Alessandra Jungs de Almeida

dblp:431/0188 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-0932-3354ORCID · reported

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
Collaborative and social computing · 87% Human-AI interaction · 13%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Collaborative and social computing
computer-supported cooperative work
1.012026
Reimagining Data Work: Participatory Annotation Workshops as Feminist Practice · CHI 2026
Collaborative and social computing › knowledge work
data work
1.012026
Reimagining Data Work: Participatory Annotation Workshops as Feminist Practice · CHI 2026

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

workshop · 1.0participatory design · 1.0case study · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Reimagining Data Work: Participatory Annotation Workshops as Feminist Practice
abstract
AI systems depend on the invisible and undervalued labor of data workers, who are often treated as interchangeable units of labor rather than as collaborators with meaningful expertise. Critical scholars and practitioners have proposed alternative principles for data work, but few empirical studies examine how to enact them in practice. This paper bridges this gap through a case study of multilingual, iterative, and participatory data annotation processes with journalists and activists focused on news narratives of gender-related violence. We offer two methodological contributions. First, we demonstrate how workshops rooted in feminist epistemology can foster dialogue, build community, and disrupt knowledge hierarchies in data annotation. Second, drawing insights from practice, we deepen analysis of existing feminist and participatory principles. We show, for example, that prioritizing context and pluralism in practice may require “bounding” context and working towards what we describe as a “tactical consensus.” We also explore tensions around materially acknowledging labor while resisting transactional researcher-participant dynamics. Through this work, we contribute to growing efforts to reimagine data and AI development as relational and political spaces for understanding difference, enacting care, and building solidarity across shared struggles.
Isadora Cruxen, Helena Suárez Val, Alessandra Jungs de Almeida, Catherine D'Ignazio, Harini Suresh
CHI4