Financial Fraud and Deception in Aging-Advances in Geriatric Medicine and Research-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库-手机版

Financial Fraud and Deception in Aging

Financial Fraud and Deception in Aging

ES评分 9.33333333333333 浏览量：3255 下载量：7

DOI	10.20900/agmr20230007
刊名	Advances in Geriatric Medicine and Research AGMR
年，卷(期)	2023, 5(3)
作者	Natalie C. Ebner*,Didem Pehlivanoglu,Alayna Shoenfelt,
作者单位	1 Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA; 2 Florida Institute for Cybersecurity Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA; 3 Florida Institute for National Security, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA; 4 Institute on Aging, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA; 5 Center for Cognitive Aging and Memory, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
Abstract	Financial exploitation among older adults is a significant concern with often devastating consequences for individuals and society. Deception plays a critical role in financial exploitation, and detecting deception is challenging, especially for older adults. Susceptibility to deception in older adults is heightened by age-related changes in cognition, such as declines in processing speed and working memory, as well as socioemotional factors, including positive affect and social isolation. Additionally, neurobiological changes with age, such as reduced cortical volume and altered functional connectivity, are associated with declining deception detection and increased risk for financial exploitation among older adults. Furthermore, characteristics of deceptive messages, such as personal relevance and framing, as well as visual cues such as faces, can influence deception detection. Understanding the multifaceted factors that contribute to deception risk in aging is crucial for developing interventions and strategies to protect older adults from financial exploitation. Tailored approaches, including age-specific warnings and harmonizing artificial intelligence as well as human-centered approaches, can help mitigate the risks and protect older adults from fraud.
KeyWord	deception detection; financial exploitation; fraud; elder maltreatment; aging; decision making; cognitive decline; socioemotional function; brain structure/function; Alzheimer’s Disease
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1. Burnes D, Pillemer K, Rosen T, Lachs MS, McDonald L. Elder abuse prevalence and risk factors: findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Nat Aging. 2022 Sep;2(9):784-95. doi: 10.1038/s43587-022-00280-2 2. Peterson JC, Burnes DPR, Caccamise PL, Mason A, Henderson CR, Wells MT, et al. Financial Exploitation of Older Adults: A Population-Based Prevalence Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Dec 1;29(12):1615-23. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2946-2 3. Button M, Lewis C, Tapley J. Not a victimless crime: The impact of fraud on individual victims and their families. Secur J. 2014 Feb 1;27(1):36-54. doi: 10.1057/sj.2012.11 4. Kemp S, Erades Pérez N. Consumer Fraud against Older Adults in Digital Society: Examining Victimization and Its Impact. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023 Jan;20(7):5404. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20075404 5. Lamar M, Yu L, Leurgans S, Aggarwal NT, Wilson RS, Han SD, et al. Self-reported fraud victimization and objectively measured blood pressure: Sex differences in post-fraud cardiovascular health. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022;70(11):3185-94. doi: 10.1111/jgs.17951 6. Federal Trade Commission. Consumer Sentinel Network Report. Federal Trade Commission. Available from: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/consumer-sentinel-network-data-book-2020/csn_annual_data_book_2020.pdf. Accessed 2023 Sep 4. 7. Elder Fraud Report. Federal Bureau of Investigation; 2021. Available from: https://www.ic3.gov/Media/PDF/AnnualReport/2021_IC3ElderFraudReport.pdf. Accessed 2023 Sep 4. 8. Pak K, Shadel D, Office AWS. AARP Foundation National Fraud Victim Study. Washington (DC,US): American Association of Retired Persons. Available from: https://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/econ/fraud-victims-11.pdf. Accessed 2023 Apr 26. 9. Shao J, Zhang Q, Ren Y, Li X, Lin T. Why are older adults victims of fraud? Current knowledge and prospects regarding older adults’ vulnerability to fraud. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect. 2019 May 27;31(3):225-43. doi: 10.1080/08946566.2019.1625842 10. Parti K, Tahir F. “If we don’t listen to them, we make them lose more than money:” Exploring reasons for underreporting and the needs of older scam victims. Soc Sci. 2023 May;12(5):264. doi: 10.3390/socsci12050264 11. Cialdini RB. Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York (US): Harper Collins; 2007. Volume 55. 12. DeLiema M. Elder fraud and financial exploitation: Application of routine activity theory. The Gerontologist. 2018 Jul 13;58(4):706-18. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnw258 13. Spreng RN, Ebner NC, Levin BE, Turner GR. Aging and Financial Exploitation Risk. In: Factora RM, editor. Aging and Money: Reducing Risk of Financial Exploitation and Protecting Financial Resources. Cham (Switzerland): Springer International Publishing; 2021. p. 55-73. 14. Ebner NC, Pehlivanoglu D, Polk R, Turner GR, Spreng RN. Aging online: Rethinking the aging decision-maker in a digital era. In: A Fresh Look at Fraud. New York (NY, US): Routledge; 2022. p. 58-87. 15. Bond CF, DePaulo BM. Accuracy of deception judgments. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2006 Aug 1;10(3):214-34. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2 16. Hartwig M, Bond CF Jr. Lie detection from multiple cues: A meta-analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2014;28(5):661-76. doi: 10.1002/acp.3052 17. Cross C. Online Fraud. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Available from: https://oxfordre.com/criminology/criminology/criminology/abstract/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-488. Accessed 2023 Sep 4. 18. Lin T, Capecci DE, Ellis DM, Rocha HA, Dommaraju S, Oliveira DS, et al. Susceptibility to spear-phishing emails: Effects of internet user demographics and email content. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact. 2019 Jul 29;26(5):32:1-32:28. doi: 10.1145/3336141 19. Spreng RN, Turner GR. The shifting architecture of cognition and brain function in older adulthood. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Jul 1;14(4):523-42. doi: 10.1177/1745691619827511 20. Verhaeghen P, Salthouse TA. Meta-analyses of age-cognition relations in adulthood: estimates of linear and nonlinear age effects and structural models. Psychol Bull. 1997 Nov;122(3):231-49. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.122.3.231 21. Peters E, Hess TM, Västfjäll D, Auman C. Adult age differences in dual information processes: Implications for the role of affective and deliberative processes in older adults’ decision making. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2007 Mar 1;2(1):1-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00025.x 22. Queen TL, Hess TM. Age differences in the effects of conscious and unconscious thought in decision making. Psychol Aging. 2010;25:251-61. doi: 10.1037/a0018856 23. Calso C, Besnard J, Allain P. Study of the theory of mind in normal aging: focus on the deception detection and its links with other cognitive functions. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2020 May 3;27(3):430-52. doi: 10.1080/13825585.2019.1628176 24. Pehlivanoglu D, Lighthall NR, Lin T, Chi KJ, Polk R, Perez E, et al. Aging in an “infodemic”: The role of analytical reasoning, affect, and news consumption frequency on news veracity detection. J Exp Psychol. 2022;28:468-85. doi: 10.1037/xap0000426 25. Ebner NC, Ellis DM, Lin T, Rocha HA, Yang H, Dommaraju S, et al. Uncovering susceptibility risk to online deception in aging. J Gerontol B. 2020 Feb 14;75(3):522-33. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gby036 26. Pehlivanoglu D, Shoenfelt A, Hakim Z, Heemskerk A, Zhen J, Mosqueda M, et al. Phishing vulnerability compounded by older age, APOE4 genotype, and lower cognition. OSF
[Preprint]. 2023 Jul 4. doi: 10.31219/osf.io/6f2y9 27. Han SD, Boyle PA, James BD, Yu L, Bennett DA. Mild cognitive impairment and susceptibility to scams in old age. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016 Jan 1;49(3):845-51. doi: 10.3233/JAD-150442 28. Boyle PA, Yu L, Schneider JA, Wilson RS, Bennett DA. Scam awareness related to incident Alzheimer dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Ann Intern Med. 2019 May 21;170(10):702-9. doi: 10.7326/M18-2711 29. Fenton L, Weissberger GH, Boyle PA, Mosqueda L, Yassine HN, Nguyen AL, et al. Cognitive and neuroimaging correlates of financial exploitation vulnerability in older adults without dementia: Implications for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022 Sep 1;140:104773. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104773 30. Lane JD, DePaulo BM. Completing Coyne’s cycle: Dysphorics’ ability to detect deception. J Res Personal. 1999 Sep 1;33(3):311-29. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.1999.2253 31. Forgas JP, East R. On being happy and gullible: Mood effects on skepticism and the detection of deception. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2008 Sep 1;44(5):1362-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.010 32. Stewart SLK, Wright C, Atherton C. Deception detection and truth detection are dependent on different cognitive and emotional traits: An investigation of emotional intelligence, theory of mind, and attention. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2019 May 1;45(5):794-807. doi: 10.1177/0146167218796795 33. Ruffman T, Murray J, Halberstadt J, Vater T. Age-related differences in deception. Psychol Aging. 2012;27(3):543-9. doi: 10.1037/a0023380 34. Mueller EA, Wood SA, Hanoch Y, Huang Y, Reed CL. Older and wiser: age differences in susceptibility to investment fraud: the protective role of emotional intelligence. J Elder Abuse Neglect. 2020 Mar 14;32(2):152-72. doi: 10.1080/08946566.2020.1736704 35. Han SD, Mosqueda L. Elder Abuse in the COVID-19 Era. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020;68(7):1386-7. doi: 10.1111/jgs.16496 36. Le Couteur DG, Anderson RM, Newman AB. COVID-19 Through the Lens of Gerontology. J Gerontol A. 2020 Sep 1;75(9):e119-20. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glaa077 37. Buckingham D. Teaching media in a ‘post-truth’ age: fake news, media bias and the challenge for media/digital literacy education/La enseñanza mediática en la era de la posverdad: fake news, sesgo mediático y el reto para la educación en materia de alfabetización mediática y digital. Cult Educ. 2019 Apr 3;31(2):213-31. doi: 10.1080/11356405.2019.1603814 38. Moore RC, Hancock JT. Older adults, social technologies, and the Coronavirus pandemic: Challenges, strengths, and strategies for support. Soc Media Soc. 2020 Jul 1;6(3):2056305120948162. doi: 10.1177/2056305120948162 39. COVID-19 Robocall Scams. Available from: https://www.fcc.gov/covid-19-robocall-scams. Accessed 2023 Sep 4. 40. Teaster PB, Roberto KA, Savla J, Du C, Du Z, Atkinson E, et al. Financial fraud of older adults during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gerontologist. 2022 Dec 19;gnac188. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnac188 41. Chen WG, Schloesser D, Arensdorf AM, Simmons JM, Cui C, Valentino R, et al. The emerging science of interoception: Sensing, integrating, interpreting, and regulating signals within the self. Trends Neurosci. 2021 Jan 1;44(1):3-16. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2020.10.007 42. Critchley HD, Wiens S, Rotshtein P, Öhman A, Dolan RJ. Neural systems supporting interoceptive awareness. Nat Neurosci. 2004 Feb;7(2):189-95. doi: 10.1038/nn1176 43. ten Brinke L, Lee JJ, Carney DR. Different physiological reactions when observing lies versus truths: Initial evidence and an intervention to enhance accuracy. J Personal and Soc Psychol. 2019;117(3):560. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000175 44. Dunn BD, Evans D, Makarova D, White J, Clark L. Gut feelings and the reaction to perceived inequity: The interplay between bodily responses, regulation, and perception shapes the rejection of unfair offers on the ultimatum game. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2012 Sep 1;12(3):419-29. doi: 10.3758/s13415-012-0092-z 45. Kirk U, Downar J, Montague PR. Interoception drives increased rational decision-making in meditators playing the ultimatum game. Front Neurosci. 2011;5:49. 46. Heemskerk A, Lin T, Pehlivanoglu D, Hernandez PV, Grilli MD, Wilson R, et al. Interoceptive accuracy enhances deception detection with greater age PsyArXiv
[Preprint]. 2023 May 11. doi:10.31234/osf.io/93meh
[Preprint]">PubMed/NCBI
[Preprint]&author=Heemskerk A">Google Scholar 47. Hakim ZM, Ebner NC, Oliveira DS, Getz SJ, Levin BE, Lin T, et al. The Phishing Email Suspicion Test (PEST) a lab-based task for evaluating the cognitive mechanisms of phishing detection. Behav Res. 2021 Jun 1;53(3):1342-52. doi: 10.3758/s13428-020-01495-0 48. Uddin LQ. Salience processing and insular cortical function and dysfunction. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015 Jan;16(1):55-61. doi: 10.1038/nrn3857 49. Andrews-Hanna JR, Smallwood J, Spreng RN. The default network and self-generated thought: component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2014 May;1316(1):29-52. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12360 50. Spreng RN, Cassidy BN, Darboh BS, DuPre E, Lockrow AW, Setton R, et al. Financial Exploitation Is Associated With Structural and Functional Brain Differences in Healthy Older Adults. J Gerontol A. 2017 Oct 1;72(10):1365-8. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glx051 51. Asp E, Manzel K, Koestner B, Cole C, Denburg N, Tranel D. A neuropsychological test of belief and doubt: Damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex increases credulity for misleading advertising. Front Neurosci. 2012;6:100. 52. Cassidy BS, Leshikar ED, Shih JY, Aizenman A, Gutchess AH. Valence-based age differences in medial prefrontal activity during impression formation. Soc Neurosci. 2013 Sep 1;8(5):462-73. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2013.832373 53. Frazier I, Lin T, Liu P, Skarsten S, Feifel D, Ebner NC. Age and intranasal oxytocin effects on trust-related decisions after breach of trust: Behavioral and brain evidence. Psychol Aging. 2021 Feb;36(1):10-21. doi: 10.1037/pag0000545 54. Weissberger GH, Mosqueda L, Nguyen AL, Axelrod J, Nguyen CP, Boyle PA, et al. Functional connectivity correlates of perceived financial exploitation in older adults. Front Aging Neurosci. 2020;12:583433. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2020.583433 55. Castle E, Eisenberger NI, Seeman TE, Moons WG, Boggero IA, Grinblatt MS, et al. Neural and behavioral bases of age differences in perceptions of trust. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Dec 18;109(51):20848-52. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1218518109 56. Griffith HR, Stewart CC, Stoeckel LE, Okonkwo OC, den Hollander JA, Martin RC, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging volume of the angular gyri predicts financial skill deficits in people with amnestic mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58(2):265-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02679.x 57. Stoeckel LE, Stewart CC, Griffith HR, Triebel K, Okonkwo OC, den Hollander JA, et al. MRI volume of the medial frontal cortex predicts financial capacity in patients with mild Alzheimer’s disease. Brain Imaging and Behav. 2013 Sep 1;7(3):282-92. doi: 10.1007/s11682-013-9226-3 58. Oliveira DS, Lin T, Rocha H, Ellis D, Dommaraju S, Yang H, et al. Empirical analysis of weapons of influence, life domains, and demographic-targeting in modern spam: an age-comparative perspective. Crime Sci. 2019 Apr 1;8(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s40163-019-0098-8 59. Symons CS, Johnson BT. The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1997;121(3):371-94. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.371 60. Kelley WM, Macrae CN, Wyland CL, Caglar S, Inati S, Heatherton TF. Finding the self? An event-related fMRI study. J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 Jul 1;14(5):785-94. doi: 10.1162/08989290260138672 61. Bordia P, DiFonzo N, Haines R, Chaseling E. Rumors denials as persuasive messages: Effects of personal relevance, source, and message characteristics. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2005;35(6):1301-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02172.x 62. Wood S, Liu PJ, Hanoch Y, Xi PM, Klapatch L. Call to claim your prize: Perceived benefits and risk drive intention to comply in a mass marketing scam. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2018 Jun;24(2):196-206. doi: 10.1037/xap0000167 63. Luo M, Hancock JT, Markowitz DM. Credibility perceptions and detection accuracy of fake news headlines on social media: Effects of truth-bias and endorsement cues. Commun Res. 2022 Mar 1;49(2):171-95. doi: 10.1177/0093650220921321 64. Pehlivanoglu D, Lin T, Deceus F, Heemskerk A, Ebner NC, Cahill BS. The role of analytical reasoning and source credibility on the evaluation of real and fake full-length news articles. Cogn Res. 2021 Mar 31;6(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s41235-021-00292-3 65. Adolphs R, Tusche A. From faces to prosocial behavior: Cues, tools, and mechanisms. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2017 Jun 1;26(3):282-7. doi: 10.1177/0963721417694656 66. Bailey PE, Leon T. A systematic review and meta-analysis of age-related differences in trust. Psychol Aging. 2019;34:674-85. doi: 10.1037/pag0000368 67. Willis J, Todorov A. First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychol Sci. 2006 Jul 1;17(7):592-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x 68. Olivola CY, Todorov A. Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearance-based trait inferences and voting. J Nonverbal Behav. 2010 Jun 1;34(2):83-110. doi: 10.1007/s10919-009-0082-1 69. Porter S, ten Brinke L, Gustaw C. Dangerous decisions: the impact of first impressions of trustworthiness on the evaluation of legal evidence and defendant culpability. Psychol Crime Law. 2010 Jul 1;16(6):477-91. doi: 10.1080/10683160902926141 70. Wilson JP, Rule NO. Facial trustworthiness predicts extreme criminal-sentencing outcomes. Psychol Sci. 2015 Aug 1;26(8):1325-31. doi: 10.1177/0956797615590992 71. Jack RE, Schyns PG. The human face as a dynamic tool for social communication. Curr Biol. 2015 Jul 20;25(14):R621-34. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.05.052 72. Ebner NC, Luedicke J, Voelkle MC, Riediger M, Lin T, Lindenberger U. An adult developmental approach to perceived facial attractiveness and distinctiveness. Front Psychol. 2018 May 7;9:561. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00561 73. Li Y, Chen Z, Liu X, Qi Y. Perceiving the facial trustworthiness: Facial age, emotional expression, and attractiveness. Q J Exp Psychol. 2022 May 1;75(5):818-29. doi: 10.1177/17470218211047176 74. Oosterhof NN, Todorov A. The functional basis of face evaluation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Aug 12;105(32):11087-92. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0805664105 75. Pehlivanoglu D, Lin T, Lighthall NR, Heemskerk A, Harber A, Wilson RC, et al. Facial trustworthiness perception across the adult life span. J Gerontol B. 2023 Mar 1;78(3):434-44. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbac166 76. Lin T, Pehlivanoglu D, Ziaei M, Liu P, Woods AJ, Feifel D, et al. Age-related differences in amygdala activation associated with face trustworthiness but no evidence of oxytocin modulation. Front Psychol. 2022;13:838642. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.838642 77. Zebrowitz LA, Boshyan J, Ward N, Gutchess A, Hadjikhani N. The older adult positivity effect in evaluations of trustworthiness: Emotion regulation or cognitive capacity? PLoS One. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):e0169823. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169823 78. Bechara A, Damasio AR, Damasio H, Anderson SW. Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition. 1994 Apr 1;50(1):7-15. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3 79. Perez E, Frazier I, Lighthall NR, Lin T, Ebner NC. The Social Iowa Gambling Task (S-IGT): A novel paradigm for investigating trust learning and decision making. Front. Psychol. 2015;6. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00391 80. Horta M, Shoenfelt A, Lighthall N, Perez E, Frazier I, Heemskerk A, et al. Facing trustworthiness: Age-group differences in trust-related decision-making and learning. PsyArXiv
[Preprint]. 2023 Apr 23. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/4hsu7 81. Slessor G, Phillips LH, Ruffman T, Bailey PE, Insch P. Exploring own-age biases in deception detection. Cogn Emot. 2014 Apr 3;28(3):493-506. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2013.839438 82. Sweeney CD, Ceci SJ. Deception detection, transmission, and modality in age and sex. Front Psychol. 2014 Jun 13;5:590. 83. Bailey PE, Slessor G, Rieger M, Rendell PG, Moustafa AA, Ruffman T. Trust and trustworthiness in young and older adults. Psychol Aging. 2015;30(4):977. doi: 10.1037/a0039736 84. Samanez-Larkin GR, Gibbs SEB, Khanna K, Nielsen L, Carstensen LL, Knutson B. Anticipation of monetary gain but not loss in healthy older adults. Nat Neurosci. 2007 Jun;10(6):787-91. doi: 10.1038/nn1894 85. Reed AE, Chan L, Mikels JA. Meta-analysis of the age-related positivity effect: Age differences in preferences for positive over negative information. Psychol Aging. 2014;29(1):1-15. doi: 10.1037/a0035194 86. Hauch V, Sporer SL, Michael SW, Meissner CA. Does training improve the detection of deception? A meta-analysis. Commun Res. 2016 Apr 1;43(3):283-343. doi: 10.1177/0093650214534974 87. Walzak LC, Thornton WL. Cognitive and Metacognitive Predictors of Financial Exploitation: Understanding Fraud Susceptibility in Adulthood. In: A Fresh Look at Fraud. New York (NY, US): Routledge; 2022. p. 111-129. 88. Karbach J, Verhaeghen P. Making working memory work: A meta-analysis of executive-control and working memory training in older adults. Psychol Sci. 2014 Nov 1;25(11):2027-37. doi: 10.1177/0956797614548725 89. Zinke K, Zeintl M, Rose NS, Putzmann J, Pydde A, Kliegel M. Working memory training and transfer in older adults: Effects of age, baseline performance, and training gains. Dev Psychol. 2014;50:304-15. doi: 10.1037/a0032982 90. Balota DA, Duchek JM, Sergent-Marshall SD, Roediger HL III. Does expanded retrieval produce benefits over equal-interval spacing? Explorations of spacing effects in healthy aging and early stage Alzheimer’s disease. Psychol Aging. 2006;21(1):19-31. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.21.1.19 91. Baker DW. The meaning and the measure of health literacy. J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Aug 1;21(8):878-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00540.x 92. Lusardi A, Mitchell OS. The Economic Importance of Financial Literacy: Theory and Evidence. J Econ Lit. 2014 Mar;52(1):5-44. doi: 10.1257/jel.52.1.5 93. Stewart CC, Yu L, Lamar M, Wilson RS, Bennett DA, Boyle PA. Associations of health and financial literacy with mortality in advanced age. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020 May 1;32(5):951-7. doi: 10.1007/s40520-019-01259-7 94. Stewart CC, Yu L, Glover C, Mottola G, Valdes O, Wilson RS, et al. Well-Being and Aging-Related Decline in Financial and Health Literacy in Advanced Age. J Gerontol B. 2023 Sep 1;78(9):1526-32. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbad059 95. James BD, Boyle PA, Bennett JS, Bennett DA. The Impact of Health and Financial Literacy on Decision Making in Community-Based Older Adults. Gerontology. 2012 Jun 22;58(6):531-9. doi: 10.1159/000339094 96. James BD, Boyle PA, Bennett DA. Correlates of Susceptibility to Scams in Older Adults Without Dementia. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2014;26(2):107-22. doi: 10.1080/08946566.2013.821809 97. Yu L, Mottola G, Bennett DA, Boyle PA. Adverse Impacts of Declining Financial and Health Literacy in Old Age. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2021 Nov 1;29(11):1129-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2021.02.042 98. Gamble KJ, Boyle P, Yu L, Bennett D. Aging, Financial Literacy, and Fraud. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2361151. Accessed 2023 Sep 5. 99. Mitchell OS, Lusardi A. Financial Literacy and Financial Behavior at Older Ages. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4006687doi:10.2139/ssrn.4006687. Accessed 2023 Sep 5. 100. Franke T, Sims-Gould J, Nettlefold L, Ottoni C, McKay HA. “It makes me feel not so alone”: features of the Choose to Move physical activity intervention that reduce loneliness in older adults. BMC Public Health. 2021 Feb 6;21(1):312. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10363-1 101. Rodríguez-Romero R, Herranz-Rodríguez C, Kostov B, Gené-Badia J, Sisó-Almirall A. Intervention to reduce perceived loneliness in community-dwelling older people. Scand J Caring Sci. 2021;35(2):366-74. doi: 10.1111/scs.12852 102. Delhom I, Satorres E, Meléndez JC. Can we improve emotional skills in older adults? Emotional intelligence, life satisfaction, and resilience. Psychosoc Interv. 2020 Jul;29(3):133-9. doi: 10.5093/pi2020a8 103. Jester DJ, Rozek EK, McKelley RA. Heart rate variability biofeedback: implications for cognitive and psychiatric effects in older adults. Aging Ment Health. 2019 May 4;23(5):574-80. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2018.1432031 104. Sitaram R, Ros T, Stoeckel L, Haller S, Scharnowski F, Lewis-Peacock J, et al. Closed-loop brain training: the science of neurofeedback. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017 Feb;18(2):86-100. doi: 10.1038/nrn.2016.164 105. Yu L, Mottola G, Barnes LL, Han SD, Wilson RS, Bennett DA, et al. Correlates of susceptibility to scams in community-dwelling older black adults. Gerontology. 2021;67(6):729-39. doi: 10.1159/000515326 106. Federal Trade Commission. Combating Fraud In African American & Latino Communities: The FTC’s Comprehensive Strategic Plan: A Federal Trade Commission Report To Congress. Available from: https://www.ftc.gov/reports/combating-fraud-african-american-latino-communities-ftcs-comprehensive-strategic-plan-federal-trade. Accessed 2023 Sep 5. 107. Federal Trade Commission. Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January-December 2016. Available from: https://www.ftc.gov/reports/consumer-sentinel-network-data-book-january-december-2016. Accessed 2023 Sep 5. 108. Rosenberg I, Shabtai A, Elovici Y, Rokach L. Adversarial machine learning attacks and defense methods in the cyber security domain. ACM Comput Surv. 2021 May 25;54(5):108:1-108:36. doi: 10.1145/3453158 109. Bera D, Ogbanufe O, Kim DJ. Towards a thematic dimensional framework of online fraud: An exploration of fraudulent email attack tactics and intentions. Decis Support Syst. 2023 Aug 1;171:113977. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2023.113977 110. Dada EG, Bassi JS, Chiroma H, Abdulhamid SM, Adetunmbi AO, Ajibuwa OE. Machine learning for email spam filtering: review, approaches and open research problems. Heliyon. 2019 Jun 1;5(6):e01802. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01802 111. Richards KE. Habituation: A possible mitigation of a wicked problem. In: Corradini I, Nardelli E, Ahram T, editors. Advances in Human Factors in Cybersecurity. Cham (Switzerland): Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 95-101. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 112. Kumaraguru P, Rhee Y, Acquisti A, Cranor LF, Hong J, Nunge E. Protecting people from phishing: the design and evaluation of an embedded training email system. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York (NY, USA): Association for Computing Machinery; 2007. p. 905-14. CHI ’07. 113. Caputo DD, Pfleeger SL, Freeman JD, Johnson ME. Going spear phishing: Exploring embedded training and awareness. IEEE Secur Priv. 2014 Jan;12(1):28-38. doi: 10.1109/MSP.2013.106 114. Peters U. What is the function of confirmation bias? Erkenn. 2022 Jun 1;87(3):1351-76. doi: 10.1007/s10670-020-00252-1 115. Tong X, Wang L, Pan X, Wang J gya. An overview of deepfake: The sword of Damocles in AI. In: 2020 International Conference on Computer Vision, Image and Deep Learning (CVIDL); 2020 Jul 10-12; Chongqing, China. New York (NY, US): IEEE; 2020. p. 265-73. doi: 10.1109/CVIDL51233.2020.00-88 116. Zhang T. Deepfake generation and detection, a survey. Multimed Tools Appl. 2022 Feb 1;81(5):6259-76. doi: 10.1007/s11042-021-11733-y 117. Azmoodeh A, Dehghantanha A. Deep fake detection, deterrence and response: Challenges and opportunities. arXiv: 2211.14667
[Preprint]. 2022 Nov 26. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/2211.14667. Accessed 2023 Sep 5. 118. Moore RC, Hancock JT. A digital media literacy intervention for older adults improves resilience to fake news. Sci Rep. 2022 Apr 9;12(1):6008. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-08437-0 119. Zielinska OA, Tembe R, Hong KW, Ge X, Murphy-Hill E, Mayhorn CB. One phish, two phish, How to avoid the internet phish: Analysis of training strategies to detect phishing emails. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annual Meet. 2014 Sep 1;58(1):1466–70. doi: 10.1177/1541931214581306

引用本文

Natalie C. Ebner*,Didem Pehlivanoglu,Alayna Shoenfelt. Financial Fraud and Deception in Aging, Advances in Geriatric Medicine and Research. 2023; 5; (3). https://doi.org/10.20900/agmr20230007.

文献评论

黄**天津市环****** 已认证✔

2026-01-24 04:22:25

老年人中金融诈骗是一个重大社会问题，本文对老年人金融欺诈易感性机制进行了全面、深入的跨学科综述。创新性地整合了认知老化、社会情绪变化及神经生物学基础，并提出了‘生物心理社会交互模型’，为理解这一复杂问题提供了一个理论框架。文章系统总结了目前现有的证据，并指出了结合人工智能的干预方向，对学术研究与实践防护均有重要价值，并对中国老龄化人群的研究具有一定的指导意义。建议未来可纳入更多社会文化变量及具体社会资本因素的讨论。总体而言，这是一篇高质量、引领性的综述文章。ES评分：9.0分

y**

2025-09-23 11:34:34

本篇文章专业性强，选题视角新颖，论述有理有据，具有较高的参考意义

h**湖南长沙******

2025-09-17 04:37:18

此文对老年人面临欺骗风险的多方面因素及制定干预措施和策略方面进行了比较深入的分析，对保护老年人免受经济剥削至关重要。

相关学者

相关机构