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

Paweł W. Woźniak

Paweł W. Woźniak contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Human-Computer InteractionCryptography and Security

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
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

4 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Creepy Technology: What Is It and How Do You Measure It?

Interactive technologies are getting closer to our bodies and permeate the infrastructure of our homes. While such technologies offer many benefits, they can also cause an initial feeling of unease in users. It is important for Human-Computer Interaction to manage first impressions and avoid designing technologies that appear creepy. To that end, we developed the Perceived Creepiness of Technology Scale (PCTS), which measures how creepy a technology appears to a user in an initial encounter with a new artefact. The scale was developed based on past work on creepiness and a set of ten focus groups conducted with users from diverse backgrounds. We followed a structured process of analytically developing and validating the scale. The PCTS is designed to enable designers and researchers to quickly compare interactive technologies and ensure that they do not design technologies that produce initial feelings of creepiness in users.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Brotate and Tribike: Designing Smartphone Control for Cycling

The more people commute by bicycle, the higher is the number of cyclists using their smartphones while cycling and compromising traffic safety. We have designed, implemented and evaluated two prototypes for smartphone control devices that do not require the cyclists to remove their hands from the handlebars - the three-button device Tribike and the rotation-controlled Brotate. The devices were the result of a user-centred design process where we identified the key features needed for a on-bike smartphone control device. We evaluated the devices in a biking exercise with 19 participants, where users completed a series of common smartphone tasks. The study showed that Brotate allowed for significantly more lateral control of the bicycle and both devices reduced the cognitive load required to use the smartphone. Our work contributes insights into designing interfaces for cycling.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Embracing Companion Technologies

As an increasing number of interactive devices offer human-like assistance, there is a growing need to understand the human experience of interactive agents. When interactive artefacts with human-like features become intertwined in our everyday experience, we need to make sure that they assume the right roles and contribute to our wellbeing. In this theoretical exploration, we propose a reframing of our understanding of interactions with everyday technologies by proposing the metaphor of digital companions. We employ the theory in the philosophy of empathy to propose a framework for understanding how users develop relationships with digital agents. The experiential framework for companion technologies provides connections between the users' psychological needs and companion-like features of interactive systems. Our work provides a theoretical basis for rethinking the user experience of everyday artefacts with a humanistic mindset and poses future challenges for HCI.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

SAFER: Development and Evaluation of an IoT Device Risk Assessment Framework in a Multinational Organization

Users of Internet of Things (IoT) devices are often unaware of their security risks and cannot sufficiently factor security considerations into their device selection. This puts networks, infrastructure and users at risk. We developed and evaluated SAFER, an IoT device risk assessment framework designed to improve users' ability to assess the security of connected devices. We deployed SAFER in a large multinational organization that permits use of private devices. To evaluate the framework, we conducted a mixed-method study with 20 employees. Our findings suggest that SAFER increases users' awareness of security issues. It provides valuable advice and impacts device selection. Based on our findings, we discuss implications for the design of device risk assessment tools, with particular regard to the relationship between risk communication and user perceptions of device complexity.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access