EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ana Vesic
dblp:433/3951
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0001-5148-8120ORCID · 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 |
Usability and user experience research · 100% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100% |
Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Usability and user experience research
technology acceptance |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Decomposing Autonomy: Explaining AI Technology Acceptance Through a Liberty-Based Framework · CHI 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
vignette study · 2.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Decomposing Autonomy: Explaining AI Technology Acceptance Through a Liberty-Based FrameworkabstractHuman autonomy is a core concept that helps explain the acceptance of and interaction with computer systems and AI technology. However, autonomy is often vaguely defined and conflated with related constructs. This paper disentangles autonomy by integrating the dualistic nature of positive and negative liberty from the perspective of political philosophy. Using an online vignette study with N=194 participants, we show that positive and negative liberty act as correlated but distinct dimensions of the autonomy foundation. While negative liberty predicts the sense of agency, positive liberty is a key dimension for people’s willingness to use technology. We argue that this dualistic stand - positive liberty as the freedom to pursue authentic goals, and negative liberty as the freedom from external constraints - offers a valuable and actionable perspective on human autonomy that can inform future system design and better answer the ambivalent question “how much autonomy is enough”? Dinara Talypova, Ana Vesic, Ambika Shahu, Helena Anna Frijns, Philipp Wintersberger |
CHI | 2 |