Search Results (3)

As offensive cyber operations have become more commonplace, cyber collateral damage (CCD) to society and to civilian infrastructure has expanded in impact and severity. Several research contexts, frameworks, and methods apply to these collateral effects, especially as they pertain to reducing them. To investigate and map this area of research, five leading scientific databases (Scopus, IEEE Xplore, Springer Link, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest) were searched for papers on CCD. From 716 search results, 74 relevant papers were selected. Using surface categories as well as thematic analysis, these were grouped into the main emergent categories of legal, ethical, targeting-oriented, and econometric papers, with each category showing a recent research trend. The papers were qualitatively assessed for importance and coverage and compared bibliographically to identify key papers and authors. Within the identified areas of research, significant gaps remain. While CCD is becoming increasingly well understood from a legal and operational perspective, this accounts only for a fraction of the civilian harm caused by offensive cyber operations. This study identifies potential pathways for the synthesis of the current research areas (targeting, taxonomy, econometrics) with broader definitions of collateral damage to include civilian harm. These include updating national cyber doctrines to require collateral damage estimates, as well as exploiting emerging open datasets to understand which cyber capabilities cause the greatest collateral effects. Finally, we observe that the research definitions and taxonomy of CCD differ widely and have been subjected to limited scrutiny and challenge to date. Full article

As digital technologies rapidly integrate into Health Professions Education (HPE), understanding cyberethics is increasingly crucial. This scoping review explores the pedagogy of cyberethics in HPE, highlighting a significant gap in explicit definitions and conceptualizations. Additionally, the absence of specific theoretical frameworks in most documents raises concerns about research progression. Only four articles introduce educational interventions in cyberethics, indicating a promising avenue for future research. While comprehensive search methods are employed, limitations, including language biases, exist. Future investigations should broaden the discourse to encompass ethical implications of emerging technologies within HPE. Cultivating comprehensive, culturally sensitive, and inclusive guidelines is vital for ethical digital practices in the health care community. Full article

Aim: To explore gender influence on individual risk perception of multiple hazards and personal attitudes towards disaster preparedness across EU citizens. Method: An online survey was distributed to 2485 participants from Spain, France, Poland, Sweden and Italy. The survey was divided into two parts. The first part examined perceived likelihood (L), perceived personal impact (I) and perceived self-efficacy (E) towards disasters due to extreme weather conditions (flood, landslide and storm), fire, earthquake, hazardous materials accidents, and terrorist attacks. The overall risk rating for each specific hazard was measured through the following equation R = (L × I)/E and the resulting scores were brought into the range between 0 and 1. The second part explored people’s reactions to the Pros and Cons of preparedness to compute the overall attitudes of respondents towards preparation (expressed as a ratio between −1 and 1). Results: Although we found gender variations on concerns expressed as the likelihood of the occurrence, personal consequences and self-efficacy, the overall risks were judged significantly higher by females in all hazards (p < 0.01). We also found that, in general, most respondents (both males and females) were in favour of preparedness. More importantly, despite the gender differences in risk perception, there were no significant differences in the attitudes towards preparedness. We found weak correlations between risks perceived and attitudes towards preparedness (rho < 0.20). The intersectional analysis showed that young and adult females perceived higher risks than their gender counterparts at the same age. There were also gender differences in preparedness, i.e., females in higher age ranges are more motivated for preparedness than men in lower age ranges. We also found that risk perception for all hazards in females was significantly higher than in males at the same education level. We found no significant differences between sub-groups in the pros and cons of getting ready for disasters. However, females at a higher level of education have more positive attitudes towards preparedness. Conclusions: This study suggests that gender along with other intersecting factors (e.g., age and education) still shape differences in risk perception and attitudes towards disasters across the EU population. Overall, the presented results policy actions focus on promoting specific DRR policies and practices (bottom-up participatory and learning processes) through interventions oriented to specific target groups from a gender perspective. Full article