Who falls for phish?: a demographic analysis of phishing susceptibility and effectiveness of interventions

783 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

PhishEye: Live Monitoring of Sandboxed Phishing Kits (2016, background): “[36] conducted a demographic analysis of victims’ susceptibility to phishing attacks and discussed the effectiveness of educational materials.”
Phishing Detection: A Literature Survey (2013, background): “is essentially PhishGuru without the embedded training part [1].”
"...No one Can Hack My Mind": Comparing Expert and Non-Expert Security Practices (2015, background): “[45] studied susceptibility to phishing attacks through an online role-playing-scenario study of 1001 participants.”
Graphical passwords: Learning from the first twelve years (2012, methodology): “…users on primary tasks other than the actual authentication offer a higher degree of ecological validity than those that simply ask users to log in. Amazon s Mechanical Turk [Amazon 2010] has been used recently to conduct some usable security studies [Kelley et al. 2010; Sheng et al. 2010].”
Intersectional HCI: Engaging Identity through Gender, Race, and Class (2017, background): “with multiple foci reported information on each identity category separately, like sharing results about gender followed by sharing results about race [85].”