Demographics are a useful tool in scam prevention by providing authorities with a deeper understanding of where scams are causing the most harm based on personal dimensions such as age, gender and location. This information can help inform what areas of the community are being most affected by scams and thereby inform possible targeted prevention strategies.
In 2013 the ACCC reviewed its collection of scams data and made several improvements to the way in which information is gathered, including demographics data. Previously the ACCC had a narrower field of demographic data collection covering age and location.
As of January 2014 individuals reporting scams activity to the ACCC have the option to self-identify personal information including, their age, gender, whether they were a small business, or from a disadvantaged or vulnerable background.
This additional data enables the ACCC to better understand where scams are being targeted, or if particular community groups display vulnerabilities that increase their susceptibility to scams.
A snapshot of what the ACCC has identified on scams demographics for 2014 is below and includes a summary of contacts by age, location and gender. Further demographic data is provided for each of the top ten scams in chapter 3.
Age range
The following information is a summary of observations about the age range of people who reported scams activity to the ACCC. The increase in demographic data in 2014 resulted in 41 384 contacts providing age related data compared with only 2152 in 2013.
Table 4 outlines scam contacts to the ACCC where individuals self-identified their age. The data demonstrates that young people were not overrepresented in scam contacts to the ACCC, with people aged under 25 continuing to comprise around 8 per cent of contacts where age range was indicated.
All other age categories were fairly evenly distributed with each category contributing approximately 18 per cent of scam contacts where age was provided.
Table 4 also provides a comparison of scam conversion rates by age range. The conversion rate is the percentage of scam contacts that report a loss. A low conversion rate would indicate a high probability that the scam is recognisable while a high conversion rate suggests that a scam is more likely to result in the loss of money.
In 2014 individuals under 18 years were less likely to report a scam to the ACCC, yet had the highest conversion rate of all groups at 29 per cent. Progressing through the spectrum the conversion rate diminishes to just 11 per cent for those aged 65 and over and suggests reporting the loss of money becomes less important for older age groups.
Table 4: Age ranges provided by consumers reporting scams to the ACCC in 2014
Age range
|
No.
|
% total
|
Reporting loss
|
Reporting no loss
|
Conversion rate
|
Under 18
|
393
|
1%
|
114
|
279
|
29%
|
18–24
|
3 268
|
8%
|
883
|
2 385
|
27%
|
25–34
|
7 421
|
18%
|
1 638
|
5 783
|
22%
|
35–44
|
7 393
|
18%
|
1 326
|
6 067
|
18%
|
45–54
|
7 989
|
19%
|
1 295
|
6 694
|
16%
|
55–64
|
7 484
|
18%
|
993
|
6 491
|
13%
|
65 and over
|
7 436
|
18%
|
800
|
6 636
|
11%
|
Total
|
41 384
|
100%
|
7 049
|
34 335
|
17%
|
The ACCC also collects data on the geographic location of people reporting scams.
Figure 5 shows a comparison of scam contacts received by the ACCC in 2014 from within Australia. New South Wales again received the greatest number of scam reports followed by Queensland and Victoria. Contacts for the remaining states and territories were below 10 per cent.
In addition to the above figures the ACCC received 1432 scam contacts from people based overseas, and a further 324 where their location was not provided, representing less than 2 per cent of total contacts.
Figure 5: Scam contacts’ location by state and territory 2014
Table 5 provides a comparison of scam contact levels and financial losses against the distribution of the Australian population as a whole. Contact levels and associated losses reported to the ACCC were largely consistent with the percentage of the Australian population by state and territory.
A breakdown of scam categories by state and territory is provided at appendix 2.
Table 5: Scam contacts’ location by state and territory 2014
State
|
Percentage of total contacts that were based in Australia
|
Percentage of reported loss where contacts were based in Australia
|
Percentage of Australian Population*
|
NSW
|
31%
|
30%
|
32%
|
QLD
|
24%
|
24%
|
20%
|
VIC
|
22%
|
27%
|
25%
|
WA
|
9%
|
10%
|
11%
|
SA
|
8%
|
4%
|
7%
|
ACT
|
3%
|
3%
|
2%
|
TAS
|
3%
|
2%
|
2%
|
NT
|
1%
|
0.5%
|
1%
|
Total
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
* Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Australian Demographic Statistics Jun 2014, released Dec. 2014.
Share with your friends: |