Skip to main content

The Online Romance Scam: A Serious Cybercrime

Monica T. Whitty ; Tom Buchanan (2012) — Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2011.0352 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   United Kingdom
Tags:   Awareness, Financial Loss, Great Britain, Media Campaigns, Prevalence, Public Awareness, Romance Scams, Under Reporting
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

            
A YouGov omnibus online survey sampled 2,028 Great Britain adults aged 18+ during 6-8 July 2011. Randomly selected members of an approximately 300,000-person panel were invited; the response rate was about 33.3%. Data were weighted against census data to represent British adults. Just over half of British respondents had heard of the online romance scam before the survey. Television and newspapers were the most frequently reported sources of prior awareness, while online dating sites were rarely reported. The prevalence estimate was based on a small self-reported victimized subgroup (0.65%) in an online panel survey and was extrapolated using the proportion of British adults online.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The authors state that much more research is needed on who is vulnerable to online romance scams and on victims’ psychological impact. They also indicate that it remains unclear whether prior knowledge of the crime prevents victimization. The study identifies a need to examine victims targeted via dating sites in greater depth.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
A YouGov omnibus online survey sampled 2,028 Great Britain adults aged 18+ during 6–8 July 2011. Randomly selected members of an approximately 300,000-person panel were invited; the response rate was about 33.3%. Data were weighted against census data to represent British adults. Participants answered closed questions on prior awareness of online romance scams, media sources of awareness, and whether they or someone they knew had lost money. The authors used descriptive estimates and a chi-square test for gender differences in media awareness.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The prevalence estimate was based on a small self-reported victimized subgroup (0.65%) in an online panel survey and was extrapolated using the proportion of British adults online. The survey measured whether respondents had heard of the scam and whether they or acquaintances had been victimized, rather than collecting detailed victim experiences, psychological outcomes, offender tactics, or reporting behavior. The authors also note that only a small proportion of the sample used online dating sites, limiting interpretation of awareness via those sites.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Compare public knowledge of the scam with victim numbers in future studies to assess whether awareness is preventive. Conduct further research on people vulnerable to romance scams and victims’ psychological impact. Examine more deeply the impacts on and views of victims targeted through dating sites. Assess communication channels, including greater use of radio, for disseminating scam knowledge.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

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