Skip to main content

Criminal practices against women masquerading as romance. Рart 1

Inna S. Alikhadzhiyeva (2026) — Proceedings of the Southwest State University Series History and Law

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 (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

The article by Inna S. Alikhadzhiyeva examines criminal schemes built on “false romance,” arguing that deceit aimed at women often relies on manufactured intimacy to gain trust and financial access. It situates this phenomenon within contemporary crime trends, including fraud in elite dating circles, social media scams, and recruitment by terrorist or criminal networks. The work aims to expand criminological understanding of how romantic attachment can be exploited, and it outlines a research program to identify and describe the various scenarios in which crimes masquerade as love, from extortion to manipulation through virtual or real-life relationships. Methodologically, the study applies formal-legal, formal-logical, and socio-psychological analyses to map criminal mechanisms and victim profiles. A key contribution is a criminological typology that classifies female victims according to a criterion the author terms “trust-based victimhood.” The text presents a typology of criminal combinations driven by mercenary motives under the guise of romance, reflecting a psychologically determined offender profile and a structured sequence of victimization. The analysis draws on court records, media reports, and online dating contexts to illustrate how perpetrators cultivate credibility and emotional bonds before pressuring for financial or other material concessions. The major findings describe several representative scenarios. These include “soap opera” style schemes leveraging fake profiles or real-world encounters, rapid emotional escalation, and sophisticated online-to-offline transitions that culminate in financial demands or coercive actions. The author highlights mechanisms such as social engineering, fake partnerships, and staged life events to pressure victims into transfers or commitments. The study concludes that the central driver of this misuse is an artificially created sense of closeness that erodes critical judgment and facilitates financial and psychological harm to female victims.

Identified Gaps

The paper states that newer ways women become targets of crime remain outside scientific attention. It identifies a need for systematic criminological description of offenses disguised as romance, including online dating fraud, exploitation through virtual relationships, and victim typologies.

Methods

The article uses formal-logical, formal-legal, and socio-psychological analysis. It reports analyzing criminal-case materials, judgments, and media content to structure criminal scenarios, identify a shared offender algorithm, examine social-engineering mechanisms, and develop a typology of women affected by romance-based criminal practices.

Limitations

The paper provides no systematic sampling frame, case-selection criteria, prevalence estimates, or comparative testing of its proposed typology. Its examples draw substantially on media accounts and selected cases, so the frequency and generalizability of the described tactics and victim categories cannot be determined from the supplied text.

Future Work

Develop and evaluate targeted victimological prevention measures that help women recognize accelerated emotional involvement, avoidance of in-person meetings, fabricated crises, and urgent financial requests. Research should also assess detection and prevention of deepfake-enabled romance fraud.

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