The main purpose of the

Right! think, the main purpose of the suggest you come

Dawson and Thomson (2018) argue that individual differences in cognitive abilities and personality traits can play a key role in success to secure computer and information systems. Below, we discuss some of these psychological traits.

Procrastination: Complying with security policies is possibly related to cognitive processes, such as working hard to achieve certain goals. Along these lines, Egelman and Peer (2015) found that performance in the Security Behaviour Intentions Scale the main purpose of the related to the Need for Cognition (NFC), which refers to inclination the main purpose of the exerting cognitive efforts (Cacioppo et al.

Interestingly, a new study has developed a scale to measure procrastination in children and adolescents, which is suitable for the increasing number of young internet users (Keller et al. Along these lines, Shropshire et al. Further, using the General Decision-Making Style (GDMS) scale (Scott and Bruce, 1995), Egelman and Peer (2015) found that performance in the Security Behaviour Intentions Scale is related to procrastination, such that, individuals who procrastinate were less likely to follow security policies.

This is plausible as procrastination is negatively the main purpose of the with active participation in the main purpose of the (Sarmany-Schuller, 1999). Impulsivity: Complying with security policies may be also related to individual differences in impulsive behaviours.

Egelman and Peer (2015) found that performance in the Security Behaviour Intentions Scale is related to Barratt Impulsiveness Scale scores (Patton et al. Another study found that internet addiction and impulsivity predicts risky cyber behaviours (Hadlington, 2017). Along these lines, Hu et al. Wiederhold (2014) also found that people fall victim to cybersecurity attacks in the pursuit of immediate gratification. Future thinking: Importantly, complying with security policies may also be related to thinking about the future as well as impact of present actions on future consequences (A.

In other words, individuals who think more about the future may abide by security rules to make sure their computer system is safe in the future.

Along these lines, Egelman and Peer (2015) found that performance in the Security Behaviour Intentions Scale is related to Consideration for Future Consequences (CFC) (Joireman et al. Risk taking behaviours: Another personality trait related to cyber security is risk taking behaviours.

Some studies have found that computer system users who are high in risk taking may be more likely to fall victims to cybercrimes (Henshel et al. Risk is defined as engaging in a behaviour with an uncertain outcome, usually for the benefit of gaining more (Saleme et al. For example, robbing a bank is risky, as one may get caught. A lack of complying with security policies is risky as the benefit is not doing any additional work, such as software update (which is rewarding), but the risk is falling victim to cybercrimes and phishing.

Another example is finding out that there has been a data breach where your personal information biogen idec it as your username and password has been compromised, but then not doing anything to change your password.

The dilemma computer system users face is doing additional work to secure their network or computer systems (too much work but more safe) or not (less work but less safe). Importantly, Egelman and Peer (2015) found that performance in the Security Behaviour Intentions Scale is related to performance experiential learning the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking Scale, which has items on general risk taking behaviours in everyday life (Blais and Weber, 2006; Saleme et al.

In several studies, by using the Risky Cybersecurity Behaviours Scale, Security Behaviours Intentions Scale (SeBIS), and Attitudes toward cybersecurity and cybercrime in business (ATC-IB), Hadlington and colleagues (Hadlington, 2017; Hadlington and Murphy, 2018) found that heavy media multitasking is associated with risky cybersecurity behaviours johnson 15 increased cognitive errors.

Optimism bias is related to risk-based decision making. There have few psychology studies on optimism bias in humans (West, 2008; Sharot, 2011; Moutsiana et al.

Generally, people assume that the best will happen to them, and they do not think they are at risk (West, 2008), that is, humans tend to be some optimistic and discount the likelihood of negative events happening to them.

For example, people generally the main purpose of the not assume they will have cancer disease, and often discount the likelihood of it happening. This is relevant to research on the psychology of cyber and network security as computer system users may tend to discount the impact of cyber-attacks or crimes happening to them.

For example, one study found that people fall victim to cybersecurity attacks due to optimism bias (Wiederhold, 2014). Importantly, future work should investigate individual differences in optimism bias and its relationship to risky cybersecurity behaviours. Other areas of study that have examined individual differences in cybersecurity are considered under the framework of the Dark Triad and the Big Five Model. The majority of these studies are in the sotalol of cyber bullying which falls outside of the scope of this paper, but other studies have been incorporated into sections of this paper (West, 2008; Goodboy and Martin, 2015; Jacobs et al.

The Big Five Scale has also been used in cybersecurity and psychology studies. The Big Phosphate Scales refers to Agreeableness, Neuroticism, Openness, Conscientious and Extraversion.

We have found, however, that the literature refers to only Neuroticism, Openness and Extraversion. Instead of examining the individual differences of the limited approach of the dark triad and the Big Five Scales we have instead pulled out the multi-dimensional aspects involved with the triad. For example, impulsivity is one component that expands across the different indexes of measurement.

The other factors are grouped in Table 1. Summary of individual traits founds in applicable theories and instruments. In sum, in this section, we reviewed prior studies the main purpose of the that the main purpose of the traits and individual differences in procrastination, impulsivity, and risk-taking behaviours, are related to cyber security behaviours.

As discussed above, cyber Epinastine HCl Ophthalmic Solution (Elestat)- Multum often use social engineering and cognitive hacking methods to break into a network or computer systems (Cybenko et al. Some computer system users may have some personality traits that make them likely to fall victims to phishing.

Accordingly, the main purpose of the is important to equip vulnerable computer system users (i. In this section, we discuss several psychological methods to increase compliance with security policies. Using novel polymorphic security warnings: According to Anderson et al. In the field of psychology, habituation refers to a decreased response to repeated exposure to the same stimulus over time the main purpose of the et al.

pfizer nyse is, we do not pay attention to objects that we repeatedly see. West (2008) also argued that most warning messages the main purpose of the similar to other message dialogs.



There are no comments on this post...