We are in the process of curating a list of this year’s publications — including links to social media, lab websites, and supplemental material. Currently, we have 96 full papers, 19 posters, one journal paper, two interactive demos, two student mentoring programs and we lead six workshops. Three papers received a best paper award and 11 papers received an honorable mention.
Your publication from 2026 is missing? Please enter the details in this Google Forms and send us an email that you added a publication: contact@germanhci.de
Characterizing Scam-Driven Human Trafficking Across Chinese Borders and Online Community Responses on RedNote
Jiamin Zheng (University of Edinburgh), Yue Deng (Hong Kong University of Science and, Technology & Max Planck Institute for Security, Privacy), Jessica Chen (University of Edinburgh), Shujun Li (University of Kent), Yixin Zou (Max Planck Institute for Security, Privacy), Jingjie Li (University of Edinburgh)
Best PaperAbstract | Tags: Best Paper, Papers | Links:
@inproceedings{Zheng2026CharacterizingScamdriven,
title = {Characterizing Scam-Driven Human Trafficking Across Chinese Borders and Online Community Responses on RedNote},
author = {Jiamin Zheng (University of Edinburgh), Yue Deng (Hong Kong University of Science and, Technology & Max Planck Institute for Security and Privacy), Jessica Chen (University of Edinburgh), Shujun Li (University of Kent), Yixin Zou (Max Planck Institute for Security and Privacy), Jingjie Li (University of Edinburgh)},
url = {https://yixinzou.github.io/group/, website https://www.linkedin.com/company/max-planck-institute-for-security-and-privacy/posts/?feedView=all, lab's linkedin
https://www.linkedin.com/in/karen-zheng-2b2267247/, author's linkedin},
doi = {10.1145/3772318.3791786},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-04-13},
urldate = {2026-04-13},
abstract = {A new form of human trafficking has emerged across Chinese borders, where individuals are lured to Southeast Asia with fraudulent job offers and then coerced into operating online scams. Despite its massive economic and human toll, this scam-driven trafficking remains underexplored in academic research. Through qualitative analysis of 158 RedNote posts, we examined how Chinese online communities respond to this threat. Our findings reveal that perpetrators exploit cultural ties to recruit victims for cybercriminal roles within self-sustaining compounds, using sophisticated manipulation tactics. Survivors face serious reintegration barriers, including family rejection, as the cultural values that enable trafficking also hinder their recovery. While communities present protective strategies, efforts are complicated by doubts about the reliability of support and cross-border coordination. We discuss key implications for prevention, platform governance, and international cooperation against scam-driven trafficking. Warning: This paper contains descriptions of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse.},
keywords = {Best Paper, Papers},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
A new form of human trafficking has emerged across Chinese borders, where individuals are lured to Southeast Asia with fraudulent job offers and then coerced into operating online scams. Despite its massive economic and human toll, this scam-driven trafficking remains underexplored in academic research. Through qualitative analysis of 158 RedNote posts, we examined how Chinese online communities respond to this threat. Our findings reveal that perpetrators exploit cultural ties to recruit victims for cybercriminal roles within self-sustaining compounds, using sophisticated manipulation tactics. Survivors face serious reintegration barriers, including family rejection, as the cultural values that enable trafficking also hinder their recovery. While communities present protective strategies, efforts are complicated by doubts about the reliability of support and cross-border coordination. We discuss key implications for prevention, platform governance, and international cooperation against scam-driven trafficking. Warning: This paper contains descriptions of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse.
From Using to Infrastructuring: Grassroots VPN-Building in Iran’s Women–Life–Freedom Movement
Sarvin Qalandar (Zentrum für Digitalisierung Südwestfalen), Philip Engelbutzeder (Information Systems, New Media, University of Siegen), David Randall (Information Systems, New Media, University of Siegen), Volker Wulf (Information Systems, New Media, University of Siegen)
Best PaperAbstract | Tags: Best Paper, Papers | Links:
@inproceedings{Qalandar2026FromUsing,
title = {From Using to Infrastructuring: Grassroots VPN-Building in Iran’s Women–Life–Freedom Movement},
author = {Sarvin Qalandar (Zentrum für Digitalisierung Südwestfalen), Philip Engelbutzeder (Information Systems and New Media, University of Siegen), David Randall (Information Systems and New Media, University of Siegen), Volker Wulf (Information Systems and New Media, University of Siegen)},
doi = {10.1145/3772318.3790369},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-04-13},
urldate = {2026-04-13},
abstract = {States increasingly weaponize digital infrastructures through censorship and surveillance. Iran represents an acute case of this broader global pattern. We study how citizens sustain connectivity and agency during Iran’s Women–Life–Freedom (WLF) protests. Based on 21 interviews with citizens and digital activists in Kermanshah province, inside Iran and in the diaspora, we document a shift from dependence on commercial circumvention to grassroots infrastructuring: people created and shared VPNs, proxies, and ad hoc communication pipelines. Peer learning on platforms such as Telegram, X, and GitHub—via Persian tutorials, scripts, and troubleshooting—enabled rapid adaptation under repression. We identify four dynamics: (1) distrust and survival as primary motivations; (2) infrastructural solidarity as everyday care; (3) technical improvisation and peer teaching; and (4) persistent constraints from censorship and risk. We argue that grassroots infrastructuring reframes end-user development as survival work. The paper contributes empirical evidence and design implications for HCI/CSCW on civic technologies, digital activism, and infrastructures of participation under authoritarian control.},
keywords = {Best Paper, Papers},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
States increasingly weaponize digital infrastructures through censorship and surveillance. Iran represents an acute case of this broader global pattern. We study how citizens sustain connectivity and agency during Iran’s Women–Life–Freedom (WLF) protests. Based on 21 interviews with citizens and digital activists in Kermanshah province, inside Iran and in the diaspora, we document a shift from dependence on commercial circumvention to grassroots infrastructuring: people created and shared VPNs, proxies, and ad hoc communication pipelines. Peer learning on platforms such as Telegram, X, and GitHub—via Persian tutorials, scripts, and troubleshooting—enabled rapid adaptation under repression. We identify four dynamics: (1) distrust and survival as primary motivations; (2) infrastructural solidarity as everyday care; (3) technical improvisation and peer teaching; and (4) persistent constraints from censorship and risk. We argue that grassroots infrastructuring reframes end-user development as survival work. The paper contributes empirical evidence and design implications for HCI/CSCW on civic technologies, digital activism, and infrastructures of participation under authoritarian control.
Who Controls the Conversation? User Perspectives on AI System Prompts
Anna Neumann (RC-Trust, UA Ruhr + University Duisburg-Essen), Yulu Pi (RC-Trust, UA Ruhr + University Duisburg-Essen), Jat Singh (RC-Trust, UA Ruhr + University Duisburg-Essen)
Best PaperAbstract | Tags: Best Paper, Papers | Links:
@inproceedings{Neumann2026WhoControls,
title = {Who Controls the Conversation? User Perspectives on AI System Prompts},
author = {Anna Neumann (RC-Trust, UA Ruhr + University Duisburg-Essen), Yulu Pi (RC-Trust, UA Ruhr + University Duisburg-Essen), Jat Singh (RC-Trust, UA Ruhr + University Duisburg-Essen)},
url = {www.linkedin.com/in/anna-neumann-rctrust, author's social media},
doi = {10.1145/3772318.3791726},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-04-13},
urldate = {2026-04-13},
abstract = {System prompts—instructions that shape the behaviour of generative AI systems—strongly influence system outputs and users' experiences. They define the model's guidelines, `personality', and guardrails, taking precedence over user inputs. Despite their influence, transparency is limited: system prompts are generally not made public and most platforms instruct models to conceal them, leaving users disconnected from and unaware of a key mechanism guiding and governing their AI interactions. This paper argues that system prompts warrant explicit, user-centred design attention and, focusing on large language models (LLMs), asks: what do system prompts contain, how do end-users perceive them, and what do these perceptions offer for design and governance practice? Our results reveal user perspectives on: the benefits and risks of system prompts; the values they prefer to be associated with prompt-design; their levels of comfort with different types of prompts; and degrees of transparency and user control regarding prompt content. From these findings emerge considerations for how designers can better align system prompt mechanisms with user expectations and preferences over these mechanisms that directly shape how generative AI systems behave.},
keywords = {Best Paper, Papers},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
System prompts—instructions that shape the behaviour of generative AI systems—strongly influence system outputs and users' experiences. They define the model's guidelines, `personality', and guardrails, taking precedence over user inputs. Despite their influence, transparency is limited: system prompts are generally not made public and most platforms instruct models to conceal them, leaving users disconnected from and unaware of a key mechanism guiding and governing their AI interactions. This paper argues that system prompts warrant explicit, user-centred design attention and, focusing on large language models (LLMs), asks: what do system prompts contain, how do end-users perceive them, and what do these perceptions offer for design and governance practice? Our results reveal user perspectives on: the benefits and risks of system prompts; the values they prefer to be associated with prompt-design; their levels of comfort with different types of prompts; and degrees of transparency and user control regarding prompt content. From these findings emerge considerations for how designers can better align system prompt mechanisms with user expectations and preferences over these mechanisms that directly shape how generative AI systems behave.