How Telecom Fraud Leads to Mistrust: Influencing Factors, Interpretation Theory and Research Prospect

CHEN Hongmin; ZHAO Lei; GUO Suran; MO Lei

Journal of South China normal University (Social Science Edition) > 2023 > (2): 94-106.

CHEN Hongmin, ZHAO Lei, GUO Suran, MO Lei. How Telecom Fraud Leads to Mistrust: Influencing Factors, Interpretation Theory and Research Prospect[J]. Journal of South China normal University (Social Science Edition), 2023, (2): 94-106.

Citation:

PDF (3308 KB)

How Telecom Fraud Leads to Mistrust: Influencing Factors, Interpretation Theory and Research Prospect

More Information

Received Date: December 23, 2022
Available Online: May 23, 2023

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Telecom fraud seriously destroys social trust, but the psychological mechanism of people being easily deceived and how to effectively prevent telecom fraud at the individual level are still lacking. From the perspective of telecom fraud victims, this paper analyzed "who", "why" and "when" choose trust. "Who" is more vulnerable to telecom fraud? We analyzed the victim's susceptibility to telecom fraud, the key factors including demographic characteristics, personality characteristics and cognitive characteristics. "Why" the victims choose trust, which is influenced by fraud stories and social influence techniques. And "when" the victims to choose trust, which is related to the psychological dynamic factors induced by the interaction between the victims and fraud information. Three models were used to explain the internal mechanism, which are Elaboration Likelihood Model, The Scammers Persuasive Techniques Mode and A Working Model of Susceptibility to Online Influence. But these models can not cover all types of telecom fraud. Future research can be carried out in the integration and development of the model, the enrichment and improvement of the research on the types and stages of telecom fraud, the improvement and innovation of causal research methods, and the practicality and operability of intervention research.
- victim,
- telecom fraud,
- susceptibility,
- trust,
- psychology mechanism

FullText(HTML)

References (60)

References

[1]	O'BRIEN J T. Telecommunications fraud[J]. Fbi law enforcement bulletin, 1998, 67(5): 2107.
[2]	公安部. 今年前9个月全国共破获电信网络诈骗案件26.2万起[EB/OL]. (2021-10-26)[2022-10-19]. https://s.cyol.com/articles/2021-10/26/content_r2vaw6h3.html.
[3]	BIJWAARD D. Survey on "scams and fraud experienced by consumers"-final report[J/OL]. (2020-01-28)[2022-10-19]. https://policycommons.net/artifacts/2135251/survey-on-scams-and-fraud-experienced-by-consumers/2890549/.
[4]	LANGENDERFER J, SHIMP T A. Consumer vulnerability to scams, swindles, and fraud: a new theory of visceral influences on persuasion[J]. Psychology and marketing, 2001, 18 (7): 763-783. doi: 10.1002/mar.1029
[5]	BUTTON M, LEWIS C, TAPLEY J. Fraud typologies and victims of fraud: literature review[R]. London: National Fraud Authority, 2009: 40.
[6]	HANOCH Y, WOOD S. The scams among us: who falls prey and why[J]. Current directions in psychological science, 2021, 30 (3): 260-266. doi: 10.1177/0963721421995489
[7]	WHITTY M T. Is there a scam for everyone? Psychologically profiling cyberscam victims[J]. European journal on criminal policy and research, 2020, 26(3): 1-11.
[8]	赵雷, 陈红敏. 电信诈骗中青年受骗的影响因素和形成机制研究[J]. 中国青年社会科学, 2022, 41(3): 102-112. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZQNZ202203013.htm
[9]	WU G, HU X, WU Y. Effects of perceived interactivity, perceived web assurance and disposition to trust on initial online trust[J]. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 2010, 16(1): 1-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01528.x
[10]	赵雷, 黄雪梅, 陈红敏. 电信诈骗中青年受骗者的信任形成及其心理——基于9名90后电信诈骗受骗者的质性分析[J]. 中国青年研究, 2020(3): 49-54. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-9931.2020.03.006
[11]	HOVLAND C I, JANIS I L, KELLEY H H. Communication and persuasion: psychological studies of opinion change[M]. New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1953: 355-357.
[12]	2021年电信网络诈骗治理研究报告[EB/OL]. (2021-10-26)[2022-10-10]. https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1714686420710721046&wfr=spider&for=pc.
[13]	唐丽娜, 王记文. 诈骗与信任的社会机制分析——以中国台湾跨境电信诈骗现象为例[J]. 学术论坛, 2016, 39(5): 97-103. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4434.2016.05.020
[14]	FISCHER P, LEA S E, EVANS K M. Why do individuals respond to fraudulent scam communications and lose money? The psychological determinants of scam compliance[J]. Journal of applied social psychology, 2013, 43(10): 2060-2072. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12158
[15]	ANDERSON K B. Mass-market consumer fraud in the United States: a 2017 update staff report[R]. Washington, DC: Bureau of Economics, Federal Trade Commission, 2019: 95-99.
[16]	EMILY A M, STACEY A W, YANIV H, et al. Older and wiser: age differences in susceptibility to investment fraud: the protective role of emotional intelligence[J]. Journal of elder abuse & neglect, 2020, 32(2): 152-172.
[17]	STACEY W, LIU P J, YANIV H, et al. Call to claim your prize: perceived benefits and risk drive intention to comply in a mass marketing scam[J]. Journal of experimental psychology-applied, 2018, 24(2): 196-206. doi: 10.1037/xap0000167
[18]	许志炜, 童泽林, 郭昱琅, 等. 诈骗受害大学生的人格特质[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2021, 35(9): 775-780. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6729.2021.09.013
[19]	CRYSTAL M G, YU L, CHRISTOPHER C S, et al. Childhood socioeconomic status interacts with cognitive function to impact scam susceptibility among community-dwelling older adults[J/OL]. (2022-06-13)[2022-10-11]. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13607863.2022.2087206?journalCode=camh20.
[20]	NATALIE C E, DONOVAN M E, LIN T, et al. Uncovering susceptibility risk to online deception in aging[J]. The journals of gerontology series B-psychological sciences and social sciences, 2020, 75(3): 522-533. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gby036
[21]	REBECCA A J, SARA N G, YANG L, et al. The role of cognition, personality, and trust in fraud victimization in older adults[J]. Frontiers in psychology, 2017, 8(3): 275-282.
[22]	MATTHEW D G, KATELYN S M, ZIAD M H, et al. Is this phishing? Older age is associated with greater difficulty discriminating between safe and malicious emails[J]. The journals of gerontology series B-psychological sciences and social sciences, 2020, 76(9): 1711-1715.
[23]	WRIGHT R T, MARETT K. The influence of experiential and dispositional factors in phishing: an empirical investigation of the deceived[J]. Journal of management information systems, 2010, 27(1): 273-303. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222270111
[24]	李辉. 电信诈骗情境下受害人欺诈信息接受意愿及其分享行为研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(7): 90-102. doi: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.07.009
[25]	兰楠. 双加工理论的两系统在决策过程中的加工方式探讨[D]. 西安: 陕西师范大学, 2018: 4-6.
[26]	ERIK D, KEVIN W R, MICHAEL G P. When should I trust my gut? Linking domain expertise to intuitive decision-making effectiveness[J]. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 2012, 119(2): 187-194. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.07.009
[27]	NING Y, LE C, YUN Z. Identity construction of suspects in telecom and internet fraud discourse: from a sociosemiotic perspective[J]. Social semiotics, 2019, 29(3): 319-335. doi: 10.1080/10350330.2019.1587847
[28]	向静, 刘亚岚. "杀猪盘"电信诈骗犯罪的心理控制机制剖析[J]. 中国人民公安大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 37(4): 1-10.
[29]	ATKINS B, HUANG W. A study of social engineering in online frauds[J]. Open journal of social sciences, 2013, 1(3): 23-32. doi: 10.4236/jss.2013.13004
[30]	GREITZER F L, STROZER J R, COHEN S, et al. Analysis of unintentional insider threats deriving from social engineering exploits[R]. San Jose, CA: IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops, 2014: 236-250.
[31]	WORKMAN M. Wisecrackers: a theory-grounded investigation of phishing and pretext social engineering threats to information security[J]. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 2008, 59(4): 662-674. doi: 10.1002/asi.20779
[32]	DAVID M, LEA S. Scam compliance and the psychology of persuasion[J/OL]. (2013-01-01)[2022-10-19]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2364464.
[33]	STAJANO F, WILSON P. Understanding scam victims: seven principles for systems security[J]. Communications of the ACM, 2011, 54(3): 70-75. doi: 10.1145/1897852.1897872
[34]	KLAPATCH L, HANOCH Y, WOOD S, et al. Consumers' response to mass market scam solicitations: profiling scams and responses[J]. Psychology, crime, and law, 2022, 2038599: 1-19.
[35]	CUKIER W L, NESSELROTH E J, CODY S. Genre, narrative and the "Nigerian Letter" in electronic mail[C]. Hawaii: Proceedings of the 40th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2007: 70.
[36]	XIAO B, BENBASAT I. Product-related deception in e-commerce: a theoretical perspective[J]. MIS quarterly, 2011, 35(1): 169-195. doi: 10.2307/23043494
[37]	GEORGE S. Research on impact of mass marketed scams[R]. London: Office of Fair Trading, 2006.
[38]	BOWER G H. Mood and memory[J]. The American psychologist, 1981, 36(2): 129. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.129
[39]	LEONARD L M, DAVID W W, JOHN W A, et al. Mood as input: people have to interpret the motivational implications of their moods[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1993, 64(3): 317-326. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.3.317
[40]	JENNIFER R D, MAURICE E S. Feeling and believing: the influence of emotion on trust[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 2005, 88(5): 736. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.736
[41]	KATHARINA K, NANNA N, MARGUERITE D, et al. Emotional arousal may increase susceptibility to fraud in older and younger adults[J]. Psychology and aging, 2018, 33 (2): 325-337. doi: 10.1037/pag0000228
[42]	ABROSHAN H, DEVOS J, POELS G, et al. COVID-19 and 640 phishing: effects of human emotions, behavior, and demographics on 641 the success of phishing attempts during the pandemic[J], IEEE Access, 2021, 642 (9): 121916-121929.
[43]	HUNG I W, WYER R S. Effects of self-relevant perspective-taking on the impact of persuasive appeals[J]. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 2014, 40(3): 402-414. doi: 10.1177/0146167213513474
[44]	CHEN H, BEAUDOIN C E, HONG T. Securing online privacy: an empirical test on Internet scam victimization, online privacy concerns, and privacy protection behaviors[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2017, 70: 291-302. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.003
[45]	JULIA N, YANIV H, STACEY W, et al. Susceptibility to COVID-19 scams: the roles of age, individual difference measures, and scam-related perceptions[J]. Frontiers in psychology, 2021, 12: 789883. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.789883
[46]	BAUMEISTER R F. Ego depletion and self-control failure: an energy model of the self's executive function[J]. Self and identity, 2002, 1(2): 129-136. doi: 10.1080/152988602317319302
[47]	JOHN T C, RICHARD E P, et al. The need for cognition[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1982, 42(1): 116-131. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
[48]	RUSCH J J. The "social engineering" of internet fraud: internet society annual conference[EB/OL]. (2003-12-14)[2022-10-19]. http://www.isoc.org/isoc/conferences/inet/99/proceedings/3g/3g_2.htm.
[49]	NORRIS G, BROOKES A. Personality, emotion and individual differences in response to online fraud[J]. Personality and individual differences, 2021, 169: 109847. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.109847
[50]	YASUHIRO D, NAOKI K, TSUKASA T, et al. Effective forewarning requires central route processing: theoretical improvements on the counter argumentation hypothesis and practical implications for scam prevention[J]. PloS one, 2020, 15(3): e0229833. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229833
[51]	WHITTY M T. The scammers persuasive techniques model[J]. British journal of criminology, 2013, 53 (4): 665-684. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azt009
[52]	KENRICK D T, SADALLA E K, GROTH G, et al. Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: qualifying the parental investment model[J]. Journal of personality, 1990, 58 (1): 97-116. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00909.x
[53]	SORELL T, WHITTY M. Online romance scams and victimhood[J]. Security journal, 2019, 32(3): 342-361. doi: 10.1057/s41284-019-00166-w
[54]	WHITTY M T. Do you love me? Psychological characteristics of romance scam victims[J]. Cyber psychology, behavior and social networking, 2018, 21 (2): 105-109. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2016.0729
[55]	WHITTY M T. Predicting susceptibility to cyber-fraud victimhood[J]. Journal of financial crime, 2019, 26(1): 277-292. doi: 10.1108/JFC-10-2017-0095
[56]	WILLIAMS E J, BEARDMORE A, JOINSON A N. Individual differences in susceptibility to online influence: a theoretical review[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2017, 72: 412-421. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.002
[57]	赵竞, 孙晓军, 周宗奎, 等. 网络交往中的人际信任[J]. 心理科学进展, 2013, 21(8): 1493-1501.
[58]	TITUS R M, GOVER A R. Personal fraud: the victims and the scams[J]. Crime prevention studies, 2001, 12: 133-151.
[59]	SUSANNE S, NANNA N, JOSEPHINE M, et al. Forewarning reduces fraud susceptibility in vulnerable consumers[J]. Basic and applied social psychology, 2014, 36 (3): 272-279. doi: 10.1080/01973533.2014.903844
[60]	ANNE H, BRENT M, DARREN W D. Above the scam: moral elevation reduces gullibility[J]. Journal of consumer psychology, 2021, 32(3): 466-474.

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(3)

1.	蒋涤非. 刑事案件中被害人过错的认定. 贵州警察学院学报. 2024(02): 27-34 .
2.	黄弘毅，程骋. 网络时代破坏生产经营罪的“其他方法”：基于客观解释的立场与实质解释的限度. 湖北社会科学. 2024(12): 132-139 .
3.	张志强. 论暴力犯罪中被害人过错的认定标准. 辽宁公安司法管理干部学院学报. 2023(03): 76-86 .

Other cited types(9)

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (484) PDF downloads (169) Cited by(12)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

How Telecom Fraud Leads to Mistrust: Influencing Factors, Interpretation Theory and Research Prospect

Abstract

References

Cited by

Periodical cited type(3)

Other cited types(9)

Catalog

Export File

Citation

Format

Content