An integrative model of computer abuse based on social control and general deterrence theories

Information and Management

Volumn 41, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 707-718

  Lee, Sang M ^a   Lee, Sang Gun ^a   Yoo, Sangjin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b Keimyung University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Computer abuse; End user computing; Organizational trust; Social issues; Telecommunications

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; ONLINE SYSTEMS; PUBLIC POLICY; SALES; SECURITY OF DATA; SOCIAL ASPECTS; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; TELECOMMUNICATION;

COMPUTER ABUSES; END USER COMPUTING; ORGANIZATIONAL ENDS; SOCIAL ISSUES;

COMPUTERS;

EID: 2342489402     PISSN: 03787206     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2003.08.008     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Agnew R. A longitudinal test of social control theory and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 28(2):1991;126-156.
2. Agnew R. Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology. 30(1):1992;47-87.
3. Agnew R. Why do they do it?: an examination of the intervening mechanisms between social control variables and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 30(3):1993;245-266.
4. Agnew R. Testing the leading crime theories: an alternative strategy focusing on motivational processes. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 32(4):1995;363-398.
5. Agnew R., White H.R. An empirical test of general strain theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 30(4):1992;475-498.
6. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 50:1991;179-211.
7. I. Ajzen, M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1980.
8. Anderson B., Homes M.D., Ostresh E. Male and female delinquent's attachment and effects of attachments on severity of self-reported delinquency. Crime Justice and Behavior. 26(4):1999;435-452.
9. M. Andress, B. Fonseca, Manage people to protect data, InfoWorld.com, November 2000.
10. Bagozzi R.P. An examination of the validity of two models of attitude. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 16:1992;323-359.
11. C. Beccaria, On Crime and Punishments, Bobbs Merril, Indianapolis, IN, 1963.
12. P.M. Bentler, Comparative fit indexes in structural models, Psychological Bulletin 58, 65-79.
13. Bernard T.J. Control criticism of train theory: an assessment of theoretical and empirical adequacy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 21:1984;353-372.
14. S. Breidenbach, How Secure are You?, Information Week, August 2000, pp. 71-78.
15. Browne M.W., Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research. 21:1992;230-258.
16. S. Cole, The growth of scientific knowledge: theories of deviance as a case study, in A. Lewis Caser (Ed.), The Idea of Social Structure: Papers in Honor of Robert K. Merton, Javanovich, Harcourt Brace, NY, 1975.
17. Costello B.J., Vowell P.R. Testing control theory and differential association: a reanalysis of the Richmond youth project data. Criminology. 37(4):1999;815-840.
18. F. D. Davis, A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results, Doctoral dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA, 1986.
19. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 13(3):1989;319-339.
20. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science. 35(8):1989;982-1003.
21. Dhillon G., Backhouse J. Information system security management in the new millennium. Communications of the ACM. 43(7):2000;125-128.
22. Dinnie G. The second annual global information security survey. Information Management & Computer Security. 7(3):1999;112-120.
23. Elis L., Simpson S.S. Informal sanction threats and corporate crime: additive versus multiplicative models. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 32(4):1995;399-424.
24. D.S. Elliott, D. Huizinga, S. Ageton, Explaining Delinquency and Drug Use, Sage, Beverly Hill, CA, 1985.
25. Eloff M.M., von Solms S.H. Information security management: a hierarchical framework for various approaches. Computer and Security. 19(3):2000;243-256.
26. Ernst and Young, Executive guide to Internet security, Information Systems Assurance and Advisory Services, 2000.
27. M. Fishbein, I. Ajzen, Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1975.
28. Frank J., Shamir B., Briggs W. Security-related behavior of PC users in organizations. Information and Management. 21(3):1991;127-135.
29. Gefen D., Straub D., Boudreau M. Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 4(7):2000;1-78.
30. A. Giddens, The Constitution of Society, Bell and Bain Limited, Glasgow, UK, 1984.
31. T. Hirschi, Causes of Delinquency, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1969.
32. Hoffer J.A., Straub D.W. The 9 to 5 underground: are you policing computer crimes? Sloan Management Review. 30(4):1989;35-44.
33. K. Hsaio, D. Kerr, S. Madnick, Computer Security, Academic Press, New York, 1979.
34. G. F. Jensen, Dis-integrated theory: a critical analysis of attempts to save strain theory, in: Proceedings of the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA, 1986.
35. Joseph G.W., Blanton J.E. Computer infectors: Prevention, detection, and recovery. Information and Management. 23(4):1991;205-216.
36. Jöreskog K.G., Sörbom D. Models search with TERRAD II and RISREL. Sociological Methods and Research. 19:1990;201-210.
37. K.G. Jöreskog, D. Sörbom, New Features in PRELIS 2, Scientific Software, Chicago, IL, 1993.
38. K.G. Jöreskog, D. Sörbom, New Features in PRELIS 8, Scientific Software, Chicago, IL, 1993.
39. K.G. Jöreskog, D. Sörbom, LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language, Scientific Software, Chicago, IL, 1993.
40. Krohn M.D., Massey J.L. Social control and delinquency: an examination of the elements of the social bond. Sociological Quarterly. 21:1980;529-543.
41. Kwok L.F., Longley D. Information security management and modeling. Information Management & Computer Security. 7(1):1999;30-39.
42. Lapierre J., Filiatrault P., Chebet J. Value strategy rather than quality strategy: a case of business to business professional service. Journal of Business Research. 45:1999;235-246.
43. S. Lee, F. Nah, S. Yoo, An integrated model on computer abuse: a pilot study, in: Proceedings of the 7th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston, MA, 2001, pp. 2195-2197.
44. Lee S., Yoo S. The integrated computer security model based on the general trust theory. Journal of Management Information System Review. 12(1):2002;123-138.
45. Makkai T., Braithwaite J. The dialectics of corporate deterrence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 31(4):1994;347-373.
46. Mathieson K. Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information System Research. 2(3):1991;173-191.
47. Matsueda R.L. Testing control theory and differential association: a casual modeling approach. American Sociological Review. 47:1982;489-504.
48. T. McCollum, Computer crime, Nation's Business, November 1997, pp. 18-26.
49. Medsker G.J., Williams L.J., Holahan P.J. A review of current practices for evaluating causal models in organizational behavior and human resources management research. Journal of Management. 20:1994;439-464.
50. W.D. Nance, D.W. Straub, An investigation into the use and usefulness of security software in detecting computer abuse, in: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Minneapolis, MN, 1988, pp. 283-294.
51. Olson J.S., Olson G.M. I2i trust in e-commerce. Communications of the ACM. 43(12):2000;41-44.
52. D.B. Parker, Fighting Computer Crime - A New Framework for Protecting Information, Wiley, New York, 1998.
53. Paternoster R. The deterrent effect of the perceived certainty and severity of punishment: A review of the evidence and issues. Justice Quarterly. 4:1987;173-217.
54. Paternoster R., Mazerolle P. The general strain theory and delinquency: a replication and extension. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 31(3):1994;235-263.
55. R. Power, 1999 CSI/FBI Computer Crime and Security Survey, Computer Security Institute, Winter 1999.
56. R. Power, Tangled web: Table of digital crime from the shadows of cyberspace, Que/Manmillan, New York, NY, 2000.
57. Reed G.E., Yeager P.C. Organizational offending and neoclassical criminology: challenging the reach of a general theory of crime. Criminology. 34:1996;357-382.
58. R. Rosenthal, R.L. Rosnow, D.B. Rubin, Contrasts and Effect Sizes in Behavioral Research: A Correlational Approach, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000.
59. R.J. Sampson, J.H. Laub, Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points through Life, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992.
60. J.L. Schaub, K.D. Biery, The Ultimate Computer Security Survey, Butterworth Heinemann, Newton, MA, 1995.
61. J.F. Shoemaker, The Theories of Delinquency, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990.
62. Siponen M. A conceptual foundation for organizational information security awareness. Information Management & Computer Security. 8(1):2000;31-41.
63. Smith D.A., Garton P.R. Specifying specific deterrence. American Sociological Review. 54:1989;94-106.
64. Straub D.W. Effective IS security: an empirical study. Information Systems Research. 1(3):1990;255-276.
65. Straub D.W., Goodhue D.L. Security concerns of system users: a study of perceptions of the adequacy of security. Information and Management. 20(1):1991;13-27.
66. Straub D.W., Nance W.D. Discovering and disciplining computer abuse in organizations: a field study. MIS Quarterly. 14(1):1990;45-62.
67. Straub D.W., Welke R. Coping with systems risk: security planning models for management decision-making. MIS Quarterly. 22(4):1998;441-469.
68. Thompson D. 1997 Computer crime and security survey. Information Management & Computer Security. 6(2):1998;78-101.
69. H.C. Triandis, Attitude and Attitude Change, Wiley, New York, 1971.
70. von Solms R. Information Security Management: why standards are important. Information Management & Computer Security. 7(1):1999;50-57.
71. C.C. Wood, Effective Information Security Management, Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 1991.
72. http://www.emarketer.com/ereports/eprivacy_security/welcome.html, 2001.