Why digital natives perpetrate smishing in emerging digital economies?

PurposeThis study aims to examine smishing perpetration intention among digital natives and investigates how impulsivity, financial strain, moral justification, technology self-efficacy and betrayal influence perpetration intention.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 300 digital natives through purposive sampling. Partial least squares structural equation modelling tested hypothesised relationships, while fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) identified configurational pathways to smishing intention.FindingsMoral justification emerged as the strongest predictor of perpetration intention, followed by impulsivity, while technology self efficacy exerted a protective effect. Betrayal moderated these relationships by weakening the protective role of technology self efficacy and reducing the influence of impulsivity. fsQCA revealed five configurations involving betrayal, financial strain, impulsivity, moral justification and technology self efficacy, indicating that smishing intention can arise through psychologically distinct pathways.Practical implicationsThe findings suggest that mobile financial service providers, institutions and regulators may incorporate betrayal sensitive workforce management, ethical awareness training focused on cognitive rationalisations and emotional regulation components within technical literacy programs. They further indicate that tailoring intervention strategies to specific perpetrator profiles could provide a more effective basis for prevention than uniform approaches.Originality/valueThis study identifies two psychologically distinct intention-based perpetrator pathways: impulsive opportunistic and grievance-driven and shows that betrayal decouples smishing intention from impulsivity. It introduces the “capable aggrieved” profile, where technological self-efficacy shifts from protective to enabling under high betrayal, within a cognitive-affective-moral framework that combines general strain theory, dual process theory and ethical fading theory to generate propositions for behavioural, longitudinal and intervention research.