VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Joshua Tseng
dblp:209/4776
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-1100-3835ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 3 · 3 since 2021
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Supporting Novices Author Audio Descriptions via Automatic FeedbackabstractAudio descriptions (AD) make videos accessible to those who cannot see them. But many videos lack AD and remain inaccessible as traditional approaches involve expensive professional production. We aim to lower production costs by involving novices in this process. We present an AD authoring system that supports novices to write scene descriptions (SD)-textual descriptions of video scenes-and convert them into AD via text-to-speech. The system combines video scene recognition and natural language processing to review novice-written SD and feeds back what to mention automatically. To assess the effectiveness of this automatic feedback in supporting novices, we recruited 60 participants to author SD with no feedback, human feedback, and automatic feedback. Our study shows that automatic feedback improves SD's descriptiveness, objectiveness, and learning quality, without affecting qualities like sufficiency and clarity. Though human feedback remains more effective, automatic feedback can reduce production costs by 45%. Rosiana Natalie, Joshua Tseng, Hernisa Kacorri, Kotaro Hara |
CHI | 2 |
| 2021 | The Efficacy of Collaborative Authoring of Video Scene DescriptionsabstractThe majority of online video contents remain inaccessible to people with visual impairments due to the lack of audio descriptions to depict the video scenes. Content creators have traditionally relied on professionals to author audio descriptions, but their service is costly and not readily-available. We investigate the feasibility of creating more cost-effective audio descriptions that are also of high quality by involving novices. Specifically, we designed, developed, and evaluated ViScene, a web-based collaborative audio description authoring tool that enables a sighted novice author and a reviewer either sighted or blind to interact and contribute to scene descriptions (SDs)—text that can be transformed into audio through text-to-speech. Through a mixed-design study with N = 60 participants, we assessed the quality of SDs created by sighted novices with feedback from both sighted and blind reviewers. Our results showed that with ViScene novices could produce content that is Descriptive, Objective, Referable, and Clear at a cost of i.e., US$2.81pvm to US$5.48pvm, which is 54% to 96% lower than the professional service. However, the descriptions lacked in other quality dimensions (e.g., learning, a measure of how well an SD conveys the video’s intended message). While professional audio describers remain the gold standard, for content creators who cannot afford it, ViScene offers a cost-effective alternative, ultimately leading to a more accessible medium. Rosiana Natalie, Jolene Loh, Huei Suen Tan, Joshua Tseng, Ian Luke Yi-Ren Chan, Ebrima Jarjue, Hernisa Kacorri, Kotaro Hara |
ASSETS | 4 |
| 2021 | Uncovering Patterns in Reviewers' Feedback to Scene Description AuthorsabstractAudio descriptions (ADs) can increase access to videos for blind people. Researchers have explored different mechanisms for generating ADs, with some of the most recent studies involving paid novices; to improve the quality of their ADs, novices receive feedback from reviewers. However, reviewer feedback is not instantaneous. To explore the potential for real-time feedback through automation, in this paper, we analyze 1,120 comments that 40 sighted novices received from a sighted or a blind reviewer. We find that feedback patterns tend to fall under four themes: (i) Quality; commenting on different AD quality variables, (ii) Speech Act; the utterance or speech action that the reviewers used, (iii) Required Action; the recommended action that the authors should do to improve the AD, and (iv) Guidance; the additional help that the reviewers gave to help the authors. We discuss which of these patterns could be automated within the review process as design implications for future AD collaborative authoring systems. Rosiana Natalie, Jolene Loh, Huei Suen Tan, Joshua Tseng, Hernisa Kacorri, Kotaro Hara |
ASSETS | 4 |