The academic article that I chose to write about is called “Exploring the
Psychological Profile of Cybercriminals: A Comprehensive Review for Improved
Cybercrime Prevention.” It was written by researchers at University of Ho Chi Minh City,
University of Economics in Vietnam. Their goal was to study a wide range of cyber security crimes to be able to provide valuable insights to all sorts of fields of work, including other researchers and even policymakers.

This article uses Empiricism as an aspect because it only uses concrete studies as
evidence without making assumptions on its own. The article does not make baseless
assumptions; instead, it gathers evidence from other studies and combines them into an
easy to access and understand framework.

This article unfortunately does not use Parsimony. It makes no effort to make this version
of the article understandable by someone who does not have a background in the
scientific world, or at least a background involving higher education. The article does make attempts multiple times to clearly explain what it is doing; however, the verbiage used is not considerate of the average person.

This article does use objectivity, it makes no attempt to sway an opinion in one direction or the other, instead it tried to simply be a place where previous knowledge can be gathered together for someone else to review without having to individually look at each involved study.

This article has less of a classic hypothesis and instead tries to gather knowledge together
from other studies to plug gaps in global knowledge when it comes to preventing
cybercrime. This article goes through multiple studies to show the aforementioned gaps. It lists multiple previous incidents of cybercrime and tries to show why they were not
prevented initially.

This study mostly uses archival research rather than extracting any new data via surveys or experiments. It explains multiple case studies involving previous cybercrimes but does not try to create new data. The study reviewed several case studies including the Sony hack from 2014, the Target Data Breach from 2013, and The Colonial Pipeline Ransomware Attack from 2021, to name a few. It reviews these incidents in depth and goes over the impact of the hack, all the way to the lessons society learned from the event.

The Data involved in this study was all pulled secondhand from other articles and studies
and reviewed comprehensively to generate understanding of what happened as well as
how things could be done differently in each situation. The data was reviewed and
combined thoroughly to figure out patterns, and to help resolutions for the future.

This article relates to situations we have learned about in class in multiple ways. The
article itself reviews data categorized as archival research rather than creating surveys or
experiments to generate new data. It does not attempt to sway an opinion by creating this
article and instead presents the facts as they are, which is classic Objectivity. It explores
the human factors of each incident, and why the criminals committed the crime in the first
place, as well as what was achieved or gained in each situation. Finally, it also explores the
perspective of the victims in each scenario, at least to the point of who was hurt in each
situation. Most of these crimes were initially portrayed as only targeting a corporation, not considering the fallout that would hurt the average person afterwards, when their personal data was leaked or the company they relied on for a service was unable to provide it.

This article does not make any attempt to connect these issues with the concerns of
marginalized groups. I think instead it tries to explore how these incidents affect humanity as a whole, and how they could be prevented in the future. Its focus is the good of humans and less of a concern for one particular group. That marginalized group is included in “humanity”, but as a part of a whole instead of concern for just the part.

This study points out various aspects of how things could be improved in the future. For
example, it states that AI in the not-so-distant future will be a massive threat that needs to be addressed as soon as possible. It also states that most companies on average are
under-protected and should get stricter cyber security protections to prevent intrusions in the future. Lastly, it states that cybercrime is often overlooked by governments and the
laws they make and should be taken into consideration by lawmakers as much as possible
going forward.