BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jan David Smeddinck

Jan David Smeddinck contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Human-Computer Interaction

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Human-GDPR Interaction: Practical Experiences of Accessing Personal Data

In our data-centric world, most services rely on collecting and using personal data. The EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) aims to enhance individuals' control over their data, but its practical impact is not well understood. We present a 10-participant study, where each participant filed 4-5 data access requests. Through interviews accompanying these requests and discussions scrutinising returned data, it appears that GDPR falls short of its goals due to non-compliance and low-quality responses. Participants found their hopes to understand providers' data practices or harness their own data unmet. This causes increased distrust without any subjective improvement in power, although more transparent providers do earn greater trust. We propose designing more effective, data-inclusive and open policies and data access systems to improve both customer relations and individual agency, and also that wider public use of GDPR rights could help with delivering accountability and motivating providers to improve data practices.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Evaluating User Experiences in Mixed Reality

Measure user experience in MR (i.e., AR/VR) user studies is essential. Researchers apply a wide range of measuring methods using objective (e.g., biosignals, time logging), behavioral (e.g., gaze direction, movement amplitude), and subjective (e.g., standardized questionnaires) metrics. Many of these measurement instruments were adapted from use-cases outside of MR but have not been validated for usage in MR experiments. However, researchers are faced with various challenges and design alternatives when measuring immersive experiences. These challenges become even more diverse when running out-of-the lab studies. Measurement methods of VR experience recently received much attention. For example, research has started embedding questionnaires in the VE for various applications, allowing users to stay closer to the ongoing experience while filling out the survey. However, there is a diversity in the interaction methods and practices on how the assessment procedure is conducted. This diversity in methods underlines a missing shared agreement of standardized measurement tools for VR experiences. AR research strongly orients on the research methods from VR, e.g., using the same type of subjective questionnaires. However, some crucial technical differences require careful considerations during the evaluation. This workshop at CHI 2021 provides a foundation to exchange expertise and address challenges and opportunities of research methods in MR user studies. By this, our workshop launches a discussion of research methods that should lead to standardizing assessment methods in MR user studies. The outcomes of the workshop will be aggregated into a collective special issue journal article.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access