CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 375Cybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesCrime Patterns and InterventionsCriminal Justice and Penology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 108 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

LOW SELF‐CONTROL, ROUTINE ACTIVITIES, AND FRAUD VICTIMIZATION*

HOLTFRETER, KRISTY, REISIG, MICHAEL D., PRATT, TRAVIS C.·2008·Criminology
DOI 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00101.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Recent research has used both routine activity/lifestyle frameworks and self‐control theory to explain victimization. Thus far, combined tests of these theories have focused on offending populations and street crime victimization. Whether these frameworks also explain exposure to and likelihood of nonviolent victimization (e.g., fraud) in general‐population samples remains an open empirical question. Building on prior work, we assess the independent effects of routine consumer activities (i.e., remote purchasing) and low self‐control on the likelihood of fraud targeting and victimization. Using a representative sample of 922 adults from a statewide survey in Florida, the results confirm our expectation that remote‐purchasing activities increase consumers' risk of being targeted for fraud. Low self‐control has no effect on whether consumers are targeted, but it does significantly increase the likelihood of fraud victimization.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00101.x

Cites

108 of 108 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. American Association for Public Opinion Research., 2004, Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys
  2. Anderson Keith B., 2004, Consumer Fraud in the United States: An FTC Survey
  3. Carach Carlos, 2001, The Victimization of Older Australians
  4. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.2005.Press Release Commissioner Bronson's Price Gouging Video.http://www.800helpfla.com/price_gouging.html.
  5. Graycar Adam andMarianneJames.2001.Older people and consumer fraud. Paper presented at the 4th National Outlook Symposium on Crime in Australia New Crimes or New Responses. Canberra Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.
  6. Hindelang Michael, 1978, Victims of Personal Crime
  7. Hirschi Travis, 2004, Handbook of Self‐Regulation: Research, Theory, and Application
  8. Jöreskog Karl G., 1996, PRELIS 2: User's Reference Guide
  9. Meier Robert F., 1993, Crime and Justice: A Review of Research
  10. Nielsen Ratings.(Press Release March 18 2004).Three out of four Americans have access to the Internet.http://www.nielsen‐netratings.com.
  11. Pew Research Center., 2004, Survey Experiment Shows Polls Face Growing Resistance, But Still Representative
  12. Pratt Travis C., 2006, Taking Stock: The Status of Criminological Theory, Advances in Criminological Theory
  13. Romal Jane B., 1995, Differences in self‐control among spenders and savers, Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 32, 8
  14. Titus Richard, 2001, Crimes of Privilege: Readings in White‐Collar Crime
  15. U.S. Census Bureau., 2004, Telephones: Historical Census of Housing Tables

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 375

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
HOLTFRETER, K., REISIG, M. D., & PRATT, T. C.
Affiliations
  • Florida State University (US)
  • Washington State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Criminology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-02
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
189-220
ISSN
  • 0011-1384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9125
DOI
10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00101.x
OpenAlex
W2050792701
Cited by
375
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 11
FWCI
48.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 59 d)
Locations
Criminology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
Keywords
self-control theory, routine activity theory, fraud victimization, consumer fraud

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