IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i14p8294-d857507.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mental States: A Key Point in Scam Compliance and Warning Compliance in Real Life

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Wen

    (Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Liang Xu

    (Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Jie Wang

    (Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Yuan Gao

    (Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Jiaming Shi

    (Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Ke Zhao

    (Ant Group, Shanghai 200120, China)

  • Fuyang Tao

    (Ant Group, Shanghai 200120, China)

  • Xiuying Qian

    (Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

Abstract

The internet’s convenience and anonymity have facilitated different types of covert fraud, resulting in economic, mental, and social harm to victims. Understanding why people are deceived and implementing appropriate interventions is critical for fraud reduction. Based on the Bayesian brain theory, individuals’ mental states may be a key point in scam compliance and warning compliance. Fraud victims with different mental states may construct various hypotheses and explanations about the fraud they are exposed to, causing different cognition and behavior patterns. Therefore, we first conducted a semi-structured in-depth interview with online fraud victims to investigate the individual and social factors that affect victims’ mental states. Grounded theory analysis showed five core factors influencing scam compliance: psychological traits, empirical factors, motivation, cognitive biases, and emotional imbalance. Based on our findings of psychological processes and deception’s influential factors, we then designed warnings to inform victims of fraud, particularly for those involving novel types of scams. Tested on a real-life setting, our designed warnings effectively enhanced warning compliance, allowing more fraud victims to avoid financial losses.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Wen & Liang Xu & Jie Wang & Yuan Gao & Jiaming Shi & Ke Zhao & Fuyang Tao & Xiuying Qian, 2022. "Mental States: A Key Point in Scam Compliance and Warning Compliance in Real Life," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8294-:d:857507
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8294/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8294/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Karamagi, 2022. "A Review of Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Phishing," Computer and Information Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Tippett, N. & Wolke, D., 2014. "Socioeconomic status and bullying: A meta-analysis," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(6), pages 48-59.
    3. S. Shyam Sundar & Silvia Knobloch‐Westerwick & Matthias R. Hastall, 2007. "News cues: Information scent and cognitive heuristics," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(3), pages 366-378, February.
    4. Boeije, Hennie R. & Duijnstee, Mia S. H. & Grypdonck, Mieke H. F. & Pool, Aart, 2002. "Encountering the downward phase: biographical work in people with multiple sclerosis living at home," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 881-893, September.
    5. Ryan Wright & Suranjan Chakraborty & Asli Basoglu & Kent Marett, 2010. "Where Did They Go Right? Understanding the Deception in Phishing Communications," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 391-416, July.
    6. Stefano Grazioli, 2004. "Where Did They Go Wrong? An Analysis of the Failure of Knowledgeable Internet Consumers to Detect Deception Over the Internet," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 149-172, March.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:33-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Isabel Riquelme & Sergio Román, 2014. "The Influence of Consumers’ Cognitive and Psychographic Traits on Perceived Deception: A Comparison Between Online and Offline Retailing Contexts," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 119(3), pages 405-422, February.
    9. Isen, Alice M. & Geva, Nehemia, 1987. "The influence of positive affect on acceptable level of risk: The person with a large canoe has a large worry," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 145-154, April.
    10. Liuchang Xu & Jie Wang & Dayu Xu & Liang Xu, 2022. "Integrating Individual Factors to Construct Recognition Models of Consumer Fraud Victimization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, January.
    11. John R. Carlson & Joey F. George, 2004. "Media Appropriateness in the Conduct and Discovery of Deceptive Communication: The Relative Influence of Richness and Synchronicity," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 191-210, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa & Ann Majchrzak, 2010. "Research Commentary ---Vigilant Interaction in Knowledge Collaboration: Challenges of Online User Participation Under Ambivalence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 773-784, December.
    2. Kim Kaivanto, 2014. "The Effect of Decentralized Behavioral Decision Making on System‐Level Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(12), pages 2121-2142, December.
    3. Liuchang Xu & Jie Wang & Dayu Xu & Liang Xu, 2022. "Integrating Individual Factors to Construct Recognition Models of Consumer Fraud Victimization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, January.
    4. Andrew W. Lo & Dmitry V. Repin & Brett N. Steenbarger, 2005. "Fear and Greed in Financial Markets: A Clinical Study of Day-Traders," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 352-359, May.
    5. Maw–Der Foo & Marilyn A. Uy & Charles Murnieks, 2015. "Beyond Affective Valence: Untangling Valence and Activation Influences on Opportunity Identification," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 39(2), pages 407-431, March.
    6. Wu Li & Pengya Ai & Annette Ding, 2023. "More Than Just Numbers: How Engagement Metrics Influence User Intention to Pay for Online Knowledge Products," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440221, January.
    7. Thomas Buser, 2016. "The Impact of Losing in a Competition on the Willingness to Seek Further Challenges," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3439-3449, December.
    8. Latefa Ali Dardas & Nadia Sweis & Bayan Abdulhaq & Ghada Shahrour & Amjad Al-Khayat & Atef Shawashreh & Mohammad AlKhayat & Ibrahim Aqel, 2022. "Personal, Familial, Psychosocial and Behavioral Characteristics of Arab Juvenile Delinquents: The Context of Jordan," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, November.
    9. Inés López López & Salvador Ruiz de Maya, 2012. "When hedonic products help regulate my mood," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 701-717, September.
    10. Inoue, Atsushi & Tanaka, Ryuichi, 2024. "The rank of socioeconomic status within a class and the incidence of school bullying and school absence," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    11. Sayed Ibrahim Ali & Nurjahan Begum Shahbuddin, 2022. "The Relationship between Cyberbullying and Mental Health among University Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-14, June.
    12. Son, Hyewon & Ahn, Eunhye & Kim, Jinho, 2024. "Children's bullying victimization and maternal suicidal ideation among multicultural families in South Korea: Heterogeneity by family socioeconomic status," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    13. Eloy López-Meneses & Esteban Vázquez-Cano & Mariana-Daniela González-Zamar & Emilio Abad-Segura, 2020. "Socioeconomic Effects in Cyberbullying: Global Research Trends in the Educational Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-31, June.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:3:p:287-296 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Pierluigi Conzo, 2018. "Natural Disasters and Social Preferences: The Effect of Tsunami-Memories on Cheating in Sri Lanka," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(10), pages 1912-1931, October.
    16. Yochi Cohen-Charash & Charles A Scherbaum & John D Kammeyer-Mueller & Barry M Staw, 2013. "Mood and the Market: Can Press Reports of Investors' Mood Predict Stock Prices?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2013. "Eliciting risk and time preferences under induced mood states," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 18-27.
    18. Izaro Babarro & Ainara Andiarena & Eduardo Fano & Nerea Lertxundi & Martine Vrijheid & Jordi Julvez & Florencia B. Barreto & Serena Fossati & Jesus Ibarluzea, 2020. "Risk and Protective Factors for Bullying at 11 Years of Age in a Spanish Birth Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Anna Bullo & Lyne H. Zen-Ruffinen & Peter J. Schulz, 2022. "Effects of Perceived School Rule Enforcement on Traditional and Cyber Victimization: A Panel Study among Early Adolescents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-18, August.
    20. Jetter, Michael & Magnusson, Leandro M. & Roth, Sebastian, 2020. "Becoming sensitive: Males’ risk and time preferences after the 2008 financial crisis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    21. Lee, Randy & Mai, Ke Michael & Qiu, Feng & Ilies, Remus & Tang, Pok Man, 2022. "Are you too happy to serve others? When and why positive affect makes customer mistreatment experience feel worse," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8294-:d:857507. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.