I was interested to read last month’s feature on activity tracker accuracy, and whether this is important (HCM May, p46).
This debate is a red herring for most fitness users. Much like scales to weigh yourself, their accuracy depends on many variables: the manufacturer, the time of day, what you ate, etc. If your goal is to win a top marathon or triathlon, accuracy is very relevant: these races are often won by a few seconds. But for general fitness users, at this stage in the development of most devices/apps, it’s more about how they can improve motivation.
Weight loss and significant health improvements take time, and this is where the wearable market is of great value. Small incremental praise, given often and focusing on my immediate improvements, will lead me to do more. No change or a bunch of data I don’t understand will demotivate me and ultimately stop me using the service.
All that said, we’re entering the next stage of development of apps and wearables: many are becoming much more accurate in the data fields they present, almost to the gold standards used in the medical world. This will be important as the health and fitness world looks to gain more credibility from the medical and sports worlds.
As for the app versus wearable debate, they are really the same thing: the winner will be the one with the user experience that leads to increased motivation every time the app/device is used.
One thing is for sure: this market is moving fast and users are making their own decisions on what’s best for them. Gyms need to help people understand the choices available to them rather than telling them what to do.