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.
EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert

Paul Sawyer

dblp:76/6590 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1996
—ORCID · none

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author

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%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Usability and user experience research
usability inspection		 0.011996
Making a Difference - the Impact of Inspections · CHI 1996
Empirical software engineering › software evaluation
inspection effectiveness		 0.011996
Making a Difference - the Impact of Inspections · CHI 1996

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

impact ratio metric · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1996 Making a Difference - the Impact of Inspections
abstract
In this methodology paper we define a metric we call impact ratio.We use this ratio to measure the effectiveness of inspections and other evaluative techniques in getting usability improvements into products.We inspected ten commercial software products and achieved an average impact ratio of 78%.We discuss factors affecting this ratio and its value in helping us to appraise usability engineering's impact on products.
Paul Sawyer, Alicia Flanders, Dennis R. Wixon
 CHI1