How does this message make you feel? A study of user perspectives on software update/warning message design

Abstract

Software update messages are commonly used to inform users about software updates, recent bug fixes, and various system vulnerabilities, and to suggest recommended actions (e.g., updating software). While various design features (e.g., update options, message layout, update message presentation) of these messages can influence the actions taken by users, no prior study can be found that investigated users opinions regarding various design alternatives. To address this void, this paper focuses on identifying software update message design features (e.g., layout, color, content) that may affect users positively or negatively. Toward that, we conducted a user study where users are shown 13 software update messages along with 1 virus warning message. We collect responses from 155 users through an online survey. Participants gave a total of 809 positive comments and 866 negative comments along with ranking of each image in terms of perceived importance, noticeability, annoyance and confusion. As many of the comments are repetitive and often contain multiple themes, we manually analyzed and performed a bottom-up, inductive coding to identify and refine the underlying themes. Over multiple iterations, positive comments were grouped into 52 categories which were subsequently grouped under four themes. Similarly, negative comments were first grouped into 38 categories which were subsequently grouped under four themes. Based on our analysis, we present the list of design features that are found to be highly correlated to confusion, annoyance, noticeability, and importance, either positively or negatively.

An investigation into users’ considerations towards using password managers

“…Das et al showed that social influences were key in users' consideration of security decisions and impactful towards security outcomes [20]. Several studies have identified the importance of individual considerations in the decision of users to apply a software update [21][22][23][24]. In particular, past experiences were identified to be an important factor in users' decisions, particularly if past experiences were negative [22,23].…”

“…Several studies have identified the importance of individual considerations in the decision of users to apply a software update [21][22][23][24]. In particular, past experiences were identified to be an important factor in users' decisions, particularly if past experiences were negative [22,23]. In addition to user perceptions, more work in cybersecurity is also taking a more explicitly psychological approach towards understanding users' computer security behaviors, as shown in Howe et al 's 2012 survey of literature related to the psychology of end-users [25].…”

In Control with no Control: Perceptions and Reality of Windows 10 Home Edition Update Features

“…It has been widely established that changes to features and interfaces are common reasons for not updating, especially after previous negative experiences [5], [13], [23]- [26]. Bergan and Whittaker [23] explained the impact of changes to interfaces in terms of five key cognitive concepts: a loss of cognitive automation (a need for more attention to the task after a user interface is made less familiar); negative transfer effects (the need to discard skills learned 'doing things the old way'); the need to rebuild cognitive maps (such as rediscovering where a menu item is); the need to retrain procedural memory ('even if we know 'in our heads', our 'hands' still do what they used to do with the old interface') and; the demotivating effects on the user of a feeling of loss of overall control.…”

“…Many previous studies about software updating e.g. [7], [22], [26] have also drawn participants from academically biased pools. These participants might be more technically savvy, with more technically accurate mental models of updates.…”

Sustainable and Practical Firmware Upgrade for Wireless Access Point Using Password-Based Authentication

“…Step 1: WAP ⟶ S: = { , , , , } The firmware upgrade is started when the WAP administrator performs a firmware upgrade or a regularly scheduled application is started [27]. The WAP sends a client hello message to the server S. The client hello contains the TLS version, a random number of 32 bytes, the session ID, and the supported encryption and compression algorithms.…”