The evidence, for and against

The main reason employees report suspicious emails is wanting to protect and help the organization and coworkers, followed by responsibility, awareness of consequences, and feelings of insecurity. Reporters were more likely to report convincing, well-impersonated emails, showing they judge potential impact.

Combines a scoping review with a 512-respondent industry survey to define information security culture, identifying 5 external and 20 internal influencing factors. Academic definitions were much broader than industry's, and strong cultures were linked to mutual trust and integrity.

A problematization analysis finds government, industry and hacker discourse treats humans as the problem, with controls designed to constrain them. The authors propose 'Cybersecurity, Differently', which assumes people are well-intentioned and builds on what contributes to positive outcomes and resilience.

Across a simulation sent to about 62,000 employees, emails carrying authority cues raised the likelihood of clicking a suspicious link. Focus groups pointed to workplace factors, such as routine email habits and work pressures, that shape whether employees fall for spear phishing.

Argues that governments shifting cyber risk onto individual citizens ('responsibilization'), by issuing advice and leaving consequences to them, is contributing to cybercrime's success. Proposes a more active risk-regulation regime instead.

Beyond comply/not-comply, security-conscious employees who cannot follow policy build their own workarounds ('shadow security') that balance getting work done with managing risk. The authors recommend learning from these practices rather than stamping them out.

Threat severity, response efficacy, self-efficacy and response costs shaped attitudes to security policy. Organisational commitment and social influence significantly drove compliance intentions, and available resources boosted self-efficacy. Employees underestimated how likely breaches were.

Introduces team psychological safety: a shared belief that it is safe to take interpersonal risks. Psychological safety, not team efficacy, was associated with learning behavior such as seeking feedback and discussing errors, and learning behavior mediated the link to team performance.