What is your  approved research question from the Brainstorming Research|Course hero helper

Assignment Content

1. At this point, you have found 4 research articles exploring your approved research question and you have learned how to find your 6 ‘ingredients’ during class (contact the Graduate Research Center for help if you need it: kgs_researchcenter@monroecollege.edu).

   For this assignment:  You will use ONE of you research articles from p. 13a to write your first objective summary.
   Requirements:

   • 15 pts, Cover/Title Page
   • 70 pts, Objective Summary: W(5) H(1) — YOU MUST PUT THIS IN YOUR OWN WORDS
   • 15 pts, References Page (you will only have one reference listed — the research article you are using.)
   • Resources to help you:
   • Re-watch the class recording
   • See pp. 17-22 to read about objective summaries
   • See pp. 23-28 to read more about avoiding plagiarismResearch Article

      

     Get your paper done on time by an expert in your field.

     

     Order Now

     Student Name

     Institutional Affiliation

     Course Number and Name

     Instructor Name

     Due Date

      

     Research Article

     What is your  approved research question from the Brainstorming Research Question HW assignment? (5 pts) 

     My Research Question: What have researchers learned about the impact of Internet of Things on data privacy of internet users?

     What is the title of the  research article you found? (5 pts)

     The Internet of Things and Its Impact On Individual Privacy

     Does the article contain the methodology the researchers used to conduct the study/research? 

     This research followed two phases. In Phase 1 a systematic literature review was conducted following two activities: 1) a literature search process to identify and select relevant articles, and 2) a content analysis of the literature to identify themes that represent key concerns related to individual privacy from the perspective of the IoT. In Phase 2, a critical analysis followed that compared themes that emerged from Phase 1 with the APPs. The two phases are outlined below

     Phase 1: Systematic literature review

     Literature search activity

     The literature search process involved a manual search of relevant articles using three search engines: Google Scholar, ‘Discovery’ (a proprietary university search-engine) and Springer’s Science & Business Media. The search was restricted to English, peer-reviewed journal papers and conference proceedings and used keywords related to the main topic of the study: ubiquitous computing, pervasive computing, Internet of Things, privacy, and individual privacy. Based on journal and conference paper abstracts and keywords, backward and forward chaining techniques and working through paper’s references to find papers that fit the search criteria, a collection of 52 key papers dated between 1993 and 2015 from 22 different journal outlets and conference proceedings were identified for the content analysis activity.

     Literature content analysis activity

     The content of each selected article was analyzed in more depth with a focus on the theme of the study. This closer inspection of each paper’s content reduced the eligible papers that fully covered the study’s key theme, to a total of 28 papers (see literature references in Table 3), which formed the basis for the in-depth content analysis activity. In the course of conducting the content analysis, a need for defining and gaining deeper knowledge about the information privacy topic emerged. This led to the identification of, and addition of a further nine journal papers that dealt specifically with this topic. The final set of 37 papers were analyzed using content analysis techniques that involve a concept mapping activity whereby key themes emerging from the literature are represented in a concept map (Novak, 2003). A concept map is a diagrammatic representation that organizes and represents key themes through a series of relationships between these themes. Four key themes regarding the impact of IoT technologies on an individual’s privacy emerged: unauthorized surveillance, uncontrolled data generation and use, inadequate authentication and information security risks. The second phase critically compared these four IoT privacy issues with the 13 APPs as described in the next section.

     Phase 2: Critical comparison of IoT privacy concerns with the APPs

     Following the in-depth context analysis and accompanying concept-mapping activity, the final four themes that emerged from the first phase, were critically juxtaposed with the 13 APPs. The major aim was to conduct an in-depth gap analysis to find possible weaknesses of the APPs with regards to the new disruptive IoT technology and individual privacy. Themes identified from the content analysis, were used to classify the IoT privacy issues referenced by the literature and map them with current APPs.

     Does the article contain findings or results of the research?

     In reflection of the research question: To what extent does the Australian Privacy Principles protect an Australian individual’s privacy in relation to data collected via the Internet of Things? findings of this study found that the current APP has limitations in terms of individual privacy and data collection through the IoT. These limitations impact on the ways in which individual data is collected, used and handled. In the sections that follow, APP limitations are first outlined, followed by key ethical considerations that need to be taken into account, and suggestions of legal reform to focus on individual privacy in a new era of the IoT.

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

     References.

     Caron, X., Bosua, R., Maynard, S. B., & Ahmad, A. (2016). The Internet of things (IoT) and its impact on individual privacy: An Australian perspective.  Computer Law & Security Review,  32(1), 4-15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2015.12.001

SOLUTION