Anna-Marie Ortloff
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Anna-Marie Ortloff has a total of 24 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Matthew Smith
University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany and Fraunhofer FKIE, Bonn, Germany
5 shared publications - Florin Martius
University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
4 shared publications - Alena Naiakshina
University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
2 shared publications - Anne Mertens
University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
2 shared publications - Asli Yardim
Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
2 shared publications - Christian Tiefenau
University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 29 August 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 88-112
"How do security threats affect my work?" - Software Developers’ Mental Models of IT Security Threats and Mitigation Strategies
- 29 August 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 88-112
Open Access"How do security threats affect my work?" - Software Developers’ Mental Models of IT Security Threats and Mitigation Strategies
- Open Access
- 13 April 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-11
PowerMeter - User Friendly Power Analysis for HCI Studies
- 13 April 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-11
Open AccessPowerMeter - User Friendly Power Analysis for HCI Studies
- Open Access
- 13 April 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-33
"The AI tool can’t make it any worse." Investigating Developers’ Security Behavior with AI Assistants in a Password Storage Study
Past research showed that software developers often require explicit instructions to implement security measures. With the rapid rise of AI assistant tools such as ChatGPT, it remains unclear whether AI assistance supports or undermines secure practices, whether explicit security instructions are still essential, and how developers behave without guidance. To investigate these research questions, we conducted a qualitative lab study with 21 computer science students and a quantitative online study with 80 freelance developers. We focused on secure password storage and asked participants to implement registration logic under four conditions: without instructions, with AI assistance, with security instructions, or with both AI assistance and security instructions. Our study reveals a clear behavioral shift: In our task, many participants relied on AI-assisted code generation for security-related tasks, often prioritizing convenience over security. However, explicit security-focused instructions can redirect this behavior toward secure outcomes, demonstrating that AI tools alone are insufficient without targeted guidance.
- 13 April 2026
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-33
Open Access"The AI tool can’t make it any worse." Investigating Developers’ Security Behavior with AI Assistants in a Password Storage Study
Past research showed that software developers often require explicit instructions to implement security measures. With the rapid rise of AI assistant tools such as ChatGPT, it remains unclear whether AI assistance supports or undermines secure practices, whether explicit security instructions are still essential, and how developers behave without guidance. To investigate these research questions, we conducted a qualitative lab study with 21 computer science students and a quantitative online study with 80 freelance developers. We focused on secure password storage and asked participants to implement registration logic under four conditions: without instructions, with AI assistance, with security instructions, or with both AI assistance and security instructions. Our study reveals a clear behavioral shift: In our task, many participants relied on AI-assisted code generation for security-related tasks, often prioritizing convenience over security. However, explicit security-focused instructions can redirect this behavior toward secure outcomes, demonstrating that AI tools alone are insufficient without targeted guidance.
- Open Access
- 25 April 2025
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-16
A Qualitative Study on How Usable Security and HCI Researchers Judge the Size and Importance of Odds Ratio and Cohen's d Effect Sizes
- 25 April 2025
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-16
Open AccessA Qualitative Study on How Usable Security and HCI Researchers Judge the Size and Importance of Odds Ratio and Cohen's d Effect Sizes
- Open Access
- 25 April 2025
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-28
Small, Medium, Large? A Meta-Study of Effect Sizes at CHI to Aid Interpretation of Effect Sizes and Power Calculation
- 25 April 2025
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-28
Open AccessSmall, Medium, Large? A Meta-Study of Effect Sizes at CHI to Aid Interpretation of Effect Sizes and Power Calculation
- Open Access
- 25 April 2025
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-16
Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Exploring Data Protection Practices for Personal Data in Usable Security & Privacy Studies
- 25 April 2025
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-16
Open AccessOut of Sight, Out of Mind? Exploring Data Protection Practices for Personal Data in Usable Security & Privacy Studies
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 19 April 2023
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-21
Different Researchers, Different Results? Analyzing the Influence of Researcher Experience and Data Type During Qualitative Analysis of an Interview and Survey Study on Security Advice
When conducting qualitative research it is necessary to decide how many researchers should be involved in coding the data: Is one enough or are more coders beneficial? To offer empirical evidence for this question, we designed a series of studies investigating qualitative coding. We replicated and extended a usable security and privacy study by Ion et al. to gather both simple survey data and complex interview data. We had a total of 65 students and seven researchers analyze different parts of this data. We analyzed the codebook creation process, similarity of outcomes, inter-rater reliability, and compared the student to the researcher outcomes. We also surveyed five years of SOUPS-PC members about their views on coding. The reviewers view on coding practices for complex and simple data are almost identical. However, our results suggest that the coding process can be different for the two types of data, with complex data benefiting more from interaction between coders.
- 19 April 2023
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- p. 1-21
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessDifferent Researchers, Different Results? Analyzing the Influence of Researcher Experience and Data Type During Qualitative Analysis of an Interview and Survey Study on Security Advice
When conducting qualitative research it is necessary to decide how many researchers should be involved in coding the data: Is one enough or are more coders beneficial? To offer empirical evidence for this question, we designed a series of studies investigating qualitative coding. We replicated and extended a usable security and privacy study by Ion et al. to gather both simple survey data and complex interview data. We had a total of 65 students and seven researchers analyze different parts of this data. We analyzed the codebook creation process, similarity of outcomes, inter-rater reliability, and compared the student to the researcher outcomes. We also surveyed five years of SOUPS-PC members about their views on coding. The reviewers view on coding practices for complex and simple data are almost identical. However, our results suggest that the coding process can be different for the two types of data, with complex data benefiting more from interaction between coders.