Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Rituparna Roychoudhury

dblp:291/2494 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

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
1 paper
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments · 50% Collaborative and social computing · 50%
Network and information security
1 paper
Usable security · 50% Cyber-physical and IoT security · 50%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Collaborative and social computing
privacy management
0.612022
Exploring the Needs of Users for Supporting Privacy-Protective Behaviors in Smart Homes · CHI 2022
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments
smart home
0.612022
Exploring the Needs of Users for Supporting Privacy-Protective Behaviors in Smart Homes · CHI 2022
Usable security › usable privacy › privacy behavior
privacy-protective behaviors
0.612022
Exploring the Needs of Users for Supporting Privacy-Protective Behaviors in Smart Homes · CHI 2022
Cyber-physical and IoT security › iot privacy
smart home privacy
0.612022
Exploring the Needs of Users for Supporting Privacy-Protective Behaviors in Smart Homes · CHI 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

survey · 1.1participatory design · 1.1storyboards · 0.6storyboard · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Exploring the Needs of Users for Supporting Privacy-Protective Behaviors in Smart Homes
abstract
In this paper, we studied people’s smart home privacy-protective behaviors (SH-PPBs), to gain a better understanding of their privacy management do’s and don’ts in this context. We first surveyed 159 participants and elicited 33 unique SH-PPB practices, revealing that users heavily rely on ad hoc approaches at the physical layer (e.g., physical blocking, manual powering off). We also characterized the types of privacy concerns users wanted to address through SH-PPBs, the reasons preventing users from doing SH-PPBs, and privacy features they wished they had to support SH-PPBs. We then storyboarded 11 privacy protection concepts to explore opportunities to better support users’ needs, and asked another 227 participants to criticize and rank these design concepts. Among the 11 concepts, Privacy Diagnostics, which is similar to security diagnostics in anti-virus software, was far preferred over the rest. We also witnessed rich evidence of four important factors in designing SH-PPB tools, as users prefer (1) simple, (2) proactive, (3) preventative solutions that can (4) offer more control.
Haojian Jin, Boyuan Guo, Rituparna Roychoudhury, Yaxing Yao, Swarun Kumar, Yuvraj Agarwal, Jason I. Hong
CHI3