Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 10 / 10 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
9 / 10 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 10 selected publications.
9 / 10 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 10 selected publications.
10 / 10 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 10 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 6 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 8 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 7 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 10 / 10 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T00:14:33.545411+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:23:08.255274+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 3 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 4 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 8 | 10 | 10/10 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Records with full publication dates only. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2022-09 | 1 |
| 2023-10 | 1 |
| 2023-12 | 1 |
| 2024-06 | 1 |
| 2026-01 | 1 |
| 2026-03 | 2 |
| 2026-06 | 1 |
| 2026-07 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4/4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 6 | 14 | 18 | 6/6 | 2.33 | 2.5 | 66.7 | 6/6 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Cybersecurity is a set of technologies, processes, practices, and response and mitigation measures aimed at ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of networks, computers, programs, and data against attack, damage, or unwanted access. Cyber security risk management strategies include limiting data access to avoid putting sensitive information at risk. The purpose of the study therefore is to evaluate the effect of cybersecurity risk management practices on performance of insurance sector. A desktop literature review was used for this purpose. Relevant seminal references and journal articles for the study were identified using Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria entailed papers that were not over ten years old. According to the findings, detected cyber risks need to be properly addressed in order to prevent secondary impacts that lead to vulnerabilities that interfere with the life of insurance institutions and the well-being of their customers. In addition, the study concluded that insurance industry performance can be improved through the implementation of cybersecurity risk management practices. Since it has been found that cybersecurity risk management strategies have a positive and significant impact on the performance of the insurance sector, the research recommends that insurance companies increase their use. Additionally, financial institutions ought to have funds set aside specifically for the purpose of facilitating the retention of risks, in the event that these risks actually materialize. In addition, the research suggests that insurance companies reorganize their product lines or establish premiums that are competitive in order to reduce the threat posed by their rivals and, as a result, prevent the loss of customers to those rivals. The research further suggest that insurance companies adopt appropriate product pricing in line with estimated risk, as this will ultimately lead to increased profitability.
Technological development has witnessed tremendous and an increase in business interactions as they execute their daily business. Information technology and broadband are significant drivers of productivity and efficiency growth for small firms as they expand their market. This development has raised growing concerns as it relates to data and information security, infrastructure, and related resources due to an increase in cybersecurity hazards faced by Small to Medium Enterprises globally. In South Africa, although, during the first four months of 2022, cyber-attacks decreased by 13% to account for 419506 internet attacks, this statistic remains high enough for concern. To counter escalating cybersecurity risks, organizations must have a cybersecurity strategy to safeguard their operations, clients, data, and infrastructure. The threat landscape is changing over time, and despite ongoing attempts to strengthen security, they don't appear to be enough to prevent evolving cyberattacks. The study aims to identify cybersecurity threats facing Small to Medium Enterprises in South Africa by reviewing the literature and identifying key Cybersecurity challenges. It also examines the strategies, resources, and techniques used in South Africa to reduce cybersecurity threats. Lastly, the paper recommends adopting a comprehensive Cybersecurity strategy to build future-proof cybersecurity for Small to Medium Enterprises in South Africa.
Over the past two decades, cybercrime and cybercriminals have had a great impact on the safety, security and protection of the public sector’s confidential data and information assets. The increased usage of the internet and new, advanced 4IR technologies, and the digitisation of government’s public sector goods and services have become a growing concern to the government and its public sector institutions. In the South African context, as a developing country, it unfortunately lags behind advanced and developed nations in terms of fully counteracting cybercrime and cybercriminal operations. Despite this challenge, the South African government has been making tremendous efforts in combatting cybercrime. The aim of this article is to contextualise the study and practice of cyber threat intelligence at the national sphere of government in the South African public sector, namely, the former Department of Energy (DoE), former Department of Science and Technology (DST) and the former Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) a qualitative research approach was followed using a case study approach. Primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews with senior departmental management. The findings are presented according to the Threat Intelligence Lifecycle analysis which serves as an analytical framework. The study concludes that in order to achieve effective cybersecurity practices and principles in the public sector , the government must identify the top trends commonly associated with cybersecurity to be able to develop and implement counteractive strategies and approaches, as well as to improve security systems and programs to ensure that an organisation is sufficiently prepared for and protected against cybercriminals and cyberattacks.
Globally, governments should prioritise and lead cybersecurity awareness as they have a duty to inform their citizens about responsible online behavior. This study aims to search for government-led cybersecurity awareness practices followed by the four world-leading countries (the United States of America (USA), the United Kingdom (UK), Saudi Arabia and Estonia) as evident on their websites. This qualitative study employs content analysis by performing a review of the four world-leading countries’ websites, with a specific focus on support materials and other relevant activities as part of cybersecurity awareness. Analysis of the websites found that cybersecurity awareness practices had a wide reach. Firstly, a host of multimedia content (videos, readings, infographics, memes, games, and quizzes) was used in addition to social media platforms. Secondly, the content was categorized for a range of users, with parents and children being favored. Lastly, for countries where the first language was not English, websites were in the official language in addition to English. The study contributes to the literature on cybersecurity awareness. The good practices employed by these countries could serve as a benchmark globally for other countries seeking to formulate or update their websites. Furthermore, showcasing the four world-leading countries serves to assist countries which have a lower Global Cybersecurity Index organizational measure can improve their cybersecurity awareness websites.
As digitalization is on the increase, deposit money banks are faced with heightened exposure to cyber threats, which pose significant risks to their financial performance and operational stability. This study investigated how cybersecurity investment and cyber insurance affected the profitability of deposit money banks, to know whether preemptive cybersecurity management strategies and transfer of risk through insurance influence financial results in the banking sector. The results revealed that both cybersecurity investment and cyber insurance have significant positive effects on bank profitability, with coefficients of 7.832 (p < 0.01) and 17.08 (p < 0.05), respectively. The study also revealed that cybersecurity investment provides more accurate estimates than cyber insurance which is reflected in its narrower confidence intervals. The results emphasize the strategic role of cybersecurity investment and insurance to improve financial flexibility, reduce operational risk, and support enduring profitability. It concluded that banks that prioritize these strategies will not only mitigate possible losses from cyber incidents but also gain a competitive advantage through strengthened customer trust and operational efficiency. The study recommended that Nigerian deposit money banks should treat cyber insurance as a vital component of cyber risk management strategies. It is also recommended that bank management should treat cybersecurity expenditure as value-adding investments rather than operational costs.
How users perceive and respond to cybersecurity warning messages under cognitively demanding conditions can result in unintended cybersecurity failures. Digital banking environments can create cognitively demanding conditions, as users are required to make quick decisions while managing many other routine tasks. This can lead to cognitive overload and pressure to comply with cybersecurity warning messages. This study examined how cybersecurity messages are framed and how this framing could influence behavioural responses under cognitively demanding conditions. The study draws on behavioural and psychological perspectives, including the Cognitive Bias Theory, the Framing Effect, and the Cognitive Load Theory, offering critical insights into compliance cybersecurity behaviour. A quantitative survey was administered to 267 South African users in digital banking environments. Path analysis, an extension of multiple regression analysis, was used to examine the relationships among message framing, mental load, and familiarity bias, and how these factors influence behaviour, thereby impacting digital banking resilience. Findings showed that, for organisations in digital banking to be cybersecurity resilient, such resilience is largely shaped by message framing and cognitive processing load. This means message framing is a central behavioural mechanism that shapes behaviour and an organisation's overall cybersecurity posture. Similarly, mental load affects behaviour change, meaning that concerted cognitive pressures will influence users’ ability to engage with cybersecurity warnings. Familiarity bias was negatively associated with desired behaviour change, highlighting a risk of habitual reliance on familiar cybersecurity messages. The study contributes to ongoing cybersecurity research on aligning cybersecurity communication with users’ cognitive capacity, prompting institutions to rethink and redesign clear, cognitively efficient security messages that support decision-making under pressure.
Cybersecurity threats pose a growing challenge for organizations in digitally dependent economies, with South African organizations facing increasing incidents of data breaches and ransomware, among other threats. This study investigates how organizations can enhance cybersecurity resilience by aligning data privacy regulations with business resilience strategies. A quantitative survey of 201 professionals across multiple industries in South Africa was conducted, guided by Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), Diffusion of Innovation Theory (DIT), and Resilience Theory. Analysis revealed that while organizations perceive the severity of cyber threats, internal threat perception alone does not drive innovation. Instead, external regulatory and institutional pressures emerged strong driver of cybersecurity innovation, which in turn strengthens cybersecurity resilience. Based on these insights, a Cybersecurity Resilience Model was developed as a defence mechanism against cybersecurity threats and attacks.
As digitalization is on the increase, deposit money banks are faced with heightened exposure to cyber threats, which pose significant risks to their financial performance and operational stability. This study investigated how cybersecurity investment and cyber insurance affected the profitability of deposit money banks, to know whether preemptive cybersecurity management strategies and transfer of risk through insurance influence financial results in the banking sector. The results revealed that both cybersecurity investment and cyber insurance have significant positive effects on bank profitability, with coefficients of 7.832 (p < 0.01) and 17.08 (p < 0.05), respectively. The study also revealed that cybersecurity investment provides more accurate estimates than cyber insurance which is reflected in its narrower confidence intervals. The results emphasize the strategic role of cybersecurity investment and insurance to improve financial flexibility, reduce operational risk, and support enduring profitability. It concluded that banks that prioritize these strategies will not only mitigate possible losses from cyber incidents but also gain a competitive advantage through strengthened customer trust and operational efficiency. The study recommended that Nigerian deposit money banks should treat cyber insurance as a vital component of cyber risk management strategies. It is also recommended that bank management should treat cybersecurity expenditure as value-adding investments rather than operational costs.
Cybersecurity is an urgent concern for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Uganda, driven by the rapid digital transformation of businesses and increasing dependence on online platforms. This study explores Ugandan SMEs' cybersecurity challenges, highlighting prevalent cyber threats, risk exposure, and a cyber maturity typology to mitigate cybercrime effectively. Using a qualitative, descriptive research design based on secondary data and a literature review, the study examines how Digital, Blended, and Traditional Business Models influence SMEs' cybersecurity preparedness. A key contribution of this research is the development of a context-sensitive typology of SME cyber maturity, which categorises businesses as Traditional, Transitioning, Digitally Enabled, and Digitally Mature, aligned with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework but adapted to Uganda's unique environment. The study identifies ongoing issues such as data breaches, financial fraud, and weak digital infrastructure, as well as gaps in policy enforcement and the disconnect between cybersecurity regulations and SME operators' literacy levels, as key cybersecurity threats. Informal responses to cybercrime, including vigilante actions, are also highlighted. This study provides a maturity typology for SMEs that guides policymakers and business owners in improving cybersecurity practices in Ugandan SMEs. The study calls for multi-stakeholder collaboration, stronger regulatory enforcement, and scalable awareness programs to build a more resilient SME sector. Overall, this study contributes to the discourse on SME cybersecurity by proposing literacy-sensitive interventions tailored to the needs of Uganda and offering a foundation for future research into the effectiveness of Uganda's cybersecurity frameworks.
Cybersecurity remains the priority of higher learning institutions owing to the growing cyber deviance against institution infrastructure as well its constituents and the implications those have on the institution. This section evaluates the cybersecurity defences, security policies which the institutions have in place to prevent and respond to emerging cybercrimes. This case study evaluates, Univen Information Communication Technology (ICT) officials who hold the mandate to manage cybercrimes within the institution. It therefore, evaluates if Univen have institutional framework for managing cybersecurity risk. It also assesses if it has been efficient to counteract cybercrimes impact against the university and students. The study discovered that Univen doesn’t have cybersecurity policy that is knowledgeable and consumable by all students. Students don’t know of avenues to report cybercrime. The students are failing to observe the terms of updating password for student ITS and Microsoft account, making their systems vulnerable and susceptible to cyberattacks. Qualitative approach is applied in the study; purposive sampling is applied to sample five (5) Univen ICT officials. The research utilises the routine activities theory and differential association theory of crime as the study problem framework. Sample was selected based on their suitability of contributing towards research; Focus group discussions was held with sample participants to collect data and Thematic Content Analysis (TCA), was used to analyse qualitative data. Ethical considerations observed in this study include: voluntary participation, confidentiality, obtain ethical clearance to conduct data. The study made findings and recommendations that inform adoption of framework to manage cybercrimes within higher education institutions (HEI) of South Africa and offer alternatives programmes that can positively address cyber incidents within academia.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |