Evaluation of Contextual and Game-Based Training for Phishing Detection
, Allex Hagberg 2, Marcus Nohlberg 1, Jana Rambusch 1, Robert Roos 2 and Steven Furnell 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
This manuscript is focused on the study and the search for solutions to the problem that represents the human factor in cybersecurity:. The work is completed with a thorough analysis of the presented study. The paper is well written, and ideas are presented in a clear and structured manner. I must point out that the link to the data that supports the investigation does not work ( p. 14, line 481). It is important that it is available so that other researchers can take the work further.
In my opinion, the paper can be published in this journal under the condition that this aspect is reviewed.
I have found this typo:
- p.3 line 110, the cited bibliography does not appear.
Author Response
We like to thank you for your review, and for your comments that helped us improve the manuscript. This is how we addressed your comments:
Point 1: This manuscript is focused on the study and the search for solutions to the problem that represents the human factor in cybersecurity:. The work is completed with a thorough analysis of the presented study. The paper is well written, and ideas are presented in a clear and structured manner. I must point out that the link to the data that supports the investigation does not work ( p. 14, line 481). It is important that it is available so that other researchers can take the work further
Response 1: Thank you for the comment. The link now works.
Point 2: - p.3 line 110, the cited bibliography does not appear.
Response 2: Thank you for finding that error, it has been fixed
Reviewer 2 Report
Overall, this is an interesting and practical paper, focused on Internet technologies, security and privacy. This topic is relevant for both engineers and researchers, as well as typical everyday users of web and mobile technologies. If the awareness of individuals would be higher, the whole worldwide user community would surely benefit. This paper might be a valuable source of information for a great number of potential readers.
To start with, the manuscript is written in proper English, it is pleasant to read. The theoretical part provides a good introduction. The research part is properly described and justified. The novelty of this paper is adequately highlighted.
However, displayed figures and block diagrams should be re-edited. Figs. 1, 4 are of too low quality, they look blurred, the lines and fonts are not sharp enough. Consider changing the file format as well.
Figs. 2, 5 could be of higher resolution, with larger fonts, as well.
How many human individuals participated in the study? Additional precise comments are necessary? A basic info (41? people) is mentioned first on page no. 10.
The statistical data analysis seems to be properly carried out. The confidence interval is adequate.
Minor editorial and formatting issues are present, e.g. lack of space or multiple spaces between subsequent words, not all citations seem to be properly inserted [??], etc.
The accuracy of correctly identifying phishing e-mails undeniably proves the people awareness and basic computer skills should be raised as soon as possible. It would be interesting to learn what is the real gap between e.g. students of technical sciences and humanities. Undeniably, there is still potential for further research in the nearest future.
The number and quality of cited references seems sufficient, however it lacks novel recently published papers. I encourage the Authors too acquaint with works focused on: digitization, digital transformation and the switchover process, streaming services, mobile technologies, consumption of rich multimedia content, and related current trends, user expectations and surveys.
Author Response
We like to thank you for your review, and for your comments that helped us improve the manuscript. This is how we addressed your comments:
Point 1: However, displayed figures and block diagrams should be re-edited. Figs. 1, 4 are of too low quality, they look blurred, the lines and fonts are not sharp enough. Consider changing the file format as well.
Response 1: We improved the figures and changed the file format of figures 1 and 4. Thank you for pointing this out.
Point 2: Figs. 2, 5 could be of higher resolution, with larger fonts, as well.
Response 2: Since the figures are screenshots from the experiment environment, we are limited in how we can edit them. We have attempted to improve the figures by re-creating them in another file format.
Point 3: How many human individuals participated in the study? Additional precise comments are necessary? A basic info (41? people) is mentioned first on page no. 10.
Response 3: We added a mention of the number of participants to the abstract and introduction.
Point 4: Minor editorial and formatting issues are present, e.g. lack of space or multiple spaces between subsequent words, not all citations seem to be properly inserted [??], etc.
Response 4: We have checked the formatting throughout the paper and believe that we have now addressed the issues of concern.
Point 5: The accuracy of correctly identifying phishing e-mails undeniably proves the people awareness and basic computer skills should be raised as soon as possible. It would be interesting to learn what is the real gap between e.g. students of technical sciences and humanities. Undeniably, there is still potential for further research in the nearest future.
The number and quality of cited references seems sufficient, however it lacks novel recently published papers. I encourage the Authors too acquaint with works focused on: digitization, digital transformation and the switchover process, streaming services, mobile technologies, consumption of rich multimedia content, and related current trends, user expectations and surveys.
Response 5: We agree with the reviewer’s observation about the potential for future work, and this may be an aspect that we seek to explore in the future. An addition about demographics has been added to the future works section. We have also added additional recent literature, mainly to the discussion.
