## 5 Results  
In order to answer the research questions listed above, we compared the responses to the questionnaires of the two groups, i.e., Eg and Ng. This section describes the techniques used to extract information from the responses to the questionnaires and presents the main results. The next section discusses the results and answers the research questions. In order to filter the results and evaluate the suitability of the learning resources, taking into account some important characteristics of the students in our institution, we segmented the subjects into several categories depending on their age and their previous theoretical knowledge in cybersecurity. In the first segmentation, we divided participants into three age categories: a first category with subjects under 30 years old, a second category with subjects older than 29 years and younger than 40, and a third category with the subjects 40 years old and above. In the second segmentation, we divided the subjects into two categories. We labeled subjects as having previous theoretical knowledge in cybersecurity if they had passed the courses Cryptography or Electronic Commerce, or achieved a high score in the first questionnaire pre-test. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Variable Type** & **ID** & **Question/Description** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Format of \\ the learning \\ resources \\ \end{tabular} } & P1.1 & The resource’s format is satisfactory. \\  & P1.2 & The resource is motivating to continue learning about security. \\  & P1.3 & The contents are useful to start working on the graded assignment. \\  & P1.4 & The content is relevant in the real world. \\  & P1.5 & How long did you take to study the learning resources and resolve the graded assignment? \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Self-evaluation \\ questions \\ \end{tabular} } & P2.1 & I know the different types of attack on TCP/IP networks. \\  & P2.2 & I know what kind of tools I should use to start exploring a system. \\  & P2.3 & I know what kind of tools I should use to protect my systems. \\  & P2.4 & I would be able to put into practice what I have learned. \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} Improvement \\ questions \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{Improvement} & Questionnaires 1 and 2 included 10 general questions to evaluate the actual knowledge \\  & & of the students on cybersecurity. Grades range from 0 to 10. \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} Course \\ assignment \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{Activity grade} & The first graded assignment of the course included 12 questions related to the content of the learning resources. Grades range from 0 to 10. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Variables included included in this study. In this study, it is highly relevant to evaluate the participants' responses considering these criteria. Knowing the motivation behind the most common computer attacks is of utmost importance to understand their risks and be able to prevent them. A mere technical description of vulnerabilities and attacks may be useful for experienced subjects, but may not give enough context for more inexperienced ones. On the other hand, narrative texts may not provide the level of technical details required by some students with some cybersecurity experience. It is also important to study if young students, accustomed to a great variety of learning resources, or more senior students have different perceptions towards the narrative text. For each of these categories, we computed the mean and the standard deviation for all the variables described in Table 1. These results are shown in Tables 2-4. In order to compare the results from the Eg and the Ng, first we performed a Shapiro-Wilk test of normality [47]. This test indicated that most of the gathered data did not follow a Gaussian distribution.