Development and Initial Validation of a Multidimensional Scale for Assessing Repeated Online Fraud Victimisation

This study aimed to develop and validate a psychometric instrument for identifying factors contributing to repeated online fraud victimisation and its associated consequences. Guided by Cyber-Routine Activity Theory (Cyber-RAT) and Cognitive-Behavioral Theory, the study examined the influence of attitudes, situational conditions, and fraud strategies on the economic, social, and psychological impacts experienced by victims. A quantitative research design was employed, with data collected from 149 respondents using a structured questionnaire and analysed through exploratory factor analysis, correlation analysis, and multiple regression techniques to assess the instrument’s reliability, validity, and the relationships among constructs. The findings demonstrated that the instrument possessed strong psychometric properties, with satisfactory reliability and construct validity. Significant relationships were identified between the predictor variables and victim impacts, with attitudes and fraud strategies emerging as stronger predictors than situational conditions, highlighting the importance of cognitive and behavioural factors in repeated online fraud victimisation. The study contributes to the literature by providing a validated psychometric instrument that integrates Cyber-RAT and Cognitive-Behavioral Theory to measure both the antecedents and multidimensional impacts of online fraud victimisation. The instrument offers practical value for researchers, policymakers, financial institutions, and digital security agencies in developing targeted fraud prevention, consumer protection, and intervention strategies.

Online fraud, repeated victimisation, instrument validation.

1. Ahmad, M. A. (2024). Cognitive bias and financial fraud vulnerability among Malaysian youths: A mediation model. Journal of Financial Crime Studies, 31(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFCS-04-2024-0061. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmad, Z. (2025). Investment scams: The effect of bias-induced gullibility on victimization propensity. Crime, Law and Social Change, 83(1), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-024-10187-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. International Universities Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Cecilia Desy Widya and Permata Sari (2015). Pengaruh Kepercayaan, Keamanan, Persepsi Resiko dan Kualitas Pelayanan Terhadap Keputusan Pembelian Secara Online. Tesis SarjanaManagemen. Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnbes. Universitas Dian Nuswantoro Semarang. Indonesia. http://dinus.ac.id/. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chen Li Yin et al. (2023). Online Fraud: Factors Affecting Consumers’ Online Purchasing [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Behaviour in Malaysia. Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman. Final Year Project Degree. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chua Yan Piaw (2006). Kaedah Penyelidikan Buku 1. 2nd edition. Shah Alam: Mc Graw Hill, Sdn Bhd. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cooper, D. R. dan Schindler, P. S. (2001). Business Research Method. 6th edition. Singapore: Mcgraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Drew, J. M., & Webster, J. (2024). The victimology of online fraud: A focus on romance fraud victimisation. Journal of Economic Criminology, 3(3), 100053. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Gan, Y. S., Lim, K. Y., & Hassan, R. (2024). Digital risk behaviour and phishing susceptibility among Gen Z in Malaysia. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 10, 100217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100217 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Gainsbury, S.M. (2019). Identifying Risky Internet Use: Linking Negative Internet Experiences to Specific Online Behaviour. New Media and Society, 21(6), 12-32. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. George, M. S., Teunisse, A. K., & Case, T. I. (2020). Gotcha! Behavioural validation of the gullibility scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 162, 110034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110034. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gogolook's 2022 Annual Fraud Report. (2022). Annual Fraud Report: Financial Loan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Frontiers in Psychology. (2023). Theoretical basis and occurrence of internet fraud victimisation: Based on two systems in decision-making and reasoning. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1087463. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1087463. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hair, J. F., Money, A. F., Samouel, P. dan Page, M. (2007). Research Methods for Business. London: John Wiley and Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hoffmann, A. O. I., Lins, S., & Riek, M. (2023). Cognitive and affective determinants of fraud victimization: A longitudinal study. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 33(2), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1345. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Jackson, S.L. (2017). Senate Special Committee on Aging Hearings and GAO Reports. Elder Abuse: Research, Practice, and Policy. Springer, New York, 595-613. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Makmor, N., Aziz, N. A., & Alam, S. S. (2019). Social Commerce an Extended Technology Acceptance Model: The Mediating Effect of Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness. Malaysian Journal of Consumer and Family Economics, 22, 119–136. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Mesch, G. S., & Dodel, M. (2018). Low self-control, information disclosure, and the risk of online fraud. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(10), 1356–1371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218787862 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Mohd Najib Abdul Ghafar. (2003) Reka Bentuk Tinjauan. Soal Selidik Pendidikan. Skudai: UTM Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Murad, F.A., Kamaluddin, M.R., Sulaiman, W.S.W., & Khairudin, A.H.S. (2020). Personalityand Low Self-control as Contributing Factors for Scam Victimization: A Concept Paper. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(2), 4448–4461. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Norlina Mohamed Noor, Shereen Noranee, Muhammad Fared Zakaria, Mohamad Atheef Hannan M. Suaee. (2020). Online Shopping: The Influence of Attitude, Subjective Norm and Perceived Behavioral Control on Purchase Intention. ICEBA 2020: 2020 The 6th International Conference on E-Business and Applications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Norris, G., & Brookes, A. (2021). Personality, Emotion and Individual Differences in Response to Online Fraud. Personality and Individual Differences, 169(1), 109-847. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Nurul Azifah and Citra Kusuma Dewi (2016). Pengaruh Shopping Orientation, Online Trust and Prior Online Purchase Experience terhadap Online Purchase Intention (Studi pada Online Shop Hijabi House). Jurnal Ilmiah Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Katolik Parahyangan. 20(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Rahim, W. N. E. W. A., & Kamaluddin, A. (2021). Online Consumer’s Behavior on Product Review and the Likelihood of Them Being Fraud Victims. International Journal of Business and Technology, 11(3), 1-20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Robinson, J., & Edwards, M. (2024). Fraudsters target the elderly: Behavioural evidence from randomized controlled scam-baiting experiments. Security Journal, 37, 1173–1196. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-023-00410-4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Siu, J. Y. M., Chan, S. H., & Leung, C. H. (2024). COVID-19 and cyberfraud: Applying routine activity theory to understand fraud vulnerability in Hong Kong. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 26(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41887-023-00105-0. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Teo, J., Khader, M., & Chai, W. (2023). Individual differences and scam victimisation: Who is more likely to become a victim? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 36(2), 188–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2297. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Vakhitova, Z. I., & Reynald, D. M. (2025). Revisiting routine activity theory for cyberspace: Toward a cyber-RAT framework. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), Article 83. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04083-1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Vinayakumar, R., Poornachandran, P., & Soman, K. P. (2018). Scalable Framework for Cyber Threat Situational Awareness Based on Domain Name Systems Data Analysis. In Big Data in Engineering Applications. Springer, Singapore. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Wan Shahrazad Wan Sulaiman, Fatin Adha Murad, Geshina Ayu Mat Saat, Rozainee Khairudin, Daniella Maryam Mohamed Mokhtar, Saralah Mariamdaran, Azianura Hani Shaari and Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin. (2022). Development and Validation of Scam Victimisation Risk Inventory (Svr-I) among Malaysian Population. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues. 25(5S). 1-15 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Williams, E. J., Beardmore, A., & Joinson, A. N. (2017). Individual differences in susceptibility to online influence: A theoretical review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 412–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.040 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Yeo, S. F., Tan, C. L., Lim, K. B., Leong, J. Y., & Leong, Y. C. I. (2020). Effects of Social Media Advertising on Consumers' Online Purchase Intentions. Global Business and Management Research, 12(1), 89-106. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Zahari, A. I., Bilu, R., & Said, J. (2019). The Role of Familiarity, Trust and Awareness Towards Online Fraud. Journal of Research and Opinion, 6(9), 2470-2480. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Zheng, C., & Geetha, S. (2019). Factors Influencing Consumers’ Online Purchase Intention in Social Commerce Among Millennials in Malaysia. Qualitative and Quantitative Research Review, 4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Zhi Zhang and Zhi Ye. (2022). The Role of Social-Psychological Factors of Victimity on Victimization of Online Fraud in China. Frontiers in Pschology. 1-10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• A Comparative Study of Adjustment Level, Parental Income and Academic Achievement of Adolescent Girls
• Increase in STIs among Adolescents in Masvingo District
• A Correlation between SDG 4 (Quality Education) and Emotional Disposition of Teacher Educators in Hyderabad District
• Ear Piercing Behaviour and Self-Esteem among Male University Students in Nigeria
• A Study of Religiosity and Psychological Well-Being