MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620966947

Do the Roles of the CEO and CFO Differ when it comes to Data Security Breaches

2017· article· en· W2620966947 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob Z. Haislip, Jee‐Hae Lim, Robert Pinsker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData breachBusinessComputer securityComputer scienceInternet privacy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a sample of S&P 1500 firms from 2005-2013, we investigate the independent relationships of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) IT expertise, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) IT expertise, and board level technology committees with data security breaches. Overall, our results indicate that firms that either employ a CEO with IT expertise or implement a technology committee are more likely to detect and report breaches. Further, firms that employ a CFO with IT expertise are less likely to report a breach, suggesting that these firms are better at preventing breaches. The aggregate findings build on the extant corporate governance and risk management literatures.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.269
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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207