How Johnny Experiences Phishing Warnings: A Qualitative Study Investigating the Impact of Design Decisions on the User

To this day, phishing remains one of the most critical and elusive threats in cybersecurity. Although detection technologies have evolved and improved, they have not kept pace with novel phishing strategies. Thus, when software cannot definitively identify phishing, the last line of defense rests with the user when they are asked to “think before you click”. The appeal is commonly accompanied by warning messages, supposedly providing the user with enough information and incentive to make an informed, secure decision. However, warning messages must be carefully crafted because their elements can considerably affect the user’s agency, trust, and decision-making. We selected four of the key design elements in warning messages: <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">content</i>, <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">placement</i>, <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">level of friction</i>, and <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">timing</i>. We conducted a qualitative study using think-aloud sessions with 18 participants. Each participant was presented with phishing scenarios, accompanied by warning messages that differ in regard to those four elements of design, followed by a post-session interview. Thematic analysis revealed 13 themes across the four elements and from the analysis, novel insights emerged. For instance, timing changes the context in which users frame their concern: rather than being concerned about the potential consequences of clicking —as the warning intends— they become suspicious of the app displaying the message, fearing it may invade their privacy and violate their security. Our findings form a basis for future research about how to design and implement mechanisms, such as warning apps, that are more adaptable, targeted, and potentially more effective in protecting users from phishing attacks.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
IEEE Access
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2025.3642897
Primary Topic
Spam and Phishing Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How Johnny Experiences Phishing Warnings: A Qualitative Study Investigating the Impact of Design Decisions on the User

Stefanie Pham, Gabriele Lenzini, Daniela Pöhn
IEEE Access
Spam and Phishing Detection
article

How Johnny Experiences Phishing Warnings: A Qualitative Study Investigating the Impact of Design Decisions on the User

Stefanie Pham, Gabriele Lenzini, Daniela Pöhn
article en

Abstract

To this day, phishing remains one of the most critical and elusive threats in cybersecurity. Although detection technologies have evolved and improved, they have not kept pace with novel phishing strategies. Thus, when software cannot definitively identify phishing, the last line of defense rests with the user when they are asked to “think before you click”. The appeal is commonly accompanied by warning messages, supposedly providing the user with enough information and incentive to make an informed, secure decision. However, warning messages must be carefully crafted because their elements can considerably affect the user’s agency, trust, and decision-making. We selected four of the key design elements in warning messages: <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">content</i>, <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">placement</i>, <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">level of friction</i>, and <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">timing</i>. We conducted a qualitative study using think-aloud sessions with 18 participants. Each participant was presented with phishing scenarios, accompanied by warning messages that differ in regard to those four elements of design, followed by a post-session interview. Thematic analysis revealed 13 themes across the four elements and from the analysis, novel insights emerged. For instance, timing changes the context in which users frame their concern: rather than being concerned about the potential consequences of clicking —as the warning intends— they become suspicious of the app displaying the message, fearing it may invade their privacy and violate their security. Our findings form a basis for future research about how to design and implement mechanisms, such as warning apps, that are more adaptable, targeted, and potentially more effective in protecting users from phishing attacks.

IEEE AccessVol. 13
University of Luxembourg (LU), Universität der Bundeswehr München (DE), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Spam and Phishing Detection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.