Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Situational States Influence on Team Workload Demands in Cyber Defense Exercise

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
HCI International 2021 - Late Breaking Papers: Cognition, Inclusion, Learning, and Culture (HCII 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 13096))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Cyber operations are increasingly automated processes that can occur at computational speed with the intent of reducing, or denying time for good decision making or time to ground communication between human agents. There is a lack of performance measures and metrics in cyber operation settings. One potential setting describing human performance could be emotional stability under stress. Measures of higher individual affective variability indicate more emotional adaptability and allows for measuring individuals as dynamic systems. Previous research in other security-sensitive high-stake situations has shown that individuals with less emotional adaptability display maladaptive behaviors while individuals with more emotional adaptability can adapt more efficiently to changing situations, show more confidence in their own abilities and skills, and display better performance. We hypothesized that measurements of affective variability during a cyber defense exercise will be associated with team workload demands. Data was collected from 13 cadets during the Norwegian Defence Cyber Academy’s annual Cyber Defense Exercise. Three indicators of individual affective variability were measured daily with the Self-Assessment Manikin and compared to scores on the Team Workload Questionnaire. We found that affective variability was negatively associated with team workload demands. Participants with higher affective variability, as measured by the Self-Assessment Manikin, will impose less workload demands on the team, which can lead to better outcomes. This is the first study to assess how individual emotional adaptability affects team dynamics in a cyber defense setting. Future research should include variable measurements as they may have better explanatory power for performance measurements.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ask, T.F., et al.: Human-Human Communication in Cyber Threat Situations: A Systematic Review, N.U.o.S.a. Technology, Editor. p. 20 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Muniz, J., McIntyre, G., AlFardan, N.: Security Operations center: Building, Operating, and Maintaining your Soc. Cisco Press (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jøsok, Ø., Knox, B.J., Helkala, K., Lugo, R.G., Sütterlin, S., Ward, P.: Exploring the hybrid space: theoretical framework applying cognitive science in military cyberspace operations. In: Schmorrow, D.D., Fidopiastis, C.M. (eds.) Foundations of Augmented Cognition: Neuroergonomics and Operational Neuroscience: 10th International Conference, AC 2016, Held as Part of HCI International 2016, Toronto, ON, Canada, July 17-22, 2016, Proceedings, Part II, pp. 178–188. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39952-2_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Zanenga, P.: Knowledge eyes: nature and emergence in society, culture, and economy. In: 2014 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE). IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Knox, B.J., Lugo, R.G., Jøsok, Ø., Helkala, K., Sütterlin, S.: Towards a cognitive agility index: the role of metacognition in human computer interaction. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) HCI International 2017 – Posters’ Extended Abstracts: 19th International Conference, HCI International 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 9–14, 2017, Proceedings, Part I, pp. 330–338. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58750-9_46

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Agyepong, E., et al.: Challenges and performance metrics for security operations center analysts: a systematic review. J. Cyber Secur. Technol. 4(3), 125–152 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Koval, P., Ogrinz, B., Kuppens, P., Van den Bergh, O., Tuerlinckx, F., Sütterlin, S.: Affective instability in daily life is predicted by resting heart rate variability. PLoS ONE 8(11), e81536 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nesselroade, J.R.: Interindividual differences in intraindividual change. In: Collins, L.M., Horn, J.L. (eds.) Best methods for the analysis of change: Recent advances, unanswered questions, future directions., pp. 92–105. American Psychological Association, Washington (1991). https://doi.org/10.1037/10099-006

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Molenaar, P.C., Campbell, C.G.: The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 18(2), 112–117 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Timmermans, T., Van Mechelen, I., Kuppens, P.: The relationship between individual differences in intraindividual variability in core affect and interpersonal behaviour. Eur. J. Pers. 24(8), 623–638 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boehm, J.K., et al.: Variability modifies life satisfaction’s association with mortality risk in older adults. Psychol. Sci. 26(7), 1063–1070 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hoffman, R.R., Hancock, P.A.: Measuring resilience. Hum. Factors 59(4), 564–581 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kahneman, D., Klein, G.: Conditions for intuitive expertise: a failure to disagree. Am. Psychol. 64(6), 515 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kavanagh, D.J., Bower, G.H.: Mood and self-efficacy: impact of joy and sadness on perceived capabilities. Cogn. Ther. Res. 9(5), 507–525 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bandura, A.: Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 2(2), 128–163 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Caprara, G.V., et al.: Mastery of negative affect: a hierarchical model of emotional self-efficacy beliefs. Psychol. Assess. 25(1), 105 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  17. González-Ibáñez, R., Shah, C.: Performance effects of positive and negative affective states in a collaborative information seeking task. In: Baloian, N., Burstein, F., Ogata, H., Santoro, F., Zurita, G. (eds.) Collaboration and Technology, pp. 153–168. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10166-8_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Lugo, R.G., et al.: Impact of initial emotional states and self-efficacy changes on nursing students’ practical skills performance in simulation-based education. Nurs. Rep. 11(2), 267–278 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Corbett, M.: From law to folklore: work stress and the Yerkes-Dodson law. J. Manag. Psychol. 30(6), 741–752 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-03-2013-0085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yerkes, R.M., Dodson, J.D.: The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Punishment Issues Exp. p. 27–41 (1908)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fernandes, M.A., et al.: Changing the focus of attention: the interacting effect of valence and arousal. Vis. Cogn. 19(9), 1191–1211 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Khoshnoud, S., Igarzábal, F.A., Wittmann, M.: Peripheral-physiological and neural correlates of the flow experience while playing video games: a comprehensive review. Peer J. 8, e10520 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Golkar, A., et al.: Distinct contributions of the dorsolateral prefrontal and orbitofrontal cortex during emotion regulation. PLoS ONE 7(11), e48107 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Banks, S.J., et al.: Amygdala–frontal connectivity during emotion regulation. Soc. Cognitive Affect. Neurosci. 2(4), 303–312 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. De Raedt, R., Koster, E.H.: Understanding vulnerability for depression from a cognitive neuroscience perspective: a reappraisal of attentional factors and a new conceptual framework. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 10(1), 50–70 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  26. De Raedt, R., Vanderhasselt, M.-A., Baeken, C.: Neurostimulation as an intervention for treatment resistant depression: from research on mechanisms towards targeted neurocognitive strategies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 41, 61–69 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Thayer, J.F., Lane, R.D.: A model of neurovisceral integration in emotion regulation and dysregulation. J. Affect. Disord. 61(3), 201–216 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Brunoni, A.R., et al.: Polarity-and valence-dependent effects of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation on heart rate variability and salivary cortisol. Psychoneuroendocrinology 38(1), 58–66 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Nikolin, S., Boonstra, T.W., Loo, C.K., Martin, D.: Combined effect of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation and a working memory task on heart rate variability. PLoS ONE 12(8), e0181833 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Thayer, J.F., et al.: A meta-analysis of heart rate variability and neuroimaging studies: implications for heart rate variability as a marker of stress and health. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 36(2), 747–756 (2012)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Appelhans, B.M., Luecken, L.J.: Heart rate variability as an index of regulated emotional responding. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 10(3), 229–240 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hildebrandt, L.K., et al.: Cognitive flexibility, heart rate variability, and resilience predict fine-grained regulation of arousal during prolonged threat. Psychophysiology 53(6), 880–890 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jøsok, Ø., Knox, B.J., Helkala, K., Wilson, K., Sütterlin, S., Lugo, R.G., Ødegaard, T.: Macrocognition applied to the hybrid space: team environment, functions and processes in cyber operations. In: Schmorrow, D.D., Fidopiastis, C.M. (eds.) Augmented Cognition. Enhancing Cognition and Behavior in Complex Human Environments: 11th International Conference, AC 2017, Held as Part of HCI International 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 9-14, 2017, Proceedings, Part II, pp. 486–500. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58625-0_35

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Cropley, M., et al.: The association between work-related rumination and heart rate variability: a field study. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 11, 27 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Résibois, M., et al.: The relation between rumination and temporal features of emotion intensity. Cogn. Emot. 32(2), 259–274 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lugo, R.G., et al.: Interoceptive sensitivity as a proxy for emotional intensity and its relationship with perseverative cognition. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 11, 1 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Porges, S.W.: The polyvagal perspective. Biol. Psychol. 74(2), 116–143 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Prizant, B.M., Meyer, E.C.: Socioemotional aspects of language and social-communication disorders in young children and their families. Am. J. Speech Lang. Pathol. 2(3), 56–71 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wilson, S.J., et al.: When couples’ hearts beat together: synchrony in heart rate variability during conflict predicts heightened inflammation throughout the day. Psychoneuroendocrinology 93, 107–116 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sætren, S.S., et al.: A multilevel investigation of resiliency scales for children and adolescents: the relationships between self-perceived emotion regulation, vagally mediated heart rate variability, and personal factors associated with resilience. Front. Psychol. 10, 438 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lischke, A., et al.: Heart rate variability is associated with social value orientation in males but not females. Sci. Rep. 8(1), 1–9 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bertollo, M., Robazza, C., Comani, S.: The juggling paradigm: a novel social neuroscience approach to identify neuropsychophysiological markers of team mental models. Front. Psychol. 6, 799 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bourguignon, M., et al.: The pace of prosodic phrasing couples the listener’s cortex to the reader’s voice. Hum. Brain Mapp. 34(2), 314–326 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Dikker, S., et al.: Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Curr. Biol. 27(9), 1375–1380 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Lindenberger, U., et al.: Brains swinging in concert: cortical phase synchronization while playing guitar. BMC Neurosci. 10(1), 1–12 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Filho, E., et al.: Shared mental models and intra-team psychophysiological patterns: a test of the juggling paradigm. J. Sports Sci. 35(2), 112–123 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hasson, U., et al.: Brain-to-brain coupling: a mechanism for creating and sharing a social world. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16(2), 114–121 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  48. McCraty, R.: New frontiers in heart rate variability and social coherence research: techniques, technologies, and implications for improving group dynamics and outcomes. Front. Public Health 5, 267 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Müller, V., Lindenberger, U.: Cardiac and respiratory patterns synchronize between persons during choir singing. PLoS ONE 6(9), e24893 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Reed, K.B., et al.: Haptic cooperation between people, and between people and machines. In: 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Stephens, G.J., Silbert, L.J., Hasson, U.: Speaker–listener neural coupling underlies successful communication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107(32), 14425–14430 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kang, O., Wheatley, T.: Pupil dilation patterns spontaneously synchronize across individuals during shared attention. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 146(4), 569 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Beatty, J., et al.: Handbook of Psychophysiology. Cambridge University Press Cambridge. pp. 142–162 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Loewenfeld, I.E.: The Pupil: Anatomy, Physiology, and Clinical Applications. Vol. 2. Iowa State University Press (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Johnstone, T., et al.: Failure to regulate: counterproductive recruitment of top-down prefrontal-subcortical circuitry in major depression. J. Neurosci. 27(33), 8877–8884 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kinner, V.L., et al.: What our eyes tell us about feelings: tracking pupillary responses during emotion regulation processes. Psychophysiology 54(4), 508–518 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Van Steenbergen, H., Band, G.P.: Pupil dilation in the Simon task as a marker of conflict processing. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 215 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Allaert, J., Sanchez-Lopez, A., De Raedt, R., Baeken, C., Vanderhasselt, M.-A.: Inverse effects of tDCS over the left versus right DLPC on emotional processing: A pupillometry study. PLoS ONE 14(6), e0218327 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Jodoin, V.D., et al.: Effects of vagus nerve stimulation on pupillary function. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 98(3), 455–459 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Goldman-Rakic, P.S.: Cellular basis of working memory. Neuron 14(3), 477–485 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wang, M., et al.: NMDA receptors subserve persistent neuronal firing during working memory in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Neuron 77(4), 736–749 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Duncan, J.: The multiple-demand (MD) system of the primate brain: mental programs for intelligent behaviour. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14(4), 172–179 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Ivanova, A.A., et al.: Comprehension of computer code relies primarily on domain-general executive brain regions. Elife 9, e58906 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Liu, Y.-F., et al.: Computer code comprehension shares neural resources with formal logical inference in the fronto-parietal network. Elife 9, e59340 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Jiang, J., et al.: Prefrontal reinstatement of contextual task demand is predicted by separable hippocampal patterns. Nat. Commun. 11(1), 1–12 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Catherwood, D., et al.: Mapping brain activity during loss of situation awareness: an EEG investigation of a basis for top-down influence on perception. Hum. Factors 56(8), 1428–1452 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Parkinson, C., Kleinbaum, A.M., Wheatley, T.: Spontaneous neural encoding of social network position. Nat. Hum. Behav. 1(5), 1–7 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Knox, B.J., et al.: Socio-technical communication: the hybrid space and the OLB model for science-based cyber education. Mil. Psychol. 30(4), 350–359 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Shamay-Tsoory, S.G., et al.: Characterization of empathy deficits following prefrontal brain damage: the role of the right ventromedial prefrontal cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 15(3), 324–337 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Koenigs, M.: The role of prefrontal cortex in psychopathy. Rev. Neurosci. 23(3), 253–262 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Meessen, J., Sütterlin, S., Gauggel, S., Forkmann, T.: Learning by heart—the relationship between resting vagal tone and metacognitive judgments: a pilot study. Cogn. Process. 19(4), 557–561 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-018-0865-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Kelley, N.J., et al.: Stimulating self-regulation: a review of non-invasive brain stimulation studies of goal-directed behavior. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 12, 337 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Beeney, J.E., et al.: Self–other disturbance in borderline personality disorder: neural, self-report, and performance-based evidence. Personal. Disord. Theory Res. Treat. 7(1), 28 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Frith, U., Frith, C.D.: Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. London. B Biol. Sci. 358(1431), 459–473 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  75. Preston, S.D., De Waal, F.B.: Empathy: its ultimate and proximate bases. Behav. Brain Sci. 25(1), 1–20 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hamilton, K., et al.: Skilled and unaware: the interactive effects of team cognition, team metacognition, and task confidence on team performance. J. Cognitive Eng. Deci. Making 11(4), 382–395 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  77. Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J.: Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 25(1), 49–59 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  78. DeFalco, J.A., et al.: Detecting and addressing frustration in a serious game for military training. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 28(2), 152–193 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  79. Paquette, L., et al.: Sensor-Free or Sensor-Full: A Comparison of Data Modalities in Multi-Channel Affect Detection. International Educational Data Mining Society (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Sellers, J., et al.: Development of the team workload questionnaire (TWLQ). In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  81. Goss-Sampson, M.: Statistical analysis in JASP: A guide for students. JASP (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  82. Lugo, R.G., Knox, B.J., Josøk, Ø., Sütterlin, S.: Variable self-efficacy as a measurement for behaviors in cyber security operations. In: Schmorrow, D.D., Fidopiastis, C.M. (eds.) HCII 2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12197, pp. 395–404. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50439-7_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  83. Nakajima, M., Ian Schmitt, L., Halassa, M.M.: Prefrontal cortex regulates sensory filtering through a basal ganglia-to-thalamus pathway. Neuron 103(3), 445-458.e10 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  84. Phillips, J.M., Kambi, N.A., Saalmann, Y.B.: A subcortical pathway for rapid, goal-driven, attentional filtering. Trends Neurosci. 39(2), 49–51 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  85. Lugo, R.G., et al.: The moderating influence of self-efficacy on interoceptive ability and counterintuitive decision making in officer cadets. J. Mil. Stud. 7(1), 44–52 (2016)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  86. Choi, M., Levy, Y. Hovav, A.: The role of user computer self-efficacy, cybersecurity countermeasures awareness, and cybersecurity skills influence on computer misuse. In: Proceedings of the Pre-International Conference of Information Systems (ICIS) SIGSEC–Workshop on Information Security and Privacy (WISP) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  87. Lan, L.Y., Gill, D.L.: The relationships among self-efficacy, stress responses, and a cognitive feedback manipulation. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 6(2), 227–238 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  88. Buchler, N., et al.: Mission command in the age of network-enabled operations: social network analysis of information sharing and situation awareness. Front. Psychol. 7, 937 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  89. Lugo, R., et al.: Team workload demands influence on cyber detection performance. In: Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  90. Champion, M.A., et al.: Team-based cyber defense analysis. In: 2012 IEEE International Multi-Disciplinary Conference on Cognitive Methods in Situation Awareness and Decision Support. IEEE (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  91. Reeck, C., Ames, D.R., Ochsner, K.N.: The social regulation of emotion: an integrative, cross-disciplinary model. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20(1), 47–63 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  92. van't Wout, M., Chang, L.J., Sanfey, A.G.: The influence of emotion regulation on social interactive decision-making. Emotion 10(6), 815 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  93. Henshel, D.S., et al.: Predicting proficiency in cyber defense team exercises. In: MILCOM 2016–2016 IEEE Military Communications Conference. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  94. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., Lang, A.-G.: Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 41(4), 1149–1160 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was conducted as part of the Advancing Cyber Defense by Improved Communication of Recognized Cyber Threat Situations (ACDICOM; #302941) project. ACDICOM is funded by the Norwegian Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjøvik, Norway

    Torvald F. Ask, Benjamin J. Knox & Ricardo G. Lugo

  2. Østfold University College, Halden, Norway

    Torvald F. Ask, Stefan Sütterlin, Benjamin J. Knox & Ricardo G. Lugo

  3. Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia

    Stefan Sütterlin

  4. Albstadt-Sigmaringen University, Sigmaringen, Germany

    Stefan Sütterlin

Authors
  1. Torvald F. Ask
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Sütterlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benjamin J. Knox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ricardo G. Lugo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Crete and Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Constantine Stephanidis

  2. Coventry University, Coventry, UK

    Don Harris

  3. Safety and Accident Investigation Centre, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK

    Wen-Chin Li

  4. Soar Technology Inc., Orlando, FL, USA

    Dylan D. Schmorrow

  5. Design Interactive, Inc., Orlando, FL, USA

    Cali M. Fidopiastis

  6. Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Margherita Antona

  7. Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    Qin Gao

  8. Chongqing University, Chongqing, China

    Jia Zhou

  9. Department of Multimedia and Graphic Arts, Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus

    Panayiotis Zaphiris

  10. Department of Multimedia and Graphic Arts, Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus

    Andri Ioannou

  11. Soar Technology Inc., Orlando, FL, USA

    Robert A. Sottilare

  12. MMS, Fraunhofer FKIE, Wachtberg, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany

    Jessica Schwarz

  13. Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Noord-Brabant, The Netherlands

    Matthias Rauterberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Ask, T.F., Sütterlin, S., Knox, B.J., Lugo, R.G. (2021). Situational States Influence on Team Workload Demands in Cyber Defense Exercise. In: Stephanidis, C., et al. HCI International 2021 - Late Breaking Papers: Cognition, Inclusion, Learning, and Culture. HCII 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13096. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90328-2_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90328-2_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-90327-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-90328-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation