Predicting Phishing Victimization: Comparing Prior Victimization, Cognitive, and Emotional Styles, and Vulnerable or Protective E-mail Strategies

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Victims & Offenders Pub Date : 2023-06-02 DOI:10.1080/15564886.2023.2218369
Loretta J. Stalans, Eric Chan-Tin, Anna Hart, M. Moran, S. Kennison
{"title":"Predicting Phishing Victimization: Comparing Prior Victimization, Cognitive, and Emotional Styles, and Vulnerable or Protective E-mail Strategies","authors":"Loretta J. Stalans, Eric Chan-Tin, Anna Hart, M. Moran, S. Kennison","doi":"10.1080/15564886.2023.2218369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Phishing victimization is prevalent and results in theft of personal identifiable information (PII) or installing malware to steal PII. Drawing upon social psychological and criminological theories, we conducted a prospective study to assess three groups of predictors to being phished or not: a) prior victimization; b) protective or vulnerable habitual strategies, and c) emotional and cognitive decision-making styles. Students (N = 236) completed a survey assessing these predictors and then about 4 weeks later received a phishing e-mail using the university’s phishing testing system. The e-mail requested that they click on a link and enter their student ID to avoid having their account blocked. About half (50.8%) clicked on the link, and 81.6% of those phished entered their PII. Individuals who had low avoidant style and high generalized anxiety were four times more likely to be phished, after controlling for the significant effects of vulnerable habitual strategies and using dating apps. Machine learning analyses also found cognitive styles and generalized anxiety are the better predictors of getting phished compared to vulnerable and protective strategies and prior victimization. These findings suggest that cybersecurity training needs to be expanded to address the emotional and cognitive processing of deceptive appeals in e-mails.","PeriodicalId":47085,"journal":{"name":"Victims & Offenders","volume":"25 1","pages":"1216 - 1235"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Victims & Offenders","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2023.2218369","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Phishing victimization is prevalent and results in theft of personal identifiable information (PII) or installing malware to steal PII. Drawing upon social psychological and criminological theories, we conducted a prospective study to assess three groups of predictors to being phished or not: a) prior victimization; b) protective or vulnerable habitual strategies, and c) emotional and cognitive decision-making styles. Students (N = 236) completed a survey assessing these predictors and then about 4 weeks later received a phishing e-mail using the university’s phishing testing system. The e-mail requested that they click on a link and enter their student ID to avoid having their account blocked. About half (50.8%) clicked on the link, and 81.6% of those phished entered their PII. Individuals who had low avoidant style and high generalized anxiety were four times more likely to be phished, after controlling for the significant effects of vulnerable habitual strategies and using dating apps. Machine learning analyses also found cognitive styles and generalized anxiety are the better predictors of getting phished compared to vulnerable and protective strategies and prior victimization. These findings suggest that cybersecurity training needs to be expanded to address the emotional and cognitive processing of deceptive appeals in e-mails.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预测网络钓鱼受害:比较先前受害,认知和情感风格,以及脆弱或保护性电子邮件策略
网络钓鱼受害现象十分普遍,导致个人身份信息(PII)被盗或安装恶意软件窃取PII。根据社会心理学和犯罪学理论,我们进行了一项前瞻性研究,以评估三组预测是否被网络钓鱼的因素:a)先前受害;B)保护性或易受伤害的习惯性策略,以及c)情感和认知决策风格。236名学生完成了一项评估这些预测因素的调查,然后大约4周后,他们使用大学的网络钓鱼测试系统收到了一封网络钓鱼电子邮件。这封电子邮件要求他们点击一个链接并输入他们的学生号,以避免他们的账户被封锁。大约一半(50.8%)的人点击了链接,81.6%的人输入了他们的个人信息。在控制了易受攻击的习惯性策略的显著影响和使用约会软件之后,低回避型和高广泛性焦虑的人被钓鱼的可能性是其他人的四倍。机器学习分析还发现,与脆弱和保护性策略以及先前的受害行为相比,认知风格和广泛性焦虑是更容易被钓鱼的预测因素。这些发现表明,网络安全培训需要扩大,以解决电子邮件中欺骗性呼吁的情感和认知处理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Victims & Offenders
Victims & Offenders CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Victims & Offenders is a peer-reviewed journal that provides an interdisciplinary and international forum for the dissemination of new research, policies, and practices related to both victimization and offending throughout the life course. Our aim is to provide an opportunity for researchers -- both in the United States and internationally -- from a wide range of disciplines (criminal justice, psychology, sociology, political science, economics, public health, and social work) to publish articles that examine issues from a variety of perspectives in a unique, interdisciplinary forum. We are interested in both quantitative and qualitative research, systematic, evidence-based reviews, and articles that focus on theory development related to offenders and victims.
期刊最新文献
Veterans Treatment Courts: A Nationwide Review of Enacting and Eligibility State Statutes. The Influence of Offender Motivation on Unwanted Pursuit Perpetration Among College Students Relatives’ Understanding of Perpetrators of Elder Family Financial Exploitation: A Bioecological Approach to Understanding Risk Factors What Separates Offenders Who are Not Victimized from Offenders Who are Victimized? Results from a Nationally Representative Sample of Males and Females Scams, Cons, Frauds, and Deceptions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1