Analyzation of seven psychological motives that make individuals vulnerable to romance scams. Using Whitty’s (2017) article, I rank these motives from most to least compelling, highlighting impulsivity, addictive desire, age, gender, loneliness, and kindness. I tie real world internet fraud risks and emphasize the need for cyber education around emotional manipulation.
Nicholas Dorsey
21 June, 2025
Romance scams exploit various psychological vulnerabilities to deceive individuals. After reviewing Whitty’s (2017) article, Do You Love Me? Psychological Characteristics of Romance Scam Victims, I ranked the following seven motives from most convincing (1) to least (7), with detailed justifications for each decision.
1. Impulsivity (Urgency & Sensation Seeking)
Impulsivity ranks first due to its strong empirical support and logical relevance to scam dynamics. Scammers often create high-pressure scenarios requiring urgent action, prompting impulsive decisions from victims. Victims’ high scores on urgency and sensation seeking (Whitty, 2017) indicate a predisposition toward quick, emotionally driven responses without adequate consideration of consequences. These characteristics match the manipulation tactics of scammers, so impulsiveness became one of the strong predictors of becoming a victim.
2. Addictive Disposition
The addictive nature of romance scams is the second most compelling factor. Victims may become emotionally “hooked” on the storyline, akin to gambling behaviors, as Whitty (2017) explains. When doubt sets in, or the SMS remedy fails, the sense of coming close to a relationship’s payoff (a near win) maintains interest. It can be related to the idea that victims are psychologically empowered by passing through the stages or phases of the scam and can hardly breach disengagement.
3. Trust in Others (Gullibility)
Trusting others, or gullibility, ranks third because many victims genuinely believe in the good intentions of others, a trait scammers exploit. According to the report given by Whitty (2017), the victims of the scam tend to say that they were naïve or believed too easily. The vulnerability caused by trust is emotional, and an online relationship, where individuals cannot see one another, poses an even greater threat.
4. Age (Middle-aged Vulnerability)
Age, particularly middle-aged, ranks fourth due to demographic data showing that most victims fall in this category (Whitty, 2017). Middle-aged men and women can be vulnerable to romantic advances on the Internet because they might be both financially and emotionally vulnerable (reviewing divorce, feeling lonely, etc.). Although age is not a characteristic feature of the psyche, it impacts exposure and vulnerability.
5. Gender (Female Vulnerability)
Female victims are overrepresented in romance scams, as Whitty (2017) notes, with 60% of victims being women. This can be explained by the larger societal trends on how online dating is used or the collective beliefs about romance. Yet, it also overlaps with the psychological reasons behind trust, emotional vulnerability, and reacting to flattery. Nevertheless, gender alone is not the cause of scam susceptibility and is thus inferior to more tightly related psychological dispositions.
6. Education Level
Surprisingly, well-educated individuals were more likely to be victims, contrary to the hypothesis that less education increases susceptibility (Whitty, 2017). That indicates that overconfidence might be a factor; educated people might feel that they can learn to see through the scam and lower their guard. Although indirect and not very intuitive, the psychological connection works against education, which is, therefore, ranked lower on the list.
7. Kindness
Finally, kindness is in the last place since the results showed that scam victims were much less kind than non-victims (Whitty, 2017). This is not a result of any expectations, and it blows away the presumption that accommodating people are more prone to coercion. The reason might be that non-kind people have weaker social networks and thus are more isolated and vulnerable to manipulation. Nonetheless, this is only conjectural and poorly documented, as are other reasons behind this.
Conclusion
All in all, the most convincing psychological predictors of romance scam victimhood are impulsivity and addictive tendencies, which are followed by the factor of trusting others. Other demographic variables, such as age and sex, are equally pertinent but not as important as personality characteristics. The unexpected results regarding education and kindness create a case to have a more comprehensive feel on the nature of scam victims. Sensitizing and preventing strategies should focus on the issues of impulsive behavior and the teaching of users concerning emotional manipulatory tactics used in internet fraud.
References
Whitty, M. T. (2017). Do you Love Me? Psychological characteristics of romance scam victims. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 21(2), 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0729