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

Audra Sterling

dblp:372/6160 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0001-5031-9288ORCID · 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
Accessibility and assistive technology · 77% Collaborative and social computing · 23%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Accessibility and assistive technology › cognitive accessibility
technology for intellectual disabilities
0.812024
"It Is Easy Using My Apps: " Understanding Technology Use and Needs of Adults with Down Syndrome · CHI 2024
Collaborative and social computing › social interaction › social engagement
social participation
0.212024
"It Is Easy Using My Apps: " Understanding Technology Use and Needs of Adults with Down Syndrome · CHI 2024

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

thematic analysis · 0.8interviews · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 "It Is Easy Using My Apps: " Understanding Technology Use and Needs of Adults with Down Syndrome
abstract
Assistive technologies for adults with Down syndrome (DS) need designs tailored to their specific technology requirements. While prior research has explored technology design for individuals with intellectual disabilities, little is understood about the needs and expectations of adults with DS. Assistive technologies should leverage the abilities and interests of the population, while incorporating age- and context-considerate content. In this work, we interviewed six adults with DS, seven parents of adults with DS, and three experts in speech-language pathology, special education, and occupational therapy to determine how technology could support adults with DS. In our thematic analysis, four main themes emerged, including (1) community vs. home social involvement; (2) misalignment of skill expectations between adults with DS and parents; (3) family limitations in technology support; and (4) considerations for technology development. Our findings extend prior literature by including the voices of adults with DS in how and when they use technology.
Hailey L. Johnson, Audra Sterling, Bilge Mutlu
CHI2