The Affective Need and the Social Illusion: the assumptions and the practices of the Romance Scam
D'Ambrosio, M. ; Barba, D. (2020) — Rivista di Criminologia, Vittimologia e Sicurezza
DOI:
10.14664/rcvs/235
Type:
Journal Article
Country:
Italy
Synopsis (AI-Generated)
The available excerpts identify the work as an article published in 2020 in the Rivista di Criminologia, Vittimologia e Sicurezza, authored by M. D'Ambrosio and D. Barba. The bibliographic data and author affiliations are visible, but the provided text does not include substantive content such as a research question, methodology, data, or results. Based on the title, the study appears to address romance scams through the lenses of affective need and social illusion, suggesting a sociological or criminological examination of the factors that underlie scammers’ practices as well as the experiences of victims. Because the excerpts do not contain the body of the article, there is no explicit description of the study’s approach, sample, data collection, or analytical methods. Consequently, this synopsis cannot confirm the specific evidence or procedures used, nor can it report quantitative or qualitative findings, themes, or observed patterns. The title implies a focus on conceptual understandings of affective motivations and the deceptive social dynamics employed in romance scams, but no concrete claims or statistics from the publication are available in the provided material. As such, a neutral, source-grounded summary of the publication’s findings or stated implications cannot be rendered from the excerpts alone. The only certain information accessible is the bibliographic identification and the general topic suggested by the title; details about conclusions, limitations, and recommendations require access to the full text.
AI-Generated Content Notice
The synopsis and research notes on this page were generated with AI from available publication information and, when available, the uploaded paper text. They may contain errors, omissions, or interpretation issues. Readers should follow the DOI or source link, review the original publication, and make their own judgment about the content.
Found a possible error? Request a correction.