Perceived risk assessment

Asnar, Yudistira; Zannone, Nicola

doi:10.1145/1456362.1456375

Cited by 15 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, we could set g(x) = x b . 2 On the other hand, it could also make sense to set g(U ) > 0, which would represent the "benefit of the doubt". An intuitive choice would then be g(x) = x b + axu, i.e.…”

Section: New Discounting Rulementioning

confidence: 99%

“…To make the results comparable, we specify the amount of positive and negative evidence (p, n) for each edge in the trust network and use such evidence to compute the opinions used for EBSL and SL as well as the aggregate ratings (Axy) used for flow-based reputation (without uncertainty). The mapping between evidence and opinion is computed using (2). For the mapping between evidence and aggregated ratings, we use an approach similar to the one presented in [35]:…”

Section: Experiments Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Often, users have to decide whether to interact with services or users with whom they have never interacted before. Uncertainty about services and users' behavior is often perceived as a risk [2] and, thus, it can restrain a user from engaging in a transaction with unknown parties. Therefore, to fully exploit the potential of online services, platforms and ultimately online communities, it is necessary to establish and manage trust amongst the parties involved in a transaction [11,40,43].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Flow-based reputation with uncertainty: evidence-based subjective logic

źKorić

Hoogh

Zannone

2015

Int. J. Inf. Secur.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of reputation is widely used as a measure of trustworthiness based on ratings from members in a community. The adoption of reputation systems, however, relies on their ability to capture the actual trustworthiness of a target. Several reputation models for aggregating trust information have been proposed in the literature. The choice of model has an impact on the reliability of the aggregated trust information as well as on the procedure used to compute reputations. Two prominent models are flow-based reputation (e.g., EigenTrust, PageRank) and subjective logic-based reputation. Flow-based models provide an automated method to aggregate trust information, but they are not able to express the level of uncertainty in the information. In contrast, subjective logic extends probabilistic models with an explicit notion of uncertainty, but the calculation of reputation depends on the structure of the trust network and often requires information to be discarded. These are severe drawbacks. In this work, we observe that the 'opinion discounting' operation in subjective logic has a number of basic problems. We resolve these problems by providing a new discounting operator that describes the flow of evidence from one party to another. The adoption of our discounting rule results in a consistent subjective logic algebra that is entirely based on the handling of evidence. We show that the new algebra enables the construction of an automated reputation assessment procedure for arbitrary trust networks, where the calculation no longer depends on the structure of the network, and does not need to throw away any information. Thus, we obtain the best of B Nicola Zannone n.zannone@tue.nl both worlds: flow-based reputation and consistent handling of uncertainties.

show abstract

Section: New Discounting Rulementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flow-based reputation with uncertainty: evidence-based subjective logic

źKorić

Hoogh

Zannone

2015

Int. J. Inf. Secur.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large contributor to risk communication's complexity is the perceptual and subjective nature of a risk itself, with authors [27,29] in both the health and terrorism domains referring to it as a socially constructed and psychologicallyoriented phenomenon. Literature has discussed the subjectivity of this topic in detail and listed key examples such as (i) the fact that actual risk and perceived risk (i.e., what a person perceives the risk to be) can be quite different [26,30] and (ii) the appetite and acceptability of a risk depends heavily on an individual's priorities and values [29].…”

Section: Communicating Risks: Hurdles and Progressmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the most significant aspects is the question of how the individual perceives the risk at a personal level. Important influential factors include a person's culture, beliefs, needs, knowledge, awareness, familiarity with the risk, feeling of control, voluntariness, and the level of impact and dread of the risk [21,23,30,31,[50][51][52]. Another key aspect is a person's literacy and (as stated before) numeracy levels; how literate or numerate an individual is will have serious repercussions on the effectiveness of risk communications (a variety of studies [32,41,42,44,47,53] over numerous domains support this reality).…”

Section: The Message Receivermentioning

confidence: 99%

Trustworthy and effective communication of cybersecurity risks: A review

Nurse

Creese

Goldsmith

et al. 2011

2011 1st Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects in Security and Trust (STAST)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Slowly but surely, academia and industry are fully accepting the importance of the human element as it pertains to achieving security and trust. Undoubtedly, one of the main motivations for this is the increase in attacks (e.g., social engineering and phishing) which exploit humans and exemplify why many authors regard them as the weakest link in the security chain. As research in the socio-technical security and trust fields gains momentum, it is crucial to intermittently pause and reflect on their progress while also considering related domains to determine whether there are any established principles which may be transferred. Comparison of the states-of-the-arts may assist in planning work going forward and identifying useful future directions for the less mature socio-technical field. This paper seeks to fulfil several of these goals, particularly as they relate to the emerging cybersecurity-risk communication domain. The literature reviews which we conduct here are beneficial and indeed noteworthy as they pull together a number of the key aspects which may affect the trustworthiness and effectiveness of communications on cybersecurity risks. In particular, we draw on information-trustworthiness research and the established field of risk communication. An appreciation of these aspects and precepts is imperative if systems are to be designed that play to individuals' strengths and assist them in maintaining security and protecting their applications and information.

show abstract

Consumer Concerns About Smart Meters

Yesudas

Clarke

2015

Distributed, Ambient, and Pervasive Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceived risk assessment

Cited by 15 publications

References 18 publications

Flow-based reputation with uncertainty: evidence-based subjective logic

Flow-based reputation with uncertainty: evidence-based subjective logic

Trustworthy and effective communication of cybersecurity risks: A review

Consumer Concerns About Smart Meters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About