Improving Interdisciplinary Communication With Standardized Cyber Security Terminology: A Literature Review <s> B. DISCUSSION OF DATA AND JUSTIFICATION FOR TERMINOLOGY STANDARDIZATION <s> This paper describes a content enabling system that provides deep semantic search and information access to large quantities of distributed multimedia data for both experts and general public. It provides with a language independent search and dynamic classification features for a broad range of data collected from several sources in a number of culturally diverse languages. This system is part of the Online Police Station, launched by the Italian Minister of the Interior in 2006. The Online Police Station uses a virtual reality interface to provide general information and online assistance. Citizens can download forms, make complaints, receive advice and/or report events of an illegal nature. Police specialists can monitor criminal trends to ensure that responses are appropriately focused, and that scarce resources are more effectively employed against criminality. Online Police Station was voted as the Most inspiring good practice for creative solutions to common challenges, at the European eGovernment Awards 2007. <s> BIB001 </s> Improving Interdisciplinary Communication With Standardized Cyber Security Terminology: A Literature Review <s> B. DISCUSSION OF DATA AND JUSTIFICATION FOR TERMINOLOGY STANDARDIZATION <s> Abstract Cyberpsychology is a recently emergent field that examines the impact of technology upon human cognition and behavior. Given its infancy, authors have rapidly created new measures to gauge their constructs of interest. Unfortunately, few of these authors have had the opportunity to test their scales' psychometric properties and validity. This is concerning, as many theoretical assumptions may be founded upon scales with inadequate attributes. If this were found to be true, then previous findings in cyberpsychology studies would need to be retested, and future research would need to shift its focus to creating psychometrically sound and valid measures. To provide inferences on this concern, the current study examines the article reporting, scale creation, and scale reliabilities of every article published in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking from its inception to July 2014. The final data set encompassed the coding of 1,478 individual articles, including 921 scales, and spanning 17 ... <s> BIB002
Inspection of the terms in Table A1 reveals many that are undoubtedly unfamiliar or informal in appearance to most readers. The lack of consistent nomenclature observed in Table A1 is not limited to the question of how to form terms with ''cyber,'' which itself is significant, but extends to whether ''cyber'' is always the most appropriate term, why we speak of e-commerce and not online commerce, why online psychology but cyber bullying or (recently) cyberpsychology BIB002 . While these terms may seem somewhat familiar to some readers, many other terms encountered when reading cyber security papers, especially nontechnical ones, are used rarely or only a few times, and can often seem ad hoc. Often when they are used, they are not rigorously defined or contrasted with other, perhaps more appropriate terms: should we speak of cyber security, cyber resilience, or cyber safety [79],  ? Many of these terms, given definitions of cyber security, are actually part of it: cyber security has been categorized into such stages as Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover, or with Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability; and resilience and safety are arguably covered in those categorizations BIB001 . In some ways, use of cyber security terminology has begun to resemble the loosely-defined grammar of online fora, with contributors communicating in a mostly, but not always, mutually understood language that is just good enough [86] . With the rapid growth of cyber security, terminology standards that are just ''good enough'' will soon not be good enough, and may be even be overdue. Fields such as healthcare, chemistry, and electrical engineering all devote much effort to standards, including terminology  -  . While cyber security is not as old as these fields, losses from cybercrime alone amount to approximately 1% of world GDP, and although this is not as large as health expenditures, it does not even reflect gains from ICT or the growing global dependence on computers  ,  . A search of IEEE Xplore's standards dictionary returns only two records of standards terminology documents referring to ''cyber''  - [92] . The lack of cyber security terminology standards is not only problematic in consistency of use, but in comparative studies and validity of results. Cryptography gives rigorous definitions of whether an encryption scheme is ''secure,'' that allow schemes to be compared, but newer branches of cyber security, as well as broader ''cyber'' areas of study, are severely lacking such definitions. Potential benefits of terminology standardization include the following: • Creation of precise laws and policies • Repeatable, mutually intelligible, and comparable research • Preservation and availability of knowledge through easily searchable and indexed publications Defining a term and eliminating unnecessary synonyms or ambiguous phrases from vocabulary facilitates the creation of precise legal constructs for cyberspace and the creation of industry standards and best practices, such as the NIST Cybersecurity [sic] Framework, which suggested standards for ensuring proper cyber security in business operations BIB001 . The ability for scholars to understand each other is of paramount importance in research and its vocabulary. As with the goals of chemical nomenclature, ensuring no ambiguity in terms should be of first importance, with a secondary objective being to minimize alternative names for the same concept. This second objective would help database searches for new journal articles. If terminology constantly evolves, much knowledge can potentially be overlooked, with only the most common terms being searched for and recognized, and with papers using ad hoc or nonstandard nomenclature being ignored or not even turning up in search results despite their valuable contributions. Therefore, to ensure accurate and comprehensive searches, standards benefit the entire body of research, and authors who choose not to adhere to such standards risk having a low impact on the field; therefore there is a strong incentive to adopt such standards if a plurality of researchers already have, and in many cases even if they have not yet done so  .