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

Susan M. Dray

dblp:19/4597 · also Susan Dray · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
12ranked-venue papers
4as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0001-6941-4939ORCID · verified

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 12 · 4 first-author · 1 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
2 papers
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments · 68% Usability and user experience research · 20% Design research and methods · 11%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments › domestic technology
domestic technology use
0.012001
Breaking up is hard to do: family perspectives on the future of the home PC · Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2001
Design research and methods › design process
sociotechnical system design
0.011986
Socio-tech: what is it (and why should we care)? · CHI 1986

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

qualitative study · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 The World Usability Initiative: Toward Inclusive and Usable Computing Technologies Worldwide
abstract
Usability is the key to making future technology useful to the world, yet it is often ignored. This workshop will introduce Usability, and brainstorm ways to incorporate it into UN SDGs. One example is our effort to add World Usability Day (WUD) to the UN calendar. We will explore implications for technology design for the Global South. We will also identify concrete next steps that we all can take to advance Usability worldwide.
Elizabeth Rosenzweig, Shaimaa Y. Lazem, Susan M. Dray
COMPASS3
2014 Socio-technical practices and work-home boundaries
abstract
Recent advances in mobile technology have had many positive effects on the ways in which people can combine work and home life. For example, having remote access enables people to work from home, or work flexible hours that fit around caring responsibilities. They also support communication with colleagues and family members, and enable digital hobbies. However, the resulting 'always-online' culture can undermine work-home boundaries and cause stress to those who feel under pressure to respond immediately to digital notifications. This workshop will explore how a socio-technical perspective, which views boundaries as being constituted by everyday socio-technical practices, can inform the design of technologies that help maintain boundaries between work and home life.
Anna Louise Cox, Jon Bird, Natasha Mauthner, Susan M. Dray, Anicia N. Peters, Emily Collins 0001
Mobile HCI4
2009 Key Issues in Planning and Making Sense of International Field Research
Susan M. Dray, David A. Siegel
INTERACT (2)1
2009 Understanding Users in Context: An In-Depth Introduction to Fieldwork for User Centered Design
Susan M. Dray, David A. Siegel
INTERACT (2)1
2009 Ethics, Roles and Relationships in Interaction Design in Developing Regions
Anxo Cereijo Roibás, Andrew M. Dearden, Susan M. Dray, Phil Gray, John C. Thomas, Niall Winters
INTERACT (2)3
2007 Sharing Perspectives on Community-Centered Design and International Development
Mike Best, Andrew M. Dearden, Susan M. Dray, Ann Light, John C. Thomas, Celeste Buckhalter, Dan Greenblatt, Shanks Krishnan, Nithya Sambasivan
INTERACT (2)3
2007 Socially Responsible Design in the Context of International Development
Andrew M. Dearden, Lynne Dunckley, Mike Best, Susan M. Dray, Ann Light, John C. Thomas
INTERACT (2)4
2007 Understanding Users In Context: An In-Depth Introduction to Fieldwork for User Centered Design
Susan M. Dray, David A. Siegel
INTERACT (2)1
2001 The past recaptured: in search of lost paradigms
abstract
In the mid 1980s, a cluster of HF professionals described a new paradigm in which technology would be designed for a better fit not just with individual users but also with organizational systems and dynamics. The term 'Macroergonomics' took hold to describe this broadening of perspective. This concept was a manifestation of the holistic design philosophy and values of the user-centred design (UCD) paradigm, but tended to place more emphasis on how technology fit into organizational systems than on either design or on individual use of technology. While the benefits in the quality of work life that were expected to result from paying more attention to how organizations managed technology and technological change were many, the track record has been disappointing. The promotion of a focus on the organizational context of technology did not lead directly to practical application or make companies more humane for either their workers or for external customers. Today, however, with the maturation and broadening application of user-centred design approaches, the time is ripe to apply them to the design of information systems within companies as vigorously as they are being applied to products and systems intended for consumers.
Susan M. Dray, David A. Siegel
Behav. Inf. Technol.1
2001 Breaking up is hard to do: family perspectives on the future of the home PC
David M. Frohlich, Susan M. Dray, Amy Silverman
Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud.2
1990 Usability engineering on a budget
Jakob Nielsen, Susan M. Dray, James D. Foley, Paul Walsh, Peter C. Wright
INTERACT2
1986 Socio-tech: what is it (and why should we care)?
abstract
At a time when more and different people are using more and different computer systems, there is growing awareness that if technology is to give companies the “competitive edge” they are seeking, it must be used to support business goals. This means that systems must work within the existing organization to improve and extend its functioning. This also means that the design of these systems must enhance the organization, not disrupt it. Yet technology is, by its very nature, a stimulus for change. The question then becomes: How can this intrinsically de-stabilizing technology be designed and implemented in a way which supports the organization, without destroying it? It is the purpose of this panel to explore this basic question.
Richard W. Pew, Karen Assunto, Walter Baker, Susan M. Dray, James C. Taylor
CHI4