The human factor: assessing individuals’ perceptions related to cybersecurity

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to reveal and describe the divergent viewpoints about cybersecurity within a purposefully selected group of people with a range of expertise in relation to computer security. Design/methodology/approach Q methodology [Q] uses empirical evidence to differentiate subjective views and, therefore, behaviors in relation to any topic. Q uses the strengths of qualitative and quantitative research methods to reveal and describe the multiple, divergent viewpoints that exist within a group where individuals sort statements into a grid to represent their views. Analyses group similar views (sorts). In this study, participants were selected from a range of types related to cybersecurity (experts, authorities and uninformed). Findings Four unique viewpoints emerged such that one represents cybersecurity best practices and the remaining three viewpoints represent poor cybersecurity behaviors (Naïve Cybersecurity Practitioners, Worried but not Vigilant and How is Cybersecurity a Big Problem) that indicate a need for educational interventions within both the public and private sectors. Practical implications Understanding the divergent views about cybersecurity is important within smaller groups including classrooms, technology-based college majors, a company, a set of IT professionals or other targeted groups where understanding cybersecurity viewpoints can reveal the need for training, changes in behavior and/or the potential for security breaches which reflect the human factors of cybersecurity. Originality/value A review of the literature revealed that only large, nation-wide surveys have been used to investigate views of cybersecurity. Yet, surveys are not useful in small groups, whereas Q is designed to investigate behavior through revealing subjectivity within smaller groups.