| Title |
Changes in Human-Technology Relationships in the History of Smart Home Development: Focused on Technological Mediation Theory |
| Authors |
신수영(Shin, Soo-Young) ; 송지현(Song, Ji-Hyun) ; 정경숙(Chong, Kyong-Suk) |
| DOI |
https://doi.org/10.14774/JKIID.2026.35.2.019 |
| Keywords |
Smart Home; Interpretive Historical Research; Human-Technology Relations; Technological Mediation Theory; Identity-Based Living Environment |
| Abstract |
This study analyzes the evolution of smart home technology from the 1930s to the present, focusing on how the relationship between humans and technology has transformed over approximately a century. Adopting an interpretive-historical research design, this study employs Verbeek’s theory of technological mediation as an analytical framework to systematically examine primary and secondary literature sources. The analysis reveals that throughout the history of smart homes, the position of residents has progressively shifted from “service recipients” to “technology operators,” “information consumers,” and finally “data providers.” This trajectory represents a gradual movement of residents from being “subjects” of technology to becoming its “objects.” The dominant types of human-technology relationships have also evolved across five periods: from the embryonic form of hermeneutic relations in the Era of Imagination (1930-1960), through the failure of embodiment relations in the Era of Challenge (1960-1990), to the coexistence of hermeneutic and background relations in the Era of Connection (1990-2010), and the overlapping of alterity and background relations in the Era of Intelligence (2010-2020). In the current fifth period, generative AI-based smart homes simultaneously embody the potential to reposition residents as “reflective subjects” and the risk of reducing them to “hyper-objectified targets.” Based on these findings, this study proposes reconceptualizing smart homes not merely as “automated convenience systems” but as “identity-based living environments.” For this transformation, four conditions are necessary: transparency, bidirectionality, support for reflection, and respect for autonomy. These conditions provide new directions for technology design, housing policy, and interior design practice. This study contributes to providing a theoretical foundation and an opportunity for reflection toward the transition “from automation to identity.” |