Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Susan E. Davies
dblp:01/1367
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1992
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 3
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
3 papers |
Usability and user experience research · 61% User interface design and tools · 22% Interaction techniques and input · 17% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Usability and user experience research › usability evaluation
automated usability evaluation |
0.0 | 1 | 1991 | An automated cognitive walkthrough · CHI 1991 |
Usability and user experience research › usability inspection
cognitive walkthrough |
0.0 | 1 | 1991 | An automated cognitive walkthrough · CHI 1991 |
Interaction techniques and input › selection techniques
menu system |
0.0 | 1 | 1988 | Transfer between menu systems · CHI 1988 |
Interaction techniques and input › selection techniques › command selection
menu interaction |
0.0 | 1 | 1988 | Transfer between menu systems · CHI 1988 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
quantitative prediction · 0.0production system model · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1992 | A visit to a very small database: lessons from managing the review of papers submitted for CHI'91abstractMany of the principles that guide user-interface design for commercial systems do not scale down to simple applications developed on personal computers. These “very small systems” are typicaly designed within a high-level application such as a database or a spreadsheet. The entire development process may take no more than a few days. In this restricted context, iterative design and usability testing are unaffordable luxuries, while detailed task analysis and early focus on users fail because the task and users will not coalesce until the system is in place. We describe our experiences with developing and using a very small sytem. We present suggestions for successful design in similar situations. John Rieman, Susan E. Davies |
CHI | 2 |
| 1991 | An automated cognitive walkthroughabstractNo abstract available. John Rieman, Susan E. Davies, D. Charles Hair, Mary Esemplare, Peter G. Polson, Clayton H. Lewis |
CHI | 2 |
| 1988 | Transfer between menu systemsabstractThis paper investigates whether changes in the user/computer dialogue structure will affect the performance of users who are familiar with an earlier version of the product. Quantitative predictions using the Kieras and Polson (1985) production system model were derived to test whether changing the lexical attributes and structure of a popular menu-driven word-processor would permit transfer of existing knowledge of the word-processor to a new version. The results show that changes to the dialogue structure of the menu-system are not detrimental, while changes to the lexical attributes of the menus will hinder user performance. Peter W. Foltz, Susan E. Davies, Peter G. Polson, David E. Kieras |
CHI | 2 |