PERSONALITY AND LOW SELF-CONTROL AS CONTRIBUTING FACTORS FOR SCAM VICTIMIZATION: A CONCEPT PAPER
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/075x5g60Keywords:
scam, commercial crimes,, psychosocial factors,, victimizationAbstract
Commercial crimes such as scams are of great concerns especially to a society. Official reports indicate that there is a progressive increase in terms of amount of losses in frauds and scams every year. The worrying and escalating trends of scams are the rationale for this concept paper to exist. Following this, the current paper aims to review previous studies to explain why people are getting scammed from the victims’ psychological viewpoint. The present paper employs archival analysis as the main methodology to retrieve information from related journal articles. As such, previous journal articles were reviewed thoroughly to identify the contributing factors for scam victimizations. This paper includes two of the most researched factors in understanding commercial crime victimization – personality and self-control factors. In-depth understanding on victims’ psychological factors is imperative as it can provide substantial information for the development of psychosocial interventions for at-risk individuals.
Downloads
References
1. Ali Salman., &SitiMinandaPulungan. (2017). Pendedahandiri, motivasidankepuasanpenggunaan Facebook dalammenjalinpersahabatan. JurnalKomunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication, 33(1), 438-459.
2. Alkış, N., &Temizel, T. T. (2015). The impact of individual differences on influence strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 147-152
3. Astro Awani. (2019). Pensyarahwanitarugi RM30,400ditipu Macau Scam. Retrieved from http://www.astroawani.com/berita-malaysia/pensyarah-wanita-rugi-rm30-400-ditipu-macau-scam-207145
4. Atkins, B., & Huang, W. (2013). A study of social engineering in online frauds. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 1(3), 23.
5. Azianura Hani Shaari, Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin, Wan FarizaPaizi @ Fauzi&MasnizahMohd. (2019). Online-Dating Romance Scam in Malaysia: An Analysis of Online Conversations between Scammers and Victims. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 19(1).
6. Bossler, A. M., & Holt, T. J. (2010). The effect of self-control on victimization in the cyberworld. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(3), 227-236.
7. Buchanan, T & Whitty M. T. (2014). The online dating romance scam: causes and consequences of victimhood. Psychology, Crime & Law, 20(3), 261-283. DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2013.772180
8. Burger, J.M. (2008).Personality.(7th ed).Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning/Wadsworth.
9. Button, M., Nicholls, C. M., Kerr, J., & Owen, R. (2014). Online frauds: Learning from victims why they fall for these scams. Australian & New Zealand journal of criminology, 47(3), 391-408.
10. Commercial Crime Investigation Department. 2019. Types of crimes. Retrieved from http://ccid.my/bi/crimes/
11. Cross, C. (2018). Victims’ motivations for reporting to the ‘fraud justice network’. Police Practiceand Research, 19(6), 550-564.
12. Cukier, W. L., Nesselroth, E. J., & Cody, S. (2007). Genre, narrative and the" Nigerian Letter" in electronic mail. 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07) Proceeding (pp. 70-70). IEEE.
13. DeLiema, M. (2017). Elder fraud and financial exploitation: Application of routine activity theory. The Gerontologist, 58(4), 706-718.
14. Emami, C., Smith, R. G., &Jorna, P. (2019). Predicting online fraud victimisation in Australia. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, (577), 1.
15. Hirschi, T., &Gottfredson, M. R. (2000). In defense of self-control. Theoretical Criminology, 4(1), 55-69.
16. Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., LeeperPiquero, N., &Piquero, A. R. (2010). Low self-control and fraud: Offending, victimization, and their overlap. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(2), 188-203.
17. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 2(1999), 102-138.
18. Judges, R. A., Gallant, S. N., Yang, L., & Lee, K. (2017). The role of cognition, personality, and trust in fraud victimization in older adults. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 588.
19. Kirwan, G. H., Fullwood, C., & Rooney, B. (2018). Risk factors for social networking site scam victimization among Malaysian students. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(2), 123-128.
20. LinthiniGannetion, Maria Magdalina Dennis Janting, Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin, NadiahSyariani Md. Shariff, GeshinaAyu Mat Saat, MazlanLazim& Abdul Aziz Nawi. (2015). Commercial Crime: The Crime, Criminals and Malaysian Law. School of Health Sciences, UniversitiSains Malaysia.
21. Maxfield, M. G. (1987). Lifestyle and routine activity theories of crime: Empirical studies of victimization, delinquency, and offender decision-making. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3(4), 275-282.
22. McCrae, R. R., & Costa Jr, P. T. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality.
23. Mesch, G. S., &Dodel, M. (2018). Low self-control, information disclosure, and the risk of online fraud. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(10), 1356-1371.
24. Modic, D., & Lea, S. E. (2013). Scam compliance and the psychology of persuasion. Achieved from SSRN 2364464.
25. Modic, D., & Lea, S. E. G. (2012). How Neurotic are Scam Victims, Really? The big five and Internet scams (2011). Social Sciences Research Network, (September). Retrieved fromhttps://ssrn.com/abstract, 2448130.
26. Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin, M. R., Shariff, N. S. M., &Saat, G. A. M. (2013). A unidimensional scale for self-control within Malaysian settings. Education in Medicine Journal, 5(4), 60-66.
27. Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin., NadiahSyarianiMdShariff., Azizah Othman., KhaidzirHj Ismail., & GeshinaAyu Mat Saat. (2015). Linking psychological traits with criminal behaviour: A review. ASEAN Journal of Psychiatry, 16 (2), 13-25.
28. MohdEzriSaad&SitiNorul Huda Sheikh Abdullah. (2018). Victimization Analysis Based On Routine Activitiy Theory for Cyber-Love Scam in Malaysia. In 2018 Cyber Resilience Conference (CRC) (pp. 1-3). IEEE.
29. Nazira Sadiron., Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin., Wan Shahrazad Wan Sulaiman.,&RozaineeKhairudin. (2019). PsikologiPenagihanDadah: SatuTinjauanLiteratur. JurnalPsikologi Malaysia, 33 (1), 12-33.
30. Norazlina Zainal, A., Mohammad Rahim, K., Azianura, H.S., Norazura, D., &Saravanan, R. (2018).PengetahuandanAmalanPerlindunganPengguna Facebook WanitaTerhadapPenipuanCinta di Malaysia. JurnalKomunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication, 34(4), 113-133.
31. Oyibo, K., &Vassileva, J. (2019). The relationship between personality traits and susceptibility to social influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 174-188.
32. Polis Diraja Malaysia. (2019). StatistikKertasSIasatan JSJK mengikutkontijen (2010-2017). Retrieved from data.gov.my/data/ms_MY/dataset/statistik-kertas-siasatan-jsjk-mengikut-kontinjen-2010- 2017/resource/f9d7ec38-fbeb-4276-aeeb-cda2459b3659
33. Pratt, T.C., & Cullen, F.T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: a meta-analysis. Criminology, 38, 931-964.
34. Pratt, T. C., Holtfreter, K., &Reisig, M. D. (2010). Routine online activity and internet fraud targeting: Extending the generality of routine activity theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 267-296.
35. Rehman, U., Nabi, A., &Shahnawaz, M. G. (2018). Machiavellianism, Influential Tactics and Well- being Among Indian College Students. Psychological Studies, 63(1), 42-51.
36. Reyns, B. W. (2013). Online routines and identity theft victimization: Further expanding routine activity theory beyond direct-contact offenses. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 50(2), 216-238.
37. Reyns, B. W., &Randa, R. (2019). No honor among thieves: personal and peer deviance as explanations of online identity fraud victimization. Security Journal, 1-16.
38. Ross, S., & Smith, R. G. (2011). Risk factors for advance fee fraud victimisation. Canberra: Australian Government: Australian Institute of Criminology.
39. Saodah Wok., JunaidahHashim., &Kalthom Abdullah. (2016). Social media influence on Malay family resilience towards challenges of the Internet. JurnalKomunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication, 32(2), 648-669.
40. Tan, H., & David, Y. (2017). Preying on lonely hearts: A systematic deconstruction of an Internet romance scammer’s online lover persona. Journal of Modern Languages, 23(1), 28-40. Retrieved from https://jml.um.edu.my/article/view/3288
41. Tan, K. H., Mohammad Abdollahi-Guilani, Chen, C. Z. (2017). Linguistic Deception of Chinese Cyber Fraudsters. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 23(3), 108-122.
42. The Star Online. (2019). Nearly 1,000 China nationals nabbed in Cyberjaya, believed to be involved in online scam syndicate. Retreived from //www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2019/11/21/nearly-1000-china- nationals-nabbed-in-cyberjaya-believed-to-be-involved-in-online-scam-syndicate.
43. Utusan Online. (2019). 22 Ahli Sindiket Macau Scam Ditahan. Retrieved from https://www.utusan.com.my/berita/jenayah/22-ahli-sindiket-macau-scam-ditahan1.774864
44. Utusan Online. (2019). RM 153, 500 lesapditipu Macau Scam. Retrieved from https://www.utusan.com.my/berita/jenayah/6-bulan-berkenalan-wanita-rugi-rm1-6-juta-ditipu-love-scam- 1.886845
45. van de Weijer, S. G., &Leukfeldt, E. R. (2017). Big five personality traits of cybercrime victims. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(7), 407-412.
46. Wall, H. J., Campbell, C. C., Kaye, L. K., Levy, A., & Bhullar, N. (2019). Personality profiles and persuasion: An exploratory study investigating the role of the Big-5, Type D personality and the Dark Triad on susceptibility to persuasion. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 69-76.
47. Whitty, M. T. (2013). The scammers’ persuasive techniques model: Development of a stage model to explain the online dating romance scam. British Journal of Criminology, 53(4), 665-684.
48. Whitty, M. T. (2019). Who can spot an online romance scam?.Journal of Financial Crime, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-06-2018-0053
49. Whitty, M. T. (2018). Do you love me? Psychological characteristics of romance scam victims. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking, 21(2), 105-109.
50. Williams, E. J., Beardmore, A., &Joinson, A. N. (2017). Individual differences in susceptibility to online influence: A theoretical review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 412-421.
51. Wright, R. A &Miller, J. M. (2005).Encyclopaedia of Criminology Volume 3 Q-Z Index. Taylor & Francis Books, Inc.
52. Yilu Wang, Xin Zhang, Jingyu Li &XiaofeiXie. (2019). Light in Darkness: Low Self-Control Promotes Altruism in Crises. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 41(3), 201-21. DOI:10.1080/01973533.2019.1616549
53. Zamani, Z. A., Nasir, R., Desa, A., Khairudin, R., &Yusooff, F. (2014). Family Functioning, Cognitive Distortion and Resilience among Clients under Treatment in Drug Rehabilitation Centres in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 140, 150-154.
54. Zain, Z. (2019). High Speed and Low Power GDI based Full Adder. Journal of VLSI Circuits And Systems, 1(1), 5-9.
55. Udupa, P., & Vishwakarma,S. (2016). A Survey of MRI Segmentation Techniques for Brain Tumor Studies. Bonfring International Journal of Advances in Image Processing, 6(3), 22-27.
56. Grondin, S., Killeen, P.R.Effects of singing and counting during successive interval productions(2009) NeuroQuantology, 7 (1), pp. 77-84.
57. Négadi, T.The genetic code degeneracy and the amino acids chemical composition are connected(2009) NeuroQuantology, 7 (1), pp. 181-187.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
