Learn › Online Safety & Digital Citizenship

Scams that target children: a working typology

Evidence grade: practitioner-grounded typology over thin victimization data. Adult scam losses are well counted (ACCC Scamwatch, FTC); child-targeted scams are systematically under-measured — children rarely report, losses are small-per-incident, and much of it happens inside game economies regulators don't tally. The typology below is assembled from regulator warnings, platform enforcement reports, and safety-practitioner literature, and it's organized to teach, not to catalogue.

Children are not scammed the way adults are — nobody pitches a nine-year-old a fake investment. They are scammed through what they value: game currency, accounts, cosmetic items, follower counts, and friendship. The inventory of specific scams churns weekly; the manipulation techniques underneath churn barely at all — which is why this page sorts by technique. A child who can name the trick generalizes; a child taught last month's scam list is defended against last month (the prebunking logic, applied to pocket-money crime).

The families, by underlying technique

Too-good-to-be-true (the free-currency family). "Free Robux / V-Bucks / skins — just log in here" is the child-scam workhorse: a fake generator or giveaway site harvesting the account credentials that are the loot. The technique is the oldest one there is; the tell — nobody gives away money for nothing — is teachable at seven, and the phishing mechanics are the same ones Owl Post drills.

Fake urgency (the account-threat family). "Your account will be deleted in 24 hours — verify now": urgency exists to prevent exactly the pause-and-check reflex the curriculum installs. Platforms don't operate this way; the countdown is the fingerprint.

Impersonation (the pretend-friend family). Fake influencer accounts running "giveaways," compromised friend accounts asking for items or codes ("it's me, just lend me your login"), and admin/moderator impostors "needing your password to fix something" — the last with the cleanest counter-rule in all of safety teaching: real staff never ask for your password, ever (passwords page).

Unfair exchange (the trade-scam family). In-game trades that vanish mid-swap, "I'll pay you after," middleman "services" — children's first contract disputes, run in economies with no small-claims court. The durable lesson is less any single scam than the concept of irreversibility: some handovers can't be undone, so the checking happens before (the same shape as sending).

The gift that obligates. Unrequested gifts, currency, or intense flattery from an online contact — sometimes a soft scam, and sometimes the opening move of something more serious; either way, the teachable norm is that unearned generosity from strangers is a question mark, and telling an adult about it is routine, not tattling.

What the evidence doesn't say

It doesn't quantify child victimization — under-reporting is structural (embarrassment, fear of losing device privileges, "it was only skins"); treat prevalence claims with suspicion, including ours.
It doesn't say children are uniquely gullible — the adult loss statistics forbid that conclusion; children are differently targeted, with less experience of the specific tricks.
It doesn't support scaring children off games — the scams live where children live; the response is skill in place, not exile (screen-time page).

In the classroom

Teach the five techniques, not the fifty scams — free-for-nothing, countdown pressure, pretend-identity, irreversible trades, obligating gifts; have children sort fresh examples into the families.
Install the pause norm: any offer with a timer earns a wait — urgency is the tell, and practicing the pause defuses it.
Rehearse "staff never ask for passwords" until it's reflexive.
De-shame reporting — the child who admits being scammed and tells someone is the success story; the one who hides it is the target who gets hit twice (reporting page).

How Wiz Kids applies this

The safety strand runs these as playable encounters in the simulated apps: too-good-to-be-true offers in the Oracle's web and Owl Post inbox, countdown-pressure popups in the browser realm (consent gates are playable), impostor "admin" messages with the never-ask-passwords rule as the win condition — each technique met in weakened, named form before the live version arrives with real stakes.

References

ACCC. Targeting Scams reports (Scamwatch, annual) — the loss-and-technique data, and its child-shaped gap.
eSafety Commissioner — practitioner guidance on scams and unwanted contact affecting Australian children.
Whitty, M. T. (2013–2019). The scammers persuasive techniques literature — urgency, authority, visceral appeal as stable technique families.
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019). Palgrave Communications, 5 — technique-level inoculation, the pedagogical frame this typology feeds.

© Glu IO Pty. Ltd. — Wiz Kids (wiz.kids). Link freely; republication requires permission — see terms. Found an error in our reading of the research? We correct fast: tell any teacher piloting Wiz Kids.