How Do Individuals Justify and Rationalize their Criminal Behaviors in Online Romance Fraud?

Offei, M. ; Andoh-Baidoo, FK. ; Ayaburi, EW. ; Asamoah, D. (2020) — Information Systems Frontiers
Synopsis

This study investigates how offenders justify and rationalize their participation in online romance fraud (ORF) by applying neutralization theory and denial of risk theory. Unlike most research that focuses on victims, the authors examine the offender perspective, aiming to understand the cognitive mechanisms that allow individuals to commit fraud while minimizing feelings of guilt or social condemnation.

Neutralization theory suggests that offenders temporarily suspend moral constraints by denying responsibility, denying injury, or denying the existence of a victim. Denial of risk theory, on the other hand, explains how offenders rationalize their crimes by downplaying or rejecting the risks involved, whether legal, social, or personal. This study integrates both theories to analyze how these cognitive strategies shape intentions to commit ORF.

The research draws on 320 survey responses collected at Internet cafés in Ghana, known as hotspots for romance fraud activity. Respondents were mostly young adults between 20 and 30 years old, with secondary or tertiary education, and high computer competence. Using structural equation modeling, the authors tested the influence of neutralization and denial of risk on the intention to commit romance fraud.

The findings reveal that not all neutralization techniques are equally important. Denial of victim was found to significantly predict the intention to commit ORF, suggesting that offenders often view their targets as wealthy foreigners or willing participants rather than genuine victims. By contrast, denial of responsibility and denial of injury were not significant predictors in this context. Offenders recognize responsibility and acknowledge harm, but shift blame or reinterpret the interaction so that the victim is not seen as harmed.

Denial of risk independently influenced intention to commit ORF and also moderated the effect of denial of victim. Offenders who perceived little or no risk were more likely to justify their actions and express stronger intentions to commit fraud. This dynamic demonstrates how confidence in anonymity, cross-border enforcement difficulties, and comparisons with “worse” crimes sustain offender motivation.

The study contributes theoretically by clarifying the boundary conditions of neutralization theory, showing that its effectiveness varies depending on context and offender perceptions of risk. Practically, it suggests that prevention efforts must target both justifications and rationalizations. Educating potential offenders about the severe emotional and financial harms to victims, challenging narratives that minimize victimhood, and demonstrating the real risks of detection and prosecution could reduce motivation. Dating platforms are also encouraged to incorporate screening mechanisms that flag risk-taking tendencies such as overconfidence or lack of empathy.

Overall, the article provides empirical evidence that online romance fraud offenders use a blend of justification (neutralization) and rationalization (denial of risk) to legitimize their actions, underscoring the need for multi-layered prevention and enforcement strategies.
Citation style