These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
6. Phishing suspiciousness in older and younger adults: The role of executive functioning. Gavett BE; Zhao R; John SE; Bussell CA; Roberts JR; Yue C PLoS One; 2017; 12(2):e0171620. PubMed ID: 28158316 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Signal Detection Theory (SDT) Is Effective for Modeling User Behavior Toward Phishing and Spear-Phishing Attacks. Martin J; Dubé C; Coovert MD Hum Factors; 2018 Dec; 60(8):1179-1191. PubMed ID: 30063406 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. So Many Phish, So Little Time: Exploring Email Task Factors and Phishing Susceptibility. Sarno DM; Neider MB Hum Factors; 2022 Dec; 64(8):1379-1403. PubMed ID: 33835881 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comprehensive survey of AI-enabled phishing attacks detection techniques. Basit A; Zafar M; Liu X; Javed AR; Jalil Z; Kifayat K Telecommun Syst; 2021; 76(1):139-154. PubMed ID: 33110340 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Improving the phishing website detection using empirical analysis of Function Tree and its variants. Balogun AO; Adewole KS; Raheem MO; Akande ON; Usman-Hamza FE; Mabayoje MA; Akintola AG; Asaju-Gbolagade AW; Jimoh MK; Jimoh RG; Adeyemo VE Heliyon; 2021 Jul; 7(7):e07437. PubMed ID: 34278030 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Role of Human Factors/Ergonomics in the Science of Security: Decision Making and Action Selection in Cyberspace. Proctor RW; Chen J Hum Factors; 2015 Aug; 57(5):721-7. PubMed ID: 25994927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How personal characteristics impact phishing susceptibility: The mediating role of mail processing. Ge Y; Lu L; Cui X; Chen Z; Qu W Appl Ergon; 2021 Nov; 97():103526. PubMed ID: 34246073 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Why Employees (Still) Click on Phishing Links: Investigation in Hospitals. Jalali MS; Bruckes M; Westmattelmann D; Schewe G J Med Internet Res; 2020 Jan; 22(1):e16775. PubMed ID: 32012071 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The role of cue utilization in the detection of phishing emails. Sturman D; Valenzuela C; Plate O; Tanvir T; Auton JC; Bayl-Smith P; Wiggins MW Appl Ergon; 2023 Jan; 106():103887. PubMed ID: 36037654 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Setting Priorities in Behavioral Interventions: An Application to Reducing Phishing Risk. Canfield CI; Fischhoff B Risk Anal; 2018 Apr; 38(4):826-838. PubMed ID: 29023908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Analysis of Web Spam for Non-English Content: Toward More Effective Language-Based Classifiers. Alsaleh M; Alarifi A PLoS One; 2016; 11(11):e0164383. PubMed ID: 27855179 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Datasets for phishing websites detection. Vrbančič G; Fister I; Podgorelec V Data Brief; 2020 Dec; 33():106438. PubMed ID: 33195768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Informing, simulating experience, or both: A field experiment on phishing risks. Baillon A; de Bruin J; Emirmahmutoglu A; van de Veer E; van Dijk B PLoS One; 2019; 14(12):e0224216. PubMed ID: 31851688 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Does content affect whether users remember that Web pages were hyperlinked? Jones KS; Ballew TV; Probst CA Hum Factors; 2008 Oct; 50(5):763-71. PubMed ID: 19110836 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]