## 4 Results and Analysis
### Analysis of NonCompliance Behaviors
#### 4.2.3. Deterrence and Noncompliance  
When considering ISPC research using deterrence techniques from many decades, deterrence proved to be a significant factor in enforcing ISP compliance and deterring noncompliance behaviors. Reference [13] provided a literature review to obtain insights into the inconsistent results of deterrence theory in IS research. A total of 60 research articles that used deterrence theory from IS and other disciplines were reviewed. These researchers identified methodological and substantive issues with deterrence theory. They suggested contingency variables (i.e., self-control, computer self-efficacy, moral beliefs, virtual status, and employee position) to improve the deterrence results. The researchers argued that when using the deterrence approach towards ISB, one must consider these issues (methodological substantive) and contingency variables to obtain better results. Reference [103] explored the factors causing the ISP violating behaviors of employees in organizations; they argued that formal and informal controls can mitigate the violation behaviors: however, their findings suggest that social bonding, social pressures, and proper controls (i.e., perceived severity and perceived certainty) have significant effects on employee violation behavior. A safe security behavior evaluation was performed by [104]. They presented a framework to determine safe information security behavior. The study results proved that if an employee knows the harmful effects of his actions, the severity of the threat, the fear of \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Authors** & **Research Method** & **Sample Size** & **Findings** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[39]} & Pre and post-test quantitative & \multirow{3}{*}{500 employees participated from different organizations} & Task completion impediments significantly influence employees’ \\  & research methodology. SEM used & & \\  & for results and analysis & & noncompliance behavior towards ISP. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[42]} & Qualitative study design and & \multirow{3}{*}{A total of 55 semi-structured interviews conducted} & The value of information is a determinant of users’ \\  & results analysis conducted with & & \\  & NVivo 11. & & compliant behavior. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[40]} & The quantitative research & \multirow{3}{*}{275 correct responses considered for results and analysis} & IT vision conflict influence perceived severity and attitude towards ISP noncompliance behavior. \\ \cline{2-2}  & Quantitative research & & Perceived externalities and triage are the leading causes for less effortful behavior of employees towards information security. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[101]} & Pre and post-test quantitative & \multirow{3}{*}{170 usable responses from a global firm} & Long-term orientation ISB discourages consequence-delayed information security violation intention. \\ \cline{1-1}  & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 12: Studies on value conflicts and noncompliance. getting caught, and the severity of punishment, he/she will have safe behavior towards information security. Moreover, satisfaction with colleagues also has a positive effect on an employees' safe information security behavior. Reference [105] introduced the concept of personality traits in behavioral information security. They tested two personality traits (i.e., stability and plasticity) with protection motivation and general deterrence elements for the first time. The stability meta-trait consists of emotional stability, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, whereas the plasticity meta-trait includes extraversion and dominant openness. The study concluded that employees with dominant stability traits are less likely to violate the ISP, whereas employees with plasticity traits violate ISP behavior more. Reference [38] examined the effects of the threat of sanctions on attitudes towards information security behavior. They have argued that rational use of section threats develops the attitude of employees.