Skip to main content

Using artificial intelligence (AI) and deepfakes to deceive victims: the need to rethink current romance fraud prevention messaging

Cassandra Cross (2022) — Crime Prevention and Community Safety

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1057/s41300-021-00134-w (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Australia
Tags:   AI-Enabled Fraud, Deepfakes, Fake Profiles, Offender Tactics, Online Dating Platforms, Prevention, Prevention Messaging, Reverse Image Search, Romance Scams, Victim Experience
What do these research terms mean?
Preprint
A manuscript shared before formal peer review and publication. Check whether a later published version is available.
Dataset
A collection of data or examples for others to inspect or reuse. It can appear in Library search and topic mapping, but RSRC does not use dataset records as evidence in Research Insights.
Dissertation or thesis
Research submitted for an academic degree. This describes its format, not its reliability.
Journal article
An article published in a journal. This label alone does not establish peer review, study quality, or how well the findings apply elsewhere.
Qualitative research
Examines experiences, meanings, or processes, often through interviews or observations. It can explain how something happens without estimating how common it is.
Quantitative research
Uses numerical measurements to describe patterns or test relationships. A relationship between two measurements does not by itself show that one causes the other.
Systematic review
Uses a planned, documented method to find and assess research addressing a question. Its conclusions still depend on the included studies and what the search covered.
Meta-analysis
Statistically combines results from multiple studies. Combining studies does not remove weaknesses in their design or make unlike populations interchangeable.
Not classified
This record has no recognized label in this filter. It does not mean the publication used no method, or that no research exists.

Definitions draw on DataCite resource types; Cochrane review methods; NLM: association and causation. RSRC’s dataset and classification rules are explained in our methodology.

Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
Source updates

                

                    No notice found at last check
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Source updates

                    

                    
No incoming update notice was found in the dated Crossref response. Coverage is incomplete, particularly for corrections and expressions of concern; this is not a guarantee that the source is valid or unchanged.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Last source-status attempt:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
The record is approved for public display, but a complete historical administrator action is not recorded.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
Romance fraud exploits the appearance of a genuine romantic connection to lure individuals into financial exploitation. Each year, a large number of people worldwide lose money to such schemes. Current prevention messaging centers on urging people to perform online searches, with particular emphasis on reverse image searches, to confirm or challenge the identity or scenario being presented. When individuals undertake these checks, they can avoid initial financial losses or reduce the total amount of money lost to an offender. However, as technology advances, it is expected that offenders will modify their approaches to mislead victims. There is already clear evidence of rapid progress in artificial intelligence and the use of deepfakes to generate distinctive images, illustrating how the landscape of deception is evolving. The article notes that the adoption of these new techniques calls for reconsideration of existing prevention strategies, since the value of conducting reverse image searches may diminish over time. In light of these developments, the piece argues for a reevaluation of current prevention messaging to keep pace with evolving tactics. The central claim is that the utility of reverse image searches could become limited as offenders leverage more sophisticated technologies, underscoring the need to adapt outreach and guidance to future risks. The discussion presents a forward-looking perspective on how prevention efforts might better address emerging capabilities in romance fraud.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
There is no clear research establishing the true extent or nature of offenders’ theft and use of legitimate people’s photographs in romance fraud; available material is described as largely media reporting. The article also identifies an absence of established methods to verify the originality of online digital video, audio, or images. Evidence on effective, user-accessible responses to AI-generated romance-fraud profiles is consequently limited.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
This is an exploratory, conceptual examination. It synthesizes existing romance-fraud and deepfake research, policy/prevention guidance, and illustrative media-reported cases to outline current fake-profile practices, explain AI/deepfake capabilities, and assess their potential implications for romance-fraud prevention messaging and platform responses. It does not report original empirical data collection or testing.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The article is exploratory and forward-looking, so several claims concern potential future offender adoption rather than measured prevalence or effectiveness. It notes that the extent and nature of stolen-image use in romance fraud lack clear research and are supported by media reports. The paper does not empirically test deepfake use, detection tools, prevention messages, or platform implementation.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Develop accessible, reliable methods to detect AI-generated or altered images, audio, and video. Test and revise prevention messaging beyond reverse-image searches. Examine how dating and social-media platforms can deploy detection tools alongside human profile screening, and how agencies in the fraud justice network can counter emerging threats promptly.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.