Skip to main content

‘They’re Very Lonely’: Understanding the Fraud Victimisation of Seniors

Cross, Cassandra (2016) — International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.5204/ijcjsd.v5i4.268 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Canada
Tags:   AI-Enabled Fraud, Older Adults, Victim Experience
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
                

            

                    

                
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:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
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 article investigates how older adults become targets of fraud by examining the perspectives of volunteers who support senior victims in Canada. It situates fraud victimisation within two competing discourses: one that portrays older victims as weak and vulnerable, and another that characterises victims as greedy or gullible. Using interviews with twenty-one volunteers who themselves are seniors and who provide telephone support through the Senior Support Unit (SSU) of the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre, the study analyzes how these volunteers understand the factors behind fraud against seniors and what this means for support. The findings indicate that volunteers overwhelmingly frame fraud victimisation in terms of social vulnerability, particularly loneliness and isolation. They describe how such vulnerability can motivate seniors to seek connection online or over the phone, creating openings for offenders to establish relationships. The analysis shows limited or carefully restrained support for victim-blaming narratives; volunteers often resist blaming victims and emphasize external factors beyond the person’s control. The paper discusses how these discourses influence a senior’s willingness to disclose victimisation and to seek help, highlighting that perceived vulnerability can nonetheless create barriers to reporting and access to services. In discussing implications, the article argues that conceptualising fraud as a consequence of social isolation can justify and operationalize targeted support, such as ongoing, relationship-based telephone assistance offered by the SSU. It also notes limitations, including reliance on volunteers’ accounts and the absence of victims’ own perspectives on their experiences. Overall, the study suggests that a vulnerability-centered understanding supports recovery and repeat-victimisation prevention through sustained, connection-oriented assistance.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The study identifies limited victim-support avenues for fraud survivors and an absence of evidence on victims’ own interpretations of fraud and their experiences of SSU support. It also cannot determine whether volunteers’ emphasis on social isolation shapes the support they deliver. The broader literature cited remains inconclusive on whether older adults are disproportionately susceptible to fraud.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 21 senior volunteers from the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre’s Senior Support Unit in North Bay, Ontario. The author conducted 20 face-to-face interviews and one telephone interview in February 2014. Recordings were transcribed, uploaded to NVivo, and analyzed through interview-schedule coding plus open and axial coding.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
This convenience sample of SSU volunteers is not representative of volunteers across victim-support services. Findings reflect volunteers’ accumulated interpretations, not victims’ own accounts, and those interpretations may have changed over time. Volunteers did not verify information received from victims or family members, so accounts may represent only one version of events. The study cannot establish how victims experience SSU support or link support practices to volunteers’ beliefs.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Research should examine how victims themselves experience SSU support and explain why they believe the fraud occurred. It should also assess whether the support offered is related to volunteers’ dominant understanding of fraud as arising from social isolation and vulnerability, and whether volunteers’ senior status shapes this interpretation.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

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