Fear of Online Consumer Identity Theft: Cross-Country Application and Short Scale Development

Abstract

Hawliau Cyffredinol / General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Innovative Research by Using IoT Applications on Cross-National English Cultural Communication Based on Crowdsourcing Translation Model

“…Social innovators are people who help people to change their lives for the better. Individuals or entire groups can be actors, regardless of the sector of society they belong to [11]. However, since all sectors must participate in the process of social innovation to solve a complex problem, social change can only be possible if all sectors are involved [12].…”

The development and validation of multidimensional workplace compassion scale: Linking its conceptualization and measurement

“…Table 9 presents the convergent and discriminant validity for the said factor structure, and no validity concerns have been observed in the results. We further used a more stringent heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) method of discriminant validity testing; here, we examined the disattenuated correlations between the constructs ( Walsh et al, 2019 ; Grace et al, 2020 ). An HTMT value of less than 0.85 indicates discriminant validity between the said constructs ( Walsh et al, 2019 ).…”

The multidimensional nature of privacy risks: Conceptualisation, measurement and implications for digital services

“…While prior literature has not distinguished between specific dimensions of privacy risks, few prior studies on privacy have touched upon specific privacy‐related adverse consequences, one essential component of privacy risks. The privacy‐related consequences comprise unwanted marketing ads, home burglary, financial losses, price discrimination or other economic discrimination (Acquisti et al, 2015; Chen & Sharma, 2013; Crossler & Posey, 2017; Degirmenci et al, 2013; Featherman & Pavlou, 2003; Haug et al, 2020; Kordzadeh & Warren, 2017; Krasnova et al, 2010; T. Li & Unger, 2012; Miltgen & Smith, 2015; Smith et al, 2011; Treiblmaier & Pollach, 2007; van Slyke et al, 2006; G. Walsh et al, 2018; Yaraghi et al, 2019), adverse physical consequences such as physical stalking or lower quality health care (Kordzadeh & Warren, 2017; Smith et al, 2011; Yaraghi et al, 2019) – as well as different facets of social consequences, such as embarrassment, harassment and bullying (Krasnova et al, 2010; T. Li & Unger, 2012; Ozdemir et al, 2017), cyber stalking and reputation damage (Chen & Sharma, 2013; Kordzadeh & Warren, 2017; Miltgen & Smith, 2015; G. Walsh et al, 2018; H. Xu et al, 2008), social sanctions (Acquisti et al, 2015; Lanzing, 2019) and stigmatisation of illness (Yaraghi et al, 2019). These consequences are in line with financial, physical and social risk dimensions found in other contexts and yet describe privacy‐specific manifestations.…”