Skip to main content

The Online Mutual Help Practices of Romance Fraud Victims

Pascale-Marie Cantin ; Fyscillia Ream ; Benoît Dupont (2025) — Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa | University of Ottawa Press eBooks

Citation activity

Total citations · Google Scholar
Unavailable
Average per calendar year
Citation count unavailable

Counts reflect Google Scholar’s coverage and do not measure research quality. Source, calculation and limitations

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.2307/jj.37022854.16 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Book Chapter
Country:   Global
Tags:   Awareness, Cybercrime, Digital Traces, Discussion Forums, Fraud Reporting, Online Mutual Help, Peer Support, Prevention, Romance Scams, Scam Reporting, Victim Recovery, Victim Support
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:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Synopsis generation 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

                    

                    
An authenticated administrator approved the bibliographic record for public Library display. This is not a review of every research claim.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Approved for public display:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
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 publication analyzes how romance fraud victims use online mutual help communities to cope with and mitigate the harm they experience. The authors frame online mutual help as a bottom-up form of “security of self” that complements conventional institutions. The study asks how victims leverage discussion forums to tell their stories, obtain practical advice, and support others, while also documenting how these forums can function as repositories of actionable information about scammers and as platforms for raising public awareness. Methodologically, the chapter relies on a hybrid approach that combines automated collection of large forum datasets with in-depth qualitative analysis. Three forums— ScamWarners, ScamSurvivors, and Signal-Arnaques—were selected for their content richness. A sample of one thousand conversations (approximately 335 per forum) was analyzed using inductive coding to identify three core themes: (1) supporting victims by helping them speak, regain a voice, and access personalized guidance; (2) identifying fraudulent profiles through shared exchanges, digital traces, and indicators of compromise; and (3) raising awareness through tips, red flags, and guidance on reporting and prevention. The findings illustrate how victims may move from novice to experienced “surviving” status, with experienced members mentoring others and contributing to collective knowledge. The chapter concludes that these mutual help practices can reveal risk patterns, aid prevention, and supplement formal response avenues, while also signaling the need for systematic evaluation, governance considerations, and potential collaboration with authorities to balance support with privacy and safety concerns. It stops short of endorsing any universal policy, emphasizing careful assessment of benefits and limitations.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
Research on romance fraud is minimal in Canada and beyond and has chiefly addressed fraud networks and victim consequences. The authors identify no prior research on post-incident experiences or victims’ use of online mutual-help strategies to mitigate harm and rebuild. Few empirical studies examine online mutual help among crime victims, its benefits for victims, or the efficacy of fraud-related mutual-help practices.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
The study used a hybrid design: automated collection of public forum data and qualitative content analysis. A custom Python script extracted post metadata and content from ScamWarners, ScamSurvivors, and Signal-Arnaques. Researchers purposively selected 1,000 high-interaction conversations (335 per forum), based on original-post length, views, and replies, imported them into QDA Miner, and inductively coded them. Analysis derived three themes: supporting victims, identifying fraudulent profiles, and raising awareness.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The conversation sample was restricted to permit in-depth qualitative analysis and selected using post length and interaction measures, which may underrepresent less visible or shorter exchanges. Platform-use statistics are historical and forum-specific: the Facebook/Skype data cover ScamWarners posts from 2012–2021, while email-provider data cover ScamSurvivors posts from 2013–2021; the authors note platform rankings may have changed since 2021. The chapter does not evaluate the efficacy of mutual-help practices.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Systematically and rigorously assess the benefits, shortcomings, and efficacy of online mutual-help practices for fraud victims; examine whether they can be scaled to improve cyber-resilience. Extend research to social-media platforms where mutual help emerges organically. Investigate protective measures by email providers that may limit fake-account creation.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

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