Empowered to Detect: How Vigilance and Financial Literacy Shield Us from the Rising Tide of Financial Frauds

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presented for review, Recognizing Fraud: The Essential Role of Vigilance and Financial Literacy in Mitigating Scam Risks, has a clearly specified problem, presenting the issues in a current and appropriate way for the scientific field. In methodological terms, the author adequately uses the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) model. Some inaccuracies and the need for corrections are noted, which can be taken into account for a better value of the scientific work. For what exactly is this model used, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), as more adequate given that there are a number of other similar models, please justify it.
The abstract lacks key details that can guide readers to better adaptation to the test.
In the introduction, the authors point to limited literature, but have the opportunity to supplement it, as for 2025 in JRFM there are current developments related to risk.
Out of a total of 22 pages, 5 pages are taken up by a bibliographic reference, which casts doubt on the author's contribution and opinion on the analyzed issues.

Author Response

Feedback from reviewers

In methodological terms, the author adequately uses the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) model. Some inaccuracies and the need for corrections are noted, which can be taken into account for a better value of the scientific work. For what exactly is this model used, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), as more adequate given that there are a number of other similar models, please justify it.

Response:

We agree that the use of PLS-SEM should be adequately justified, especially considering the existence of other comparable techniques to investigate the decision-making process. In this regard, we have added a great deal of discussion in Subsection 3.2 to elaborate the rationales for employing PLS-SEM. This justification is provided from conceptual, methodological, and practical standpoints.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

already in the attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Feedback from reviewers

The abstract lacks key details that can guide readers to better adaptation to the test.

Response:

We agree with the reviewers that the abstract should include key details to facilitate readers’ comprehension of the topic being highlighted. Hence, we have incorporated several key elements, including sentences that highlight the identified literature gap, which is an overarching factor underpinning the necessity of our study. We have also elaborated on the roles of vigilance and financial literacy in moderating the relationship between fraud exposure and victimization to help readers catch the core issue being investigated. Furthermore, we have highlighted this study’s limitations and encouraged subsequent research to inquire other factors that affect victimization likelihood.

 

Feedback from reviewers

Self-reported measures may introduce bias, especially for sensitive topics like fraud victimsation

 

Response:

We agree with the reviewers that self-reported measures, particularly of sensitive topics, may introduce bias. Hence, we have add a specific paragraph in Subsection 4.2 to explain that our study mitigates potential biases commonly associated with self-reported data, specifically the common method variance (CMV).

 

Feedback from reviewers

• The connection between SDT and the specific constucts could be more rigorously established
• Financial literacy as formative construct is somewhat disconnected from the main theoretical framework

 

Response:

We agree with these comments, and have accordingly added two paragraphs in Section 2 to elucidate the conceptual link between the Signal Detection Theory (SDT) and the operationalized constructs. In addition, we have revised the Instrument Measurements subsection to further elaborate on each operationalized construct. We not only provide their operational definitions but also the dimensions associated with our constructs.

 

Feedback from reviewers

The discussion could better integrate findings with existing literature & address the low predictive power limitations more thoroughly

 

Response:

We agree with the reviewers that our findings should be more thoroughly integrated with the extant literature. To address this, we have strengthened the discussion section by explicitly connecting our findings with previous research, including highlighting the results and their relevance to the Signal Detection Theory (SDT). Furthermore, we have incorporated this study’s limitations—specifically the low predictive power—into the abstract, introduction, methodology, discussion, and conclusion sections to underscore the sheer possibility that other factors might affect decision-making in the victimization process. This also argues for the need for future and more comprehensive research.

 

Feedback from reviewers

Improve the writing quality

 

Response:

We agree, and have edited the language thoroughly before resubmission.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf