Digital Mindfulness · Research

The Susceptibility Atlas

Why do some people fall for phishing, scams and fake news while others don't? The Atlas maps what the published research shows so far: which human factors have been studied, how much evidence sits behind each, and what has been tried to help.

The map

What has been studied

Every factor the research has examined, grouped into six categories: cognitive, psychological, behavioural, situational, demographic, and external (the message itself). The size of a bubble shows how many studies looked at that factor, and the ring shows which way their findings point. Switch between threats to see the evidence for each. What each study found is in the full Atlas. The map covers phishing and scams, and misinformation. A third area, manipulative design in apps and online shopping ("dark patterns"), has just been added with studies so far: too few to show separately yet.

Protects Raises risk Depends on the situation No effect found Bubble size = studies; ring = findings
Headlines

Six things the map shows

What stands out when you read the rings. Study counts are live; the detail, the exceptions and the open questions are in the full Atlas.

  1. Thinking fast hurts; thinking slowly helps, but not reliably. Going with your gut raises risk in almost every finding ( studies). Thinking things through is protective in most findings ( studies), yet about a third of them find no effect: effort alone is not a guarantee. Being able to stand back from one's own reactions also protects, on much thinner evidence ( studies).
  2. Self-belief tells you little. How capable people rate themselves is one of the most studied factors ( studies) and the most evenly split: protective, harmful and no effect in roughly equal measure. Overrating one's own ability, measured against actual performance, mostly raises risk ( studies).
  3. Tested knowledge protects, with conditions. Knowledge that is actually tested is protective in over half of findings ( studies); most of the rest depend on the situation, such as political knowledge helping on neutral content but not on content that suits one's side.
  4. Trust cuts both ways. Across studies the findings spread over every colour on the map. Trusting the apparent sender or source raises risk; trusting independent institutions protects; a generally trusting personality makes little difference.
  5. Being online more mostly means being targeted more. Time online, shopping and sharing details raise exposure to attempts rather than the chance of falling for one ( studies). For misinformation, where people get their news matters more than how much they consume.
  6. Being scammed once does not teach. In studies, nearly all on phishing and scams, past victimisation mostly raises later risk or makes no difference; only one finding shows it protecting.
What helps

What has been tried, and how it went

Every kind of intervention tested in the research, from most to least studied. Each study counts once, by its best result. A long bar means well studied, not necessarily effective; read the colours. The full Atlas breaks this down by audience and threat, with what each study found.

Clear protective effect Helped in some conditions No effect Backfired Not tested statistically

About

About the Atlas

What's in it

A plain-English summary of the evidence on every factor, which way it points and how strong it is; a practitioner's playbook by audience and threat; filters for recent or high-quality research only; and the classical roots of each idea. This page is the public overview; the full Atlas is available by invitation while the research is being written up.

Who it's for

Researchers, security-awareness and trust-and-safety teams, journalists and policy people, and anyone trying to understand why people fall for things online.

About

A systematic review of the published research on susceptibility to phishing, scams and online manipulation, part of a PhD at Nelson Mandela University. Ongoing research, updated as studies are coded. Not professional advice.

Collard, A. (2026). The Susceptibility Atlas. Digital Mindfulness. Data as of .