Author(s): Kaczmarek, T; Kobsa, A; Sy, R; Tsudik, G | Abstract: User errors while performing security-critical tasks can lead to undesirable or even disastrous consequences. One major factor influencing mistakes and failures is complexity of such tasks, which has been studied extensively in prior research. Another important issue which hardly received any attention is the impact of both accidental and intended distractions on users performing security-critical tasks. In particular, it is unclear whether, and to what extent, unexpected sensory cues (e.g., auditory or visual) can influence user behavior and or trigger mistakes. Better understanding of the effects of intended distractions will help clarify their role in adversarial models. As part of the research effort described in this paper, we administered a range of naturally occurring -- yet unexpected -- sounds while study participants attempted to perform a security-critical task. We found that, although these auditory cues lowered participants' failure rates, they had no discernible effect on their task completion times. To this end, we overview some relevant literature that explains these somewhat counter-intuitive findings. Conducting a thorough and meaningful study on user errors requires a large number of participants, since errors are typically infrequent and should not be instigated more than once per subject. To reduce the effort of running numerous subjects, we developed a novel experimental setup that was fully automated and unattended. We discuss our experience with this setup and highlight the pros and cons of generalizing its usage.
The literature on the effects of noise on monitoring performance shows a disappointing lack of consistency in results. The hypothesis of the present study was that task classification in terms of demands made on the observer should reconcile conflicting findings so that generalizations could be made. Therefore, a study was made of the effects of intermittent or variable noise on vigilance experiments with similar task demands. Twenty-one sensory vigilance studies, selected from 98 visual performance experiments, were analyzed in detail. It appeared that, even when studies possess similar task characteristics, they are hard to compare due to the many types and varieties of the noise variables involved and the measures of performance used. Contradictory results remain. It was concluded that we know nothing about the effects of variable noise on sustained attention, despite the importance of this kind of noise for everyday life. Using this detailed analysis as an illustration, it was suggested that disparate...