We are not equipped to identify the first signs of cyber–physical attacks: emotional reactions to cybersecurity breaches on domestic internet of things devices

Budimir, Sanja; Fontaine, Johnny R. J.; Huijts, Nicole M. A.; Haans, Antal; IJsselsteijn, Wijnand A.; Oostveen, Anne-Marie; Stahl, Frederic; Heartfield, Ryan; Loukas, George; Bezemskij, Anatolij; Filippoupolitis, Avgoustinos; Ras, Ivano; Roesch, Etienne B.

Download

Preview

Text (Open Access)
- Published Version
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Advice

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Tools

Lists

Budimir, S., Fontaine, J. R. J., Huijts, N. M. A., Haans, A., IJsselsteijn, W. A., Oostveen, A.-M., Stahl, F. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4860-0203, Heartfield, R., Loukas, G., Bezemskij, A., Filippoupolitis, A., Ras, I. and Roesch, E. B. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8913-4173 (2024) We are not equipped to identify the first signs of cyber–physical attacks: emotional reactions to cybersecurity breaches on domestic internet of things devices. Applied Sciences, 14 (24). 11855. ISSN 2076-3417 doi: 10.3390/app142411855

Abstract/Summary

The increasing number of domestic Internet of Things (IoT) devices in our lives leads to numerous benefits, but also comes with an increased risk of cybersecurity breaches. These breaches have psychological consequences for the users. We examined the nature of the psychological impact of cybersecurity breaches on domestic IoT by investigating emotional experiences in a scenario study (Study 1) and a field experiment (Study 2) using the five emotion components of the Compo- nent Process Model (CPM) and emotion regulation as a framework. We replicated a three-dimen- sional structure for emotional experiences found in a previous study, with an addition of an ancil- lary fourth dimension in the second study. The first dimension represents emotional intensity. The second bipolar dimension describes constructive vs. unconstructive action tendencies. On the third dimension, also bipolar, cognitive and motivational emotion features are opposed to affective emo- tion features. The fourth dimension, labeled distress symptoms, mainly reflects negative emotions. In Study 2, most of the introduced frequent irregularities on IoT devices were not noticed, and the intensity of emotional reactions and tendencies to react in a constructive way decreased throughout the phases of the experiment. These findings reveal that we are not emotionally equipped to identify potential threats in the cyber world.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type	Article
URI	https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/id/eprint/119950
Identification Number/DOI	10.3390/app142411855
Refereed	Yes
Divisions	Interdisciplinary Research Centres (IDRCs) > Centre for Integrative Neuroscience and Neurodynamics (CINN) Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Neuroscience Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Perception and Action
Uncontrolled Keywords	cybersecurity breach; IoT devices; emotions; componential process model
Publisher	MDPI
Download/View statistics	View download statistics for this item

Download Statistics

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Deposit Details

References

References 1. IoTAnalytics Connected IoT Device Market Update—Summer. 2024. Available online: https://iot-analytics.com/number- connected-iot-devices/ (accessed on 16 December 2024). 2. Statista Number of Internet of Things (IoT) Connections Worldwide from 2022 to 2023, with Forecasts from 2024 to 2033. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1183457/iot-connected-devices-worldwide/ (accessed on 16 December 2024). 3. ISO 25000. Software and Data Quality. Available online: https://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-standards/iso-25010 (accessed on 16 December 2024). 4. Systems and Software Engineering—Systems and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE)—Product Quality Model.Available online: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:25010:ed-2:v1:en (accessed on 16 December 2024) 5. ISO/IEC 27000. Family Information Security Management. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/iso-iec-27000-family (accessed on 16 December 2024). 6. Vardakis, G.; Hatzivasilis, G.; Koutsaki, E.; Papadakis, N. Review of Smart-Home Security Using the Internet of Things. Electronics 2024, 13, 3343. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13163343. 7. Marton, A. IoT Malware Attacks up by 37% in the First Half of 2023. Available online: https://iotac.eu/iot-malware-attacks-up- by-37-in-the-first-half-of-2023/ (accessed on 16 December 2024). 8. Kaspersky Unveils an Overview of IoT-Related Threats in 2023. Available online: https://www.kaspersky.com/about/press- releases/kaspersky-unveils-an-overview-of-iot-related-threats-in-2023 (accessed on 16 December 2024). 9. Heartfield, R.; Loukas, G.; Budimir, S.; Bezemskij, A.; Fontaine, J.R.J.; Filippoupolitis, A.; Roesch, E. A Taxonomy of Cyber- Physical Threats and Impact in the Smart Home. Comput. Secur. 2018, 78, 398–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2018.07.011. 10. Bitdefender The 2023 IOT Security Landscape Report 2023. Available online: https://www.bitdefender.com/files/News/CaseStudies/study/429/2023-IoT-Security-Landscape-Report.pdf (accessed on 16 December 2024) 11. Loukas, G. Cyber‐Physical Attacks: A Growing Invisible Threat; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-0-12-801463- 9. 12. Parsons, E.K.; Panaousis, E.; Loukas, G.; Sakellari, G. A Survey on Cyber Risk Management for the Internet of Things. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 9032. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13159032. 13. Baraniuk, C. Ashley Madison: ‘Suicides’ over Website Hack. Available online: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34044506 (accessed on 10 December 2019). 14. Watson, D.; Clark, L.A.; Tellegen, A. Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1988, 8, 1063. 15. Scherer, K.R. Appraisal Considered as a Process of Multilevel Sequential Checking. In Appraisal Processes in Emotion: Theory, Methods, Research; Series in Affective Science; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2001; pp. 92–120, ISBN 978-0-19- 513007-2. 16. Gross, M.L.; Canetti, D.; Vashdi, D.R. Cyberterrorism: Its Effects on Psychological Well-Being, Public Confidence and Political Attitudes. J. Cybersecur. 2017, 3, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyw018. 17. Gross, M.L.; Canetti, D.; Vashdi, D.R. The Psychological Effects of Cyber Terrorism. Bull. At. Sci. 2016, 72, 284–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2016.1216502. 18. Kopecký, K.; Szotkowski, R. Cyberbullying, Cyber Aggression and Their Impact on the Victim—The Teacher. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 506–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.08.014. 19. Budimir, S.; Fontaine, J.R.J.; Roesch, E.B. Emotional Experiences of Cybersecurity Breach Victims. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2021, 24, 612–616. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0525. 20. Budimir, S.; Fontaine, J.R.J.; Huijts, N.M.A.; Haans, A.; Loukas, G.; Roesch, E.B. Emotional Reactions to Cybersecurity Breach Situations: Scenario-Based Survey Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2021, 23, e24879. https://doi.org/10.2196/24879. 21. Qualtrics, P.U. Qualtrics 2019. Provo, UT, USA. https://www.qualtrics.com 22. Huijts, N.M.A.; Haans, A.; Budimir, S.; Fontaine, J.R.J.; Loukas, G.; Bezemskij, A.; Oostveen, A.; Filippoupolitis, A.; Ras, I.; IJsselsteijn, W.A.; et al. User Experiences with Simulated Cyber-Physical Attacks on Smart Home IoT. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2023, 27, 2243–2266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-023-01774-5. 23. Achenbach, T.M. The Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessemnt (ASEBA): Development, Findings, Theory, and Applications; University of Vermont Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families: Burlington, VT, USA, 1966. 24. Fontaine, J.R.J.; Scherer, K.R.; Soriano, C. (Eds.) Components of Emotional Meaning: A Sourcebook; Oxford University Press:Oxford, UK, 2013; ISBN 978-0-19-959274-6. 25. Frijda, N.H. The Emotions; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1986; ISBN 978-0-521-31600-2. 26. Riquelme, H.E.; Alqallaf, A. Anticipated Emotions and Their Effects on Risk and Opportunity Evaluations. J. Int. Entrep. 2020, 18, 312–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-019-00262-3. 27. Kaplan, S.; Winslow, C.; Craig, L.; Lei, X.; Wong, C.; Bradley-Geist, J.; Biskup, M.; Ruark, G. “Worse than I Anticipated” or “This Isn’t so Bad”?: The Impact of Affective Forecasting Accuracy on Self-Reported Task Performance. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0235973. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235973. 28. Kutt, K.; Nalepa, G.J. Emotion Prediction in Real-Life Scenarios: On the Way to the BIRAFFE3 Dataset. In Artificial Intelligence for Neuroscience and Emotional Systems; Ferrández Vicente, J.M., Val Calvo, M., Adeli, H., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; Volume 14674, pp. 465–475, ISBN 978-3-031-61139-1. 29. Beaton, A.; Cook, M.; Kavanagh, M.; Herrington, C. The Psychological Impact of Burglary. Psychol. Crime Law 2000, 6, 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160008410830. 30. Chung, M.C.; Stedmon, J.; Hall, R.; Marks, Z.; Thornhill, K.; Mehrshahi, R. Posttraumatic Stress Reactions Following Burglary: The Role of Coping and Personality. Traumatol. Int. J. 2014, 20, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099374.

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Date Deposited:	07 Jan 2025 14:12	Date item deposited into CentAUR
Last Modified:	19 Jul 2025 08:00	Date item last modified