Skip to main content

Love scam as the art of manipulation through Instagram in Indonesia

Roro Retno Wulan ; Dyah Ayu Wiwid Sintowoko ; Intan Putri Cahyani ; Nur Sabariah (2026) — Cogent Arts & Humanities 13(1), 2620235

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

This study examines love scams on Instagram in Indonesia, focusing on how perpetrators manipulate women financially and emotionally. Using a critical discourse approach, the authors analyze the Instagram direct-message exchanges of four women in Bandung who had been deceived or manipulated, with data collected from late 2022 through early 2023. The goal is to illuminate the gendered dynamics and cultural contexts that shape vulnerability to online romance fraud, rather than to quantify prevalence or identify universal tactics. The authors identify three interconnected channels of manipulation: (1) manipulative language and narrative patterns used to establish trust and intimacy, including religious greetings and promises of marriage or a better life; (2) psychological manipulation that exploits emotional vulnerability and social stigma, producing anxiety, guilt, and dependence; and (3) cultural background influences that align scammers with traditional masculine and romantic ideals, leveraging Indonesian norms around gender roles. They describe a four-item framework of scammer presentation in victims’ accounts: stated residential location, claimed occupation, reported luxuries or lifestyle, and minimal personal information in posts. A recurring pattern involves “Cinderella Syndrome,” wherein victims’ desires for an ideal partner render them more susceptible to scammers who project wealth, status, and relational security. The study notes that such scams disproportionately affect single women, with consequences including financial loss and mental distress, compounded by stigma and shame. Limitations acknowledged include a small, non-generalizable sample. The authors advocate for enhanced digital literacy, education, and stigma reduction to empower women and reduce susceptibility to love scams on social media platforms.

Identified Gaps

The paper identifies a significant lack of research on Instagram as a manipulative tool in Indonesian love scams. It also identifies a need to examine specific linguistic and rhetorical manipulation strategies and to connect social-network-site affordances with scammers' granular psychological tactics.

Methods

The study used Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis and Standpoint theory. Fieldwork in Bandung, Indonesia, from October 2022 to February 2023 involved four women who had experienced love scams or romantic manipulation. Primary data were participant narratives and Instagram direct-message conversations. The researchers also interviewed people close to participants and used source triangulation to corroborate accounts.

Limitations

The authors state that the study is highly specific and cannot be generalized because of its exceptionally small sample. The sample comprised four women recruited through a victim-support community in Bandung, limiting representativeness and the ability to establish broader prevalence or causal patterns.

Future Work

Conduct larger, widely disseminated research on online romance fraud, including quantitative studies of cultural expectations such as Cinderella Syndrome. Evaluate digital-literacy and gender-focused awareness approaches for Indonesian women. Examine how Instagram and other platforms can better protect users and limit scammers' access to potential victims.

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