# A Review of Constructive Alignment in Information Security Educational Research

Vuyolwethu Mdunyelwa, Lynn Futcher, Johan Van Niekerk

► To cite this version:

Vuyolwethu Mdunyelwa, Lynn Futcher, Johan Van Niekerk. A Review of Constructive Alignment in Information Security Educational Research. 17th International Symposium on Human Aspects of Information Security and Assurance (HAISA), Jul 2023, Kent, United Kingdom. pp.461-469, 10.1007/978-3-031-38530-8_36. hal-05462108

HAL Id: hal-05462108

https://inria.hal.science/hal-05462108v1

Submitted on 16 Jan 2026

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

ifip

International Federation for Information Processing

This document is the original author manuscript of a paper submitted to an IFIP
conference proceedings or other IFIP publication by Springer Nature. As such, there
may be some differences in the official published version of the paper. Such
differences, if any, are usually due to reformatting during preparation for publication or
minor corrections made by the author(s) during final proofreading of the publication
manuscript.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

# A Review of Constructive Alignment
in Information Security Educational Research

Vuyolwethu Mdunyelwa<fnref n="1" />(✉) ID, Lynn Futcher<fnref n="1" /> ID, and Johan van Niekerk<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="2" /> ID

**Abstract.** Cybersecurity is a growing concern in today's digitally connected world. With the increasing reliance on technology, it is essential to develop effective educational interventions that enhance users' knowledge and behaviour in both information security and cybersecurity. However, there is limited research on whether these interventions adhere to sound pedagogical approaches. This study evaluates the approaches taken when creating information security and cybersecurity educational interventions by analysing past Human Aspects of Information Security Assurance (HAISA) and World Information Security Education (WISE) papers from 2018 to 2022. A thematic content analysis was conducted to determine whether the papers from these conferences over the 5-year period considered any of the elements of constructive alignment when designing their interventions. The results reveal that the majority of studies focus primarily on learning activities and assessment tasks, rather than incorporating all elements of constructive alignment. Consequently, the positive outcomes on assessment tasks may not necessarily indicate that the intended learning outcomes have been addressed. This research highlights the importance of adopting sound pedagogical approaches in the design of information security and cybersecurity educational interventions to ensure that all intended learning outcomes are adequately addressed and measured before the learning process begins.

**Keywords:** Information Security · Educational Interventions · Educational Pedagogy · Constructive Alignment

## 1 Introduction

Information security and cybersecurity play a crucial role in the field of information technology. As a result, securing information has become a significant challenge in today's world [9]. Efforts to enhance information security involve equipping users with relevant knowledge, which aims to improve their understanding of both information security and cybersecurity [21]. Programs that strive to improve information security and cybersecurity knowledge include education, training, or awareness initiatives [13]. Issues with such programs include a lack of adherence to sound educational pedagogies,

<footnote n="1">¹ Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa</footnote>

<footnote>{vuyolwethu.mdunyelwa,lynn.futcher,</footnote>

<footnote>johan.vanniekerk}@mandela.ac.za, johan.vanniekerk@noroff.no</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Noroff University College, Kristiansand, Norway</footnote>
which underpin the creation of effective educational experiences for targeted users [1]. This research aimed to review past papers focused on information security and cybersecurity interventions to determine whether they considered any of the elements relating to constructive alignment in the design of these interventions.

This was done by means of a thematic content analysis of past Human Aspects of Information Security Assurance (HAISA) and World Information Security Education (WISE) conference papers from 2018 to 2022.

This paper begins with a review of related literature in Sect. 2, followed by the research methodology in Sect. 3, which outlines the methodology undertaken for this study. Section 4 describes the research process undertaken, while Sect. 5 presents the results of the thematic content analysis. Section 6 provides a brief discussion, and Sect. 7 concludes this paper.

## 2 Related Literature

The rise in the use of information technology has also increased the prevalence of cyber-security attacks among cyberspace users. One way of keeping users safe when engaging with internet services is the introduction of programs that aim to equip cyberspace users with relevant cybersecurity knowledge. Such programs include education, training, and awareness programs [23]. These interventions can be used to address different aspects of information and cybersecurity relevant to the needs of various users, such as programs focusing on fostering a cybersecurity culture for end-users within an organisation through awareness programs, or introducing secure coding clinics to improve secure coding knowledge and behaviour among programmers [4, 19].

Consequently, the foundation of such programs focuses on equipping users with the relevant knowledge, skills and abilities to address their information security behaviour [20]. However, any form of information and cybersecurity educational research approach should align with sound educational pedagogical approaches when developing their educational programs [13]. If the underlying basic educational pedagogy, which underpins the educational programs, is overlooked or ignored, the specific cybersecurity threats that the various programs seek to address will not be effectively mitigated [14].

Educational theories recommend that the intentions for the teaching and learning process, along with the required resources and output, should be aligned during the design of any curriculum. This allows for measuring whether the intended output has been achieved at the end of the educational process [7]. Educational theories exist that enable the design for teaching to provide students with a way to express their learning, with clearly stated objectives before the teaching and learning process takes place [2]. A widely used theory for clearly stating learning objectives in relation to students' learning before the teaching and learning process begins, allowing for the measurement of such objectives, is constructive alignment [2, 14].

### 2.1 Constructive Alignment

The creation of academic programs requires the integration of curricular documents with academic content development for teaching and learning. This integration aligns
the curricular statements to determine whether students’ learning was effective [14]. The integration takes an approach that connects theory to policy and practice, with the results of student learning measured at the end of the educational process [8]. Various approaches can be used to design educational programs that allow for measuring students’ learning in relation to the intended learning outcomes; however, a widely recommended approach is constructive alignment [2].

Constructive alignment is an pedagogical framework of teaching and assessment that enables learners to construct their own learning through relevant learning activities [2]. In this pedagogical framework, the teacher’s job is to create a learning environment that supports the learning activities appropriate for achieving the desired learning outcomes [2]. What is essential is that all elements in the pedagogical framework, such as the curriculum, intended learning outcomes, teaching methods used, and assessments, are aligned with each other [2, 14], as seen in Fig. 1.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. Constructive Alignment Elements [10].</figcaption></figure>

Constructive alignment occurs at different levels: course and unit level. Each of the units in a program should address the course learning outcomes [2]. The intended learning outcomes in a unit should be specific to the content and learning activities from that unit. It is crucial to identify the intended learning outcomes and design assessment tasks to measure the attainment of these learning outcomes [14]. The learning activities should be well-planned to enable students to develop skills, knowledge, and understanding described in the intended learning outcomes and measured by the assessments [2]. It is essential to choose the content required to support the learning activities for the students [14]. An example can be seen when creating a module focusing on secure coding, which is an aspect of information security and cybersecurity. This example would include course learning outcomes which are specific for the module, and intended learning outcomes which are specific for addressing the various units of the module. These intended learning outcomes should include learning activities which the students should engage with, and the content or resources which assists them in achieving the learning activities. The assessment tasks should also be included and identified to measure whether the intended learning outcomes have been met by the students.
# 3 Research Methodology

This study aimed to review past papers focused on information security and cybersecurity interventions to determine whether they considered any of the elements relating to constructive alignment in the design of these interventions. While numerous conferences and journals focus on information and cybersecurity education research, the researchers chose to focus on the proceedings from two main International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) Technical Committee (TC) 11 conferences, namely the WISE and HAISA conferences over a 5-year period from 2018 to 2022. WISE is the official conference of the IFIP TC 11 Working Group 8 which focuses on Information Security Education, while HAISA is the IFIP TC 11 Working Group 12 on Human Aspects of Information Security and Assurance. This focused approach allows for a more in-depth exploration of the themes within the chosen conferences.

While analysing content from conferences may limit the generalisability of the findings, this also assists in providing valuable insights into the specific context and content of these conferences. A thematic content analysis was deemed relevant for this study since it involves counting and categorising the occurrences of specific terms, phrases, or themes in the text [6]. This type of content analysis is useful when the aim is to identify patterns or trends in the data [11]. While various approaches for conducting a thematic content analysis exist, this study follows a six-step process, namely familiarisation, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and writing up, as described below [11, 17]:

**STEP 1 - Familiarisation:** The initial stage involves comprehending all the gathered data to establish a general perspective for examining the specific elements.

**STEP 2 - Coding:** This step refers to highlighting sections of text or phrases, resulting in the creation of labels to describe their codes.

**STEP 3 - Generating Themes:** At this stage, themes are generated from patterns identified from the codes that have been created.

**STEP 4 - Reviewing Themes:** This step includes comparing the data set to the generated themes to ensure an accurate representation of the data.

**STEP 5 - Defining and Naming Themes:** During this phase, defining themes involves the exact formulation for determining what they mean, while naming themes involves coming up with brief and easily understandable names for each theme.

**STEP 6 - Writing Up:** This final step includes writing the analysis of the data, covering data collection and how the thematic content analysis was conducted.

The six-step content analysis process was implemented while conducting the thematic content analysis to determine whether the identified studies considered any of the elements relating to constructive alignment in the design of their interventions.

# 4 Research Process

This research took a phased approach in reviewing literature to identify studies for information and cybersecurity interventions. A total of 75 studies were identified, focusing on education, awareness, or training. However, this was filtered down to those which focused
specifically on educational interventions, resulting in 14 studies. These 14 studies were further filtered down to those that focused on formal information and cybersecurity educational interventions to enhance users' knowledge and behaviour, resulting in a final data set of 10 studies as listed in Table 1.

Each paper is represented by a paper Code which is built from the Conference (C), the corresponding year (18 for 2018; 19 for 2019; 20 for 2020; 21 for 2021 and 22 for 2022), the specific conference, i.e., WISE (W) or HAISA (H), and the sequential number in the list presented (1 to 10). Therefore a HAISA paper from 2018 which is number one in the list has a paper code of C18H1. These 10 studies were used to conduct the thematic content analysis, which focused on the five elements of constructive alignment, namely: Course Learning Outcomes; Intended Learning Outcomes; Assessment Tasks; Learning Activities; and Content/Resources. The results for the content analysis are presented in Sect. 5. The thematic content analysis followed a six-step process as discussed in Sect. 3:

**STEP 1 - Familiarisation:** This step was achieved by reviewing the 10 identified studies to recognise elements of constructive alignment in the study or terms that relate to those of constructive alignment.

**STEP 2 - Coding:** This step involved highlighting different phrases or text in the 10 identified studies that relate to the five elements of constructive alignment.

**STEP 3 - Generating Themes:** This step was achieved through identifying the elements of constructive alignment which the identified code should be reviewed against in the following step.

**STEP 4 - Reviewing Themes:** This step included a comparison between the identified phrases from the studies and the five elements of constructive alignment. Some studies referred to gaps for learning outcomes, and referred to intervention or educational interventions as the learning activities.

**STEP 5 - Defining and Naming Themes:** This step involved conducting a review of the identified studies using metrics to indicate whether the studies adhere to some of the elements of constructive alignment.

**STEP 6 - Writing Up:** The final step is the analysis of the data, which forms part of the discussion in Sect. 6.

This six-step process was applied to the 10 identified studies to determine whether these studies considered any of the elements of constructive alignment when designing their information and cybersecurity interventions. The findings of this research will contribute to the understanding of the design for cybersecurity educational interventions and will provide insights into the importance of constructive alignment when designing information and cybersecurity interventions.

# 5 Results

The results of the thematic content analysis as described in Sect. 4 are presented in Table 2 which clearly indicates the ten studies analysed and their corresponding mapping to the five elements of constructive alignment.

From the ten studies analysed, the majority of them do not adhere to the five elements of constructive alignment in the design of their information and cybersecurity interventions.
<table><caption>**Table 1.** Thematic content analysis data set.</caption><thead><tr><td>Paper Code</td><td>Paper Title</td><td>Year</td><td>Reference</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>C18H1</td><td>An Educational Intervention Towards Safe Smartphone Usage</td><td>2018</td><td>[22]</td></tr><tr><td>C18H2</td><td>Social Networking: A Tool for Effective Cybersecurity Education in Cyber-Driven Financial Transactions</td><td>2018</td><td>[15]</td></tr><tr><td>C18H3</td><td>Using the IKEA Effect to Improve Information Security Policy Compliance</td><td>2019</td><td>[18]</td></tr><tr><td>C20H4</td><td>SherLOCKED: A Detective-Themed Serious Game for Cyber Security Education</td><td>2021</td><td>[12]</td></tr><tr><td>C21H5</td><td>A Wolf, Hyena, and Fox Game to Raise Cybersecurity Awareness Among Pre-school Children</td><td>2021</td><td>[21]</td></tr><tr><td>C22H6</td><td>Visual Programming in Cyber Range Training to Improve Skill Development</td><td>2022</td><td>[9]</td></tr><tr><td>C18W7</td><td>A Design for a Collaborative Make-the-Flag Exercise</td><td>2018</td><td>[3]</td></tr><tr><td>C18W8</td><td>ForenCity: A Playground for Self-Motivated Learning in Computer Forensics</td><td>2018</td><td>[5]</td></tr><tr><td>C18W9</td><td>A Pilot Study in Cyber Security Education Using CyberAIMs: A Simulation-Based Experiment</td><td>2018</td><td>[24]</td></tr><tr><td>C18W10</td><td>An Educational Intervention for Teaching Secure Coding Practices</td><td>2019</td><td>[16]</td></tr></tbody></table>

Studies for improving cybersecurity knowledge focus on the learning activities which are the actual interventions and also focus on the assessment tasks which are designed to test the knowledge acquired from the cybersecurity learning activities. In the results from Table 2, only two studies (C18H1 and C18W10) indicated their intended learning outcomes before the teaching and learning process starts, and these were phrased as gaps which were aligned to the activities and assessment tasks. Also, two studies (C18H1 and C18W7) included the Course Learning Outcomes which were relevant for the study since it provided outcomes for the overarching cybersecurity programme, and these were broader than the intended learning outcomes which would be for a specific learning unit in a course.

Seven papers included assessment tasks and various learning activities for their programs. Three studies (C18H2, C20H4, and C18W10) did not include assessment tasks to measure their achievement of the intended learning outcomes. Similarly, eight out of the ten studies included learning activities, except for C18H1 and C18W10. Four studies provide various content and additional resources for students to enhance their information security knowledge and behaviour. In general, none of the studies had all the required elements of constructive alignment before conducting their cybersecurity interventions.
<table><caption>**Table 2:** Results from thematic content analysis.</caption><thead><tr><th>Paper Code</th><th>Course Learning Outcomes</th><th>Intended Learning Outcomes</th><th>Assessment Tasks</th><th>Learning Activities</th><th>Content/Resources</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>C18H1</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C18H2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>C18H3</td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C20H4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>C21H5</td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C22H6</td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C18W7</td><td>x</td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C18W8</td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>C18W9</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>C18W10</td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>TOTALS</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>7</td><td>8</td><td>4</td></tr></tbody></table>

# 6 Discussion

The majority of the studies analysed primarily concentrate on learning activities (8 of the 10) and assessment tasks (7 of the 10), which aim to gauge the knowledge or behaviour associated with these activities. However, a favourable outcome on assessment tasks does not necessarily mean that learning outcomes have been met; it merely suggests that students have comprehended the provided content. This presents a concern, as tasks may address only one anticipated learning outcome and exclude others. If these outcomes were explicitly stated before designing or initiating the program, it would be simpler to assess whether the intended learning outcomes have been met. This paper argues that using a pedagogical framework like constructive alignment can facilitate the alignment of design, learning activities, and assessment tasks before beginning the process for designing information and cybersecurity educational programs. It is crucial for information and cybersecurity educational interventions to consider and adopt such pedagogical frameworks to reinforce their initiatives, ensuring all intended learning outcomes are addressed and measured before the learning process commences. Constructive alignment, as a pedagogical framework, offers this support and enables students and teachers to express their learning and teaching experiences, fostering a learning environment that facilitates student activities tailored to achieving desired learning outcomes.

# 7 Conclusion

Incorporating various educational foundations is essential when conducting research that encompasses educational processes. In the realm of information and cybersecurity research, there is often insufficient consideration given to sound pedagogical approaches
when designing educational interventions. These approaches should define clear learning outcomes and the methods of measuring them before initiating the teaching and learning process. Constructive alignment is one such approach that aligns these elements effec-
tively. This research has discovered that numerous information and cybersecurity studies
aiming to create educational interventions do not adhere to such an approach, thereby
evaluating only what has been taught. As mentioned in Sect. 6, a positive assessment
result does not necessarily equate to meeting the envisioned learning outcomes; it merely
indicates students’ understanding of the taught content. Outcomes in terms of informa-
tion and cybersecurity knowledge can be significantly improved if the intended learning
outcomes are described before the teaching and learning process, demonstrating how
the appropriate objectives have been accomplished. This study only focused on review-
ing past studies on information security and cybersecurity education interventions to
identify whether past HAISA and WISE publications over a 5-year period (2018–2022)
considered any elements of constructive alignment in the design of their interventions.
Future work will focus on developing a broader educational process model considering
how the constructive alignment elements could fit in the educational process model.

References

1. Amankwa, E.: Relevance of cybersecurity education at pedagogy levels in schools. J. Inf. Secur. **12**(04), 233–249 (2021). https://doi.org/10.4236/jis.2021.124013

2. Biggs, J.: Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. High. Educ. **32**, 347–364 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871

3. Bishop, M.: A design for a collaborative make-the-flag exercise. In: Drevin, L., Theocharidou, M. (eds.) WISE 2018. IAICT, vol. 531, pp. 3–14. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99734-6_1

4. Bishop, M., et al.: Cybersecurity curricular guidelines. In: Bishop, M., Futcher, L., Miloslavskaya, N., Theocharidou, M. (eds.) WISE 2017. IAICT, vol. 503, pp. 3–13. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58553-6_1

5. Blauw, F.F., Leung, W.S.: Forencity: A playground for self-motivated learning in computer forensics. In: Drevin, L., Theocharidou, M. (eds.) Information Security Education – Towards a Cybersecure Society. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol. 531, pp. 15–27. Springer, New York (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99734-6_2

6. Creswell, J.W.: Qualitative enquiry & research design, choosing among five approaches, vol. 2nd ed (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aenj.2008.02.005

7. Fawcett, G., Juliana, M.: Teaching in the digital age. designing instruction for technology-enhanced learning, pp. 71–82 (2015). http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/%5Cnhttp://services.igiglobal.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/978-1-930708-28-0.ch004

8. Genon, L.J.D., Torres, C.P.B.: Constructive alignment of assessment practices in English lan-
guage classrooms. Engl. Lang. Teach. Educ. J. **3**, 211–228 (2020). https://doi.org/10.12928/
eltej.v3i3.2460. http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index

9. Glas, M., Vielberth, M., Reittinger, T., Böhm, F., Pernul, G.: Visual programming in cyber range training to improve skill development. In: Clarke, N., Furnell, S. (eds.) Human Aspects of Information Security and Assurance: 16th IFIP WG 11.12 International Symposium, HAISA 2022, Mytilene, Lesbos, Greece, July 6–8, 2022, Proceedings, pp. 3–13. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12172-2_1

10. Gurney, B., Rundle, N.: Constructive Alignment (2014). https://www.teachinglearning.utas.edu.au/unit-design/constructive-alignment
11. Caulfield, J.: How to do thematic analysis—a step-by-step guide & examples. Scribbr pp. 1–9 (2020). https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematicanalysis/

12. Jaffray, A., Finn, C., Nurse, J.R.C.: Sherlocked: a detective-themed serious game for cyber security education. In: Furnell, S., Clarke, N. (eds.) Human Aspects of Information Security and Assurance. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, pp. 35–45. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81111-2_4

13. Li, L., Shen, Y., Han, M.: Perceptions of information systems security compliance: An empirical study in higher education setting. In: Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2020-Janua, pp. 6226–6231 (2021). https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2021.751

14. Loughlin, C., Lygo, S.: Asa Lindberg-Sand: reclaiming constructive alignment. Eur. J. High. Educ. 11, 119–136 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1816197

15. Maharaj, R., Solms, R.V.: Social networking: a tool for effective cybersecurity education in cyber-driven financial transactions. In: HAISA, pp. 91–100 (2018)

16. Mdunyelwa, V., Futcher, L., van Niekerk, J.: An educational intervention for teaching secure coding practices. In: Drevin, L., Theocharidou, M. (eds.) WISE 2019. IAICT, vol. 557, pp. 3–15. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23451-5_1

17. Nowell, L.S., Norris, J.M., White, D.E., Moules, N.J.: Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int. J. Qual. Methods 16(1), 1–13 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

18. Olivos, O.: Using the icea effect to improve information security policy compliance. In: HAISA, pp. 12–19 (2019)

19. PayU: SA companies under cyber-attack? (2020). https://www.payu.co.za/pressroom/sa-companies-under-cyberattack

20. Richardson, M.D., Lemoine, P.A., Stephens, W.E., Waller, R.E.: Planning for cyber security in schools: the human factor. Educ. Plan. 27, 23–39 (2020)

21. Snyman, D.P., Drevin, G.R., Kruger, H.A., Drevin, L., Allers, J.: A wolf, hyena, and fox game to raise cybersecurity awareness among pre-school children. In: Furnell, S., Clarke, N. (eds.) HAISA 2021. IAICT, vol. 613, pp. 91–101. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81111-2_8

22. Van Rensburg, W.J., Thomson, K.L., Futcher, L.A.: An educational intervention towards safe smartphone usage. In: HAISA, pp. 123–134 (2018)

23. Venter, I.M., Blignaut, J., Renaud, K., Venter, M.A.: Heliyon Cyber security education is as essential as “the three R’s” 5(April), 0–7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02855

24. Zoto, E., Kowalski, S., Frantz, C., Lopez-Rojas, E., Katt, B.: A pilot study in cyber security education using cyberaims: a simulation-based experiment. In: Drevin, L., Theocharidou, M. (eds.) Information Security Education – Towards a Cybersecure Society. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol. 531, pp. 40–54. Springer, New York (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99734-64