Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

18
Alan Nochenson IST 597J Method Implementation 10/24/2012

Transcript of Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Page 1: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Alan NochensonIST 597J Method Implementation10/24/2012

Page 2: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Is it possible to prime participants so that they ask in a less risky way in security user studies?

Page 3: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Pennstate.qualtrics.com Let me randomize viewing order and other

advanced options

Timing

Browser statistics

Number of clicks

Page 4: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics
Page 5: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics
Page 6: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Based on Meertens and Lion (2008)

Had to reverse-score the appropriate questions (typo in original paper)

Then, add up the answers to get a score (higher is more risk-seeking)

Change to percentage

Page 7: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

H1: The order in which the warning message is displayed has an impact on risk propensity

H2: Demographic factors have an impact on risk propensity

H3: Demographic factors have an impact on knowledge about phishing

Page 8: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Remove unused variables

Timing

Browser information

Change variables to usable categorical forms

Change to binary yes/no

▪ Phishing question correct?

▪ Country of origin is US?

Change to low/high around median

▪ Education, Income, RPS, Age

Page 9: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Order does not have an effect

Median: 40%Mean: 43%

Page 10: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Gender almost has an effect (males higher)

Page 11: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Country of origin has no effect

U.S. – 14India – 5China – 3Other – 1 (Israel)

Page 12: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Income almost has an effectMedian: $80-90kMode: Over $100k (9 of 23)

Page 13: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Education has no effectMedian: completed 4 year degreeMode: same (11 of 23)

Page 14: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Gender has a weak effect

Page 15: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Recruitment is difficult Difficult to see effects with small n Important to use not only crosstabs Important to go in with specific

hypothesis, otherwise too many options

Page 16: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics
Page 17: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics

Meertens, R. M. and R. Lion. 2008. “Measuring and Individual’s Tendency to Take Risks: the Risk Propensity Scale” Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 38(6): 1506-1520.

Page 18: Risk propensity v. priming and demographics