MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2902327952

The influence of expected benefits and perceived costs on the performance of protective behaviours against email phishing threats

2018· dissertation· en· W2902327952 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueMurdoch Research Repository (Murdoch University) · 2018
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueSpam and Phishing Detection
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesMcGill University
Mots-clésPhishingIdentity theftInternet privacyPsychologyOrder (exchange)Qualitative researchApplied psychologySocial psychologyBusinessComputer scienceThe InternetWorld Wide WebFinance
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Email phishing is the use of email communications to deceive individuals into providing their personal information to fraudulent versions of legitimate websites. These details can be used for identity theft, and often result in financial loss to the victim of email phishing. This research aims to investigate the reasons why individuals do not perform protective behaviours against email phishing threats. The reasons proposed in this study for not undertaking these behaviours relate to the benefits expected to be gained from not performing these behaviours, and the perceived costs for the actual performance of these behaviours. This research predicts that the benefits expected to be gained from a phishing email would encourage an individual to respond to it and thus, omit to perform the recommended protective behaviours. Furthermore, this research study predicts that the costs perceived to be incurred for the performance of protective behaviours against email phishing threats will discourage an individual from taking these actions. A research model based upon Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) (Rogers, 1983; Rogers & Prentice-Dunn, 1997) was proposed to support this study. 
\n
\nIn order to achieve the objectives of this study, a mixed-methods research approach was used involving two phases. The first, qualitative, phase consisted of interviews with participants who could potentially be recipients of phishing emails. This phase aimed to gain a greater understanding of the roles played by the expected benefits and the perceived costs in relation to performing recommended email phishing protective behaviours. The findings of this phase indicated that, consistent with the literature, benefit-related factors including need and greed, compliance with authority, altruism, satisfaction of curiosity and diminishing concerns could potentially encourage individuals to respond to phishing emails. Two additional factors were also identified: automatic behaviour and fear of missing out (FoMO). Consistent with the response costs literature, potential costs in effort, costs in time and financial costs were identified as potentially influencing individuals to not perform protective behaviours against email phishing threats. Two other factors were also identified: costs of mis-identified phish, and loss of trust. The findings from the first phase of the research study were used to inform the development of the questionnaire used in the second phase. 
\n
\nThe second phase of the research study tested the proposed research model. A questionnaire data collection method was used, and PLS-SEM was the technique used for data analysis. Of the eight hypotheses proposed, seven were supported. The hypothesis relating to perceived costs negatively influencing the intention to perform protective behaviours against email phishing threats was supported. However, the hypothesis relating to expected benefits negatively influencing the intention to perform protective behaviours against email phishing threats was not supported. Post hoc analysis suggested that expected benefits were instead associated with maladaptive behaviours. More research is required to further explore the relationship between expected benefits and the intentions to perform protective behaviours against email phishing. Furthermore, the relationship between maladaptive behaviours and the intentions to perform protective behaviours may also provide some insight into the undertaking of information security behaviours when there are potential maladaptive rewards available. 
\n
\nThis research has contributed to knowledge relating to the mitigation of information security threats, and in particular email phishing. It has identified factors that may encourage individuals to not perform protective behaviours against email phishing threats, and factors that may discourage them from performing these protective behaviours. The outcomes of this research study provide important implications for both research and practice.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,627
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,032
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle