Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ester Fritsch
dblp:217/9302
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—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 |
Design research and methods · 77% Collaborative and social computing · 23% |
Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Design research and methods
responsible design |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Calling for a Revolution: An Analysis of IoT Manifestos · CHI 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
qualitative document analysis · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Calling for a Revolution: An Analysis of IoT ManifestosabstractDesigners and developers are increasingly writing manifestos to express frustration and uncertainty as they struggle to negotiate between the possibilities that IoT technologies offer, and the ethical concerns they engender. Manifestos are defining of a 'moment of crisis' and their recent proliferation indicates a desire for change. We analyze the messages manifesto authors have for their readers. Emerging from a sense of uncertainty, these manifestos create publics for debate, demand attention and call for change. While manifestos provide potential roadmaps for a better future, they also express a deep concern and even fear of the state of the world and the role of technology in it. We highlight how practitioners are responding to unstable and rapidly changing times and detail what solutions they envision, and what conflicts these might bring about. Our analysis suggests new ways HCI might theorize and design for responsibility while attending to the perils of responsibilisation. Ester Fritsch, Irina Shklovski, Rachel Douglas-Jones |
CHI | 1 |