解开欺骗网络:在五种类型的数字欺骗中检查共享用户的易感性。

IF 3.3 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Dawn M Sarno, Jinan N Allan
{"title":"解开欺骗网络:在五种类型的数字欺骗中检查共享用户的易感性。","authors":"Dawn M Sarno, Jinan N Allan","doi":"10.1177/00187208251363406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo examine how domain-switching and user characteristics may predict broad susceptibility to digital deception.BackgroundDespite successful automated filtering techniques, humans remain vulnerable to fraud, losing billions of dollars annually. Many scams are delivered by digitally mediated methods, such as phishing emails or fake social media accounts. However, research typically explores susceptibility to these deceptions independently, making it difficult to draw broad conclusions regarding susceptibility to digital deception.MethodWe recruited a representative sample to investigate how susceptibility to deception may vary across digital domains, particularly when switching between domains (i.e., domain-switching). Participants classified stimuli from five different digital domains (i.e., emails, text messages, news headlines, social media accounts, and voicemails), either randomly (i.e., domain-switching) or in separate blocks, and completed measures of cognitive reflection and digital literacy.ResultsThe results suggest that when users struggle to discriminate between deceptive and legitimate stimuli in one digital deception domain, they are likely to struggle in others. Additionally, the results suggest that while cognitive reflection and digital literacy may help insulate users from deception, domain-switching may generally hinder user performance (i.e., slower responses).ConclusionOverall, individuals appear to be consistently vulnerable to deception across digital domains and this vulnerability can be exacerbated by certain task factors (e.g., domain-switching) and user characteristics (e.g., cognitive reflection and digital literacy).ApplicationTo develop more efficacious interventions that enhance user resiliency, research should consider broad training that incorporates correlates of susceptibility (e.g., cognitive reflection and digital literacy), and more realistic task settings (e.g., domain-switching).</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"187208251363406"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Untangling the Web of Deceit: Examining Shared User Susceptibility Across Five Types of Digital Deceptions.\",\"authors\":\"Dawn M Sarno, Jinan N Allan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187208251363406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectiveTo examine how domain-switching and user characteristics may predict broad susceptibility to digital deception.BackgroundDespite successful automated filtering techniques, humans remain vulnerable to fraud, losing billions of dollars annually. Many scams are delivered by digitally mediated methods, such as phishing emails or fake social media accounts. However, research typically explores susceptibility to these deceptions independently, making it difficult to draw broad conclusions regarding susceptibility to digital deception.MethodWe recruited a representative sample to investigate how susceptibility to deception may vary across digital domains, particularly when switching between domains (i.e., domain-switching). Participants classified stimuli from five different digital domains (i.e., emails, text messages, news headlines, social media accounts, and voicemails), either randomly (i.e., domain-switching) or in separate blocks, and completed measures of cognitive reflection and digital literacy.ResultsThe results suggest that when users struggle to discriminate between deceptive and legitimate stimuli in one digital deception domain, they are likely to struggle in others. Additionally, the results suggest that while cognitive reflection and digital literacy may help insulate users from deception, domain-switching may generally hinder user performance (i.e., slower responses).ConclusionOverall, individuals appear to be consistently vulnerable to deception across digital domains and this vulnerability can be exacerbated by certain task factors (e.g., domain-switching) and user characteristics (e.g., cognitive reflection and digital literacy).ApplicationTo develop more efficacious interventions that enhance user resiliency, research should consider broad training that incorporates correlates of susceptibility (e.g., cognitive reflection and digital literacy), and more realistic task settings (e.g., domain-switching).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Factors\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"187208251363406\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251363406\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251363406","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的研究领域切换和用户特征如何预测对数字欺骗的广泛敏感性。尽管有成功的自动过滤技术,人类仍然容易受到欺诈的影响,每年损失数十亿美元。许多骗局都是通过数字媒介的方式传播的,比如网络钓鱼电子邮件或虚假的社交媒体账户。然而,研究通常是独立地探讨对这些欺骗的敏感性,因此很难得出关于对数字欺骗的敏感性的广泛结论。方法我们招募了一个有代表性的样本来研究对欺骗的敏感性如何在不同的数字域之间变化,特别是在域之间切换时(即域切换)。参与者将来自五个不同数字领域(即电子邮件、短信、新闻标题、社交媒体账户和语音邮件)的刺激分类,要么是随机的(即领域切换),要么是单独的块,并完成认知反射和数字素养的测量。结果表明,当用户在一个数字欺骗领域难以区分欺骗性和合法刺激时,他们很可能在其他领域也难以区分。此外,研究结果表明,虽然认知反思和数字素养可以帮助用户免受欺骗,但领域切换通常会阻碍用户的表现(即较慢的反应)。总体而言,个体似乎始终容易受到跨数字领域的欺骗,并且这种脆弱性可能会因某些任务因素(例如,领域切换)和用户特征(例如,认知反射和数字素养)而加剧。为了开发更有效的干预措施以增强用户的弹性,研究应考虑纳入易感性相关(例如,认知反射和数字素养)和更现实的任务设置(例如,领域切换)的广泛培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Untangling the Web of Deceit: Examining Shared User Susceptibility Across Five Types of Digital Deceptions.

ObjectiveTo examine how domain-switching and user characteristics may predict broad susceptibility to digital deception.BackgroundDespite successful automated filtering techniques, humans remain vulnerable to fraud, losing billions of dollars annually. Many scams are delivered by digitally mediated methods, such as phishing emails or fake social media accounts. However, research typically explores susceptibility to these deceptions independently, making it difficult to draw broad conclusions regarding susceptibility to digital deception.MethodWe recruited a representative sample to investigate how susceptibility to deception may vary across digital domains, particularly when switching between domains (i.e., domain-switching). Participants classified stimuli from five different digital domains (i.e., emails, text messages, news headlines, social media accounts, and voicemails), either randomly (i.e., domain-switching) or in separate blocks, and completed measures of cognitive reflection and digital literacy.ResultsThe results suggest that when users struggle to discriminate between deceptive and legitimate stimuli in one digital deception domain, they are likely to struggle in others. Additionally, the results suggest that while cognitive reflection and digital literacy may help insulate users from deception, domain-switching may generally hinder user performance (i.e., slower responses).ConclusionOverall, individuals appear to be consistently vulnerable to deception across digital domains and this vulnerability can be exacerbated by certain task factors (e.g., domain-switching) and user characteristics (e.g., cognitive reflection and digital literacy).ApplicationTo develop more efficacious interventions that enhance user resiliency, research should consider broad training that incorporates correlates of susceptibility (e.g., cognitive reflection and digital literacy), and more realistic task settings (e.g., domain-switching).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信