Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter / Doktorand
Kontakt: +49 (0) 6151 / 1620943 | henkel(at)peasec.tu-darmstadt.de
Technische Universität Darmstadt, Fachbereich Informatik, Wissenschaft und Technik für Frieden und Sicherheit (PEASEC) Pankratiusstraße 2, 64289 Darmstadt, Raum 111
DE
Markus Henkel, M.Sc. ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter und Doktorand am Lehrstuhl Wissenschaft und Technik für Frieden und Sicherheit (PEASEC) im Fachbereich Informatik der Technischen Universität Darmstadt. Er arbeitet im Projekt emergenCITY zur Erhöhung der Resilienz in digitalen Städten.
Seine Forschungsinteressen liegen im Bereich Human-Computer Interaction in Verbindung mit sicherheitsrelevanten Fragestellungen, um vor und während Krisen oder Gefahren besser mit solchen umgehen zu können.
Er studierte Informatik im Bachelor und Master an der Technischen Universität Darmstadt. Während der Masterarbeit setzte er sich mit der Nutzersicht auf Peer-to-peer-basierte Kommunikation auseinander, mithilfe derer Nachbarschaften während Internetausfällen weiterhin miteinander kommunizieren können. Während des Studiums arbeitete er als studentische Hilfskraft (HiWi) bei PEASEC.
EN
Markus Henkel, M.Sc. is a research associate and PhD student at Science and Technology for Peace and Security (PEASEC) in the Department of Computer Science at Technical University of Darmstadt. He works in the project emergenCITY to strengthen the resilience of digital cities.
His research interests lie in the field of human-computer interaction in conjunction with safety and security related questions, aiming to improve preparedness and response to crises and emergencies.
He studied computer science at Technical University of Darmstadt for his Bachelor’s and Master’s degree. During his master thesis, he dealt with the users‘ perspective on peer-to-peer-based communication, which can be used during Internet outages to keep up digital communication in neighbourhoods. During his studies, he worked as student assistant at PEASEC.
Publikationen
2025
[BibTeX] [Abstract]
As smart home technology becomes integral to modern living, researchers must consider safety aspects. While single-purpose devices alert users to specific dangers, integrating them within comprehensive smart home warning systems (SHWSs) offers new safety potentials by allowing actuators to respond to threats based on predefined protocols. Key questions include whether user preferences for automation levels in smart homes are affected by different warning scenarios, and how unwanted automation or false positives influence acceptance. To explore this, we conduct two studies: (1) A lab study in a smart home with various actuators, where participants (N = 48) encounter warnings across three automation levels. (2) A follow-up interview study (N = 16) further evaluating our prototype and unwanted automation situations. Results show that participants preferred higher automation during warnings and were more receptive to smart technology in dangerous situations, though customization remains essential to ensure acceptance. While higher automation levels reduced perceived interruption, some still preferred less intense warnings. Others preferred not receiving warnings of mild dangers, fully relying on automation. Finally, we find that specific safety protocols and handling of false positive alarms must be chosen carefully to avoid mistrust, users feeling a loss of control, and damage through unwanted executions.
@article{henkel_house_2025,
title = {The {House} {That} {Saves} {Me}? {Assessing} the {Role} of {Smart} {Home} {Automation} in {Warning} {Scenarios}},
abstract = {As smart home technology becomes integral to modern living, researchers must consider safety aspects. While single-purpose devices alert users to specific dangers, integrating them within comprehensive smart home warning systems (SHWSs) offers new safety potentials by allowing actuators to respond to threats based on predefined protocols. Key questions include whether user preferences for automation levels in smart homes are affected by different warning scenarios, and how unwanted automation or false positives influence acceptance. To explore this, we conduct two studies: (1) A lab study in a smart home with various actuators, where participants (N = 48) encounter warnings across three automation levels. (2) A follow-up interview study (N = 16) further evaluating our prototype and unwanted automation situations. Results show that participants preferred higher automation during warnings and were more receptive to smart technology in dangerous situations, though customization remains essential to ensure acceptance. While higher automation levels reduced perceived interruption, some still preferred less intense warnings. Others preferred not receiving warnings of mild dangers, fully relying on automation. Finally, we find that specific safety protocols and handling of false positive alarms must be chosen carefully to avoid mistrust, users feeling a loss of control, and damage through unwanted executions.},
journal = {Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies},
author = {Henkel, Markus and Haesler, Steffen and Al-Najmi, Hiba and Hessel, Frank and Reuter, Christian},
year = {2025},
keywords = {AuswahlCrisis, Crisis, HCI, Projekt-emergenCITY, Ranking-CORE-A*, Student},
}Frühere Publikationen
- Markus Henkel, Volker Knauthe, Tatiana von Landesberger, Stefan Guthe (2020): Data Reconstruction from Colored Slice-and-Dice Treemaps. VMV 2020: 89-97
- Sarah Delgado Rodriguez, Sarah Prange, Christina Vergara Ossenberg, Markus Henkel, Florian Alt, Karola Marky (2022): PriKey – Investigating Tangible Privacy Control for Smart Home Inhabitants and Visitors. NordiCHI 2022: 74:1-74:13