Skip to main content

Strategi Komunikasi Penjenayah Cinta Siber Terhadap Wanita Profesional

Khadijah Alavi ; Maizatul Haizan Mahbob ; Mohammad Syahrul Azha Sooed (2020) — Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication

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

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


              
              

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 (2)
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
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

The study aims to understand how love scammers target professional women in Malaysia, what factors draw victims into online dating fraud, and how scammers structure their communications. Using a qualitative design, the researchers conducted in-depth interviews with five women who had experienced love scams and with three social-work professionals, drawing on data from a district police headquarters in Selangor. Victims were described as generally well-educated professionals who became involved with scammers after encounters on social media, particularly Facebook. The analysis focused on the victims’ involvement factors, the scammers’ communication strategies, and the practical responses of authorities and service providers. Findings indicate that victims were drawn in by positive treatment, social isolation, easy internet access, and personal pressures, with scammers employing carefully crafted profiles and appealing narratives to establish trust quickly. The scammers’ orchestration relied on several interlocking tactics: impersonating credible identities, delivering promises of gifts or financial opportunities, and using parcel-delivery or tax-agency gambits to elicit payments. The abuse of staged legitimacy extended to impersonations of courier services, customs authorities, and national banks to extract funds across multiple, staged payments. The study notes that victims often received email or social-media communications that reinforced the illusion of authenticity, including fabricated documents and timestamps. The authors discuss implications for prevention and intervention, urging closer collaboration between police and social workers to provide crisis support, trauma counseling, and psychosocial services. They also suggest future research into social engineering elements associated with “magic” or hypnosis-like tactics. Limitations include a small, region-specific sample and reliance on interview data, with calls for expanded, representative studies to generalize findings.

Identified Gaps

The study identifies an unresolved need to investigate the relationship between online persuasion described as hypnotic influence, black magic, or charm techniques and social-engineering attacks. It also implies a service gap: police mainly collect written reports from traumatized victims, while coordinated crisis, counseling, and psychosocial support are needed.

Methods

This qualitative study used in-depth interviews and thematic analysis in a district in Selangor, Malaysia. It recruited five professional women who had experienced romance scams through snowball sampling, assisted by police handling commercial-crime cases. The researchers also interviewed a district police officer and social-work informants to obtain information about offender methods, communication strategies, and responses.

Limitations

The evidence is based on a small, localized, nonrandom sample of five victim cases in one Selangor district, recruited through police contacts. Victim background information was obtained from police officers, and findings are largely based on interview accounts. Therefore, the reported tactics, victim factors, and loss patterns should not be assumed to represent all Malaysian romance-scam victims or offenders.

Future Work

Future research should examine whether online hypnosis, psychological tricks, black magic, and related forms of persuasion operate through social-engineering attacks. The article specifically recommends an anthropological approach to understanding cybercriminals’ use of these practices, to inform police, social workers, and counselors.

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