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

Christine Denise Head

dblp:402/9892 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0005-8269-9912ORCID · reported

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 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
Collaborative and social computing · 77% Health and well-being technologies · 23%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Health and well-being technologies › health informatics › health information systems
electronic medical records
0.312026
Designing for Resistance: Analyzing Data Work Among Direct Service Providers · CHI 2026
Empirical software engineering › qualitative research
interview study
0.312026
Designing for Resistance: Analyzing Data Work Among Direct Service Providers · CHI 2026

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

typology development · 2.0interview study · 2.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Designing for Resistance: Analyzing Data Work Among Direct Service Providers
abstract
Information systems, such as electronic health records (EHRs) and case note software, increasingly support direct service providers (DSPs) in social service administration. Previous scholarship examined how these digital interventions enhance care but also create unintended consequences for DSPs and their clients. Despite broad interest in how DSPs and other frontline social service workers utilize information technology, few studies examine how they avoid digital tools, particularly when documentation stakes are high for both clients and DSPs. We report findings from interviews with 16 DSPs, who remain keenly aware that the information they document may become visible to others now and in the future. To protect themselves and their clients, they develop practices to resist recording data in digital records such as EHRs. We offer a typology of resistant data practices and design considerations grounded in the experiences and understanding of power within the roles of DSPs.
Christine Denise Head, Anne Marie Piper, Melissa Mazmanian
CHI1