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

Anabelle Cooper

dblp:340/7652 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-3732-4805ORCID · reported

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

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 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
1 paper
Personal fabrication and tangible interfaces · 44% Design research and methods · 44% Collaborative and social computing · 13%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Personal fabrication and tangible interfaces
maker culture
0.712023
Democratizing Making: Scaffolding Participation Using e-Waste to Engage Under-resourced Communities in Technology Design · CHI 2023
Design research and methods
participatory design
0.712023
Democratizing Making: Scaffolding Participation Using e-Waste to Engage Under-resourced Communities in Technology Design · CHI 2023

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

participatory maker workshops · 0.7e-waste toolkit · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Democratizing Making: Scaffolding Participation Using e-Waste to Engage Under-resourced Communities in Technology Design
abstract
Maker culture and DIY practices are central to democratizing the design of technology; enabling non-designers (future end-users) to actively participate in the design process. However, little is known about how individuals from under-resourced communities and low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds, can practically leverage maker practices to design technology, creating value for themselves or their communities. To investigate this, we collaborated with an e-waste recycling centre, involving 24 participants (staff and low-SES volunteers) in two participatory maker workshop activities. Participants were provided with a generative e-waste toolkit, through which they repurposed e-waste materials and developed novel technology prototypes that created value from their perspectives and agendas. Our findings unpack three factors that influenced their making: balancing personal and community needs; incorporating convenience and productivity; and re-thinking sustainability and connection; and discuss strategies for scaffolding participation and engagement of under-resourced communities in making using an e-waste generative toolkit to democratize technology design.
Dhaval Vyas, Awais Hameed Khan, Anabelle Cooper
CHI3