A Qualitative Study on How Usable Security and HCI Researchers Judge the Size and Importance of Odds Ratio and Cohen's d Effect Sizes
Anna-Marie Ortloff, Julia Angelika Grohs, Simon Lenau, Matthew Smith
Abstract
Researchers often place a strong focus on statistical significance when reporting the results of statistical tests. However, effect sizes are reported less frequently, and interpretation in the context of the study and the research field is even rarer. These interpretations of effect sizes are, however, necessary to understand the practical importance of a result for the community. To explore how Usable Security & Privacy (USP) and HCI researchers interpret effect sizes and make judgments on practical importance, we conducted survey and interview studies with a total of 63 researchers at CHI and SOUPS 2023. Our studies focused on Cohen's d and odds ratios in two USP and one HCI scenario. We analyzed which artifacts researchers consider when judging effect size, and found misconceptions and variation between the participants, highlighting how difficult judging statistics can be. Based on our findings, we make concrete recommendations for improved reporting practices around effect sizes.
• General and reference → Surveys and overviews; • Humancentered computing → Empirical studies in HCI; • Security and privacy → Human and societal aspects of security and privacy.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext b099149c-31fd-484a-b8cc-364205c2b84cCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on10
- You Get Where You're Looking for: The Impact of Information Sources on Code SecurityYasemin Acar, Michael Backes, Sascha Fahl, Doowon Kim et al.S&P 2016 · 325 citations
- Why Do Developers Get Password Storage Wrong?: A Qualitative Usability StudyAlena Naiakshina, Anastasia Danilova, Christian Tiefenau, Marco Herzog et al.CCS 2017 · 146 citations
- Visual Reasoning Strategies for Effect Size Judgments and DecisionsAlex Kale, Matthew Kay, Jessica HullmanIEEE VIS 2020 · 112 citations
- How Visualizing Inferential Uncertainty Can Mislead Readers About Treatment Effects in Scientific ResultsJake M. Hofman, Daniel G. Goldstein, Jessica HullmanCHI 2020 · 83 citations
- Privacy Research with Marginalized Groups: What We Know, What's Needed, and What's NextShruti Sannon, Andrea ForteCSCW 2022 · 66 citations
Related papers
- Small, Medium, Large? A Meta-Study of Effect Sizes at CHI to Aid Interpretation of Effect Sizes and Power CalculationAnna-Marie Ortloff, Florin Martius, Mischa Meier, Theo Raimbault et al.CHI 2025 · 17 citations
- Transparency in Usable Privacy and Security Research: Scholars' Perspectives, Practices, and RecommendationsJan H. Klemmer, Juliane Schmüser, Byron M. Lowens, Fabian Fischer et al.S&P 2025
- Putting scientific results in perspective: Improving the communication of standardized effect sizesYea-Seul Kim, Jake M. Hofman, Daniel G. GoldsteinCHI 2022 · 16 citations
- What is User Engagement?: A Systematic Review of 241 Research Articles in Human-Computer Interaction and BeyondBernard J. Jansen, Kathleen W. Guan, Joni Salminen, Kholoud Khalil Aldous et al.CHI 2025 · 17 citations
- Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Exploring Data Protection Practices for Personal Data in Usable Security & Privacy StudiesFlorin Martius, Luisa Jansen, Lukas Struck, Arthi Arumugam et al.CHI 2025 · 7 citations
