MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206478679 · doi:10.5539/ass.v18n1p55

Moderating Effect of Self-Efficacy in the Relationship Between Knowledge, Attitude and Environment Behavior of Cybersecurity Awareness

2021· article· en· W4206478679 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norhafizah Che Zainal, Mohd Hazwan Mohd Puad, Nor Fazlida Mohd Sani

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModerationPsychologyIBMSelf-efficacyAffect (linguistics)Self-awarenessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, cybersecurity is a growing issue in our education society to ensure a safe teaching and learning process for teachers and students. Reports and studies demonstrated that teachers and students are moderately aware of the cybersecurity threat surrounding them that could affect the learning curve and other fatal impacts. This study aims to identify the role of self-efficacy in the relationship between knowledge, attitude, and environment behavior of cybersecurity awareness. The researchers used a correlational design with a quantitative approach by using a questionnaire instrument to collect data from teacher respondents. A total of 350 teachers in took part in this survey voluntarily, distributed using social media applications in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic. The researchers used the IBM SPSS Statistics to analyze the data descriptively and inferentially. The levels of knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and environment behavior of Malaysian school teachers towards cybersecurity awareness are low. Self-efficacy acts as a moderator in influencing the relationship between knowledge, attitude, and environment behavior of cybersecurity awareness. Strategies and programs need to be initiated by stakeholders to increase the self-efficacy of cybersecurity that could assist the positive change of environment behavior among teachers for teaching and learning benefit.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207