## 4 Results
### Influence of Email Habits on the Impact of Design Cues for Sextortion  
A number of correlational analyses were conducted between susceptibility scores for each of the email design cue conditions and participants' scores on each of the email habit categories measured by the modified version of the SRHI (general email habits, security email habits, and attentional email habits). As email habits may influence susceptibility to cyber sextortion attacks, correlational analyses were conducted to gather foundational information that might help account for possible discrepancies in measuring the effect of attention to specific design cues within cyber sextortion emails on participants' susceptibility to cyber sextortion attacks. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (Spearman's _rho_) was used for the analysis because it does not require the assumption that scores for each correlated variable be normally distributed [29], and since the susceptibility distributions for each email design cue condition departs from normality, Spearman's _rho_ was considered the most appropriate correlational measure for the current analysis. A visual inspection of scatterplots also indicated some evidence of heteroscedasticity (see Figures 3 and 4), meaning that results should be interpreted with caution.  
With alpha set to 0.05, results showed a weak, positive relationship between participants' attentional email habits, and susceptibility scores when attention to cyber sextortion email design cues was not specified, \(r(84)=0.22\), \(p=0.045\). As the questions used to measure attentional email habits asked how rarely participants pay attention to email design cues when checking their emails, this result suggests that people who rarely pay attention to email design cues are more susceptible to cyber sextortion attacks than people who frequently pay attention to email design cues, but only when not primed to pay attention to them. Results also showed a weak negative relationship between participants' general email habits and susceptibility scores when attention was focused on grammar and spelling, \(r(84)=-0.24\), \(p=0.027\). This suggests that people who use emails frequently and with less cognitive effort are less susceptible to cyber sextortion attacks when focusing on grammar and spelling than people who use emails infrequently and with more cognitive effort. No other correlations were significant. All inter-correlations between susceptibility scores for each of the email design cue conditions and scores for each of the email habit categories are presented in Table 7.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Email Habit**} \\ \hline
**Design Cue** & **General** & **Security** & **Attentional a** \\ \hline Email source & \(-0.132\) & \(0.009\) & \(0.042\) \\ \hline Grammar and spelling & \(-0.239\) * & \(-0.048\) & \(0.173\) \\ \hline Urgency cues & \(-0.148\) & \(-0.066\) & \(0.152\) \\ \hline Title/subject line & \(-0.112\) & \(-0.076\) & \(0.127\) \\ \hline Control & \(-0.162\) & \(-0.016\) & \(0.217\) * \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 7: Inter-correlations between susceptibility scores for each design cue condition and scores for each email habits category.  
Figure 4: Scatterplot of participants’ general email habits and cyber sextortion susceptibility scores when attention was focused on grammar and spelling.