@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Young People’s Security Behavior Intentions regarding Cloud Service UseA measurement and comparison of Korean and Dutch students’ security intentions
Prof. Jang Hyun Kim*Sungkyunkwan University
Associate professor
P.I.M. KamphuisSungkyunkwan University
Master student
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
From USB to Personal Cloud Services
From portable storage To cloud storage For use on Cloud
Access Devices (CAD)
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
A threat to security?
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
RQ1 : What is students’ intention on securing their cloud access devices?
Security Behavior Intention Scale[1]
1 Egelman, Serge, and Eyal Peer. "Scaling the security wall: Developing a security behavior intentions scale (sebis)."
Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2015.
SeBIS:
DeviceSecurement
Password Generation
Proactive Awareness
SoftwareUpdating
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
RQ2 : What factors influence students’ intention on securing their CADs
Theory of Planned Behavior [2]
2 Ajzen, Icek (1991). "The theory of planned behavior". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 50 (2): 179–211.
Attitude
Subjective Norm
Perceived Behavior
Control
Intention Behavior
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
RQ2 : What factors influence students’ intention on securing their CADs
Proposed model
Attitude
Subjective Norm
Perceived Behavior
Control
Intention
(SeBIS)
H2.1
H2.2
H2.3
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Cultural differences between Netherlands and South Korea
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long Term Orientation Indulgence
Netherlands in comparison to South Korea trough the lens of the 6D-model [3]
Netherlands Korea
3 Hofstede, G. (n.d.). Netherlands - South Korea. Retrieved January 13, 2017, from https://geert-hofstede.com/netherlands.html
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
RQ3 : Is there a significant difference between Korean and Dutch students?
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Method
• Survey containing SeBIS and TPB questionnaires
• Pilot survey in June 2016 (N = 58)
• Google forms on-line survey in October 2016 (N = 226)
• Recruitment via University’s student portal
• SPSS Data analysis
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Results: Demographics (N = 226)
53%47%
Country
Korea
Netherlands
8%
75%
17%
Age
15 - 20
21 - 26
26 +
43%
57%
Gender
Male
Female
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Results: RQ1 - Students Intention
2.7
3.7
3.1
2.9
Device security
Password generation
Proactive awareness
Software updating
3.1
SeBIS Score
out of 5.0
Ds Pg Pa Su SeBIS
N 226 226 226 226 226
Mean 3.7058 2.6903 2.9502 3.1121 3.1146
Sum 837.50 608.00 666.75 703.33 703.90
Std.
Deviation
.96766 .77980 .79268 .88567 .42287
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Results: RQ2 – Influential TPB factors
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
(Constant) 1.833 .169 10.880 .000
Attitude .185 .034 .318 5.382 .000
Subjective Norm .234 .035 .391 6.710 .000
Perceived
behavior control
-.035 .038 -.055 -.938 .349
> H1. Students attitude influences intention on securing CADs
> H2. Students subjective norms influence intention on securing CADs
> H3. Students perceived behavior control influence intention onsecuring CADs
Regression analysis results
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Attitude
Subjective
Norm
Perceived
Behavior
Control
Device
security
Password
generation
Proactive
Awareness
Software
Updating
Attitude
Subjective Norm .326**
Perc. Behavior Control .212** -.139*
Device Security .326** .333** -.015
Password Generation .275** .038 .346** .037
Proactive Awareness -.191* .131* -.492** -.001 -.218**
Software Updating .321** .381** .073 .151* .061 -.160*
Correlations Coefficients
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Results: RQ2 – Influential TPB factors
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Results: RQ3 – Significant differences
0
10
20
30
40
Device Security** Password generation Proactive Awareness Software updating
Differences in means between Dutch and Korean students
Netherlands Korea
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
0
10
20
30
40
Attitude Subjective Norm Perceived Behavior Control SeBIS
Differences in means between Dutch and Korean students
Netherlands Korea
Results: RQ3 – Significant differences
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Results: Conclusion and Discussion
• Dutch and Korean students score average on SeBIS
• High score on securing their Cloud Access Devices
• Average score on Software Updating and Proactive Awareness
• Low score on Password Generation
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
• Relationships between SeBIS and TPB constructs are found
• High correlation between Perceived Behavior Control and
Password Generation and Proactive Awareness
• PBC requires attention in order to increase security intentions
Results: Conclusion and Discussion
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Results: Conclusion and Discussion
• Cultural differences (6D) seem to have no effect on
students’ security intention
• No significant differences between the two groups
• To improve Proactive Awareness and Password Generation
Perceived Behavior Control should be addressed
@PTCouncil
#PTC17
Mahalo
Top Related