Dr Susanne van’t Hoff de Goede joins us to talk about the link between cybersecurity motivation and knowledge, cybersecurity behaviours and cybercrime victimization. She discusses research that provide some interesting insights into victimization that brings into question some common assumptions about crime online. Dominic Vogel from cyber.sc joins us to help with a silly question. He explains that a security consultant should be honest and helpful even when they don't know the answer to a question, and the importance of authenticity for him as an entrepreneur.
About our guests:
Dr Susanne van’t Hoff de Goede
https://www.linkedin.com/in/susanne-van-t-hoff-de-goede-8057a98/
https://victimologie.nl/netwerkleden/susanne-van-t-hoff-de-goede/
Dominic Vogel
https://ca.linkedin.com/in/domvogel
Papers or resources mentioned in this episode:
Van ’t Hoff-de Goede, S., Leukfeldt, R., Van der Kleij, R., & Van de Weijer, S. (2020). The online behaviour and victimization study: The development of an experimental research instrument for measuring and explaining online behaviour and cybercrime victimization. In M. Weulen Kranenbarg & R. Leukfeldt (Eds.), Cybercrime in Context. The human factor in victimization, offending and policing. Springer.
Van der Kleij, R., Van ’t Hoff-de Goede, S., Van de Weijer, S., & Leukfeldt, R. (2021). How safely do we behave online? An explanatory study into the cybersecurity behaviors of Dutch citizens. In M. Zallio, C. Raymundo Ibañez, & J.H. Hernandez (Eds), Advances in Human Factors in Robots, Unmanned Systems and Cybersecurity. AHFE 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 268. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79997-7_30
Other:
We weren't able to include all of the discussion in the podcast, but there is an interesting discussion to be had around the relationship between theory and research method. Often this kind of discussion is around how a theory might shape the research methods that are chosen, in this case Dr van’t Hoff de Goede raised the issue of methods and theory reinforcing each other as the method provides proof of the theory and the theory provides valid application of the method. I am not a great discussant for this particular debate, but I would say that it provides an argument for a greater range of research methods being a component of strong science.