New Applications of Self-Control Theory to Computer-Focused Cyber Deviance and Victimization: A Comparison of Cognitive and Behavioral Measures of Self-Control and Test of Peer Cyber Deviance and Gender as Moderators

Abstract

This study tests the effects of behavioral and cognitive measures of self-control on computer-focused cyber deviance and cyber victimization with survey data from 1,036 adult employees. We examine moderating effects of cyber deviant peers and gender in the relationship between self-control, and cyber deviance and victimization. Cognitive and behavioral measures of self-control are negativity associated with cyber deviance, whereas only behavioral self-control predicted reduced cyber victimization. Moderation analyses show that cyber deviant peer associations condition the relationship between self-control, and both cyber deviance and victimization. Gender moderation models reveal no consistent significant effects. The results have implications for the understanding of cognitive predictors of computer-focused cybercrime and victimization, as well as institutional cybercrime prevention policies. Our findings can inform the future integration of self-control and social learning theories in cyberspace.

Keywords

cybercrime deviant peers criminological theory self-control hacking victimization

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

(1999). Code of the streets: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. W.W. Norton.

Antonaccio

Tittle

C. R.

(2008). Morality, self-control, and crime. Criminology, 46, 479–510.

Bachmann

(2010). The risk propensity and rationality of computer hackers. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 4, 643–656.

Bissell

LaSalle

Dal Cin

(2019.). The cost of cybercrime 2019 report. https://www.accenture.com/us-en/insights/security/cost-cybercrime-study

Bossler

A. M.

Burruss

G. W.

(2012). The general theory of crime and computer hacking: Low self-control hackers?. In Cyber Crime: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (pp. 1499–1527). IGI Global.

Bossler

A. M.

Holt

T. J.

(2009). On-line activities, guardianship, and malware infection: An examination of routine activities theory. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 3, 400–420.

Bossler

A. M.

Holt

T. J.

(2010). The effect of self-control on victimization in the cyberworld. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 227–236.

Bossler

A. M.

Holt

T. J.

May

D. C

. (2012). Predicting online harassment victimization among a juvenile population. Youth & Society, 44, 500–523.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2016). Cybercrime: National Computer Security Survey (NCSS). https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=260

10.

Burruss

G. W.

Bossler

A. M.

Holt

T. J.

(2013). Assessing the mediation of a fuller social learning model on low self-control’s influence on software piracy. Crime & Delinquency, 59, 1157–1184.

11.

Burton

V. S.

Cullen

F. T.

Evans

T. D.

Alarid

L. F.

Dunaway

R. G.

(1998). Gender, self-control, and crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35, 123–147.

12.

Choi

(2008). Computer crime victimization and integrated theory: An empirical assessment. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 2, 308–333.

13.

Chui

W. H.

Chan

H. C.

(2016). The gendered analysis of self-control on theft and violent delinquency: An examination of Hong Kong adolescent population. Crime & Delinquency, 62, 1648–1677.

14.

Daigle

L. E.

Cullen

F. T.

Wright

J. P.

(2007). Gender differences in the predictors of juvenile delinquency: Assessing the generality-specificity debate. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 254–286.

15.

De Ridder

D. T. D.

Lensvelt-Mulders

Finkenauer

Stok

F. M.

Baumeister

R. F

. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 76–99.

16.

Donner

C. M.

(2016). The gender gap and cybercrime: An examination of college students online offending. Victims and Offenders, 11, 556–577.

17.

Donner

C. M.

Marcum

C. D.

Jennings

W. G.

Higgins

G. E.

Banfield

(2014). Low self-control and cybercrime: Exploring the utility of the general theory of crime beyond digital piracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 165–172.

18.

Evans

D. T.

Cullen

F. T.

Burton

V. S.

Dunaway

R. G.

Benson

M. L.

(1997). The social consequences of self-control: Testing general theory of crime. Criminology, 35, 475–504.

19.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2005). 2004 IC3 annual report.

20.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2018). 2018 IC3 annual report.

21.

Furnell

(2002). Cybercrime: Vandalizing the information society. Addison-Wesley.

22.

Gottfredson

M. R.

Hirschi

(1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press.

23.

Gove

Hughes

Geerken

(1985). Are uniform crime reports a valid indicator of the index crimes?: An affirmative answer with only minor qualifications. Criminology, 23, 451–501.

24.

Grasmick

H. G.

Tittle

C. R.

Bursik

R. J.

Jr Arneklev

B. J.

(1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 5–29.

25.

Green

D. E.

(1989). Measures of illegal behavior in individual-level deterrence research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 26, 253–275.

26.

Higgins

G. E.

Makin

D. A.

(2004). Does social learning theory condition the effects of low self-control on college students’ software piracy. Journal of Economic Crime Management, 2, 1–22.

27.

Higgins

G. E.

(2005). Can low self-control help with the understanding of the software piracy problem? Deviant Behavior, 26, 1–24.

28.

Higgins

G. E.

Fell

B. D.

Wilson

A. L.

(2006). Digital piracy: Assessing the contributions of an integrated self-control theory and social learning theory using structural equation modeling. Criminal Justice Studies, 19, 3–22.

29.

Higgins

G. E.

(2007). Digital piracy, self-control, and rational choice: An examination of the role of value. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1, 33–55.

30.

Higgins

G. E.

Marcum

C. D.

Freiburger

T. L.

Ricketts

M. L.

(2012). Examining the role of peer influence/self-control on downloading behavior. Deviant Behavior, 33, 412–423.

31.

Higgins

G. E.

Wolfe

S. E.

Ricketts

M. L.

(2009). Digital piracy: A latent class analysis. Social Science Computer Review, 27, 24–40.

32.

Hirschi

Gottfredson

(1993). Commentary: Testing the general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 47–54.

33.

Holt

T. J.

Bossler

A. M.

(2009). Examining the applicability of lifestyle-routine activities theory for cybercrime victimization. Deviant Behavior, 30, 1–25.

34.

Holt

T. J.

Bossler

A. M.

(2014). An assessment of the current state of cybercrime scholarship. Deviant Behavior, 35, 20–40.

35.

Holt

T. J.

Bossler

A. M.

May

D. C

. (2012). Low self-control deviant peer associations and juvenile cyberdeviance. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 378–395.

36.

Holt

T. J.

Burruss

G. W.

Bossler

A. M.

(2010). Social learning and cyber-deviance: Examining the importance of a full social learning model in the virtual world. Journal of Crime and Justice, 33, 31–61.

37.

Holt

T. J.

Fitzgerald

Bossler

A. M.

Chee

(2016). Assessing the risk factors of cyber and mobile phone bullying victimization in a nationally representative sample of Singapore youth. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 60, 598–615.

38.

Holt

T. J.

Navarro

J. N.

Clevenger

(2019). Exploring the moderating role of gender in juvenile hacking behaviors. Crime & Delinquency. doi.org/10.1177/0011128719875697

39.

Holtfreter

Reisig

M. D.

Pratt

T. C.

(2008). Low self-control, routine activities, and fraud victimization. Criminology, 46, 189–220.

40.

C. K. W.

Holt

T. J.

Bossler

A. M.

May

D. C

. (2016). Examining the mediating effects of social learning on the low self-control—Cyberbullying relationship in a youth sample. Deviant Behavior, 37, 126–138.

41.

Longshore

Rand

S. T.

Stein

J. A.

(1996). Self-control in a criminal sample: An examination of construct validity. Criminology, 34, 209–225.

42.

Louderback

E. R.

Antonaccio

(2017). Exploring cognitive decision-making processes, computer-focused cyber deviance involvement and victimization: The role of thoughtfully reflective decision-making. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54, 639–679.

43.

Maimon

Louderback

E. R.

(2019). Cyber-dependent crimes: An interdisciplinary review. Annual Review of Criminology, 2, 191–216.

44.

McGloin

J. M.

Shermer

L. O.

(2009). Self-control and deviant peer network structure. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 46, 35–72.

45.

Meldrum

R. C.

Young

J. T. N.

Weerman

F. M.

(2009). Reconsidering the effect of self-control and delinquent peers: Implications of measurement for theoretical significance. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 46, 353–376.

46.

Mickelberg

Schive

Pollard

(2014). US cybercrime: Rising risks, reduced readiness: Key findings from the 2014 US state of cybercrime survey. PwC.

47.

Moon

Mccluskey

J. D.

Mccluskey

C. P.

(2010). A general theory of crime and computer crime: An empirical test. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 767–772.

48.

Murray

G. F.

Erickson

P. G.

(1987). Cross-sectional vs. longitudinal research: An empirical comparison of projected/subsequent criminality. Social Science Research, 16, 107–118.

49.

Ngo

Paternoster

(2011). Cybercrime victimization: An examination of individual and situational level factors. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 5, 773–793.

50.

Nulty

D. D.

(2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 301–314.

51.

Pogarsky

(2004). Projected offending and contemporaneous rule-violation: Implications for heterotypic continuity. Criminology, 42, 111–135.

52.

Pratt

T. C.

Cullen

F. T.

(2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38, 931–964.

53.

Pratt

T. C.

Turanovic

J. J.

Fox

K. A.

Wright

K. A.

(2014). Self-control and victimization: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 52, 87–116.

54.

Raine

(1993). The psychopathology of crime: Criminal behavior as a clinical disorder. Academic Press.

55.

Schonlau

Fricker

Elliott

. Conducting Research Surveys via Email and the Web. (2002). RAND. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1480.html

56.

Schreck

C. J.

(1999). Criminal victimization and low self-control: An extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 16, 633–654.

57.

Sharkey

Torrats-Espinosa

Takyar

(2017). Community and the crime decline: The causal effect of local nonprofits on violent crime. American Sociological Review, 82(6), 1214–1240.

58.

Skinner

W. F.

Fream

A. M.

(1997). A social learning theory analysis of computer crime among college students. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34, 495–518.

59.

Tittle

C. R.

(1995). Control balance: Toward a general theory of deviance. Roxbury.

60.

Tittle

C. R.

(2004). Refining control balance theory. Theoretical Criminology, 8, 395–428.

61.

Tittle

C. R.

Ward

D. A.

Grasmick

H. G.

(2003a). Gender, age, and crime/deviance: A challenge to self-control theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40, 426–453.

62.

Tittle

C. R.

Ward

D. A.

Grasmick

H. G.

(2003b). Self-control and crime/deviance: Cognitive vs. behavioral measures. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 333–365.

63.

Tittle

C. R.

Botchkovar

E. V.

(2005). Self-control, criminal motivation and deterrence: An investigation using Russian respondents. Criminology, 43, 307–354.

64.

Van Wilsem

. (2013). Hacking and harassment-do they have something in common? Comparing risk factors for online victimization. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 29, 437–453.

65.

Ward

J. T.

Gibson

C. L.

Boman

Leite

W. L.

(2010). Assessing the validity of the retrospective behavioral self-control scale: Is the general theory of crime stronger than the evidence suggests? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 336–357.

66.

Wikström

P. O.

Oberwittler

Treiber

Hardie

(2012). Breaking rules: The social and situational dynamics of young people’s urban crime. Oxford University Press.

67.

Yar

(2005). The novelty of cybercrime: An assessment in light of routine activity theory. European Journal of Criminology, 2, 407–427.