Anti-Phishing Training (Still) Does Not Work: A Reproduction of Phishing Training Inefficacy Grounded in the NIST Phish Scale
Andrew T. Rozema, James C. Davis
Abstract
Social engineering attacks delivered via email, commonly known as phishing, represent a persistent cybersecurity threat leading to significant organizational incidents and data breaches. Although many organizations train employees on phishing, often mandated by compliance requirements, the real-world effectiveness of this training remains debated. Past work has demonstrated the ineffectiveness of training, but reproduction across different organizations, training approaches, and with a standardized threat assessment will help the generalizability of this phenomenon. To contribute to evidence-based cybersecurity policy, we conducted a large-scale reproduction study (N=12,511) at a US-based financial technology firm. Our design refined prior work by comparing training modalities in operational environments, applying NIST's standardized phishing difficulty measurement, and introducing novel organizational-level temporal resilience metrics. Echoing prior work, training interventions showed no significant main effects on click rates (p=0.450) nor reporting rates (p=0.417), with negligible effect sizes. However, we found that the NIST Phish Scale predicted user behavior, with click rates increasing from 7.0% (easy lures) to 15.0% (hard lures). Our organizational-level resilience result was mixed: 36-55% of campaigns achieved ''inoculation'' patterns where reports preceded clicks, but training did not significantly improve organizational-level temporal protection. Our results confirm the ineffectiveness of current phishing training approaches and offer a refined study design for future work.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 0ad4e2d6-3e69-4a84-942d-a83eed354711Builds on7
- Phishing in Organizations: Findings from a Large-Scale and Long-Term StudyDaniele Lain, Kari Kostiainen, Srdjan CapkunS&P 2022 · 92 citations
- From Chatbots to Phishbots?: Phishing Scam Generation in Commercial Large Language ModelsSayak Saha Roy, Poojitha Thota, Krishna Vamsi Naragam, Shirin NilizadehS&P 2024 · 57 citations
- Phishing Vs. Legit: Comparative Analysis of Client-Side Resources of Phishing and Target Brand WebsitesKyungchan Lim, Jaehwan Park, Doowon KimWWW 2024 · 11 citations
- Content, Nudges and Incentives: A Study on the Effectiveness and Perception of Embedded Phishing TrainingDaniele Lain, Tarek Jost, Sinisa Matetic, Kari Kostiainen et al.CCS 2024 · 9 citations
- 7 Days Later: Analyzing Phishing-Site Lifespan After DetectedKiho Lee, Kyungchan Lim, Hyoungshick Kim, Yonghwi Kwon et al.WWW 2025 · 5 citations
Related papers
- Simulated Stress: A Case Study of the Effects of a Simulated Phishing Campaign on Employees' Perception, Stress and Self-EfficacyMarkus Schöps, Marco Gutfleisch, Eric Wolter, M. Angela SasseUSENIX Security 2024 · 7 citations
- Understanding the Efficacy of Phishing Training in PracticeGrant Ho, Ariana Mirian, Elisa Luo, Khang Tong et al.S&P 2025
- Phishing Susceptibility and the (In-)Effectiveness of Common Anti-Phishing Interventions in a Large University HospitalJan Tolsdorf, David Langer, Luigi Lo IaconoCCS 2025
- What Mid-Career Professionals Think, Know, and Feel About Phishing: Opportunities for University IT Departments to Better Empower Employees in Their Anti-Phishing DecisionsAnne Clara Tally, Jacob Abbott, Ashley M. Bochner, Sanchari Das et al.CSCW 2023 · 11 citations
- Cognitive Triaging of Phishing AttacksAmber van der Heijden, Luca AllodiUSENIX Security 2019 · 100 citations
