» Articles » PMID: 36938452

A Systematic Literature Review of Cybersecurity Scales Assessing Information Security Awareness

Overview
Journal Heliyon
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 2023 Mar 20
PMID 36938452
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Information Security Awareness (ISA) is a significant concept that got considerable attention recently and can assist in minimizing the risks associated with information security breaches. Several measurement scales have been developed in this regard, as measuring users' ISA is paramount. Although ISA specific scales are very important, yet what methodological rigor they use in terms of initial conceptualization of ISA, data collection and analysis during the development, and scale validation of such scales are some unknown aspects. Therefore, we provide a comprehensive review of the existing ISA specific scales to address all the above concerns. A popular method, PRISMA, is utilized, and a total of 24 articles that match with criteria of this research are included for the final in-depth analysis. Also, a holistic evaluation framework is developed containing three phases and 19 criteria. Findings revealed that most studies treat ISA as a multi-dimensional construct, and ISA researchers rarely conduct both pilot testing and pre-text evaluation while validating and refining the initial scales. Additionally, several articles did not report some of the essential elements used for checking the rigor of factor analysis, and evidence for validities of the identified scales is inadequate. Consequently, existing ISA specific scales must be improved both in terms of the methodological thoroughness of the scale development procedure and their validities. Moreover, not only justifying why the development of a new scale is necessary, but also improving the quality of the existing scales by doing multiple iterations is significant in the future. Likewise, the inclusion of all the dimensions of ISA, while generating the initial items pool is an important aspect to be considered. A thorough discussion, recommendations for future research, conclusions, and study limitations are provided.

References
1.
Norris M, Lecavalier L . Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in developmental disability psychological research. J Autism Dev Disord. 2009; 40(1):8-20. DOI: 10.1007/s10803-009-0816-2. View

2.
Hadlington L . Human factors in cybersecurity; examining the link between Internet addiction, impulsivity, attitudes towards cybersecurity, and risky cybersecurity behaviours. Heliyon. 2017; 3(7):e00346. PMC: 5501883. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00346. View

3.
Morgado F, Meireles J, Neves C, Amaral A, Ferreira M . Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices. Psicol Reflex Crit. 2020; 30(1):3. PMC: 6966966. DOI: 10.1186/s41155-016-0057-1. View

4.
Goretzko D . Factor Retention in Exploratory Factor Analysis With Missing Data. Educ Psychol Meas. 2022; 82(3):444-464. PMC: 9014734. DOI: 10.1177/00131644211022031. View

5.
Keshavarzi M, Ghaffary H . An ontology-driven framework for knowledge representation of digital extortion attacks. Comput Human Behav. 2022; 139:107520. PMC: 9557090. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107520. View