The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations
Abstract
Enterprises establish computer security policies to ensure the security of information resources; however, if employees and end-users of organisational information systems (IS) are not keen or are unwilling to follow security policies, then these efforts are in vain. Our study is informed by the literature on IS adoption, protection-motivation theory, deterrence theory, and organisational behaviour, and is motivated by the fundamental premise that the adoption of information security practices and policies is affected by organisational, environmental, and behavioural factors. We develop an Integrated Protection Motivation and Deterrence model of security policy compliance under the umbrella of Taylor-Todd's Decomposed Theory of Planned Behaviour. Furthermore, we evaluate the effect of organisational commitment on employee security compliance intentions. Finally, we empirically test the theoretical model with a data set representing the survey responses of 312 employees from 78 organisations. Our results suggest that (a) threat perceptions about the severity of breaches and response perceptions of response efficacy, self-efficacy, and response costs are likely to affect policy attitudes; (b) organisational commitment and social influence have a significant impact on compliance intentions; and (c) resource availability is a significant factor in enhancing self-efficacy, which in turn, is a significant predictor of policy compliance intentions. We find that employees in our sample underestimate the probability of security breaches.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
Advances In Experimental Social Psychology
(2022) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(22)x0002-6 · Cited by 22,259
Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144 · Cited by 8,815
A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1
Rogers, R. W. (1975) · The Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803 · Cited by 6,805
Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249688 · Cited by 6,553
Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice
Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M.-C. (2000) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.00407 · Cited by 6,416
Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4 · Cited by 5,718
Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization1
Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249443 · Cited by 3,814
Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis.
Stajković, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.124.2.240 · Cited by 3,782
Cited by
Ifinedo, P. (2012) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2011.10.007 · Cited by 854
Employees’ adherence to information security policies: An exploratory field study
Siponen, M., Adam Mahmood, M., & Pahnila, S. (2014) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2013.08.006 · Cited by 498
Toward a Unified Model of Information Security Policy Compliance1
Moody, G. D., Siponen, M., & Pahnila, S. (2018) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2018/13853 · Cited by 450
Hsu, C.-L., & Chen, M.-C. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.06.037 · Cited by 357
Investigating the impact of cybersecurity policy awareness on employees’ cybersecurity behavior
Li, L., He, W., Xu, L., Ash, I., Anwar, M., & Yuan, X. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.017 · Cited by 328
Metadata
- Authors
- Herath, T., & Rao, H. R.
- Venue
- European Journal of Information Systems
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 106-125
- ISSN
- 0960-085X (ISSN-L)
- 1476-9344
- OpenAlex
- W2010902645
- Cited by
- 1,249
- References
- 81
- FWCI
- 78.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1057/ejis.2009.6
- The paper
- Herath, T., & Rao, H. R. (2009). Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations. European Journal of Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2009.6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.