Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Hayley Hinsberger
dblp:179/4842
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1
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 · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Collaborative and social computing › social media
self-presentation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Does Saying This Make Me Look Good?: How Posters and Outsiders Evaluate Facebook Updates · CHI 2016 |
Collaborative and social computing
social media |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Does Saying This Make Me Look Good?: How Posters and Outsiders Evaluate Facebook Updates · CHI 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
empirical study · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | Does Saying This Make Me Look Good?: How Posters and Outsiders Evaluate Facebook UpdatesabstractPeople often try to impress their friends online, but we don't know how well they do it or what they talk about to try to make themselves look good. In the face of known egocentric biases, which cause communicators to overestimate the extent that audiences will understand the intent of their messages, and self-enhancement biases, that cause people to overvalue their own behavior, it is likely that many self-presentation attempts will often fail. However, we don't know which topics cause such failure. In an empirical study, 1300 Facebook users evaluated their most recent status update in terms of how good it make them look. In addition external judges also evaluated the same update. Posters and outsiders agreed only modestly about how good an update made the poster appear (r=.36, p<.001). Posters generally thought that their posts make them look better than did the outsider judges. They also disagreed on which topics made them look good. Posters were especially likely to overestimate their self-presentation when they wrote about the mundane details of their daily life (e.g., Clothing, Sleep, or Religious imagery), but underestimated it when they wrote about family and relationships (e.g., Birthday, Father's Day, Love). Yi-Chia Wang, Hayley Hinsberger, Robert E. Kraut |
CHI | 2 |