You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.
"Scientific" Apple Watch Study Makes Unscientific Claims

"Scientific" Apple Watch Study Makes Unscientific Claims

October 27, 2015

Even Killham, Cult of Mac:

A recent study that measured the brain activity of people using the Apple Watch suggests that even the most skeptical of users came to like the wearable after some hands-on time with it.

The findings come from “neuromarketing” group eMerite, which connected electroencephalograms to 20 people and studied their reactions as they tried out different functions of Apple’s smartwatch. …

In addition to the EEG readings, researchers used eye tracking to see where participants were focusing most of their attention. This helped them identify which watch bands were most appealing. The big winner, surprisingly, was the soft pink modern buckle, which scored the highest focus and emotional reactions regardless of gender, according to the report.

What is this, Junk Science Week?

Sample size of this “study” aside, the premise is completely unfounded. Engagement (i.e. looking at something) is hardly an indication of positive or negative response. Heck, by now you probably know I tend to focus a lot more on the negative aspects of things within my critical purview. I’m greatly engaged in these topics (like this one!), but that doesn’t mean I’m greatly compelled by them in any positive way. I wonder what my EEG would indicate at this very moment…

But aside from such absurd (il)logical leaps, this so-called “study” undercuts itself further by its blatant structural oversights — and I’m not just talking about the fact that there’s no freaking control:

The Apple Watch vibrating to announce an incoming call or notification garnered positive reactions at first, when the feature came as a surprise, but the impact wore off when it was no longer surprising, the study says.

Well, no kidding. I’m never surprised by email or incoming text message notifications on my iPhone, but that’s no statement on how useful or beneficial I continue to find those functions. The surprise of my MacBook Pro’s Taptic trackpad? Gone. Its utility? Still amazing. And so on.

But it gets better (emphasis mine):

Siri fared less well due to a language barrier causing misunderstanding of commands (the study took place in the Czech Republic, and Apple Watch does not include a Czech language option).

Sheesh and/or LOL.

The single worst part of all of this nonsense, though, is Cult of Mac’s headline: “It’s official: Apple Watch will grow on you.

This study makes that claim “official”? Really? Brain engagement with a new gizmo means users love it? That seems like a tenuous metric for any consumer product, much less a device that’s notorious for taking weeks or months for users to “figure out” exactly what works for them. Brain engagement is probably pretty high when processing your yearly tax forms, too. What a pleasure!

Look, if you need polls and “studies” to convince you that your Apple Watch was a smart buy, it was a stupid buy. And if tripe like the above is what convinces you to actually shell out for one, there’s an adage for that.