Predicting Online Target Hardening Behaviors: An Extension of Routine Activity Theory for Privacy-Enhancing Technologies and Techniques
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using representative survey data from Canada, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and five European Union member countries (n= 9,011), this paper predicts the use of privacy-enhancing technologies and techniques as a form of individual target hardening behavior. It presents a novel extension of routine activity theory by revisiting the theory from the perspective of Internet users in their efforts to minimize their likelihood of victimization. The results show that perceived concern and exposure to certain motivated offenders leads to target hardening behaviors, such as using two-factor authentication and antivirus software. Encryption communication services, however, were not associated with concern for any combination of motivated offenders. Moreover, perceived deficiencies in governmental but not company guardianship predicted new protective behaviors.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it