Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35568794›Full record

ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2023

Many phish in the

Iain Embrey, Kim Kaivanto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Many phish in theRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Iain EmbreyGlen Urquhart High School, Drumnadrochit, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9177-2916
Kim KaivantoDepartment of Economics, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5309-4157

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/P000665/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Normative decision theory proves inadequate for modeling human responses to the social-engineering campaigns of advanced persistent threat (APT) attacks. Behavioral decision theory fares better, but still falls short of capturing social-engineering attack vectors which operate through emotions and peripheral-route persuasion. We introduce a generalized decision theory, under which any decision will be made according to one of multiple coexisting choice criteria. We denote the set of possible choice criteria by

Indexed as

advanced persistent threatchoice criteriadual-process theorylatent class modelperipheral-route persuasionphishingsocial engineeringstates of mind

Identifiers

PMID35568794
PMCPMC10947107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.