Nolte Julia, Hanoch Yaniv, Wood Stacey, Hengerer David
Department of Human Development (now Department of Psychology), Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States.
Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2021 Dec 15;12:789883. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.789883. eCollection 2021.
As the COVID-19 pandemic was unfolding, a surge in scams was registered across the globe. While COVID-19 poses higher health risks for older adults, it is unknown whether older adults are also facing higher financial risks as a result of COVID-19 scams. Here, we examined age differences in vulnerability to COVID-19 scams and individual difference measures (such as impulsivity, ad skepticism, and past experiences with fraud) that might help explain them. A lifespan sample ( = 48.03, = 18.56) of sixty-eight younger (18-40 years, = 25.67, = 5.93), 79 middle-aged (41-64 years, = 49.86, = 7.20), and 63 older adults (65-84 years, = 69.87, = 4.50) recruited through Prolific completed questions and questionnaires online. In a within-subjects design, each participant responded to five COVID-19 solicitations, psychological measures, and demographic questions. Age group comparisons revealed that older adults were marginally less likely to perceive COVID-19 solicitations as genuine than middle-aged adults were. In addition, older adults perceived significantly fewer benefits than both younger and middle-aged adults did and perceived marginally higher risks than younger adults did. Hence, older adults did not exhibit greater vulnerability to COVID-19 scams. Regardless of age, intentions to respond to COVID-19 solicitations were positively predicted by higher levels of educational attainment, being married, past fraud victimization, and higher levels of positive urgency. As expected, stronger genuineness and benefit perceptions positively predicted action intentions, whereas stronger risk perceptions negatively predicted action intentions As such, COVID-19 scam susceptibility appears to be the result of a impulse control issue that is not easily inhibited, not even by past experiences of scam victimization.
在新冠疫情不断发展的过程中，全球范围内诈骗案激增。虽然新冠病毒给老年人带来了更高的健康风险，但尚不清楚老年人是否也因新冠诈骗而面临更高的财务风险。在此，我们研究了在易受新冠诈骗影响方面的年龄差异以及可能有助于解释这些差异的个体差异指标（如冲动性、广告怀疑态度和过去的欺诈经历）。通过Prolific招募了一个涵盖不同年龄段的样本（平均年龄 = 48.03岁，标准差 = 18.56岁），其中68名年轻人（18 - 40岁，平均年龄 = 25.67岁，标准差 = 5.93岁）、79名中年人（41 - 64岁，平均年龄 = 49.86岁，标准差 = 7.20岁）和63名老年人（65 - 84岁，平均年龄 = 69.87岁，标准差 = 4.50岁），他们通过在线方式完成了问题和问卷。在一项被试内设计中，每位参与者对五条新冠相关的邀约、心理测量指标和人口统计学问题进行了回应。年龄组比较显示，老年人比中年人将新冠相关邀约视为真实的可能性略低。此外，老年人察觉到的益处明显少于年轻人和中年人，且察觉到的风险比年轻人略高。因此，老年人在新冠诈骗方面并未表现出更大的易感性。无论年龄如何，受教育程度较高、已婚、过去曾是欺诈受害者以及积极紧迫性较高都能正向预测对新冠相关邀约做出回应的意愿。正如预期的那样，更强的真实性和益处感知正向预测行动意愿，而更强的风险感知则负向预测行动意愿。因此，新冠诈骗易感性似乎是一个冲动控制问题的结果，即使过去有过诈骗受害经历也不容易抑制这种冲动。
