A Taxonomy of Situations within the Context of Risk Analysis

Prediction of deliberate human decisions with potential negative impact on others would have great practical and scientific utility. The Conflicting Incentives Risk Analysis (CIRA) method defines risk as a result of misaligned incentives between various stakeholders. The method makes predictions based on action desirability from the perspective of the individual in the position to implement the action. Therefore, in order to assess action desirability it is necessary to characterize stakeholders and their perceptions about the situation as well. While classification systems and taxonomies related to stakeholder attributes are well-established, systematic classifications of situational aspects are underdeveloped in the literature. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to present a classification of situational variables in the form of a taxonomy capturing key situational features that exert influence on decision-makers. The development of the taxonomy begins with mapping two major types of risks distinguished in the CIRA method to relevant psychological constructs. The principled, systematic development of dilemmas enabled by the taxonomy allows researchers to investigate the predictability of stakeholder behavior which may result in various types of risks. The taxonomy is extensible, thus additional concepts and variables can be included depending on the needs of the analysis and according to future developments within the fields of psychology and information security.

[1]  Shalom H. Schwartz,et al.  Basic values: How they motivate and inhibit prosocial behavior. , 2010 .

[2]  Lawrence A. Pervin,et al.  A free-response description approach to the analysis of person-situation interaction. , 1976 .

[3]  S. B. Sells.  AN INTERACTIONIST LOOKS AT THE ENVIRONMENT , 1963 .

[4]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment , 2008, Cognition.

[5]  Joshua D. Greene,et al.  Finding faults: How moral dilemmas illuminate cognitive structure , 2012, Social neuroscience.

[6]  Einar Snekkenes,et al.  Using Demographic Features for the Prediction of Basic Human Values Underlying Stakeholder Motivation , 2019, ICEIS.

[7]  B. D. Raad,et al.  Taxonomies of situations from a trait psychological perspective: A review , 1999 .

[8]  E. L. Kelly.  Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and review of the evidence. , 1955 .

[9]  Michael Koenigs,et al.  Utilitarian moral judgment in psychopathy. , 2012, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[10]  Lisa Rajbhandari,et al.  Using the Conflicting Incentives Risk Analysis Method , 2013, SEC.

[11]  Steven C. R. Williams,et al.  A dose of ruthlessness: interpersonal moral judgment is hardened by the anti-anxiety drug lorazepam. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[12]  D. Heller,et al.  The Dynamics of Personality States, Goals, and Well-Being , 2007, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[13]  Sang Eun Woo,et al.  CAPTION-ing the Situation: A Lexically-Derived Taxonomy of Psychological Situation Characteristics , 2017, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Marlatt Ga,et al.  Taxonomy of high-risk situations for alcohol relapse: evolution and development of a cognitive-behavioral model. , 1996 .

[15]  M. Krause.  Use of social situations for research purposes. , 1970 .

[16]  P. Spengler.  Clinical Versus Mechanical Prediction , 2012 .

[17]  Canice Prendergast.  The Provision of Incentives in Firms , 1999 .

[18]  Dennis Kundisch,et al.  Because Your Taxonomy is Worth IT: towards a Framework for Taxonomy Evaluation , 2019, ECIS.

[19]  Zahir Tari,et al.  A Survey of Clustering Algorithms for Big Data: Taxonomy and Empirical Analysis , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing.

[20]  J. G. Holmes,et al.  An Atlas of Interpersonal Situations , 2003 .

[21]  Jacky Akoka,et al.  A Taxonomy of Evaluation Methods for Information Systems Artifacts , 2015, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[22]  O. Robinson,et al.  Person, Persona, and Personality Modification: An In-Depth Qualitative Exploration of Quantitative Findings , 2013 .

[23]  J. P. Rushton,et al.  The altruistic personality and the self-report altruism scale , 1981 .

[24]  B. D. Raad,et al.  The construction of a joint taxonomy of traits and situations , 2001 .

[25]  Noureldien A. Noureldien,et al.  A novel taxonomy of MANET attacks , 2015, 2015 International Conference on Electrical and Information Technologies (ICEIT).

[26]  R. Moos.  Conceptualizations of human environments. , 1973 .

[27]  Einar Snekkenes,et al.  Unobtrusive Psychological Profiling for Risk Analysis , 2018, ICETE.

[28]  A. Gomila,et al.  Moral judgment reloaded: a moral dilemma validation study , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[29]  Einar Snekkenes,et al.  Position Paper: Privacy Risk Analysis Is about Understanding Conflicting Incentives , 2013, IDMAN.

[30]  B. Roberts,et al.  Cross-sectional and longitudinal tests of the Personality and Role Identity Structural Model (PRISM). , 2006, Journal of personality.

[31]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles , 2015, Science.

[32]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment , 2001, Science.

[33]  W. Grove,et al.  Clinical versus mechanical prediction: a meta-analysis. , 2000, Psychological assessment.

[34]  Kennon M. Sheldon,et al.  Trait Self and True Self: Cross-Role Variation in the Big-Five Personality Traits and Its Relations With Psychological Authenticity and Subjective Well-Being , 1997 .

[35]  J. Forgas.  The perception of social episodes: Categorical and dimensional representations in two different social milieus. , 1976 .

[36]  A. Tellegen,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES An Alternative "Description of Personality": The Big-Five Factor Structure , 2022 .

[37]  Albert E. Beaton,et al.  Prediction of organizational behavior , 1972 .

[38]  D. Funder,et al.  The Person-situation Debate and the Assessment of Situations , 2012 .

[39]  D. Magnusson.  An Analysis of Situational Dimensions , 1971 .

[40]  J. Borges,et al.  A TAXONOMY OF PRIVACY , 2006 .

[41]  Personality psychology in europe - theoretical and empirical developments - bonarius,h, vanheck,g, smid,n , 1984 .

[42]  B. Roberts,et al.  One personality, multiple selves: integrating personality and social roles. , 1994, Journal of personality.

[43]  Norman Frederiksen,et al.  Toward a Taxonomy of Situations. , 1972 .

[44]  S. Read,et al.  A taxonomy of situations from Chinese idioms , 2006 .

[45]  R. Price.  The Taxonomic Classification of Behaviors and Situations and the Problem of Behavior-Environment Congruence , 1974 .

[46]  G A Marlatt,et al.  Taxonomy of high-risk situations for alcohol relapse: evolution and development of a cognitive-behavioral model. , 1996, Addiction.