A critical review of “Why are some Internet users more prone to adopt prudent Cybersecurity practices than others”?
At the beginning of the paper, the author mentioned several points about cybersecurity and why it is important regarding the internet security and vulnerability of the user. I think it is well relevant and representative of the paper. In the whole paper, I found some unclear issues that make a question about the paper. I have tried to critically analyze the paper. Several things need to improve. The paper leads a good and well define topic that is very relevant in the present era, but the arrangement does not focus on everything properly. There are missing some vital point and somehow it looks like a normal essay or assignment. I will discuss everything chronologically.
1. . In the initial part of the paper, author includes some relevance definition of the topic. They mentioned that cybersecurity technologies have become increasingly sophisticated, and compare in on paradise. I am not clear that point, recently most of the giant tech companies like MS Windows, Google, and Facebook, etc. developed their security system. There is a good representation of the introduction, include some similar study notes and points out it. But my question is why finding the answer to question depending on personality trait? Cybersecurity is a critical issue for everyone; it depends on good experience and knowledge about tech.
The study topic is more indispensable for research. But the issue of Cybersecurity is changing day by day. So literature should have to take from a very recent study. There are lots of studies have done in a similar area. Here author remarks on some papers’ reference and points out important notes that good sign of the study. And here noted that “Cyberattacks are increasing in both sophistication and quantity with over 65% of users becoming victim to some form of cybercrime (Symantec, 2013; LaBrie et al., 2010)”. It is a very poor and old study, everything is unclear and less defines.
3 The author includes here “study therefore investigate attitudes and behaviors that make users vulnerable to the most common types of cyberattacks” and mention some like Phishing, Malware, Social Engineering, password Usage, and Downloads from unreliable sources that is proved this tools used for hacking. But I have a question about the point of how “attitudes and behaviors” can be related to this matter. There is no proved and study mention here. Other descriptions of the tools of hacking structurally well.
4. The author clarifies the theory of personality traits by Kurt Lewin. The big five personality traits describe here and try to add a relevant example of the topic. It is a good arrangement to define the theory and practice of the study. There is a lack of explanation for the relevancy and clearness of the regulatory theory to apply here.
5 In the study, the author defines some assumptions as a question mark of the respondent to clarify the relation with Cyberattacks – human attitudes and behavior and find out the target information. These sections arranged well relevance of the study.
6. The author develops three hypotheses regarding the study, all three points of the hypothesis lead the same meaning and there is no relevant example or description. Here just point out three hypotheses and how it will be proved that is missing.
7. The author entails to t-test for hypothesis testing on the methodology. This is a good selection to prove the method through two separate groups purposing for statistical variation of the data. The overall method and sample selection of the study should appreciable. They used likert scale for questionnaire.
8 In the study, they represent the data through the questions mark “Differences in User Cybersecurity Attitudes in Prevention vs Promotion groups” and “Differences in User Cybersecurity Behavior in Prevention vs Promotion groups” in both sections here organize several question and sub-question to collect data. And the used SPSS software for data analysis, that is properly well arranged for this study. They didn’t mention any correlation analysis, factor analysis and regression analysis of the representation. All things look very far from the aim of the study.
9 The important part of every paper is proper data representation. There is a big issue of this paper to avoid a vast description of the result of data analysis. There is no recommendation found to improve the Cybersecurity risk and apply properly at the individual and organizational levels.
Analyzing the above issues it is merely difficult to approve this paper. There is a lack of raw data and a detailed explanation of data. Missing actual case study of the victims who are faced with the situation. There is a problem in hypothesis development that seems similar to all of. There are several weaknesses in the study. The whole study runs through one thing that human attitudes and behavior. But cybersecurity may depend on several things just not one thing. Regarding the respect of the author's professionalism, I would like to mention some detailed comments below.
Detailed Comments:
The whole study has some issues that need to edit. There are missing words, grammatical issue, incorrect punctuation, miss place of preposition and article. I recommend proofreading again and solving the issues.
§ In page1 introduction part line 2; mentioned the URL of site. This is not an actual approach of the referencing. In the same thing done several times in this part.
§ In introduction part, Mention in the relevance definition and include why Cybersecurity is more relevant on personality traits.
§ Page 2 literature review 1st para: there are lots of studies done in recent year. Try to add more recent literature like Global Cyber Security Threat ( Adem) Cybersecurity: Analysis of Issues and Threats (Cybersecurity: Analysis of Issues and Threats). Because it is very critical issue that changing day by day. Otherwise everything is okay.
§ In the page 3& 4 Cybersecurity - Human attitudes and behavior part. In the whole study questions and findings of paper based on this perspectives. Here missing the issues like skills and experience of technology also a variables of cybersecurity.
§ Page 5 identifies three hypotheses that output is more similar and the study I haven’t found any define variable which set by author.
§ In Page 6 the methodology of the study is good enough but sampling method is missing here.
§ In the page 6 & 7 result and analysis part missing regression analysis and also might add descriptive analyses through SPSS. Improve it and describes details about everything.
§ The page 8 descriptions and contribution, there is not properly describe everything and mentioned what output and finding get from this study. There is missing recommendation of the study.
§ And the last part of the study is referencing. Here is found confusion that which methods used for reference. Improve it and arrange it chronological way.
§ And the overall assumption that if it will improve the listed issues. It will be a perfect paper for publish. (Why are some Internet users more prone to adopt prudent Cybersecurity practices than others?)
Reference:
Why are some Internet users more prone to adopt prudent Cybersecurity practices than others? . (n.d.). Americas Conference on Information Systems .
Adem, S. (n.d.). Global Cyber Security Threat. Researchgate.
Cybersecurity: Analysis of Issues and Threats. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://ukdiss.com.
Why are some Internet users more prone to adopt prudent Cybersecurity practices than others? . (n.d.). Americas Conference on Information Systems .
Why are some Internet users more prone to adopt prudent Cybersecurity practices than others? (n.d.). Americas Conference on Information Systems .
Post a Comment