The "wearability" of wearable technology addresses the factors that affect the degree of comfort the wearer experiences while wearing a device, including physical, psychological, and social aspects. While the physical and psychological aspects of wearing technology have been investigated since early in the development of the field of wearable computing, the social aspects of wearability have been less fully-explored. As wearable technology becomes increasingly common on the commercial market, social wearability is becoming an ever-more-important variable contributing to the success or failure of new products. Here we present an analysis of social aspects of wearability within the context of the greater understanding of wearability in wearable technology, and focus on selected theoretical frameworks for understanding how wearable products are perceived and evaluated in a social context. Qualitative results from a study of social acceptability of on-body interactions are presented as a case study of social wearability.

No abstract

The goal of this research was to develop a model to predict which students with disabilities will drop out before graduation and to investigate the drop out pattern of students with disabilities. To accomplish this we evaluated potential predictors of persistence and drop-out among 611 college and university students with various disabilities and developed a prediction model. We tested this model in a retrospective study using an independent sample of actual graduates (n = 133) and premature leavers (n = 39). Results show that the best predictors of academic persistence and dropout are the three Theory of Planned Behavior scales. These predicted 25% of the variance in intention to graduate and correctly classified 83% of participants who were no longer in school (86% of graduates and 74% of premature leavers). Path analysis showed linkages between demographic, academic performance, personality, self-efficacy, and college experience measures and the three Theory of Planned Behavior predictors. Key reasons for dropping out were: disability, health, finances, career direction uncertainty, inadequate disability accommodations, and lack of interest/motivation. A one-page questionnaire based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (i.e., Attitude, Subjective Norms, Perceived Behavioral Control) can add to the literature on predictors of intention to graduate, graduation and drop-out among college and university students with disabilities; this is enclosed in the Appendix.

We tested the ability of Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) model to predict intention to graduate among Canadian and Israeli students with and without a learning disability / attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (LD/ADHD). Results based on 1486 postsecondary students show that the model's predictors (i.e., attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control related to graduation) predicted between 32% and 59% of the variability in intention to graduate. Gender made a minor contribution to the prediction equation and age was unrelated. This suggests that our TPB measure, included in Table 1, is valid for diverse samples and countries. It can be used as a quick, inexpensive way to predict intention to graduate and, as shown by previous investigations, actual graduation rates. Thus, strengthening the three predictors may result in higher graduation rates.

Objective: To examine similarities and differences among college/university students with ADHD, LD, and comorbid ADHD and LD on variables related to academic performance. Method: Students who self-reported ADHD (n=42), LD (n=72), or comorbid ADHD and LD (n=42), completed an online questionnaire which evaluated grades, parental education, course and social self-efficacy, and personal and school related obstacles and facilitators. Results: Students with ADHD (with or without comorbidity) reported the worst grades, personal situations (e.g., study habits, personal motivation), and course-related self-efficacy (e.g., time management, keeping up-to-date with school work). The single exception was that students with ADHD had more confidence in understanding textbooks than students with LD. Comorbid ADHD and LD sometimes led to worse outcomes than LD or ADHD alone. Conclusion: The common practice of combining all three groups, "LD and/or ADHD", should be avoided. Suggestions are made about what could be done to help students with ADHD.