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

Leah Sprain

dblp:183/7405 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · unresolved

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.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
User interface design and tools · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational social science and digital humanities
science and technology studies
0.312017
Thin Grey Lines: Confrontations With Risk on Colorado's Front Range · CHI 2017

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

ethnographic observation · 0.6design research · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2017 Thin Grey Lines: Confrontations With Risk on Colorado's Front Range
abstract
This paper reports on two years of ethnographic observation of the science and politics of flood risk in Colorado, as well as design research that examines citizen interaction with expert knowledge about flooding in the region. We argue that the 100-year floodplain standard that inform maps produced by the USA Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)'s National Floodplain Insurance Program (NFIP) represent a problematic form of discursive closure of scientific understanding of flood hazard. We show that in order to meet the requirements of the NFIP, this standard acts as a closure that conveys a certainty that the underlying science does not warrant and foreshortens dialogue on disaster risk and public understanding of flood hazard. Engaging with literature in science and technology studies and human-centered computing, we investigate design opportunities for resisting closure and supporting public formation through encounters with the uncertainty and complexities of risk information.
Robert Soden, Leah Sprain, Leysia Palen
CHI2