Authors: Karla Pak & Doug Shadel
Publication: AARP Foundation
Year: 2011
Summary: Building on previous profiling studies of known investment and lottery fraud victims, this project surveys both a substantially larger population (723 victims and 1,509 general population participants) and four additional fraud types.
Using demographic, psychological, and behavioral measures, the study identified predictive models for each type of victimization
- Investment fraud: Demographically, they are more likely to be men, college educated, income of $50,000 or more per year, and have a higher average age than the general population.
- Psychologically, they are less upset at the prospect of losing money (even controlling for income, age, and gender).
- Behaviorally, they are more likely to expose themselves to sales situations.
- Lottery fraud: Demographically, they are more likely to be single, have less than a college education, report an annual income of less than $50,000, and have a higher average age.
- Behaviorally, they are more likely to expose themselves to sales situations, take fewer prevention measures, and are less informed about consumer protections.
- Prescription drug fraud/Identity theft: Demographically, they are more likely to be female, single, have less than a college education, report an annual income less than $50,000, and have a higher average age.
- Behaviorally, they report taking fewer preventative measures and are less aware of consumer protections.
- Advance Fee Loan fraud: Unclear profile, though they are more likely to report a lower income.
- Business Opportunity fraud: They are more likely to be male, college educated, and have an annual income greater than $50,000. Behaviorally, they report taking more preventative measures than the general population.
All types of victims, excepting business opportunity victims, demonstrated greater interest in persuasive statements than the general population.
- Admitting to victimization: Only 37% of victims 55+ acknowledged being defrauded. 56% of victims under age 55 acknowledged it.
First Paragraph: Counting only those losses which are detected or prosecuted, or surveying those working in the area for their opinion, will never be accepted as a reliable indicator of the real economic cost of fraud.
