After JEE, I pursued Design at IIT Guwahati with a focus on Interaction Design. Known by different acronyms such as UX, IxD, UCD, etc., design aids a user in making sense of the world by humanizing technology. Here, I was introduced to several disciples of design and was trained in design methods, usability and visual design. After my bachelor's program, I worked as a UX designer for 3 years, shaping user interfaces of e-commerce platfroms and business services.
With an interest in understanding the building blocks of experience and human cognition, I went on to pursue Cognitive Science. Here I was introduced to the realm of Science and was trained in quantitative research methods and experiment designs. For my dissertation, I explored the prevalence of a human error called goal slippage through a lab experiment. After my master's, I worked as a UX researcher for a year.
Seeking research opportunities to design for human wellbeing, I returned to academia. Currently, I am pursuing a PhD at Lancaster University, wherein I am exploring goal technologies. Here I was trained in participatory design methods and scientific writing,. I have also been a teaching assistant for the HCI courses at Lancaster.
పక్కా తెలుగు, I come from the region of Mahakavi Sri Sri!
I follow cricket, movies and politics, typical of an Indian. Lately I picked up cooking and running, typical of PhDing.
Hobby numbers:
🏃🏼♂️ 10K Run 56:44 (top 39pt of the race finishers, N=400)
♟️ Chess Bullet 673 (top 32pt on chess.com, N>7M)
🏏 Cricket Bare CC 4% Bare2s runs (top 67 pt of active batsmen, N=60)
For comparison, I was in top 3pt in JEE 2012 (N>500K and 1.2pt within OBC, N>250K) and 0.1pt in topics of math such as P&C (N>20K) so I stuck to the boring academics and was always on the lookout for quant and math. This search was resolved in 2020 when I was introduced to the concept of statistical significance, alongside the post-positivist paradigms such as Karl Popper's falsifiability. There on, my repertoire in quantitative analysis grew. This pursuit allowed me to lead quantitative analysis for a systematic review project. More broadly, this endeavour introduced me to science and shaped my approach to critical thinking. Currently, I'm exploring my dilemma 'Is HCI a science?' 'Are our methods (quantitative as well as qualitative) rigorous enough?'. If these questions interest you too, I'd encourage you to read J Zimmerman et al 2007 or Braun and Clarke 2021. This exploration is informing me that logic and rigour are the backbone of any work, including the subjective approaches in qualitative methods and that they are rarely done as prescribed.
In a recent development (early 2026), I received back-to-back recognitions for my peer reviews in HCI conferences.
100+ user interviews
22 expert interviews
17 co-design workshops
30+ usability testing sessions
1 web experiment (N=40)
1 in-the-wild longitudinal study (N=20)
500+ large surveys
Numerous short surveys, web analytics, A/B tests (N>300K)
In a cascading effect, as a TA for HCI courses I had the opportunity to teach some of these methods to CS bachelor students. Working in groups, students (N>300) created 50+ unique reaction time web experiments and 300+ usability testing sessions.
2025: 33 TSRI score (reflection, out of 42) for a goal intervention
2024: (secondary research) Identified medium overall effect size for HCI's goal interventions in the recent decade
2022: Maintained 4.5 rating (satisfaction, out of 5) for numerous scaled deployments of a work-related AI bot
2019: 4x increase in session time (engagement) for e-commerce brand pages
2017: 29 point SUS (usability, out of 100) increase for an e-commerce website