Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Alexis Lim
dblp:239/7866
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—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 |
Design research and methods · 61% Usability and user experience research · 30% Human-AI interaction · 9% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Design research and methods › user-centered design
child-centered design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Laughing is Scary, but Farting is Cute: A Conceptual Model of Children's Perspectives of Creepy Technologies · CHI 2019 |
Design research and methods
participatory design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Laughing is Scary, but Farting is Cute: A Conceptual Model of Children's Perspectives of Creepy Technologies · CHI 2019 |
Usability and user experience research
user perception |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Laughing is Scary, but Farting is Cute: A Conceptual Model of Children's Perspectives of Creepy Technologies · CHI 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
participatory design sessions · 0.4interviews · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Laughing is Scary, but Farting is Cute: A Conceptual Model of Children's Perspectives of Creepy TechnologiesabstractIn HCI, adult concerns about technologies for children have been studied extensively. However, less is known about what children themselves find concerning in everyday technologies. We examine children's technology-related fears by probing their use of the colloquial term "creepy." To understand children's perceptions of "creepy technologies," we conducted four participatory design sessions with children (ages 7 - 11) to design and evaluate creepy technologies, followed by interviews with the same children. We found that children's fear reactions emphasized physical harm and threats to their relationships (particularly with attachment figures). The creepy signals from technology the children described include: deception, lack of control, mimicry, ominous physical appearance, and unpredictability. Children acknowledged trusted adults will mediate the relationship between creepy technology signals and fear responses. Our work contributes a close examination of what children mean when they say a technology is "creepy." By treating these concerns as principal design considerations, developers can build systems that are more transparent about the risks they produce and more sensitive to the fears they may unintentionally raise. Jason C. Yip 0001, Kiley Sobel, Allison Marie Hishikawa, Alexis Lim, Laura Meng, Romaine Flor Ofiana, Justin Park, Alexis Hiniker |
CHI | 5 |