On August 24, 2020, Amazon revealed the release of a bracelet that gauges the wearer’s level of happiness by the sound of their voice (https://money.yahoo.com/amazon-health-wristband-gauges-happiness-221129110.html).
As far as I know, this is the first time when an outside agency – in this case, artificial intelligence – will track and record not only quantifiable measurements, such as the amount of hours a person sleeps, heart rate or the number of steps taken per day, but something as subjective as our feeling of happiness. It makes me ponder how this particular new technology could affect each wearer individually and the society at large.
Up until now, we knew that some things are subjective: beauty, taste, pain or happiness. Subjectivity was the point, something we agreed to disagree on – you find this image beautiful and I don’t and that’s ok, I like spinach and you detest it, and both opinions are valid. But what now? If a smart machine will conclusively decide that now we are happy and now we are not, how do we argue against that?
We are so used to trusting technology that we’ll most probably just assume that the happiness level readouts are accurate. But will they be? When I am asked to assess my own happiness on a scale of 1 to 5 for a survey, I often hesitate. How can we trust that AI knows exactly how we feel, better then we do? Besides, as psychology professors note, our perception of what happy voice sounds like varies by personality, culture and other factors.
What will the new feature mean for our self-awareness? Will we become more self-aware, taking better notice of when we are happy or sad at any given time, or less self-aware, completely relying on the readout, notwithstanding the issue of its accuracy? Will we start doubting ourselves if our own assessment of our state of wellbeing will differ from the verdict by AI?
It’s definitely nice to get a reminder that you are happy. But how will a wearer react to the assessment that she is not? And not just by a subjective feeling, but by very concrete words on a screen. There are many ways one could deal with that. Hopefully, people will turn to constructive and healthy practices: spending time with loved ones, meditating for a bit, taking a moment to recall several things they are grateful for or pausing what they are doing for several minutes of physical exercise. Although, if a person practices such habits and turns to them to feel better, they are probably already more aware of their happiness state.
However, Amazon Halo’s principal medical officer Dr. Maulik Majmudr mentions that despite the rise in digital health devices over the past decade, there is no corresponding improvement in health in the US. Therefore, it’s safe to assume that not everyone will start practicing their happiness skills once they see less favorable interpretation of their voices. I imagine some people will try to rectify the slum in the happiness readout by going for ice cream or wine or turning on a game to distract themselves. Some may find themselves in a catch 22, becoming more upset or saddened by the screen indicating that they are upset or sad. Some may self-diagnose and take antidepressants or mood boosters of some kind.
Alternatively, if someone wants to keep the results in a happy green without changing their life perception or lifestyle, they could probably just trick the device, saying aloud several artificially cheerful phrases. But then our understanding of what it means to be happy and how to achieve it may become blurry, more focused on keeping the readout at high levels rather than minding the feelings inside and working on the actual wellbeing.
Another option of dealing with the changing status of the happiness level is to not pay attention to it, to learn to disregard it. However, deliberately not caring can also decrease our self-awareness and mindfulness.
I also wonder if clear labels of happy or sad on our wristbands will lead to people reassessing satisfaction with their lives in general. We often do chores we don’t necessarily enjoy much out of love or duty or for the sake of our future selves. When we see “sad” on our wrists, how would it affect our attitude toward the necessity to continue this activity?
There are issues the society at large might want to consider as well. I wonder if the assessment will benefit or interfere with the field of psychology. Will people feel increased happiness or frustration about themselves and their lives? Will more or less people turn for professional help?
The wristband has build-in microphones that listen to and analyze the wearer’s voice. The manufacturer assures that our privacy will be protected. Still, there are potential problems with that on a whole other level than the possible issues with happiness assessment.
Besides, how do we feel about teaching machines to recognize human emotions, and as the next logical step, being able to alter them?
Generally, technology such as this is developed with good intentions – to make our lives happier, better, easier. At the same time there are a host of potential wellbeing, ethics and privacy issues that it raises. And so far, as technology changes the world we live in, there are more questions than answers. As for me, I will keep practicing happiness skills and keep relying on myself in assessing my happiness levels.
If you plan to do the same and want to brush up on your happiness skills, read my book Happiness the Jewish Way: A Practical Guide to Happiness Through the Lens of Jewish Wisdom.
