MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226369790 · doi:10.4018/jgim.299324

Effects of Personal Factors and Organizational Reinforcing Tools in Decreasing Employee Engagement in Unhygienic Cyber Practices

2022· article· en· W4226369790 on OpenAlexafffund
Princely Ifinedo, Nigussie Mengesha, Rahel Bekele

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Information Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersBrock University
KeywordsEmployee engagementBusinessPsychologyStructural equation modelingPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employee engagement in unhygienic cyber practices (UCP) is a concern for organizations across the world. The purpose of this paper is to explore the effects of personal and environmental factors in decreasing workers’ engagement in UCP in a developing country: A personal-environment-behavior model was adapted for the study. Data was collected from working MBA students in Ethiopia. The key results show that the personal factor of self-regulation related to acceptable cyber practices decreases workers’ engagement in UCP, while self-efficacy did not. The environmental factor of computer monitoring (CM) decrease workers’ engagement in UCP, while the availability of security education and training awareness (SETA) programs did not. Both CM and SETA have positive effects in improving self-efficacy. Only SETA programs positively impact self-regulation. This study adds to the understanding of end-user security behavior by focusing on UCP with insights from a developing country.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global Information ManagementSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207