Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to test a comprehensive routine activity framework on three types of online victimization. Prior research has utilized routine activity theory to explain varied online forms of victimization, but most have focused on its person-based forms. The present study, therefore, expands upon this research to examine the effects of online exposure, online target suitability and online guardianship upon phishing, hacking and malware infection victimization. Design/methodology/approach – Secondary data from the 23rd Cycle of the Canadian GSS were used to address the study’s research questions using binary logistic regression analyses. Findings – Particular online behaviors were consistently and positively related to all three types of online victimization, including booking/making reservations, social networking and having one’s information posted online. Other online routines exhibited unique effects on online victimization risk. Originality/value – In support of the theory, the results suggest that online exposure and target suitability increase risks for phishing, hacking and malware victimization. Online guardianship was also positively related to victimization, a finding that runs counter to theoretical expectations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".