Search results

This paper aims to explore the role of libraries and librarians in promoting appropriate cyberethical behaviour among postgraduate students in Nigeria.

Using content analysis and a review of relevant literature, this study examines the challenges that librarians face in enforcing cyberethics and highlights the strategies that libraries can adopt to promote responsible online behaviour.

This paper identifies the lack of awareness among postgraduate students regarding cybersecurity risks and the need for training and resources for librarians as key challenges in promoting cyberethics.

This study recommends that libraries provide access to training resources and develop policies and guidelines to promote cyberethics among postgraduate students. Overall, this paper argues that libraries and librarians can play a critical role in promoting responsible online behaviour and ensuring the safety and security of postgraduate students in Nigeria.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the differences and similarities between computer ethics, internet ethics and cyberethics as reflected in the contents of the published literature as well as the search trends on Google.

The paper opted for an informetrics approach, and more specifically content analysis, to investigate the inter-relationships between computer ethics, internet ethics and cyberethics. The data sources for this study included Google Trends, Google Scholar and the Web of Science citation indexes. Different search queries were used, depending on the structure of each data source, to extract the relevant data sets.

Using different methods and techniques to analyse the data, the paper provides an alternative means of investigating relationships among concepts. The findings indicate that there is still no clear distinction between the concepts in terms of subject and title terms used to describe the published literature on the three concepts, as well as the research areas where the three concepts are applied. Going by the current trend, the paper envisages that cyberethics may, in the future, become a broader term to include computer ethics and internet ethics.

The data sources that were selected for the study might have not been comprehensive in the coverage of the published literature on the three concepts and therefore there is need for further research, which will expand the scope of the data sources.

The paper’s findings may apply in the practice of indexing and abstracting as well as thesaurus construction as far as the three terms are concerned.

The paper offers an alternative technique that can be used to investigate relationships among concepts. The value of the paper could include curriculum development of programmes dealing with ethical issues that arise when developing and using computers and related technologies.

To protect information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure and resources against poor cyber hygiene behaviours, organisations commonly require internal users to confirm they will abide by an ICT Code of Conduct. Before commencing enrolment, university students sign ICT policies, however, individuals can ignore or act contrary to these policies. This study aims to evaluate whether students can apply ICT Codes of Conduct and explores viable approaches for ensuring that students understand how to act ethically and in accordance with such codes.

The authors designed a between-subjects experiment involving 260 students’ responses to five scenario-pairs that involve breach/non-breach of a university’s ICT policy following a priming intervention to heighten awareness of ICT policy or relevant ethical principles, with a control group receiving no priming.

This study found a significant difference in students’ responses to the breach versus non-breach cases, indicating their ability to apply the ICT Code of Conduct. Qualitative comments revealed the priming materials influenced their reasoning.

The authors’ priming interventions were inadequate for improving breach recognition compared to the control group. More nuanced and targeted priming interventions are suggested for future studies.

Appropriate application of ICT Code of Conduct can be measured by collecting student/employee responses to breach/non-breach scenario pairs based on the Code and embedded with ethical principles.

Shared awareness and protection of ICT resources.

Compliance with ICT Codes of Conduct by students is under-investigated. This study shows that code-based scenarios can measure understanding and suggest that targeted priming might offer a non-resource intensive training approach.

The purpose of this paper is to present the conceptual model of an innovative methodology (SAT) to assess the social acceptance of technology, especially focusing on artificial intelligence (AI)-based technology.

After a review of the literature, this paper presents the main lines by which SAT stands out from current methods, namely, a four-bubble approach and a mix of qualitative and quantitative techniques that offer assessments that look at technology as a socio-technical system. Each bubble determines the social variability of a cluster of values: User-Experience Acceptance, Social Disruptiveness, Value Impact and Trust.

The methodology is still in development, requiring further developments, specifications and validation. Accordingly, the findings of this paper refer to the realm of the research discussion, that is, highlighting the importance of preventively assessing and forecasting the acceptance of technology and building the best design strategies to boost sustainable and ethical technology adoption.

Once SAT method will be validated, it could constitute a useful tool, with societal implications, for helping users, markets and institutions to appraise and determine the co-implications of technology and socio-cultural contexts.

New AI applications flood today’s users and markets, often without a clear understanding of risks and impacts. In the European context, regulations (EU AI Act) and rules (EU Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy) try to fill this normative gap. The SAT method seeks to integrate the risk-based assessment of AI with an assessment of the perceptive-psychological and socio-behavioural aspects of its social acceptability.

This viewpoint aims to highlight the necessarily technical nature of ethics in software development, propose a label (ethical bypassing) for ethical analysis that does not lead to ethical action and introduce a philosophical foundation for technical analysis that leads to ethical software development.

The methodological approach is one of technical analysis that is aware of social science and philosophical knowledge bases.

The findings establish a clear technical foundation that is crucial to ethical analysis that will actually inform software development.

The idea that beginning with technical expertise is the best way to begin ethical reflection on a technical implementation has been often suggested, but not really empircally tested. Research using cases or other qualitative approaches would need to be done to add credibility to the claim.

This approach suggests that collaboration between technically informed ethicists and ethically informed technical experts should begin with the exploration of the technical questions rather than with ethical speculation.

A common approach to ethical education is to concentrate on ethical theory and its application in technical contexts. This approach suggests that this may lead to ethical bypassing by the student, the avoidance of the making technical decisions by extensive ethical reflection.

This paper introduces a new term, ethical bypassing, to the literature on the ethics of software development.

This paper addresses social and ethical issues in computer‐mediated education, with a focus on higher education. It will be argued if computer‐mediated education is to be implemented in a socially and ethically sound way, four major social and ethical issues much be confronted. These are: (1) the issue of value transfer in higher education: can social, cultural and academic values be successfully transmitted in computer‐mediated education? (2) the issue of academic freedom: are computer‐mediated educational settings conducive for academic freedom or do they threaten to undermine it? (3) the issue of equality and diversity: does a reliance on computer networks in higher education foster equality and equity for students and does it promote diversity, or does it disadvantage certain social classes and force conformity? (4) the issue of ethical student and staff behaviour: What kinds of unethical behaviour by students and staff are made possible in computer‐mediated education, and what can be done against it? Existing studies relating to these four issues are examined and some tentative policy conclusions are drawn.