Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kianna Ng
dblp:374/8530
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0001-8927-9690ORCID · 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 |
Interaction techniques and input · 77% Haptics and multimodal interaction · 23% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Interaction techniques and input
text entry |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Investigating the Effects of Self-selected Pleasant Scents on Text Composition and Transcription Performance · CHI 2024 |
Haptics and multimodal interaction › olfactory interfaces
olfactory display |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Investigating the Effects of Self-selected Pleasant Scents on Text Composition and Transcription Performance · CHI 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
scent diffusion · 0.8empirical study · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Investigating the Effects of Self-selected Pleasant Scents on Text Composition and Transcription PerformanceabstractThe extensive use of computers for text entry has been linked to increased stress, depression, and sleep disturbances, adversely affecting performance. Recent trends involve using scent diffusers to counter these effects. However, the impact of scents on text entry performance is not well-studied. Our empirical study investigated the effects of self-selected pleasant scents on text composition and transcription performance. Results showed that while composing, users were slower with a scent present, potentially due to heightened focus on text quality. Scent did not alter accuracy or text length. In transcription tasks, although scent did not alter typing speed, it adversely affected accuracy, likely due to its impact on concentration levels. Despite these mixed results, users felt more effective and enjoyed the scent, indicating a preference for its continued use. This study opens avenues for further research into scents’ influence on computer-based tasks, potentially contributing to the evolving field of olfactory displays. Wendy Haw, Kianna Ng, Ahmed Sabbir Arif |
CHI | 3 |