Building Cybersecurity Awareness: The need for evidence-based framing strategies

Government Information Quarterly

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 1-7

  de Bruijn, Hans ^a   Janssen, Marijn ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

communication; cyber war; cyberphysical society; cyberphysical system; cybersecurity; evidence based policymaking; framing; information security; Internet of Things

Indexed keywords

EID: 85015714120     PISSN: 0740624X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2017.02.007     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Arora, A., Nandkumar, A., Telang, R., Does information security attack frequency increase with vulnerability disclosure? An empirical analysis. Information Systems Frontiers 8:5 (2006), 350–362.
2. Crompton, T., Common cause: The case for working with our cultural values. 2010, WWF, Oxfam, Friends of the Earth, CPRE, Climate Outreach Information Network.
3. De Bruijn, H., Framing. Over de macht van taal in de politiek. 2014, Atlas Contact, Amsterdam.
4. De Bruijn, H., The art of framing: How politicians convince us that they are right. 2017, Etopia BV.
5. De Vries, G., How Positive Framing May Fuel Opposition to Low-Carbon Technologies: The Boomerang Model. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 36:1 (2017), 28–44.
6. De Vries, G., Terwel, B.W., Ellemers, N., Spare the details, share the relevance: The dilution effect in communications about carbon dioxide capture and storage. Journal of Environmental Psychology 38 (2014), 116–123, 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.01.003.
7. Doty, P., U.S. homeland security and risk assessment. Government Information Quarterly 32:3 (2015), 342–352, 10.1016/j.giq.2015.04.008.
8. Elmaghraby, A.S., Losavio, M.M., Cyber security challenges in smart cities: Safety, security and privacy. Journal of Advanced Research 5:4 (2014), 491–497.
9. Gorham-Oscilowski, U., Jaeger, P.T., National Security Letters, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the Constitution: The tensions between national security and civil rights. Government Information Quarterly 25:4 (2008), 625–644, 10.1016/j.giq.2008.02.001.
10. Hernández-Ramos, J.L., Jara, A.J., Marın, L., Skarmeta, A.F., Distributed capability-based access control for the internet of things. Journal of Internet Services and Information Security (JISIS) 3:3/4 (2013), 1–16.
11. Janowski, T., Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly 32:3 (2015), 221–236, 10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001.
12. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., Prospect Theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 4 (1979), 362–377.
13. Langner, R., Stuxnet: Dissecting a cyberwarfare weapon. IEEE Security and Privacy 9:3 (2011), 49–51.
14. Leuprecht, C., Skillicorn, D.B., Tait, V.E., Beyond the Castle Model of cyber-risk and cyber-security. Government Information Quarterly 33:2 (2016), 250–257, 10.1016/j.giq.2016.01.012.
15. Levin, I.P., Schneider, S.L., Gaeth, G.J., All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 76:2 (1998), 149–188.
16. Lipton, E., Sanger, D.E., Shane, S., The Perfect Weapon: How Russian Cyberpower invaded the U.S. 2016, 13 December, The New York Times.
17. Maheswaran, D., Meyers-Levy, J., The Influence of Message Framing and Issue Involvement. Journal of Marketing Research 27:3 (1990), 361–367, 10.2307/3172593.
18. O'Neill, S., Nicholson-Cole, S., ‘Fear Won't Do It’. Promoting Positive Engagement With Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations’. Science Communication 30:3 (2009), 355–379.
19. Quigley, K., Burns, C., Stallard, K., ‘Cyber Gurus’: A rhetorical analysis of the language of cybersecurity specialists and the implications for security policy and critical infrastructure protection. Government Information Quarterly 32 (2015), 108–117, 10.1016/j.giq.2015.02.001.
20. Reddick, C.G., Chatfield, A.T., Jaramillo, P.A., Public opinion on National Security Agency surveillance programs: A multi-method approach. Government Information Quarterly 32:2 (2015), 129–141, 10.1016/j.giq.2015.01.003.
21. Rothman, A.J., Salovey, P., Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin 121:1 (1997), 3–19, 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3.
22. Smith, S.M., Petty, R.E., Message framing and persuasion: A message processing analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22 (1996), 257–268.
23. Ten, C.W., Liu, C.C., Manimaran, G., Vulnerability Assessment of Cybersecurity for SCADA Systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 23:4 (2008), 1836–1846, 10.1109/TPWRS.2008.2002298.
24. Woolgar, S., Neyland, D., Mundane Governance: Ontology and Accountability. 2013, Oxford University Press.
25. Zhao, J.J., Zhao, S.Y., Zhao, S.Y., Opportunities and threats: A security assessment of state e-government websites. Government Information Quarterly 27:1 (2010), 49–56, 10.1016/j.giq.2009.07.004.