With the widespread adoption of social media, cybersecurity threats such as data breaches, online fraud, and identity theft have become increasingly prevalent. Despite these risks, many users remain unaware of potential security threats and fail to take adequate precautions to protect their privacy and confidentiality. This study aims to develop and validate the “Cybersecurity Awareness Scale” (CSAS) for social media users. Data was collected from 1096 social media users in two phases. An “Exploratory Factor Analysis” (EFA), conducted with data from 500 users, identified a three-factor structure with strong internal reliability (α = 0.88). A “Confirmatory Factor Analysis” (CFA), performed on a separate sample of 596 users, confirmed that the three-factor model-comprising Confidentiality, Trust, and Privacy-provided a good fit to the data. Additionally, convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity assessments supported the scale's robustness. The findings indicated that the CSAS is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring cybersecurity awareness among social media users.
AbawajyJ (2014) User preference of cyber security awareness delivery methods. Behaviour & Information Technology33(3): 237–248.
2.
AbolfathiMDehdariTZamani-AlavijefF, et al. (2022) Identification of the opportunities and threats of using social media among Iranian adolescent girls. Heliyon8(4): e09224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09224
3.
AddaeJHBrownMToweyD, et al. (2017) Measuring attitude towards personal data for adaptive cybersecurity. Information & Computer Security25(5): 560–579.
4.
Al SerhanTFZhangS (2025) The paradox of digital marketing: Sustainable framework for effective strategies and regulatory challenges. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/026666692413034
5.
AnwarMHeWAshI, et al. (2017) Gender difference and employees’ cybersecurity behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior69: 437–443.
6.
ArntzP (2018) Social media: A treasure trove of spam and scams. Oberlo. Retrieved on April 19, 2025, from https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2018/06/social-media-a-treasure-trove-of-spam-and-scams.
7.
ArpaciI (2024) A multianalytical SEM-ANN approach to investigate the social sustainability of AI chatbots based on cybersecurity and protection motivation theory. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management71: 1714–1725.
8.
ArpaciIAslanO (2023) Development of a scale to measure cybercrime-awareness on social media. Journal of Computer Information Systems63(3): 695–705.
9.
ArpaciIKarataşKBaloğluM, et al. (2022) COVID-19 Phobia in the United States: Validation of the COVID-19 Phobia Scale (C19P-SE). Death Studies46(3): 553–559.
10.
ArpaciIKilicerKBardakciS (2015) Effects of security and privacy concerns on educational use of cloud services. Computers in Human Behavior45(5): 93–98.
11.
ArpaciISevincK (2022) Development of the cybersecurity scale (CS-S): Evidence of validity and reliability. Information Development38(2): 218–226.
12.
AşanC (2024) Developing a measurement scale to assess the perception of cybersecurity among employees in the maritime industry. Journal of Naval Sciences and Engineering20(2): 135–162. https://doi.org/10.56850/jnse.1485985
13.
AslanÖOzkan-OkayMGuptaD (2021) Intelligent behavior-based malware detection system on cloud computing environment. IEEE Access9: 83252–83271.
14.
BandlerJMerzonA (2020) Cybercrime investigations: A comprehensive resource for everyone. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
15.
BeigiGLiuH (2020) A survey on privacy in social media: Identification, mitigation, and applications. ACM Transactions on Data Science1(1): 1–38.
16.
BenbasatIWangW (2005) Trust in and adoption of online recommendation agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems6(3): 4.
17.
BenderSJarminRSKreuterF, et al. (2020) Privacy and confidentiality. In: Foster I, Ghani R, Jarmin RS, Kreuter F and Lane J (eds) Big Data and Social Science. New York, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429324383
18.
BensonVSaridakisGTennakoonH (2015) Information disclosure of social media users: Does control over personal information, user awareness and security notices matter?Information Technology & People28(3): 426–441.
19.
BradyGMTruxilloDMBauerTN, et al. (2020) The development and validation of the Privacy and Data Security Concerns Scale (PDSCS). International Journal of Selection and Assessment29(1): 100–113.
20.
ButaviciusMParsonsKLillieM, et al. (2020) When believing in technology leads to poor cyber security: Development of a trust in technical controls scale. Computers & Security98: 102020.
21.
ÇetinkayaLÖktelikB (2022) Development of information security awareness scale for secondary school learners. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi11(4): 696–708.
22.
CharoensukmongkolP (2016) Contribution of mindfulness to individuals’ tendency to believe and share social media content. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI)12(3): 47–63.
23.
ChildD (2006) The Essentials of Factor Analysis. London & New York: Continuum.
24.
CoralloALazoiMLezziM, et al. (2022) Cybersecurity awareness in the context of the industrial internet of things: A systematic literature review. Computers in Industry137: 103614.
25.
CrandallKSNoteboomCEl-GayarO, et al. (2019) High school students’ perceptions of cybersecurity: An explanatory case study. Issues in Information Systems20(3): 74–82.
26.
CronbachLJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika16(3): 297–334.
27.
DavisLL (1992) Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research5(4): 194–197.
28.
DeVellisRF (2014) Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4th Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.
29.
EgelmanSPeerE (2015, April) Scaling the security wall: Developing a security behavior intentions scale (SeBIS). In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp.2873–2882. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702249.
30.
ErdoğduFGökoğluSKaraM (2021) What about users?”: Development and validation of the mobile information security awareness scale (MISAS). Online Information Review45(2): 406–421.
31.
ErdoğmuşA (2017) Analyzing the effects of information security achievements of university students on awareness: Afyon Kocatepe University sample. Master’s thesis. Afyon Kocatepe University. http://hdl.handle.net/11630/6277.
32.
ErolOŞahinYLYılmazE, et al. (2015) Kişisel siber güvenliği sağlama ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. International Journal of Human Sciences12(2): 75–91.
33.
FleissJL (1971) Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin76(5): 378–382.
34.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
35.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJ, et al. (2019) Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed. Boston.: Cengage Publications.
36.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science43(1): 115–135.
37.
ISO (2018) ISO/IEC 27000:2018 – Information technology – Security Techniques – Information Security Management Systems – Overview and Vocabulary. International Organization for Standardization. Retrieved on April 19, 2025, from https://www.iso.org/standard/73906.html.
38.
JewkesYYarM (2012) Policing cybercrime: Emerging trends and future challenges. In: Newburn T (ed) Handbook of Policing. 2nd Ed.London, UK: Willan, 904. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118238
39.
JiangYAtifY (2021) A selective ensemble model for cognitive cybersecurity analysis. Journal of Network and Computer Applications193: 103210.
40.
KamHJOrmondDKMenardP, et al. (2022) That’s interesting: An examination of interest theory and self-determination in organisational cybersecurity training. Information Systems Journal32(4): 888–926.
KlineRB (2005) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford.
43.
LawsheCH (1975) A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology28(4): 563–575.
44.
LeechNLBarrettKCMorganGA (2005) SPSS for Intermediate Statistics: Use and Interpretation, 2nd Ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45.
LiDC (2015) Online security performances and information security disclosures. Journal of Computer Information Systems55(2): 20–28.
46.
MadyAGuptaSWarkentinM (2023) The effects of knowledge mechanisms on employees’ information security threat construal. Information Systems Journal33(4): 693–702.
47.
McCormacACalicDParsonsK, et al. (2018) The effect of resilience and job stress on information security awareness. Information & Computer Security26(3): 277–289.
48.
Miró-LlinaresFDrewJTownsleyM (2020) Understanding target suitability in cyberspace: An international comparison of cyber victimization processes. International Journal of Cyber Criminology14(1): 139–155.
49.
MonteithSBauerMAldaM, et al. (2021) Increasing cybercrime since the pandemic: Concerns for psychiatry. Current Psychiatry Reports23(4): –9.
50.
MorganS (2020) Cybercrime to Cost the World $10.5 Trillion Annually by 2025. Cybersecurity Ventures. Retrieved on April 19, 2025, from https://cybersecurityventures.com/cybercrime-damage-costs-10-trillion-by-2025.
51.
NissenbaumH (2010) Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford, CA, USA: Stanford University Press.
52.
OroniCZXianpingFNdunguruDD, et al. (2025) Enhancing cyber safety in e-learning environment through cybersecurity awareness and information security compliance: PLS-SEM and FsQCA analysis. Computers and Security150: 104276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2024.104276
53.
ParsonsKCalicDPattinsonM, et al. (2017) The human aspects of information security questionnaire (HAIS-Q): Two further validation studies. Computer & Security66: 40–51.
54.
RogersRW (1975) A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology91(1): 93–114.
55.
ShahAVarshneySMehrotraM (2024) Threats on online social network platforms: Classification, detection, and prevention techniques. Multimedia Tools and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-024-19724-5.
56.
Statista (2024) Number of Social Media Users Worldwide from 2017 to 2028. Statista. Retrieved on April 19, 2025, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/278414/number-of-worldwide-social-network-users/.
57.
TolahAFurnellSMPapadakiM (2021) An empirical analysis of the information security culture key factors framework. Computers & Security108: 102354.
58.
VanithaABalakrishnanN (2021) A responsiveness model for privacy conservation against antagonist and fake user in cyber-physical and online social networks. Journal of Physics: Conference Series1767(1): 012051. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1767/1/012051
59.
WangCCChangSCHsiehIH (2025) Motives for following social media influencers: Scale development and validation. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241309.
60.
WhitmanMEHerbertJM (2011) Principles of Information Security. 7th Ed.Boston, MA, USA: Cengage learning.
61.
WileyAMcCormacACalicD (2020) More than the individual: Examining the relationship between culture and information security awareness. Computer & Security88: 101640.
62.
YanZRobertsonTYanR, et al. (2018) Finding the weakest links in the weakest link: How well do undergraduate students make cybersecurity judgment?Computers in Human Behavior84: 375–382.
63.
YazdanmehrALiYWangJ (2023) Employee responses to information security related stress: Coping and violation intention. Information Systems Journal33(3): 419–436.
