. (2016) Smart homes and home health monitoring technologies for older adults: a systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics (Shannon, Ireland)91: 44–59.
López GómezD (2015) Little arrangements that matter. Rethinking autonomy-enabling innovations for later life. Technological Forecasting & Social Change93: 91–101. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.02.015
23.
MennickenSMHuangEM (2012) Hacking the natural habitat: an in-the-wild study of smart homes, their development, and the people who live in them. In: Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics), Newcastle, UK, 19–22 June 2012, Vol. 7319, pp. 143–160. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-31205-2_10
24.
MooresS (2012) Media, Place and Mobility. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
MortMRobertsCCallénB (2013) Ageing with telecare: care or coercion in austerity?. Sociology of Health & Illness35(6): 799–812. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2012.01530.x
26.
NobleS.U (2018) Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York, US: NYU Press.
27.
PalDTriyasonTFunikulS (2017) Smart homes and quality of life for the elderly: a systematic review. In: 2017 IEEE international symposium on multimedia (ISM), Taichung, Taiwan, 11–13 December 2017, pp. 413–419. IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/ISM.2017.83
28.
PeekSTLuijkxKGRijnaardMD, et al. (2016) Older adults’ reasons for using technology while aging in place. Gerontology62(2): 226–237. DOI: 10.1159/000430949
29.
PeekSWoutersEVan HoofJ, et al. (2014) Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics (Shannon, Ireland), 83(4): 235–248. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004
30.
PinkS (2021) The ethnographic hunch: analysis in the field and at the desk. In WinthereikB.BallesteroA. (eds) Experimenting with Ethnography. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
31.
PinkSLeder MackleyK (2013) Saturated and situated: rethinking media in everyday life. Media, Culture and Society35(6): 677–691. DOI: 10.1177/0163443713491298
32.
PinkSLeder MackleyKMorosanuR (2015) Researching in atmospheres: video and the ‘feel’ of the mundane. Visual Communication14(3): 351–369. DOI: 10.1177/1470357215579580
33.
PinkSMorganJ (2013) Short term ethnography: Intense routes to knowing. Symbolic Interaction36(3): 351–361.
34.
PhanT (2019) Amazon Echo and the aesthetics of whiteness. Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience, 5(1): 1–38. DOI: 10.28968/cftt.v5i1.29586
35.
PradhanALazarAFindlaterL (2020) Use of intelligent voice assistants by older adults with low technology use. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction27(4): 1–27. DOI: 10.1145/3373759
36.
PradhanAFindlaterLLazarA (2019) “Phantom friend” or “just a box with information”: personification and ontological categorization of smart speaker-based voice assistants by older adults. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-computer Interaction3(CSCW): 1–21.
37.
RodeJPooleE (2018) Putting the gender back in digital housekeeping. In: Proceedings of the 4th conference on gender & IT,Heilbronn, Germany, May 2018, pp. 79–90. DOI: 10.1145/3196839.3196845
38.
RosenbergLKottorpANygårdL (2012) Readiness for technology use with people with dementia: the perspectives of significant others. Journal of applied gerontology31(4): 510–530. DOI: 10.1177/0733464810396873
39.
SayagoSNevesBCowanB (2019) Voice assistants and older people. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces, Dublin, Ireland, 22–23 August 2019. pp. 1–3. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI: 10.1145/3342775.3342803
40.
SciutoASainiAForlizziJ, et al. (2018) “Hey Alexa, what’s up?”: a mixed-methods studies of in-home conversational agent usage. In: Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference, Hong Kong, 9–13 June 2018, pp. 857–868. DOI: 10.1145/3196709.3196772
41.
SofferO (2020) From textual orality to oral textuality: the case of voice queries. Convergence26(4): 927–941. DOI: 10.1177/1354856519825773
42.
SunyoungK (2021) Exploring how older adults use a smart speaker-based voice assistant in their first interactions: qualitative study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth9(1): e20427. DOI: 10.2196/20427
43.
StrengersYKennedyJ (2020) The Smart Wife: Why Siri, Alexa and other Smart Home Devices Need a Feminist Reboot. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
44.
StrengersYKennedyJArcariP, et al. (2019) Protection, productivity and pleasure in the smart home: emerging expectations and gendered insights from Australian early adopters. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Glasgow, Scotland UK, 4–9 May 2019. New York, NY, USA: ACM. Paper 645. DOI: 10.1145/3290605.3300875
45.
StrengersYNichollsL (2018) Aesthetic pleasures and gendered tech-work in the 21st-century smart home. Media International Australia166(1): 70–80.
46.
StrengersYQuLXuQ, et al. (2020) Adhering, steering, and queering: treatment of gender in natural language generation. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 April 2020. pp. 1–14. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI: 10.1145/3313831.3376315
47.
TerzopoulosGSatratzemiM (2020) Voice assistants and smart speakers in everyday life and in education. Informatics in Education19(3): pp. 473–490. DOI: 10.15388/infedu.2020.21
48.
VinesJPritchardGWrightP, et al. (2015) An age-old problem: examining the discourses of ageing in HCI and strategies for future research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)22(1): 1–27. DOI: 10.1145/2696867
49.
WaycottJVetereFOzanneE (2019) Building social connections: a framework for enriching older adults’ social connectedness through information and communication technologies. In: Ageing and Digital Technology. Singapore: Springer, pp. 65–82. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-3693-5_5
50.
WieseLPohlmeyerAHekkertP (2019) Activities as a gateway to sustained subjective well-being mediated by products. In: DIS 2019–Proceedings of the 2019 ACM designing interactive systems conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 23–28 June 2019. pp. 85–97. DOI: 10.1145/3322276.3322297
51.
ZuboffS (2019) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. London, UK: Profile Books.
