Which Factors Explain Employees' Adherence to Information Security Policies? An Empirical Study

By Seppo Pahnila, Mikko T. Siponen, Motaharinia Mahmood. Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, 2007

330 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/668caef50ee712d1831d37104b4e6b05e04a0c76

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Motivating IS security compliance: Insights from Habit and Protection Motivation Theory (2012, background): “Research on information security policy compliance shows that people see saving time as a benefit for non-compliance [21].”
Security awareness of computer users: A phishing threat avoidance perspective (2014, background): “Previous research has revealed that individuals are more motivated to perform IT security related behaviozrs as the level of their self-efficacy increases (Kaiser, 1974; Ng et al., 2009; Woon et al., 2005).”
The Impact of Organizational Commitment on Insiders’ Motivation to Protect Organizational Information Assets (2015, background): “Several previous IS PMT efforts have assessed realworld behaviors [37, 44, 48, 73, 90, 92, 113], but most of these studies focus on isolated behaviors, an issue mentioned above.”
Employees' Behavior towards IS Security Policy Compliance (2007, methodology): “Woon et al. [54] studied what factors explain the usage of security features among those home PC users that have a wireless network.”
Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations (2009, background): “In the information security literature, in addition to threats affecting individuals (Anderson, 2005; Woon et al., 2005), PMT has been applied to threats posed to organisations in a security policy compliance context (Pahnila et al., 2007).”
Threat or coping appraisal: determinants of SMB executives’ decision to adopt anti-malware software (2009, background): “Perceived severity 4.166 (0.816) Woon et al. (2005) How strongly do you disagree or agree with the following statements?”
Future directions for behavioral information security research (2013, background): “…(Johnston and Warkentin, 2010; Lee and Larsen, 2009; Liang and Xue, 2010), compliance with security policies (Herath and Rao, 2009b; Iﬁnedo, 2012), backing up data (Crossler, 2010), properly securing home wireless networks (Woon et al., 2005), and adoption of anti-plagiarism software (Lee, 2011).”
What Do Systems Users Have to Fear? Using Fear Appeals to Engender Threats and Fear that Motivate Protective Security Behaviors (2015, unknown): “Response costs (Woon et al. 2005) 1.”
Studying users' computer security behavior: A health belief perspective (2009, methodology): “ng a suspicious email attachment is a serious problem [51]”
An Enhanced Fear Appeal Rhetorical Framework: Leveraging Threats to the Human Asset Through Sanctioning Rhetoric (2015, background): “However, IS scholars have seemingly made repeated assumptions to the contrary, which has led to a variety of compromised threat perspectives within their respective studies ( Bélanger and Crossler 2011; Crossler 2010; Johnston and Warkentin 2010; Woon et al. 2005).”