The Uncanny Valley of Wearables

The uncanny valley is a hypothesis that comes from the world of aesthetics and has been applied to animation. Put simply, the hypothesis states “when features look and move almost, but not exactly, like natural beings, it causes a response of revulsion among some observers.” After spending some time with the Apple Watch as well a bit of time with Google Glass, it seems that wearables have an uncanny valley of their own. Namely, wearables occupy a space between utility and the self that many are not particularly comfortable with. If wearables are to bridge the uncanny valley and have a larger appeal, they must provide features that reconcile themselves to the trigger points they leverage.

Take a look at Apple’s marketing the Apple Watch, and you’ll inevitably come across the tag line: “our most personal device yet.” And it’s true: whereas previous categories of devices have provided immense utility, convenience, and distraction, they have done it at an arm’s length while the Apple Watch occupies a space usually reserved for our fight-or-flight mechanisms. The problem is that the Apple Watch rarely yields anything remotely comparable to what our fight-or-flight mechanisms are used to.

If your wrist tingles, you look down because it’s either someone shaking you or your digital appendage is demanding attention. Either might be important to address, but it’s invariably disconcerting to respond to a fight-or-flight type of response and be faced with a group chat regarding donuts.

All this is not to say that wearables are bad or doomed. Rather, wearables must produce and deliver interactions that fit within the context of the physical space they occupy. Call it growing pains.