A Study in the Improvement and Analysis Problem of Privacy Impact Assessment Qualification Criteria: focus on Similarity Analysis between Similar Certificates and Certification System of Privacy Impact Assessment
28 Feb 2013-Vol. 23, Iss: 1, pp 127-142
TL;DR: The sufficiency of current similar certificates compared with the PIA qualification requirements is analyzed and the validity of allowance as similar certificates is analyzed by using this outcome of the validity.
Abstract: Since Personal Information Protection Act came into effect on September 2011, PIA(Privacy Impact Assessment) of public institutions has become obliged. Therefore, an increasing demand for PIA professionals is being expected. In domestic, however, no specialized certificates exist and therefore similar certificates have become a requirement for PIA professionals. Henceforth, however, the system based on these similar certificates is to be an obstacle to advancing PIA. Therefore, this study analyzes the sufficiency of current similar certificates compared with the PIA qualification requirements. And then, analyzes the validity of allowance as similar certificates by using this outcome of the validity. As this comparison draws a clear gap between PIA qualification and similar certificates, this paper suggest three suggestions to improve current qualification. Three suggestions are expected to contribute a qualitative improvement of the PIA industry.
Citations
More filters
31 Aug 2016
TL;DR: To settle down PIA system as the reasonable and effective assessment system even after 2016, the statutory deadline for completion of PIA, assessors and appointed assessment firms and authorities should cooperate to complete the assessment system.
Abstract: It’s been almost 6 years since PIA was implemented based on legislation. So I analyzed problems of PIA from the perspective of ITSM 3 elements. I mainly took account of quality improvement of the report when I assessed systems processing personal informations. So, I propose in terms of logical validity improvement of assessment report. The improvements on 4 different outputs for each phase are many cases that I assessed systems processing personal informations. And I propose improvements on qualified assessors having capability of GRC and on process for managing the assessment system. To settle down PIA system as the reasonable and effective assessment system even after 2016, the statutory deadline for completion of PIA, assessors and appointed assessment firms and authorities should cooperate to complete the assessment system.
2 citations
Additional excerpts
...선행연구 사례로서 김이랑의 ‘개인정보영향평가 자 격기준의 문제분석과 개선방안 연구’[7]에서는 CPPG5), ISA6)와 함께 평가 목적과 대상, 업무, 지...
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: This paper showed that if two prior analogs were given, subjects often derived a problem schema as an incidental product of describing the similarities of the analogs, and the quality of the induced schema was highly predictive of subsequent transfer performance.
2,740 citations
Additional excerpts
...표면 유사성은 문제에 서 서술된 눈에 띄는 구체적인 단어나 문구 등의 서술 적 정보의 유사성을 뜻하며, 구조 유사성은 공유하는 해법법칙이나 주요 구성 요인들 사이의 인과적인 관계 의 유사성을 뜻한다[5][6]....
[...]
TL;DR: For example, the authors showed that structural alignment influences which features to pay attention to in choice options and that alignable differences are given more weight in choice situations than are nonalignable differences.
Abstract: ions Keil, 1989 ; Rips, 1989) For example, bats have the perceptual and behavioral characteristics of birds (they are similar to birds in this sense), but they are classified as mammals, because of important (though nonobvious) properties, such as giving birth to live young On the basis of examples like this, similarity's role in categorization has been challenged ; it has been argued that category membership judgments are theory based rather than similarity based (Keil, 1989 ; Murphy & Medin, 1985) The process of alignment and mapping points the way to a reconciliation of similarity-based and theorybased accounts (see also Goldstone, 1994a) If we focus purely on perceptual similarity among objects, we are led to conclude that bats should be categorized with birds On this view, theory-based knowledge (such as why bats are mammals) must intervene from elsewhere to overrule this assignment However, if the similarity computation is assumed to be that ofstructural alignment, then the similarity between two instances will be based riot only on object-level commonalities but also on common relations such as common causal relations and common origins Assuming that our representations include information about theory-based relations, such as that bats bear live young, as well as information about features, then the schism between similarity-based and theory-based categorization may be more apparent than real Developmentally, if we assume that theoretical knowledge is acquired gradually, this view would account for the characteristic-to-defining shift (Keil & Batterman, 1984) in children's interpretations of word meaning from local object features (eg , a taxi is bright yellow and has a checkered sign) to deeper relational commonalities (eg , a taxi is a vehicle that may be hired to transport people) Choice and decision Structural alignment also sheds light on the processes underlying choice behavior Medin, Goldstone, and Markman (1995) reviewed paral lels between phenomena in decision processing and phenomena in comparison processing that suggest an important role for structural alignment in decision making Structural alignment influences which features to pay attention to in choice options Research suggests that alignable differences are given more weight in choice situations than are nonalignable differences (Lindemann & Markman, 1996 ; Markman & Medin, 1995 ; Slovic & MacPhillamy, 1974) For example, Markman and Medin (1995) asked participants to choose between video games and to justify their choices Their justifications were more likely to contain alignable differences than nonalignable differences As another example, Kahneman and Z'versky (1984) described to participants a hypothetical store in which a jacket could be bought for $125 and a calculator for $15 They offered participants the opportunity to go to another store and save $5 on the total purchase Participants who were offered ajacket for $125 and a calculator for $10 were more willing to make the effort to go to another store than those offered a jacket for $120 and a calculator for $15 Even though the monetary reward for going to the other store was the same for both groups, participants were influenced by the alignable difference
1,611 citations
Additional excerpts
...이러한 표면과 구조, 절차에 대한 유사성을 모두 언급하는 것을 전반적 유사성이라 한다[8]....
[...]
02 Jan 1993
TL;DR: This paper decomposes similarity-based transfer into separate subprocesses and compares how different kinds of similarity affect each of these processes.
Abstract: It is widely accepted that similarity is a key determinant of transfer. In this chapter I suggest that both of these venerable terms – similarity and transfer – refer to complex notions that require further differentiation. I approach the problem by a double decomposition: decomposing similarity into finer subclasses and decomposing learning by similarity and analogy into a set of component subprocesses. One thing reminds us of another. Mental experience is full of moments in which a current situation reminds us of some prior experience stored in memory. Sometimes such remindings lead to a change in the way we think about one or both of the situations. Here is an example reported by Dan Slobin (personal communication, April 1986). His daughter, Heida, had traveled quite a bit by the age of 3. One day in Turkey she heard a dog barking and remarked, “Dogs in Turkey make the same sound as dogs in America.… Maybe all dogs do. Do dogs in India sound the same?” Where did this question come from? According to Slobin's notebook, “She apparently noticed that while the people sounded different from country to country, the dogs did not.” The fact that only humans speak different languages may seem obvious to an adult, but for Heida to arrive at it by observation must have required a series of insights. She had to compare people from different countries and note that they typically sound different.
892 citations
Additional excerpts
...표면 유사성은 문제에 서 서술된 눈에 띄는 구체적인 단어나 문구 등의 서술 적 정보의 유사성을 뜻하며, 구조 유사성은 공유하는 해법법칙이나 주요 구성 요인들 사이의 인과적인 관계 의 유사성을 뜻한다[5][6]....
[...]
TL;DR: The results indicate that the ease with which a source solution was implemented was largely determined by the abstraction level at which a solution was shared by a source analogue and the target problem.
Abstract: Similarity between source analogues and target problems is a central theme in the research on analogical transfer. Much of the theorizing and research has focused on the effects of superficial and structural similarity on transfer. The present research is an attempt to analyze systematically another critical type of similarity, namely, procedural similarity, and to examine its effects on the executing process. Participants viewed a schematic picture as a source model, interpreted its conceptual meaning, and then attempted to solve a problem to which the conceptual information from the source model could be applied. The results indicate that the ease with which a source solution was implemented was largely determined by the abstraction level at which a solution was shared by a source analogue and the target problem. The degree of procedural similarity was also found to influence the executing process in analogical transfer. A conceptual model concerning the function of procedural similarity as a utilizational constraint in analogical problem solving is proposed.
47 citations