Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose This study aims to synthesize evidence on women’s cybersecurity risks, consolidate risk typologies, assess theoretical engagement, map methodological tendencies and identify multilevel determinants of these risks. Design/methodology/approach Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, this study searched Scopus and Web of Science (2010–2025) and included 34 peer-reviewed studies using calibrated inclusion criteria. Guided by the SPIDER framework, qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods and conceptual designs were accommodated. Study quality was appraised with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A deductive–inductive thematic synthesis identified risk types and determinants, while theoretical frameworks and methodological features were descriptively charted. Findings Three major risk domains emerged: interpersonal cyber abuse, data privacy and surveillance vulnerabilities and technology-facilitated coercion and control. Theoretical engagement was limited and fragmented. Methodologically, the field is dominated by quantitative self-report surveys, with fewer mixed-methods or longitudinal designs. Determinants of risk clustered across five mutually reinforcing levels: structural–cultural norms, institutional and organizational governance, sociotechnical affordances, datafication and commercial ecosystems and individual capacities and interactional dynamics. Originality/value This review highlights that women’s cybersecurity vulnerabilities are embedded in sociotechnical systems rather than isolated incidents. It emphasizes the need for mechanism-driven and intersectional theorization, diversified and longitudinal research designs, updated and validated measures, survivor-centered ethical protocols and governance and design interventions that address upstream structural conditions.
Kamarudin et al. (Fri,) studied this question.