Skip to main content

“I knew it was a scam”: Understanding the triggers for recognizing romance fraud

Cassandra Cross (2023) — Criminology & Public Policy

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133.12645 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Australia
Tags:   AI-Enabled Fraud, Bank Intervention, Banks, Financial Loss, Platform Policy, Prevention, Prevention Messaging, Romance Scams, Scamwatch, Third Party Intervention, Verification Checks, Victim Experience, Victim Recognition
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

            
This article examines the factors that contribute to the moment a romance fraud victimization becomes realized, drawing on 1015 reports submitted to Scamwatch, Australia’s online fraud reporting portal, during the period from July 2018 through July 2019. By analyzing the free-text narratives provided in each report, the study identifies five distinct trigger categories that recur across cases. The categories are further requests for money, particular characteristics of the communications, the verification checks attempted by the victim, actions taken by the offender, and instances in which a third party provides information or influence. Through this categorization, the research delineates a structured view of how romance fraud signals emerge within real-world reports. The five trigger categories collectively illuminate common pathways through which victims recognize and respond to romance fraud. Recurrent demands for funds reflect the financial bait that underpins many schemes. The descriptions of communications highlight specific patterns or features that distinguish fraudulent interactions from ordinary online contact. Verification-related steps underscore the attempts victims make to confirm information, while offender actions capture the strategic moves employed by perpetrators. Third-party communications point to external influences that can complicate discernment and delay realization. Together, these elements portray a sequence of cues and responses that help explain how, why, and when victims become aware of the deception. Policy implications drawn from these insights advocate for broader messaging strategies designed to bolster financial literacy and well-being, cyberliteracy and critical thinking, cybersecurity practices, and the promotion of respectful and healthy relationships. By integrating these areas into education and awareness initiatives, the aim is to enhance individuals’ ability to recognize romance fraud more effectively. The analysis further suggests that banks and other financial institutions occupy a pivotal role in disseminating these wider messages, using their platforms and networks to drive positive changes in recognition and prevention of romance fraud. In sum, the study argues for a multi-faceted educational approach that aligns consumer protection with broader literacy and behavioral guidance to reduce victimization risk.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
Recognition of romance-fraud victimization has received less attention than motivations for fraud reporting and complaint processes. The study indicates that known warning signs are often recognized only after financial loss, leaving a need to identify ways to foreground triggers early in relationships and before a first transfer. The value and limits of verification checks also require attention as AI-generated synthetic identities may undermine image-search results.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
Qualitative inductive thematic analysis of de-identified free-text Scamwatch reports. The author obtained 3,463 shareable romance/dating-fraud reports lodged July 2018–July 2019, removed duplicates and nonrelationship billing cases, and analyzed 1,015 reports involving financial loss. Narratives were read to identify recognition reasons, then consolidated into five higher-level trigger categories and further coded in NVivo 2020. The sample was 60% women; 60% reported being in Australia and 31% overseas.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
Narrative detail and length varied despite the mandatory free-text field, and complainants received no guidance on what information to include. Data rely on complainants’ memories and interpretations; the researcher could not verify narratives or loss amounts. Findings are constrained by what people chose to disclose and by researcher interpretation; direct questioning might have identified different recognition triggers. Percentages across trigger categories are indicative rather than robust quantitative estimates because cases could involve multiple factors.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Evaluate whether prevention messages framed around financial wellbeing, cyberliteracy, cybersecurity, and healthy relationships improve earlier recognition and reduce transfers. Test proactive, coordinated bank and financial-institution communications on transfer risks, account autonomy, disclosure, and help-seeking. Assess how AI-generated synthetic identities affect the usefulness of reverse-image and online verification checks.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

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