The gift of the gab: Are rental scammers skilled at the art of persuasion?
Authors:
Sophie Van Der Zee,
Richard Clayton,
Ross Anderson
Abstract:
Rental scams are a type of advance fee fraud, in which the scammer tries to get a victim to pay a deposit to rent an apartment of which the scammer pretends to be the landlord. We specifically focused on fraudulent long-term rentals advertised in the UK on Craigslist. After a victim responds to the scammer's advertisement, the scammer attempts to persuade them to transfer money without having seen…
▽ More
Rental scams are a type of advance fee fraud, in which the scammer tries to get a victim to pay a deposit to rent an apartment of which the scammer pretends to be the landlord. We specifically focused on fraudulent long-term rentals advertised in the UK on Craigslist. After a victim responds to the scammer's advertisement, the scammer attempts to persuade them to transfer money without having seen the property. We were interested in which persuasion techniques scammers use, and in assessing their skill at the art of persuasion. During a period of three weeks, we scraped 2112 letting advertisements, identified the fraudulent advertisements and had 44 conversations of around 4 or 5 emails each with the scammers. Our analysis indicates that Cialdini`s marketing-based social persuasion strategies, such as liking, appeal to authority, and the need for commitment and consistency are extensively implemented by rental scammers. Of Stajano and Wilson's scam-based persuasion strategies, an appeal to sympathy (i.e., kindness) and need for greed were commonly used. We identified two further social persuasion strategies: establishing credibility and removing objections. At a superficial level, rental scammers seem skilled at their job, because they mimic genuine landlords and use a range of effective persuasion techniques. However, when examining their emails more closely, we see they often use pre-scripted emails, their mimicry is often incompetent, and they have a lack of language skills and cultural knowledge that may tip people off. They appear to be the criminal equivalent of a boilerhouse sales operation, a modus operandi that has not previously been studied by cybercrime researchers.
△ Less
Submitted 19 November, 2019;
originally announced November 2019.
A personal model of trumpery: Deception detection in a real-world high-stakes setting
Authors:
Sophie van der Zee,
Ronald Poppe,
Alice Havrileck,
Aurelien Baillon
Abstract:
Language use reveals information about who we are and how we feel1-3. One of the pioneers in text analysis, Walter Weintraub, manually counted which types of words people used in medical interviews and showed that the frequency of first-person singular pronouns (i.e., I, me, my) was a reliable indicator of depression, with depressed people using I more often than people who are not depressed4. Sev…
▽ More
Language use reveals information about who we are and how we feel1-3. One of the pioneers in text analysis, Walter Weintraub, manually counted which types of words people used in medical interviews and showed that the frequency of first-person singular pronouns (i.e., I, me, my) was a reliable indicator of depression, with depressed people using I more often than people who are not depressed4. Several studies have demonstrated that language use also differs between truthful and deceptive statements5-7, but not all differences are consistent across people and contexts, making prediction difficult8. Here we show how well linguistic deception detection performs at the individual level by develo** a model tailored to a single individual: the current US president. Using tweets fact-checked by an independent third party (Washington Post), we found substantial linguistic differences between factually correct and incorrect tweets and developed a quantitative model based on these differences. Next, we predicted whether out-of-sample tweets were either factually correct or incorrect and achieved a 73% overall accuracy. Our results demonstrate the power of linguistic analysis in real-world deception research when applied at the individual level and provide evidence that factually incorrect tweets are not random mistakes of the sender.
△ Less
Submitted 5 November, 2018;
originally announced November 2018.
