论文标题

10年网络安全用户研究(扩展版)的统计可靠性

Statistical Reliability of 10 Years of Cyber Security User Studies (Extended Version)

论文作者

Groß, Thomas

论文摘要

背景。近年来,网络安全用户研究已在元研究中进行了评估,主要关注其统计推断的完整性和统计报告的保真度。但是,估计该领域的统计能力分布及其出版偏见并没有得到太多关注。目的。在这项研究中,我们旨在估计效果大小及其标准错误以及对统计能力和出版偏见的影响。方法。我们基于对网络安全用户研究的$ 146 $(2006---2016)的发表系统文献评论。我们考虑了$ 431 $的统计推断,包括$ t $ - ,$χ^2 $ - ,$ r $ - ,单向$ f $ -tests和$ z $ -tests。此外,我们编码了相应的总样本量,小组尺寸和测试家族。鉴于这些数据,我们确定了观察到的效果大小并评估了总体出版物偏见。我们进一步计算了参数化人群阈值的统计功率有关的统计功率,以获得对功率分布的无偏估计。结果。我们获得了效应大小的分布及其转换为可比的对数赔率,以及它们的标准误差。此外,我们获得了样本中存在的出版偏差的漏斗图估计,以及对电源分配及其后果的见解。结论。通过权力和出版偏见的镜头,我们阐明了该领域研究的统计可靠性。此内省的结果是进行和评估研究以推进领域的实用建议。

Background. In recent years, cyber security security user studies have been appraised in meta-research, mostly focusing on the completeness of their statistical inferences and the fidelity of their statistical reporting. However, estimates of the field's distribution of statistical power and its publication bias have not received much attention. Aim. In this study, we aim to estimate the effect sizes and their standard errors present as well as the implications on statistical power and publication bias. Method. We built upon a published systematic literature review of $146$ user studies in cyber security (2006--2016). We took into account $431$ statistical inferences including $t$-, $χ^2$-, $r$-, one-way $F$-tests, and $Z$-tests. In addition, we coded the corresponding total sample sizes, group sizes and test families. Given these data, we established the observed effect sizes and evaluated the overall publication bias. We further computed the statistical power vis-{à}-vis of parametrized population thresholds to gain unbiased estimates of the power distribution. Results. We obtained a distribution of effect sizes and their conversion into comparable log odds ratios together with their standard errors. We, further, gained funnel-plot estimates of the publication bias present in the sample as well as insights into the power distribution and its consequences. Conclusions. Through the lenses of power and publication bias, we shed light on the statistical reliability of the studies in the field. The upshot of this introspection is practical recommendations on conducting and evaluating studies to advance the field.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源