Cited by 35Cybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesCriminal Justice and PenologyPolicing Practices and Perceptions

Victims’ motivations for reporting to the ‘fraud justice network’

Open access
Cross, Cassandra·2018·Police Practice and Research

Abstract

It is well-established that (online) fraud has one of the lowest reporting rates across all crime categories. However, there is a large gap examining why some victims choose to report online fraud offenses. Therefore, this paper examines the under-researched group of online fraud victims who reported their crimes to authorities. Based on interviews with 80 victims across Australia, who lost at least AUD10,000 to online fraud, this paper demonstrates two motivations behind reporting: a sense of individual justice, and an altruistic notion of protecting others. The paper also highlights the negativity associated with the reporting process. The paper uses these findings to determine what can be learnt from the victims who were willing to report. It concludes with a discussion of the challenges evident in seeking to improve the confidence of victims reporting to authorities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15614263.2018.1507891

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cross, C.
Affiliations
Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
Cross, Cassandra
Venue
Police Practice and Research
Published
2018-09-20
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
550-564
ISSN
  • 1477-271X (ISSN-L)
  • 1561-4263
OpenAlex
W2890444636
Cited by
35
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Police Practice and Research (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
Criminology Research Advisory Council, Australian Institute of Criminology (29-13/14)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
Keywords
online fraud, fraud reporting, individual justice, altruism, reporting procedures, victim-offender overlap

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review