Skip to main content

Mental Models of Verifiability in Voting

  • Conference paper
E-Voting and Identify (Vote-ID 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNSC,volume 7985))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In order for voters to verify their votes, they have to carry out additional steps besides selecting a candidate and submitting their vote. In previous work, voters have been found to be confused about the concept of and motivation for verifiability in electronic voting when confronted with it. In order to better communicate verifiability to voters, we identify mental models of verifiability in voting using a questionnaire distributed online in Germany. The identified mental models are, Trusting, No Knowledge, Observer, Personal Involvement and Matching models. Within the same survey, we identify terms that can be used in place of ‘verify’ as well as security-relevant metaphors known to the voters that can be used to communicate verifiability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Microsoft: Forsa-Umfrage: Jeder zweite würde online wählen. Digitale Technologien stärken die Demokratie. Bürgerbeteiligung über das Internet fördert Vertrauen in die Politik (2013), http://www.microsoft.com/germany/newsroom/pressemitteilung.mspx?id=533684 (accessed March 22, 2013)

  2. Simons, B., Jones, D.W.: Internet voting in the U.S. Communications of the ACM 55(10), 68–77 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sherman, A.T., Carback, R., Chaum, D., Clark, J., Essex, A., Herrnson, P.S., Mayberry, T., Stefan, P., Rivest, R.L., Shen, E., Sinha, B., Vora, P.: Scantegrity Mock Election at Takoma Park. In: Electronic Voting 2010 (EVOTE 2010), pp. 45–61 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Karayumak, F., Kauer, M., Olembo, M.M., Volk, T., Volkamer, M.: User Study of the Improved Helios Voting System Interface. In: Socio-Technical Aspects in Security and Trust (STAST), pp. 37–44. IEEE (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schneider, S., Llewellyn, M., Culnane, C., Heather, J., Srinivasan, S., Xia, Z.: Focus Group Views on Prêt à Voter 1.0. In: International Workshop on Requirements Engineering for Electronic Voting Systems (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Langer, L., Schmidt, A., Buchmann, J., Volkamer, M.: A Taxonomy Refining the Security Requirements for Electronic Voting: Analyzing Helios as a Proof of Concept. In: International Conference on Availability, Reliability, and Security, ARES 2010, pp. 475–480. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Krimmer, R., Volkamer, M.: Bits or Paper? Comparing Remote Electronic Voting to Postal Voting. In: Andersen, K., Grönlund, A., Traunmüller, R., Wimmer, M. (eds.) Workshop and Poster Proceedings of the Fourth International EGOV Conference, pp. 225–232 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Demirel, D., Henning, M., Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S., Volkamer, M.: Feasibility Analysis of Prêt à Voter for German Federal Elections. In: Kiayias, A., Lipmaa, H. (eds.) VoteID 2011. LNCS, vol. 7187, pp. 158–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Storer, T., Little, L., Duncan, I.: An Exploratory Study of Voter Attitudes Towards a Pollsterless Remote Voting System. In: Chaum, D., Rivest, R., Ryan, P.Y.A. (eds.) IaVoSS Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (WOTE 2006) Pre-Proceedings, pp. 77–86 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Campbell, B.A., Byrne, M.D.: Straight-Party Voting: What Do Voters Think? IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 4(4), 718–728 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yao, Y., Murphy, L.: Remote Electronic Voting Systems: An Exploration of Voters’ Perceptions and Intention to Use. European Journal of Information Systems 16(2), 106–120 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Raja, F., Hawkey, K., Beznosov, K.: Revealing Hidden Context: Improving Mental Models of Personal Firewall Users. In: Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2009 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Almuhimedi, H., Bhan, A., Mohindra, D., Sunshine, J.S.: Toward Web Browsers that Make or Break Trust. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2008 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Raja, F., Hawkey, K., Jaferian, P., Beznosov, K., Booth, K.S.: It’s Too Complicated, So I turned It Off!: Expectations, Perceptions, and Misconceptions of Personal Firewalls. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Assurable and Usable Security Configuration, SafeConfig 2010, pp. 53–62 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Friedman, B., Hurley, D., Howe, D.C., Felten, E., Nissenbaum, H.: Users’ Conceptions of Web Security: A Comparative Study. In: Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI EA 2002, pp. 746–747. ACM (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ho, J.T., Dearman, D., Truong, K.N.: Improving Users’ Security Choices on Home Wireless Networks. In: Symposium of Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2010 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wash, R.: Folk Models of Home Computer Security. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2010 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dourish, P., Grinter, B., Delgado de la Flor, J., Joseph, M.: Security in the wild: User Strategies for Managing Security as an Everyday, Practical Problem. Personal and Ubiquitious Computing 8(6), 391–401 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Camp, L.J.: Mental models of computer security. In: Juels, A. (ed.) FC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3110, pp. 106–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Camp, L.: Mental Models of Privacy and Security. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 28(3), 37–46 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Asgharpour, F., Liu, D., Camp, L.J.: Mental Models of Computer Security Risks. In: Workshop on the Economics of Information Security (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Liu, D., Asgharpour, F., Camp, L.J.: Risk Communication in Security Using Mental Models. In: Usable Security (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Camp, J., Asgharpour, F., Liu, D.: Risk Communication in Computer Security Using Mental Models. In: Workshop on the Economics of Information Security, WEIS 2007 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bravo-Lillo, C., Cranor, L.F., Downs, J.S., Komanduri, S.: Bridging the Gap in Computer Security Warnings: A Mental Model Approach. IEEE Security and Privacy 9(2), 18–26 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Charmaz, K.: Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis, 1st edn. Sage Publications Limited (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Andrews, D., Nonnecke, B., Preece, J.: Conducting Research on the Internet: Online Survey Design, Development and Implementation Guidelines. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 16(2), 185–210 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Oppenheim, A.N.: Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. Continuum (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wright, K.B.: Researching Internet-based Populations: Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Survey Research, Online Questionnaire Authoring Software Packages, and Web Survey Services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lazar, J., Feng, J.H., Hochheiser, H.: Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley and Sons (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Guest, G., Bunce, A., Johnson, L.: How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods 18(1), 59–82 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Karayumak, F., Michaela, K., Maina, O., Melanie, V.: Usability Analysis of Helios - An Open Source Verifiable Remote Electronic Voting System. In: Proceedings of the 2011 USENIX Electronic Voting Technology Workshop/Workshop on Trustworthy Elections. USENIX (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Olembo, M.M., Bartsch, S., Volkamer, M. (2013). Mental Models of Verifiability in Voting. In: Heather, J., Schneider, S., Teague, V. (eds) E-Voting and Identify. Vote-ID 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7985. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39185-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39185-9_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39184-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39185-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics