Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information (한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지)

Korean Society of Computer Information (한국컴퓨터정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Crowdfunding Scams: The Profiles and Language of Deceivers

  • Received : 2018.02.07
  • Accepted : 2018.03.09
  • Published : 2018.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a model to detect crowdfunding scams, which have been reportedly occurring over the last several years, based on their project information and linguistic features. To this end, we first collect and analyze crowdfunding scam projects, and then reveal which specific project-related information and linguistic features are particularly useful in distinguishing scam projects from non-scams. Our proposed model built with the selected features and Random Forest machine learning algorithm can successfully detect scam campaigns with 84.46% accuracy.

Keywords

References

  1. Statista, https://www.statista.com/statistics/310218/total-kickstarter-funding/
  2. Symbid, http://blog.symbid.com/2015/trends/crowdfund ing-industry-overtakes-venture-capital-and-angel-in vesting/
  3. Cumming, Douglas, Gael Leboeuf, and Armin Schwien bacher. "Crowdfunding models: Keep-it-all vs. all-ornothing." 2015.
  4. Kickstarter, https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats?ref =global-footer
  5. Mollick, Ethan. "The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study." Journal of business venturing, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1-16, Jan. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.06.005
  6. Suspicious activity report, https://www.crowdfundin sider.com/2015/10/75936-us-treasury-publishes-sus picious-activity-report-highlighting-crowdfunding-sc ams-frauds/
  7. Ho, Tina H. "Social purpose corporations: The next targets for greenwashing practices and crowdfunding scams." Seattle J. Soc. Just., Vol. 13, pp. 935, Sep. 2015.
  8. Xu, Jennifer, Dongyu Chen, and Michael Chau. "Identifying features for detecting fraudulent loan requests on P2P platforms." IEEE Intelligence and Security Informatics, pp. 79-84, Sep. 2016.
  9. CNN Kickstarter scam project, http://money.cnn.com /2013/06/17/technology/kickstarter-scam-kobe-jerky
  10. Reddit, https://reddit.com/
  11. Kickscammed, http://kickscammed.com/
  12. Facebook group, https://www.facebook.com/groups/1380253912299062/
  13. Etter, Vincent, Matthias Grossglauser, and Patrick Thiran. "Launch hard or go home!: predicting the success of kickstarter campaigns." Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Online social networks, pp. 177-182, Oct. 2013.
  14. Mollick, E. "The dynamics of crowdfunding: Deter minants of success and failure." Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY, 2014.
  15. Greenberg, Michael D., et al. "Crowdfunding support tools: predicting success & failure." CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1815-1820, 2013.
  16. Mitra, Tanushree, and Eric Gilbert. "The language that gets people to give: Phrases that predict success on kickstarter." Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, pp. 49-61, 2014.
  17. Xu, Anbang, et al. "Show me the money!: An analysis of project updates during crowdfunding campaigns." Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 591-600, 2014.
  18. Zvilichovsky, David, Yael Inbar, and Ohad Barzilay. "Playing both sides of the market: Success and reciprocity on crowdfunding platforms." 2015.
  19. An, Jisun, Daniele Quercia, and Jon Crowcroft. "Recommending investors for crowdfunding projects." Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on WWW, pp. 261-270, 2014.
  20. Kim, Yongsung, et al. "Understanding trust amid delays in crowdfunding." 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 2017.
  21. Xiao, Bo, and Izak Benbasat. "Product-related deception in e-commerce: a theoretical perspective." Mis Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 169-196, 2011. https://doi.org/10.2307/23043494
  22. Burgoon, Judee K., et al. "Detecting deception through linguistic analysis." International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics, pp. 91-101, 2003.
  23. Humpherys, Sean L., et al. "Identification of fraudulent financial statements using linguistic credibility analysis." Decision Support Systems, Vol. 50, No. 3, pp. 585-594, Feb. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.08.009
  24. Keila, Parambir S., and D. B. Skillicorn. "Detecting unusual and deceptive communication in email." Centers for Advanced Studies Conference, pp. 17-20, 2005.
  25. Toma, Catalina L., and Jeffrey T. Hancock. "Reading between the lines: linguistic cues to deception in online dating profiles." Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, pp. 5-8, 2010.
  26. Pennebaker, James W., Matthias R. Mehl, and Kate G. Niederhoffer. "Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves." Annual review of psychology, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 547-577, Feb. 2003 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
  27. Shafqat, Wafa, et al. "The language of deceivers: Linguistic features of crowdfunding scams." WWW, pp. 99-100, 2016.
  28. Cumming, Douglas J., et al. "Disentangling crowdfunding from fraudfunding." 2016.
  29. Siering, Michael, Jascha-Alexander Koch, and Amit V. Deokar. "Detecting fraudulent behavior on crowdfunding platforms: The role of linguistic and content-based cues in static and dynamic contexts." Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 421-455, Oct. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2016.1205930
  30. Manning, Christopher, et al. "The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit." Proceedings of 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: system demonstrations, pp. 55-60, 2014.
  31. Gunning, Robert. "The technique of clear writing." 1952.
  32. Outgrow, https://outgrow.me/
  33. Zhou, Lina, et al. "Automating linguistics-based cues for detecting deception in text-based asynchronous computer-mediated communications." Group decision and negotiation, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 81-106, Jan. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000011944.62889.6f
  34. Smith, Edgar A., and R. J. Senter. "Automated readability index." AMRL-TR. Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories (US), pp. 1-14, May. 1967
  35. Coleman, Meri, and Ta Lin Liau. "A computer readability formula designed for machine scoring." Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 283, Apr. 1975 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076540
  36. Flesch, Rudolph. "A new readability yardstick." Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 221, Jun. 1948. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057532
  37. Hall, Mark Andrew. "Correlation-based feature selection for machine learning." 1998.
  38. Liu, Huan, and Rudy Setiono. "A probabilistic approach to feature selection-a filter solution." 13th International Conference on Machine Learning, Vol. 96, pp. 319-327, Apr. 1996.
  39. De Winter, Joost CF. "Using the Student's t-test with extremely small sample sizes." Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, Vol. 18, No. 10, Jul. 2013.
  40. Beier, Michael, and Kerstin Wagner. "Crowdfunding Success of Tourism Projects-Evidence from Switzer land." 2014.
  41. Hauch, Valerie, et al. "Are computers effective lie detectors? A meta-analysis of linguistic cues to deception." Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 19, 2015
  42. Hall, Mark, et al. "The WEKA data mining software: an update." ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 10-18, Jun. 2019 https://doi.org/10.1145/1656274.1656278