Elizabeth Rosenzweig

Elizabeth Rosenzweig

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Elizabeth Rosenzweig

Bentley University, Waltham, MA, USA

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

26Years (2001-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 July 2001 in Computer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HLH. Lieberman
H. Lieberman
ERE. Rosenzweig
E. Rosenzweig
PSP. Singh
P. Singh
The paper discusses Aria, an interface agent designed to assist users by preactively looking for opportunities for image annotation and retrieval. While it does not completely automate the image annotation and retrieval process, Aria dramatically reduces user interface overhead, which can lead to better annotated image libraries and fewer missed opportunities for image use.

27 March 2024 in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CRChristine Riedmann-Streitz
Christine Riedmann-Streitz
NSNorbert Streitz
Norbert Streitz
MAMargherita Antona
Margherita Antona
AMAaron Marcus
Aaron Marcus
George MargetisGeorge Margetis
George Margetis
ERElizabeth Rosenzweig
Elizabeth Rosenzweig

2 June 2016 in Communication and the Public
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JGJohn Gastil
John Gastil
ERElizabeth Rosenzweig
Elizabeth Rosenzweig
KKKatherine R. Knobloch
Katherine R. Knobloch
DBDavid Brinker
David Brinker
Deliberative democratic theory has proposed the use of mini-publics to discern a more reflective public opinion, which can then be conveyed to policymakers or back to the wider public. In 2009, the legislature in the State of Oregon (USA) created one such process in the Citizens’ Initiative Review to help the public make informed choices on statewide ballot measures. This study investigated how the public conceptualizes and assesses the Citizens’ Statements that Citizens’ Initiative Review panels place in the statewide Voters’ Pamphlet. We pose a series of research questions concerning how the public perceives the role of the Citizens’ Initiative Review in initiative elections. We investigate those questions with usability testing sessions held in the final weeks before the 2014 election. Forty interviews were conducted in Portland, Oregon, and 20 were held in Denver, CO, where a pilot version of the Citizens’ Initiative Review was held. Online survey data collected in Oregon and Colorado followed up on the themes that emerged from the usability tests to obtain more general findings about these electorates’ views of elections and the Citizens’ Initiative Review. Key results showed that voters found the Citizens’ Initiative Review Statements to be a useful alternative source of information, although they required more information about the Citizens’ Initiative Review to make robust trust judgments about the process. Voters were uncertain of the value of the vote tally provided by Citizens’ Initiative Review panelists, but reading the Citizens’ Initiative Review Statement inspired some to vote on ballot measures they might have skipped.

1 December 2015
Verified
Book Chapter
Closed access
PDF file
HLHenry Lieberman
Henry Lieberman
CFChristopher Fry
Christopher Fry
ERElizabeth Rosenzweig
Elizabeth Rosenzweig


24 February 2014
Verified
Conference Paper
Open access
PDF file
HLHenry Lieberman
Henry Lieberman
ERElizabeth Rosenzweig
Elizabeth Rosenzweig
CFChristopher Fry
Christopher Fry