Self-Care through Smartwatches: An Analysis of Technology as Infrastructure of Care
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research article investigates the perspectives and conditions of using smartwatches for personal healthcare. It examines the device's functions, the daily practices of using smartwatches for health, and the role and impact of this technology on self-care. Employing a qualitative approach, the study used actor-network theory (ANT) to follow 15 participants aged 25-60 who had used a smartwatch for health monitoring for at least one year. The goal was to study the network of relationships in personal self-care that is interconnected with the smartwatch's functions. Data was analyzed through the lens of new materialism and the infrastructure of care. The findings demonstrate that smartwatches are commonly used for health monitoring. The embedded “smartness” of the device, in combination with personal factors, environmental context, lifestyle, social network support, and its popularity as a consumer technology, shapes users’ decisions to adopt it. The smartwatch becomes an influential actor that plays a key role in an individual's self-care practices by operating within a network and connecting to other devices. The smartwatch's functions not only enable care at home but also facilitate monitoring outside the home and during various daily activities. Furthermore, the smartwatch's potential for care is dependent on the temporal and spatial dimensions of movement and relies on the capabilities of other components. This study reflects that self-care is more than a human-centered practice; it also relies on the role of technology as a care infrastructure that can produce effects on the physical, mental, and social well-being of the wearer. The study reflects that self-care extends beyond a purely human-centered practice, relying instead on technology as a care infrastructure that produces effects on wearers’ physical, mental, and social well-being. Furthermore, such care is mobile, circulating through networks of care relationships enabled by wearable technologies.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
บทความที่ได้รับการตีพิมพ์เป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของวารสารมนุษยศาสตร์และสังคมศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยอุบลราชธานี
ข้อความที่ปรากฏในบทความแต่ละเรื่องในวารสารวิชาการเล่มนี้เป็นความคิดเห็นส่วนตัวของผู้เขียนแต่ละท่านไม่เกี่ยวข้องกับมหาวิทยาลัยอุบลราชธานี และคณาจารย์ท่านอื่นๆในมหาวิทยาลัยฯ แต่อย่างใด ความรับผิดชอบองค์ประกอบทั้งหมดของบทความแต่ละเรื่องเป็นของผู้เขียนแต่ละท่าน หากมีความผิดพลาดใดๆ ผู้เขียนแต่ละท่านจะรับผิดชอบบทความของตนเองแต่ผู้เดียว
References
Achanakitthi, C. (2021). Anthropology of Care. https://www.sac.or.th/portal/th/article/detail/274 (in Thai)
Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. Signs, 3(28), 801-831.
Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: The political ecology of things. Duke University Press.
Bowker, G. C. & Star, S.L. (2000). Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. MIT Press.
Bruno, L. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Harvard University Press.
ÇİÇEK, M. (2015). Wearable Technologies and Its Future Applications. International Journal of Electrical, Electronics and Data Communication, 3(4), 45-50.
Chatchawandamrongjet, T & Intojunyong, S. (2019). Factors influencing Intention to Use Wearable Device for Self Protection of Health Risk. Journal of Information Systems in Business, 5(3), 6-19. (in Thai)
Chutikamoltham, C. (2020). Material Turn in History: Actor-Network Theory and Material as Historical Agency. Journal of Liberal Arts, 20(1), 97–125. (in Thai)
Coole, D. & Frost,S. (2010). New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Duke University Press.
Danholt, P. & Langstrup, H. (2012). Medication as infrastructure: decentring self–care. Culture Unbound, 4(3), 513–32.
Duus, R. & Cooray,M. (2015). How We Discovered the Dark Side of Wearable Fitness Trackers. https://theconversation.com/how-we-discovered-the-dark-side-of-wearable-fitnesstrackers-43363
Jiranansakul, S. (2022). What is a Smart Watch?. https://www.changfi.com/fix/2022/02/04/14781/ (in Thai)
Lupton, D. (2016). The quantified self: A sociology of self-tracking. Polity Press.
Park, S. & Jayaraman, S. (2003). Enhancing the Quality of Life Through Wearable Technology. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 22(3), 41-48.
Panpao, S. (2020). Factors affecting intention to us smartwatch of consumers in Bangkok [Master’s thesis, Graduate School, Bangkok University]. (in Thai)
Piwek, L., Ellis, D. A., Andrews, S., & Joinson, A. (2016). The Rise of Consumer Health Wearables: Promises and Barriers. PLoS Med. 13(2): e1001953.
Sangkhamanee, J. (2016). An Ethnography of Infrastructure. Thammasat Journal, 36(2), 33–57. (in Thai)
Suksawat, T. & Keawpromman, C. (2021). Factors affecting Smart watch Purchasing Decisions of People in Generation X. MUT Journal of Business Administration, 18(1), 116-139. (in Thai)
Sultan, N. (2015). Reflective thoughts on the potential and challenges of wearable technology for healthcare provision and medical education. International Journal of Information Management, 35(5), 521-526.
Swan, M. (2012). Sensor Mania! The Internet of Things, Wearable Computing, Objective Metrics, and the Quantified Self 2.0. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks, 1(3), 217–253.
Toner, J. (2018). Exploring the dark-side of fitness trackers: Normalization, objectification and the anaesthetisation of human experience. Performance Enhancement & Health, 6(2), 75-81.
Weiner,K. & Will,C. (2018). Thinking with care infrastructures: people, devices and the home in home blood pressure monitoring. Sociology of Health & Illness, 40(2), 270–282
Yasar, K. (2022). Definition: Wearable technology. https://www.techtarget.com/searchmobilecomputing/definition/wearable-technology
