EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 218 (2020) E3S Web Conf., 218 (2020) 04032 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 218, 2020
2020 International Symposium on Energy, Environmental Science and Engineering (ISEESE 2020)
Article Number 04032
Number of page(s) 6
Section Environmental Climate Change Monitoring and Urban Protection Planning
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202021804032
Published online 11 December 2020
  1. Moody, G.D., Siponen, M., and Pahnila S. (2018) “Toward a unified model of information security policy compliance, ” Mis Quarterly, 42(1), 285-311. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chua, H.N., Wong, S.F., Low, Y.C., & Chang Y. (2018) Impact of employees’ demographic characteristics on the awareness and compliance of information security policy in organizations. Telematics and Informatics, 35(6), 1770-1780. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cram, W.A., D’Arcy, J., & Proudfoot, J.G. (2019) Seeing the forest and the trees: a meta-analysis of the antecedents to information security policy compliance. MIS Quarterly, 43(2), 525-554. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dhillon, G., & Backhouse J. (2001) Current directions in is security research: towards socioorganizational perspectives. Information Systems Journal, 11(2), 127-153. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Greene, G., and D’Arcy J. (2010) “Assessing the Impact of Security Culture and the Employee Organization Relationship in IS Security Compliance, ” in Proceedings of the 5th Annual Symposium on Information Assurance, Albany, NY. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ifinedo P. (2018) “Roles of Organizational Climate, Social Bonds, and Perceptions of Security Threats on IS Security Policy Compliance Intentions, ” Information Resources Management Journal (31:1), pp. 53-82. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Siponen, M., Mahmood, M. A., and Pahnila S. (2014) “Employees’ Adherence to Information Security Policies: An Exploratory Field Study, ” Information & Management (51:2), pp. 217-224. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Ifinedo P. (2012) “Understanding Information Systems Security Policy Compliance: An Integration of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Protection Motivation Theory, ” Computers & Security (31:1), pp. 83-95. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lowry, P.B., and Moody, G.D. (2015) “Proposing the Control-Reactance Compliance Model (CRCM) to Explain Opposing Motivations to Comply with Organisational Information Security Policies, ” Information Systems Journal (25:5), pp. 465-488. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Goo, J., Yim, M.S., and Kim, D.J. (2014) “A Path to Successful Management of Employee Security Compliance: An Empirical Study of Information Security Climate, ” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication (57:4), pp. 286-308. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jaafar, N.I., and Ajis A. (2013) “Organizational Climate and Individual Factors Effects on Information Security Compliance Behaviour, ” International Journal of Business and Social Science (4:10), pp. 118-130. [Google Scholar]
  12. Han, J., Kim, Y.J., and Kim H. (2017) “An Integrative Model of Information Security Policy Compliance with Psychological Contract: Examining a Bilateral Perspective, ” Computers & Security (66), pp. 52-65. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. D’Arcy, J., Hovav, A., and Galletta D. (2009). “User Awareness of Security Countermeasures and Its Impact on Information Systems Misuse: A Deterrence Approach, ” Information Systems Research (20:1), pp. 79-98. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Puhakainen, P., & Siponen M. (2010) Improving employees’ compliance through information systems security training: An action research study. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 34(4), 757–778. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Li, L., He, W., Xu, L., Ash, I., Anwar, M., & Yuan X. (2019) Investigating the impact of cybersecurity policy awareness on employees’ cybersecurity behavior. International Journal of Information Management, 45, 13-24. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Ifinedo P. (2011) An exploratory study of the relationships between selected contextual factors and information security concerns in global financial services institutions. Journal of Information Security and Privacy; 7(1):25-49. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Lee Y, Larsen KR. (2009) Threat or coping appraisal: determinants of SMB executives’ decision to adopt anti-malware software. European Journal of Information Systems; 18(2): 177-87. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Johnston, A.C., Warkentin, M., and Siponen M. (2015) “An Enhanced Fear Appeal Rhetorical Framework: Leveraging Threats to the Human Asset through Sanctioning Rhetoric, ” MIS Quarterly (39:1), pp. 113-134. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Herath T, Rao HR. (2009) Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organizations. European Journal of Information Systems, 18(2):106-25. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Siponen, M.T., Pahnila, S., and Mahmood A. (2007) “Employees’ Adherence to Information Security Policies: An Empirical Study, ” in New Approaches for Security, Privacy and Trust in Complex Environments (Proceedings of the 22nd IFIP TC 11 International Information Security Conference), H. Venter, M. Eloff, L. Labuschagne, J. Eloff, and R. von Solms (eds.), Boston: Springer, pp. 133-144. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kessler, S.R.; Pindek S.; Kleinman G.; Andel, S.A.; Spector, P.E. (2020) Information security climate and the assessment of information security risk among healthcare employees. Health Informatics Journal, 26 (1):461-473. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. D’Arcy, J., Teh P. (2019) Predicting employee information security policy compliance on a daily basis: The interplay of security-related stress, emotions, and neutralization. Information and Management, 56(7), 1-14. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.