MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106866650 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.50.2.153

Student and Non-Student Perceptions and Awareness of Identity Theft

2008· article· en· W2106866650 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
John Winterdyk, Nikki Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity theftIdentity (music)Law enforcementLikert scalePerceptionPsychologySocial psychologyInternet privacyPolitical scienceLawDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several recent reports have recognized identity theft as a major concern to law-enforcement agencies and the judicial system in Canada. While there is considerable descriptive information on identity theft and identity fraud in Canada, there is a dearth of information about peoples’ knowledge and awareness of identity theft and their potential risk to becoming a victim. This study measured the self-reported perception and awareness about the nature, extent, risk, and effects of identity theft and a variety of fraudulent behaviours among 360 college/university students and 106 non-students using a 5-point Likert scale survey. The findings indicate that students are perhaps slightly more at risk but are also somewhat better informed than adult non-students about identity theft. Based on the findings, some general policy implications and educational strategies are offered to better combat identity theft in Canada. A number of suggestions for future research are also proposed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesFrench-language works237,207