认知老化对老年人电信网络受骗易感性影响的研究综述
Research Review on the Impact of Cognitive Aging on Older Adults’ Susceptibility to Telecommunications Scams
摘要: 随着人口老龄化与电信网络诈骗手段翻新，老年人成为诈骗犯罪的重要目标。认知老化如何影响老年人对电信网络诈骗的易感性，是理解其受害风险的关键。本文采用叙述性综述方法，梳理认知老化与受骗易感性的理论框架与实证证据。结果表明，认知老化并非单一、必然增加受骗风险：分析性决策、实践判断与工作记忆衰退与更高易感性相关；轻度认知衰退阶段风险尤为突出，而中度至重度认知衰退可能因暴露减少而降低风险；载脂蛋白Eε4、β-淀粉样蛋白与TDP-43病理可调节认知与易感性的关系；老年人虽初始依赖面部信任等非诊断性线索，但仍保留规则学习能力。未来研究应区分诈骗类型、认知域与认知状态，采用纵向设计与真实受害者样本，并整合认知、社会与情绪因素。
Abstract: With the accelerating population aging and evolving tactics of telecommunications fraud, older adults have become a major target group for fraud crimes. How cognitive aging influences older adults’ susceptibility to telecommunications fraud is a key issue for understanding their victimization risk. This article adopts a narrative review approach to synthesize the theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence regarding the relationship between cognitive aging and scam susceptibility. Existing research demonstrates that cognitive aging does not uniformly or inevitably increase scam risk: declines in analytical decision-making, practical judgment, and working memory are associated with higher scam susceptibility; the risk is particularly prominent during the mild cognitive impairment stage, whereas moderate-to-severe cognitive decline may reduce exposure due to diminished comprehension and participation capacity; apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele, β-amyloid pathology, and TDP-43 pathology moderate the relationship between cognition and susceptibility; although older adults initially rely more on non-diagnostic cues such as facial trustworthiness, they retain rule-based learning capabilities. Future research should distinguish among fraud types, cognitive domains, and cognitive statuses, employ longitudinal designs with real-victim samples, and integrate cognitive, social, and emotional factors.
文章引用：吴贝贝 (2026). 认知老化对老年人电信网络受骗易感性影响的研究综述. 心理学进展, 16(11), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.12677/ap.2026.1611521

参考文献

[1] 吕子岩, 张婷, 高士方, 等(2024). 徐州市泉山区社区老年人社会决策能力调查及影响因素分析. 中国康复医学杂志, 39(12), 1873-1880.
[2] 杨琰(2022). 有图有真相? 网络谣言如何影响老年人的判断. 心理学进展, 12(10), 3538-3543.
[3] Boyle, P. A., Wang, T., Mottola, G., Stewart, C., Wilson, R. S., Bennett, D. A. et al. (2025). Scam Susceptibility Is Associated with a Markedly Accelerated Onset of Alzheimer’s Disease Dementia. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 21, e14544.
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14544
[4] Burnes, D., Henderson, C. R., Sheppard, C., Zhao, R., Pillemer, K., & Lachs, M. S. (2017). Prevalence of Financial Fraud and Scams among Older Adults in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. American Journal of Public Health, 107, e13-e21.
https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2017.303821
[5] Burton, A., Cooper, C., Dar, A., Mathews, L., & Tripathi, K. (2022). Exploring How, Why and in What Contexts Older Adults Are at Risk of Financial Cybercrime Victimisation: A Realist Review. Experimental Gerontology, 159, Article ID: 111678.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2021.111678
[6] Button, M., Lewis, C., & Tapley, J. (2014). Not a Victimless Crime: The Impact of Fraud on Individual Victims and Their Families. Security Journal, 27, 36-54.
https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2012.11
[7] Carminati, J., Ponsford, J. L., & Gould, K. R. (2026). Associations between Cognitive Functioning and Cyberscam Risk for People with and without Acquired Brain Injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation.
https://doi.org/10.1097/htr.0000000000001166
[8] Castle, E., Eisenberger, N. I., Seeman, T. E., Moons, W. G., Boggero, I. A., Grinblatt, M. S. et al. (2012). Neural and Behavioral Bases of Age Differences in Perceptions of Trust. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 20848-20852.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218518109
[9] Dadà, C. B., Colautti, L., Rosi, A., Cavallini, E., Antonietti, A., & Iannello, P. (2025). Uncovering Vulnerability to Fraud and Scams among Adult Victims in Online and Offline Contexts: A Systematic Review. Computers in Human Behavior, 172, Article ID: 108734.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108734
[10] Ebner, N. C., Ellis, D. M., Lin, T., Rocha, H. A., Yang, H., Dommaraju, S. et al. (2020). Uncovering Susceptibility Risk to Online Deception in Aging. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 75, 522-533.
https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gby036
[11] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
[12] Fenton, L., Weissberger, G. H., Boyle, P. A., Mosqueda, L., Yassine, H. N., Nguyen, A. L. et al. (2022). Cognitive and Neuroimaging Correlates of Financial Exploitation Vulnerability in Older Adults without Dementia: Implications for Early Detection of Alzheimer’s Disease. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 140, Article ID: 104773.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104773
[13] Fischer, P., Lea, S. E. G., & Evans, K. M. (2013). Why Do Individuals Respond to Fraudulent Scam Communications and Lose Money? The Psychological Determinants of Scam Compliance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 2060-2072.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12158
[14] Gavett, B. E., Zhao, R., John, S. E., Bussell, C. A., Roberts, J. R., & Yue, C. (2017). Phishing Suspiciousness in Older and Younger Adults: The Role of Executive Functioning. PLOS ONE, 12, e0171620.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171620
[15] Grilli, M. D., McVeigh, K. S., Hakim, Z. M., Wank, A. A., Getz, S. J., Levin, B. E. et al. (2021). Is This Phishing? Older Age Is Associated with Greater Difficulty Discriminating between Safe and Malicious Emails. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76, 1711-1715.
https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa228
[16] James, B. D., Boyle, P. A., & Bennett, D. A. (2014). Correlates of Susceptibility to Scams in Older Adults without Dementia. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 26, 107-122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2013.821809
[17] Judges, R. A., Gallant, S. N., Yang, L., & Lee, K. (2017). The Role of Cognition, Personality, and Trust in Fraud Victimization in Older Adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 588.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00588
[18] Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment (pp. 49-81). Cambridge University Press.
[19] Kapasi, A., Yu, L., Stewart, C., Schneider, J. A., Bennett, D. A., & Boyle, P. A. (2021). Association of Amyloid-β Pathology with Decision Making and Scam Susceptibility. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 83, 879-887.
https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-210356
[20] Kemp, S., & Erades Pérez, N. (2023). Consumer Fraud against Older Adults in Digital Society: Examining Victimization and Its Impact. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20, Article 5404.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20075404
[21] Kircanski, K., Notthoff, N., DeLiema, M., Samanez-Larkin, G. R., Shadel, D., Mottola, G. et al. (2018). Emotional Arousal May Increase Susceptibility to Fraud in Older and Younger Adults. Psychology and Aging, 33, 325-337.
https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000228
[22] Koestner, B. P., Hedgcock, W., Halfmann, K., & Denburg, N. L. (2016). The Role of the Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex in Purchase Intent among Older Adults. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 8, Article 189.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00189
[23] Lacey, D., Campbell, A., Goode, S., & Ridout, B. (2024). The Cyberpsychology of Deception: A Mini Review of the Psychological Factors Influencing Scam Compliance. Annual Review of CyberTherapy and Telemedicine, 22, 34-41.
[24] Langenderfer, J., & Shimp, T. A. (2001). Consumer Vulnerability to Scams, Swindles, and Fraud: A New Theory of Visceral Influences on Persuasion. Psychology & Marketing, 18, 763-783.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.1029
[25] Liao, S., Chen, J., Chen, L., Chen, C., Zhang, H., & Zhang, X. (2025). Rule-Based Learning among Older Adults: Overcoming Prior Beliefs for Better Trust-Related Decisions. Psychology and Aging, 40, 449-461.
https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000897
[26] Norris, G., Brookes, A., & Dowell, D. (2019). The Psychology of Internet Fraud Victimisation: A Systematic Review. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 34, 231-245.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-019-09334-5
[27] Pehlivanoglu, D., Shoenfelt, A., Hakim, Z., Heemskerk, A., Zhen, J., Mosqueda, M. et al. (2024). Phishing Vulnerability Compounded by Older Age, Apolipoprotein E E4 Genotype, and Lower Cognition. PNAS Nexus, 3, pgae296.
https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae296
[28] Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. Springer-Verlag.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1
[29] Sarno, D. M., Lewis, J. E., Bohil, C. J., & Neider, M. B. (2020). Which Phish Is on the Hook? Phishing Vulnerability for Older versus Younger Adults. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 62, 704-717.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819855570
[30] Sergeyev, N., Heller-Wight, A., Nester Rooney, C., Paré, N., Krishnan, A., Ellis, D. G. et al. (2026). Practical Judgment in Aging: Examining Behavioral Vulnerabilities and Neurobiological Correlates. Frontiers in Psychology, 17, Article 1709372.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1709372
[31] Shang, Y., Wu, Z., Du, X., Jiang, Y., Ma, B., & Chi, M. (2022). The Psychology of the Internet Fraud Victimization of Older Adults: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 912242.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.912242
[32] Shao, J., Zhang, Q., Ren, Y., Li, X., & Lin, T. (2019). Why Are Older Adults Victims of Fraud? Current Knowledge and Prospects Regarding Older Adults’ Vulnerability to Fraud. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 31, 225-243.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2019.1625842
[33] Ueno, D., Daiku, Y., Eguchi, Y., Iwata, M., Amano, S., Ayani, N. et al. (2021). Mild Cognitive Decline Is a Risk Factor for Scam Vulnerability in Older Adults. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, Article 685451.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.685451
[34] Wang, S., Hakim, Z., Pehlivanoglu, D., Ebner, N. C., Grilli, M. D., & Wilson, R. C. (2026). Decomposing Trust-Related Decision Making: Dimensionality and Predictability of Phishing Susceptibility in an Adult Lifespan Sample. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 81, gbag090.
https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbag090
[35] Weissberger, G. H., Yassine, H. N., Axelrod, J., Fenton, L., Noriega-Makarskyy, D. T., Molinare, C. et al. (2025). Cognitive Functioning Predicts Vulnerability to Financial Exploitation in APOE E4 Carriers. International Psychogeriatrics.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inpsyc.2025.100162
[36] Whitty, M. T. (2013). The Scammers Persuasive Techniques Model: Development of a Stage Model to Explain the Online Dating Romance Scam. British Journal of Criminology, 53, 665-684.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azt009
[37] Whitty, M. T. (2025). A Systematic Literature Review of Profiling Victims of Cyber Scams: Setting up a Framework for Future Research. Cogent Social Sciences, 11, Article ID: 2563781.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2025.2563781
[38] 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.2017.03.002
[39] Wilson, R. S., Yu, L., Stewart, C. C., Bennett, D. A., & Boyle, P. A. (2023). Change in Decision-Making Analysis and Preferences in Old Age. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 78, 1659-1667.
https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbad037
[40] Xiang, H., Zhou, J., & Xie, B. (2020). Understanding Older Adults’ Vulnerability and Reactions to Telecommunication Fraud: The Effects of Personality and Cognition. In Q. Gao, & J. Zhou (Eds.), Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Technology and Society (pp. 351-363). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50232-4_25
[41] Yu, L., Mottola, G., Kieffer, C. N., Mascio, R., Valdes, O., Bennett, D. A. et al. (2023). Vulnerability of Older Adults to Government Impersonation Scams. JAMA Network Open, 6, e2335319.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.35319