Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40923120›Full record

ArticleTrauma, violence & abuse2026

Love as Bait: A Scoping Review and Crime Script Analysis of Online Romance Scams.

Janneke M Schokkenbroek, Thom Snaphaan

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Janneke M SchokkenbroekDelft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3603-8927
Thom SnaphaanGhent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7887-4723

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study presents a scoping review and crime script analysis of the modus operandi of online romance scammers. Online romance scams are a form of fraud in which perpetrators fabricate online romantic relationships with victims, aiming to emotionally manipulate and, ultimately, financially exploit them. The review aims to synthesize existing research on how scammers operate and to develop a comprehensive crime script that can guide prevention and policy efforts. A literature search was conducted in Web of Science and Scopus. The search yielded 318 initial results, which were screened for relevance using ASReview Lab and supplemented with 14 additional sources from reference lists and Google Scholar. In total, 50 empirical studies were included based on their descriptions of scammer behaviors. Data were analyzed by coding relevant passages on scammer actions and process models, which were then categorized into scenes and actions to construct a crime script. The resulting script identifies nine major scenes in the scam process: (1) preparation (the Setup); (2) target selection (the Hunt); (3) initial contact (the Hook);(4) transition to private communication (the Shift); (5) grooming; (6) the Sting; (7) financial transaction (the Payout); (8) the Squeeze (e.g., sextortion); and (9) the Aftermath (e.g., revictimization). Each scene includes multiple possible actions and variations, demonstrating the flexibility and adaptability of scammers. The review underscores gaps in previous process models by highlighting non-linearity, scammer adaptability, and revictimization in the online romance scam process. This study contributes to both theory and practice by offering a detailed framework for understanding and reducing (the harm following) online romance scams.

Indexed as

Crime VictimsEroticaFraudLoveHumansInternetcrime script analysismodus operandionline dating fraudonline romance scamsscoping review

Identifiers

PMID40923120
PMCPMC13578658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.