Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Does exposure to lethal and non-lethal cyber terrorism affect psychological ll being, public confidence and political attitudes? By what mechanisms do they do so? While cyber terrorism most often raises concerns about national security, its effects on individuals’ psyche and cognition are overlooked. To address these questions  carried out four experiments beten 2013 and 2016. Subjects re exposed to simulated cyber-attacks in the lab and experimental manipulations (video clips) to simulate the experience of lethal and nonlethal cyber terrorism. Our findings demonstrate a stress-based “cyber terrorism effect.” Exposure to cyber terrorism is not benign and shares many traits with conventional terrorism: stress, anxiety, insecurity, a preference for security over liberty, a reevaluation of confidence in public institutions, an exaggerated assessment of risk and support for militant government policies. In the cyber realm this translates into support for such policies as internet surveillance, government regulation of the internet, and a harsh military response to cyber terrorism (including conventional, kinetic retaliation). These attitudes may impinge upon the tolerance and confidence necessary for a vibrant civil society. This effect is associated with nonlethal cyber terrorism that causes economic loss as ll as with cyber terrorism that causes death and injury. Nonlethal cyber terrorism is not as benign as many people think.Our data also show that perceptions of cyber threat are as important, if not more important, than actual cyber-attacks (whether self-reported or experienced in the clips). While the experimental manipulations directly affect stress and insecurity, threat perception relating to cyber terrorism rather than actual cyber-attacks stands behind demands for surveillance, regulation and militant retaliatory policy. As a result, any policy that focuses solely on cyber defense (or active cyber defense) is insufficient. There is no necessary and direct relationship beten a cyber terror event and threat perception. Threat perception may draw from past or hypothetical events, as much as from recent, actual events, signals and cues. Although cyber terrorism has yet to cause extensive harm to individuals, our research line shows how both non-lethal and lethal cyber terrorism undermine psychological ll-being as they threaten economic and/or physical harm. To strengthen confidence and resilience, policy must focus on reducing stress, anxiety as much as preventing actual cyber-attacks. Both elements are crucial for any effective and comprehensive defensive and offensive cyber policy.
['Michael L. Gross', 'Daphna Canetti', 'Dana R. Vashdi']
I am writing a research paper on a idea Cyberterrorism: its effects on psychological well-being, public confidence and political attitudes
[{"from": "human", "value": "I am writing a research paper on a idea Cyberterrorism: its effects on psychological well-being, public confidence and political attitudes"}, {"from": "gpt", "value": "Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Does exposure to lethal and non-lethal cyber terrorism affect psychological ll being, public confidence and political attitudes? By what mechanisms do they do so? While cyber terrorism most often raises concerns about national security, its effects on individuals\u2019 psyche and cognition are overlooked. To address these questions  carried out four experiments beten 2013 and 2016. Subjects re exposed to simulated cyber-attacks in the lab and experimental manipulations (video clips) to simulate the experience of lethal and nonlethal cyber terrorism. Our findings demonstrate a stress-based \u201ccyber terrorism effect.\u201d Exposure to cyber terrorism is not benign and shares many traits with conventional terrorism: stress, anxiety, insecurity, a preference for security over liberty, a reevaluation of confidence in public institutions, an exaggerated assessment of risk and support for militant government policies. In the cyber realm this translates into support for such policies as internet surveillance, government regulation of the internet, and a harsh military response to cyber terrorism (including conventional, kinetic retaliation). These attitudes may impinge upon the tolerance and confidence necessary for a vibrant civil society. This effect is associated with nonlethal cyber terrorism that causes economic loss as ll as with cyber terrorism that causes death and injury. Nonlethal cyber terrorism is not as benign as many people think.Our data also show that perceptions of cyber threat are as important, if not more important, than actual cyber-attacks (whether self-reported or experienced in the clips). While the experimental manipulations directly affect stress and insecurity, threat perception relating to cyber terrorism rather than actual cyber-attacks stands behind demands for surveillance, regulation and militant retaliatory policy. As a result, any policy that focuses solely on cyber defense (or active cyber defense) is insufficient. There is no necessary and direct relationship beten a cyber terror event and threat perception. Threat perception may draw from past or hypothetical events, as much as from recent, actual events, signals and cues. Although cyber terrorism has yet to cause extensive harm to individuals, our research line shows how both non-lethal and lethal cyber terrorism undermine psychological ll-being as they threaten economic and/or physical harm. To strengthen confidence and resilience, policy must focus on reducing stress, anxiety as much as preventing actual cyber-attacks. Both elements are crucial for any effective and comprehensive defensive and offensive cyber policy."}]