Skip to main content

Tainted Love: Characteristics, Dynamics and Effects of Online Dating Scam in China

Bao Han ; Philip Magtaan (2026) — Asia Pacific Journal of Management and Sustainable Development

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 examines online dating scams in China, aiming to describe the characteristics of the scam, the dynamics by which it unfolds, and the resulting effects on victims. The researchers used a quantitative descriptive design, surveying 415 individuals who had experienced online dating scams in the prior three years, with data gathered in Anhui Province. The instrument was validated for reliability, translated for local use, and analyzed with nonparametric tests due to non-normal distributions. The study tracks participants’ demographics, online social habits, and perceptions of the epidemiological, relational, psychological, and economic aspects of scams. Key findings indicate a typical victim profile of middle adulthood, male, single, with at least a junior college education and a low-to-middle income, living in ordinary urban areas. Respondents predominantly used social apps such as Tantan and Soul, spending moderate to high daily screen time, and reporting exposure to narratives involving emergencies, investment opportunities, and requests for gifts. The analysis suggests that vulnerability arises from emotional needs (loneliness, desire for companionship) and that perpetrators employ affective language to foster trust, squeeze financial resources, and sustain online interactions. Victims reported both psychosocial distress (anxiety, shame, depression) and financial losses, with the economic impact closely tied to psychological effects. Across demographic and behavioral groupings, perceptions of scam characteristics, dynamics, and effects were notably consistent, indicating a shared understanding of how these scams operate regardless of age, sex, income, or platform. The authors advocate multisectoral action, including digital fraud literacy, stronger platform safeguards, victim-support services, and public education to mitigate victimization and its psychological and financial consequences. The study notes limitations in causal inference and emphasizes that relationships among variables are correlational.

Identified Gaps

The paper identifies a need to examine scam characteristics, dynamics, and effects together in the Chinese context, rather than treating them separately. It also points to the need for culturally and gender-sensitive interventions that integrate victim vulnerabilities, offender behavior, and psychological and economic consequences.

Methods

This quantitative descriptive survey studied 415 online-dating-scam victims in Anhui Province, China, recruited through snowball sampling. A Mandarin-translated adapted questionnaire measured demographics, online habits, scam characteristics, dynamics, and effects on four-point scales. The instrument underwent validation, ethics review, pilot testing, and reliability testing. Analyses used descriptive statistics, Mann–Whitney U, Kruskal–Wallis, and Spearman’s rho in SPSS 28.

Limitations

The evidence is based on a nonprobability snowball sample of self-identified victims from Anhui Province, limiting generalizability to China as a whole. The cross-sectional descriptive design and self-reported perceptions cannot establish causation. Although correlations were very high, the authors explicitly caution that correlational results do not demonstrate causal relationships.

Future Work

Collaborative stakeholders and policymakers should strengthen digital fraud literacy, platform security, victim support services, financial safeguards, public awareness campaigns, accessible reporting systems, cybersecurity measures, and victim-centered psychosocial interventions.

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