Police warn students about check and wire fraud

To check this alert, SuperGrok Heavy 4.5 (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  25 of 25 passes marked Source present and 0 absent. "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is named as the agency that received the fraud reports.

  Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is named as the agency that received the fraud reports.
  2. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named issuing agency.
  3. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the police agency that issued the advisory.
  4. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named agency that received the reports.
  5. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the police agency sending the advisory.
  6. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is named as the reporting authority.
  7. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named agency, and "Public Safety" is named again later.
  8. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is named, and the text also cites "Public Safety."
  9. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" identifies the police agency, and "Public Safety" is named too.
  10. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the police agency issuing the advisory.
  11. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the issuing authority.
  12. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" and "Public Safety" identify the issuing authorities.
  13. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" and later "Public Safety" identify the issuing authority.
  14. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the issuing authority.
  15. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named agency issuing the fraud advisory.
  16. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named agency receiving the reports.
  17. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is a named issuing agency, and "Public Safety" is named again later.
  18. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named agency that received the reports.
  19. present: The opener names "Grand Canyon University Police Department", and the close names "Public Safety" and the "FBI".
  20. present: It identifies "Grand Canyon University Police Department" and later "Public Safety" and the "FBI".
  21. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the authority sending the advisory.
  22. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is the named issuing agency.
  23. present: The opener "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the issuing police authority.
  24. present: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is named, and "Public Safety" is named again for reports.
  25. present: It names "Grand Canyon University Police Department" and later "Public Safety" as authorities.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  25 of 25 passes marked Hazard present and 0 absent. "fraudulent activity" and later "suspected fraud" name a specific crime rather than a generic incident.

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: "fraudulent activity" and later "suspected fraud" name a specific crime rather than a generic incident.
  2. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" names fraud as the specific threat.
  3. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" names fraud, and "suspected fraud" repeats that specific crime.
  4. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" states fraud as the specific threat.
  5. present: "fraudulent activity" and later "suspected fraud" name the specific crime.
  6. present: "fraudulent activity" specifies the threat as fraud, not a generic incident.
  7. present: "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" name the crime, which is more specific than "incident".
  8. present: "Fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" name a specific crime rather than a vague incident.
  9. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" names fraud as the specific threat.
  10. present: "Fraudulent activity targeting students" names fraud as the specific threat.
  11. present: "fraudulent activity" is a specific threat, unlike a generic incident.
  12. present: "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" name a specific crime, not a generic incident.
  13. present: "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" name a specific crime, not a generic emergency.
  14. present: "Fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" name the specific threat.
  15. present: The threat is "fraudulent activity", later called "suspected fraud", which is a specific crime.
  16. present: "fraudulent activity" and later "suspected fraud" name the threat.
  17. present: "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" specify the crime instead of calling it a generic incident.
  18. present: It specifies "fraudulent activity" and later "suspected fraud", not a generic incident.
  19. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" states the specific threat.
  20. present: "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" name a specific crime, not a vague incident.
  21. present: "Fraudulent activity" is a specific threat, not a generic incident or situation.
  22. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" names the fraud threat.
  23. present: "fraudulent activity targeting students" identifies fraud as the threat.
  24. present: "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" specify the crime instead of a vague situation.
  25. present: It names "fraudulent activity" and "suspected fraud" as the specific threat.
• Locationabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  0 of 25 passes marked Location present and 25 absent. "targeting students" does not say where, and "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is an agency name, not a place.

  Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: "targeting students" does not say where, and "Grand Canyon University Police Department" is an agency name, not a place.
  2. absent: No building, street, campus, or "area" is given as the place of the fraud.
  3. absent: No building, street, or campus is given, and "Grand Canyon University" appears only in the police department's name.
  4. absent: It says fraud is "targeting students" but never names a building, campus, street, or area.
  5. absent: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" identifies the sender, not where the fraud happened.
  6. absent: It never gives a building, street, campus, or other place where the fraud is occurring.
  7. absent: The text never gives a building, street, or "campus", and "Grand Canyon University" only names the police department.
  8. absent: The message never says campus, a building, a street, or any other place where the fraud is occurring.
  9. absent: The message never says where the fraud is happening; no campus, building, street, or area is named.
  10. absent: The advisory never gives a building, street, campus, or other place where the fraud occurs.
  11. absent: The text never gives a building, street, campus, or other place for the fraud.
  12. absent: No building, street, campus, or other place is given, and only students are mentioned as targets.
  13. absent: No building, street, campus, or other place is given, only that reports involve "students".
  14. absent: "Targeting students" names people, not a campus, building, street, or area.
  15. absent: It says the activity is "targeting students" but gives no campus, building, street, or area.
  16. absent: "targeting students" identifies who, not a campus, building, street, or area.
  17. absent: The advisory never gives a building, street, campus, or area; students are the targets, not a place.
  18. absent: No building, street, campus, or other place is given; the university name only labels the police department.
  19. absent: "targeting students" names the victims, but no building, street, campus, or other place is stated.
  20. absent: "targeting students" names the victims, but no campus, building, street, or "area" is given.
  21. absent: The advisory never says where the fraud is occurring, on campus or elsewhere.
  22. absent: No building, street, campus, or other place is given for the fraud.
  23. absent: "Grand Canyon University Police Department" names the sender, not a campus, street, or other place of the fraud.
  24. absent: "Grand Canyon University" only labels the "Police Department", with no campus, street, or area for the fraud.
  25. absent: It says the activity is "targeting students" but gives no campus, building, street, or area.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  25 of 25 passes marked Guidance present and 0 absent. Recipients are told "do not send money", "do not respond", and to "Report the suspected fraud".

  The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Recipients are told "do not send money", "do not respond", and to "Report the suspected fraud".
  2. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  3. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  4. present: "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information" are instructions.
  5. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  6. present: It instructs recipients: "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  7. present: Recipients are told "do not send money", "do not respond", and to "Report the suspected fraud".
  8. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information."
  9. present: Recipients are told "do not send money", "do not respond", and to "Report the suspected fraud".
  10. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  11. present: Readers are told "do not send money" and not to "provide personal or financial information".
  12. present: It instructs people not to "send money" and not to "provide personal or financial information".
  13. present: It directs readers to "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  14. present: "Do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information" are protective instructions.
  15. present: Instructions include "do not send money", "do not respond", and "Report the suspected fraud".
  16. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  17. present: It instructs people to "do not send money", "do not respond", and not to give out "personal or financial information".
  18. present: It directs readers to "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  19. present: It instructs people to "do not send money", "do not respond", and "Report the suspected fraud".
  20. present: It instructs people to "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  21. present: Recipients are told "do not respond or provide personal or financial information" and to report it.
  22. present: Readers are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  23. present: Recipients are told "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
  24. present: It says "do not send money", "do not respond", and "Report the suspected fraud".
  25. present: It instructs recipients "do not send money" and "do not respond or provide personal or financial information".
• Timeabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  0 of 25 passes marked Time present and 25 absent. "has received numerous reports" has no date, clock time, "now", "today", or "until" phrase.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: "has received numerous reports" has no date, clock time, "now", "today", or "until" phrase.
  2. absent: No date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" condition appears.
  3. absent: "has received numerous reports" has no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until further notice".
  4. absent: The phrase "has received numerous reports" has no date, clock time, or recency cue.
  5. absent: "has received numerous reports" never adds a date or clock time.
  6. absent: No clock time, date, "today", "now", or "until" phrase marks when the reports occurred.
  7. absent: "has received numerous reports" does not include a date, a clock time, "today", "now", or "ongoing".
  8. absent: No date, clock time, "today," "now," or "until" phrase indicates when the reports occurred.
  9. absent: No date, clock time, "today", "now", "immediately", or "until" phrase appears in the advisory.
  10. absent: No date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" condition is included.
  11. absent: No date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" wording appears.
  12. absent: No clock time, date, "today", "now", or "until" condition says when the fraud is happening.
  13. absent: "has received numerous reports" gives no date, clock time, "today", or "until" window.
  14. absent: "Has received numerous reports" includes no date, clock time, "now", "today", or "until".
  15. absent: No date, clock time, "now", "today", or "until" condition tells when the reports occurred.
  16. absent: "has received numerous reports" carries no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" condition.
  17. absent: The advisory has no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" language.
  18. absent: "has received numerous reports" has no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" marker.
  19. absent: Reports are described as "numerous" with no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" phrase.
  20. absent: "has received numerous reports" gives no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until".
  21. absent: "Has received numerous reports" gives no date, clock time, "today", or "now".
  22. absent: The advisory has no date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" wording.
  23. absent: "has received numerous reports" is not a date, a clock time, "today", "now", or "until".
  24. absent: "has received numerous reports" never adds a date, a clock time, "today", or "now".
  25. absent: No date, clock time, "today", "now", or "until" duration is given.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  0 of 25 passes marked Impact present and 25 absent. Talk of "requests for money" and "personal information" describes the scam, not a stated loss, injury, or severity.

  What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: Talk of "requests for money" and "personal information" describes the scam, not a stated loss, injury, or severity.
  2. absent: Asking for "money" and "banking information" describes the fraud and does not state a further consequence or severity.
  3. absent: "requests for money, checks, banking information" describe the fraud method, not a stated loss, injury, or danger.
  4. absent: Requests "for money, checks, banking information" describe the scheme, but no loss, harm, or severity is stated.
  5. absent: "requests for money" describes the scheme, but the text never states loss, harm, or danger.
  6. absent: Describing requests for money names the scam method but does not state a consequence such as financial loss or danger.
  7. absent: Requests "for money" describe the scam, but the text never states loss, injury, or another consequence.
  8. absent: Listing requests for money and banking information does not itself state loss, injury, or severity.
  9. absent: The advisory names fraud and money requests but never states a loss, injury, or other harm.
  10. absent: The text names "fraudulent activity" and scam tactics but does not state loss, harm, or danger.
  11. absent: The advisory names fraud but does not state loss, injury, or severity.
  12. absent: Naming "fraudulent activity" and money requests does not itself state loss, danger, or severity.
  13. absent: "fraudulent activity" is named, but no consequence such as financial loss is stated.
  14. absent: Requests "for money" describe the fraud tactic, not a stated loss, danger, or severity.
  15. absent: "fraudulent activity" names the crime, but the text never states loss, danger, or another consequence.
  16. absent: "fraudulent activity" names the scheme, but no words state loss, danger, or another consequence.
  17. absent: Describing requests for "money" and "banking information" restates the fraud, without saying anyone was harmed or how severe the loss could be.
  18. absent: Requests for "money" and "personal information" describe the fraud itself and do not state a consequence or severity.
  19. absent: Scam methods such as "checks" and "wire transfers" detail the hazard, not a stated harm like lost funds or injury.
  20. absent: "fraudulent activity" and "requests for money" name the scheme, not a stated loss, harm, or danger.
  21. absent: Describing requests for money names the scam itself and states no separate consequence or severity.
  22. absent: It describes fraud tactics but never states a loss, injury, or other consequence.
  23. absent: Talk of "requests for money" and "personal information" describes the scheme, not a stated loss or injury.
  24. absent: "requests for money" and "personal information" are mentioned, but no loss, harm, or danger is stated.
  25. absent: Describing requests for "money" and "banking information" explains the fraud, but it never states a consequence or severity.