Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Maria Kett
dblp:402/9742
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-1975-7674ORCID · 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 |
Human-AI interaction · 44% Collaborative and social computing · 44% Design research and methods · 13% |
Topics — the 1 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Design research and methods › qualitative analysis
reflexive thematic analysis |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Bridging AI and Humanitarianism: An HCI-Informed Framework for Responsible AI Adoption · CHI 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
reflexive thematic analysis · 0.9interviews · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Bridging AI and Humanitarianism: An HCI-Informed Framework for Responsible AI AdoptionabstractAdvances in artificial intelligence (AI) hold transformative potential for humanitarian practice. Yet aligning this potential with the demands of humanitarian practice in dynamic and often resource-austere contexts remains a challenge. While research on Responsible AI provides high-level guidance, humanitarian practice demands nuanced approaches for which human-computer interaction (HCI) can provide a strong foundation. However, existing literature lacks a comprehensive examination of how HCI principles can inform responsible AI adoption in humanitarian practice. To address this gap, we conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of 34 interviews with AI technology experts, humanitarian practitioners, and humanitarian policy developers. Our contributions are twofold. First, we empirically identify three cross-cutting themes—AI risks in humanitarian practice, organisational readiness, and collaboration—that highlight common tensions in adopting AI for humanitarian practice. Second, by analysing their interconnectivities, we reveal intertwined obstacles and propose a conceptual HCI-informed framework. Tigmanshu Bhatnagar, Maarya Omar, Davor Orlic, Catherine Holloway, Maria Kett |
CHI | 6 |