Romance Scam Reporting and Support: Help-Seeking Timing, Trust, and Escalation
Herrera, LD (2026) — 2026 14th International Symposium on Digital Forensics and Security (ISDFS)
Type:
Proceedings Article
Country:
United States
Synopsis (AI-Generated)
Built on social engineering and identity deception, romance scams often create financial loss and distress. For victims, it can be difficult to know where to go, what information is needed, and what outcomes are realistic. This paper reports results from an anonymous survey of people who were targeted by or experienced a romance scam (completed surveys: n=386), focusing on (1) when and whether victims first reach out for help, (2) perceived difficulty and confidence in navigating support, (3) how trust relates to expectations of assistance, and (4) how loss severity relates to transfer-method complexity. When help was sought, it was often after money was sent rather than earlier in the scam. Many respondents also reported low confidence in finding support and navigational difficulty. Trust in formal organizations is positively associated with expectations of assistance, while perceived reporting difficulty is negatively associated with expectations. Loss severity increases with transfer method complexity, highlighting the value of time-sensitive harm reduction guidance. Based on these findings, this paper outlines design requirements and proposes a coordinated model centered on a structured incident record, a minimal evidence bundle, and “report once, route many” workflows that connect victims to platforms, financial institutions, and reporting channels with minimal additional burden.
Identified Gaps (AI-Generated)
The literature has limited empirical evidence on when romance-scam victims first seek help, perceived difficulty navigating support, how trust relates to expected assistance, and the relationship between loss severity and transfer-method complexity. Coordinated support models that reduce victim burden while improving reporting quality also remain underdeveloped.
Methods (AI-Generated)
Anonymous mixed-methods online survey of U.S. adults targeted by or experiencing a romance scam within the prior 12 months. Participants were recruited through paid Facebook advertisements; 386 completed surveys formed the main sample. Measures covered scam timing, losses and transfer methods, help-seeking, navigation and reporting difficulty, trust, assistance expectations, and open-ended unmet needs. Analysis used descriptive statistics, Spearman correlations, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and thematic analysis of narratives.
Limitations (AI-Generated)
The voluntary Facebook-recruited U.S. convenience sample cannot estimate population prevalence and may not generalize across countries or cultures. Self-reported timing, losses, and contact/payment sequences are vulnerable to recall error, embarrassment, distress, and differing item interpretations. Item completion and gating created varying denominators. Cross-sectional correlations cannot establish causality. Open-ended themes may reflect what respondents chose to mention. The proposed coordination model was not implemented or evaluated.
Future Work (AI-Generated)
Prototype and pilot a workflow that collects a structured incident record, generates a minimal evidence-bundle checklist, and prepares submissions for reporting channels. Test stakeholder integration to determine whether escalation and interruption can be standardized without increasing disclosure risk. Measure time to first action, evidence-bundle completion, initiation of financial interruption steps, and partner acknowledgement rates.
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.