No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Although employee computer abuse is a costly and significant problem for firms, the existing academic literature regarding this issue is limited. To address this gap, we apply a multi‐theoretical model to explain employees' intentions to abuse computers. To understand the motives for such behaviour, we investigate the role of two forms of organizational justice – distributive and procedural – both of which provide explanations of how perceptions of unfairness are created in the organizational context. By applying deterrence theory, we also examine the extent to which formal sanctions influence and moderate the intentions to abuse computers. Finally, we examine how the potential motives for abuse may be moderated by techniques of neutralization, which allow offenders to justify their actions and absolve themselves of any associated feelings of guilt and shame. Utilizing the scenario‐based factorial survey method for our experimental design, we empirically evaluated the association between these antecedents and the behavioural intention to violate Information systems (IS) security policies in an environment where the measurement of actual behaviour would be impossible. Our findings suggest that individual employees may form intentions to commit computer abuse if they perceive the presence of procedural injustice and that techniques of neutralization and certainty of sanctions moderate this influence. The implications of these findings for research and practice are presented. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Objective The study sought to develop and empirically validate an integrative situational privacy calculus model for explaining potential users’ privacy concerns and intention to install a contact tracing mobile application (CTMA). Materials and Methods A survey instrument was developed based on the extant literature in 2 research streams of technology adoption and privacy calculus. Survey participants (N = 853) were recruited from all 50 U.S. states. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was used to validate and test the model. Results Individuals’ intention to install a CTMA is influenced by their risk beliefs, perceived individual and societal benefits to public health, privacy concerns, privacy protection initiatives (legal and technical protection), and technology features (anonymity and use of less sensitive data). We found only indirect relationships between trust in public health authorities and intention to install CTMA. Sex, education, media exposure, and past invasion of privacy did not have a significant relationship either, but interestingly, older people were slightly more inclined than younger people to install a CTMA. Discussion Our survey results confirm the initial concerns about the potentially low adoption rates of CTMA. Our model provides public health agencies with a validated list of factors influencing individuals’ privacy concerns and beliefs, enabling them to systematically take actions to address these identified issues, and increase CTMA adoption. Conclusions Developing CTMAs and increasing their adoption is an ongoing challenge for public health systems and policymakers. This research provides an evidence-based and situation-specific model for a better understanding of this theoretically and pragmatically important phenomenon.