The threat of formal sanctions is the criminal justice system’s primary tool to discourage online and offline deviant behavior. Yet, scholars have expressed strong concerns about the effectiveness of formal sanctions to deter cybercrime. Even more surprising is the sparsity of deterrence research in the cybercrime literature. This study examined the effects of perceived formal and informal sanctions on digital piracy, computer hacking, and online harassment in a large American college sample. Perceived formal sanctions was negatively correlated with software piracy, media piracy, password cracking, accessing accounts, sending mean messages privately online, and posting mean messages. Higher levels of perceived formal sanctions did not significantly predict any form of cybercrime, however, when controlling for informal sanctions and deviant peer associations. The implications of the findings for our ability to deter deviant behavior in cyberspace are explored.
AkersR. L. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Northeastern University Press.
2.
ApelR. (2012). Sanctions, perceptions, and crime: Implications for criminal deterrence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 29, 67–101.
3.
BachmannM. (2010). The risk propensity and rationality of computer hackers. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 4, 643–656.
4.
BarlettC.CoyneS. M. (2014). A meta-analysis of sex differences in cyber-bullying behavior: The moderating role of age. Aggressive Behavior, 40, 474–488.
5.
BeccariaC. (1963). On crimes and punishment (PaolucciH., Trans.). Bobbs-Merrill. (Original work published 1764)
6.
BenthamJ. (1973). Political thought. Barnes and Noble. (Original work published 1789)
7.
BerenblumT.Weulen KranenbargM.MaimonD. (2019). Out of control online? A combined examination of peer-offending and perceived formal and informal social control in relation to system-trespassing. Journal of Crime and Justice, 42, 616–631.
8.
BosslerA. M. (2017). Need for debate on the implications of honeypot data for restrictive deterrence policies in cyberspace. Criminology & Public Policy, 16, 681–688.
9.
BosslerA. M. (2019). Perceived formal and informal sanctions on the willingness to commit cyber attacks against domestic and foreign targets. Journal of Crime and Justice, 42, 599–615.
10.
BosslerA. M. (2020). Cybercrime legislation in the United States. In HoltT. J.BosslerA. M. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of international cybercrime and cyberdeviance (pp. 257–280). Palgrave Macmillan.
11.
BosslerA. M.BurrussG. W. (2011). The general theory of crime and computer hacking: Low self-control hackers? In HoltT. J.SchellB. H. (Eds.), Corporate hacking and technology-driven crime: Social dynamics and implications (pp. 38–67). ISI Global.
12.
BrennerS. W. (2007). “At light speed”: Attribution and response to cybercrime/terrorism/warfare. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97, 379–475.
13.
BrennerS. W. (2010). Cybercrime: Criminal threats from cyberspace. ABC-CLIO.
14.
Brunton-SmithI.McCarthyD. J. (2016). Explaining young people’s involvement in online piracy: An empirical assessment using the offending crime and justice survey in England and Wales. Victims & Offenders, 11, 509–533.
15.
DonnerC. M. (2016). The gender gap and cybercrime: An examination of college students’ online offending. Victims & Offenders, 11, 556–577.
16.
DupontB. (2019). Enhancing the effectiveness of cybercrime prevention through policy monitoring. Journal of Crime and Justice, 42, 500–515.
17.
GrasmickH. G.BursikR. J. (1990). Conscience, significant others, and rational choice: Extending the deterrence model. Law and Society Review, 24, 837–861.
18.
GravesJ. T.AcquisitiA.AndersonR. (2019). Perception versus punishment in cybercrime. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 109, 313–363.
19.
GunterW. D. (2009). Internet scallywags: A comparative analysis of multiple forms and measurements of digital piracy. Western Criminology Review, 10, 15–28.
20.
HigginsG. E.MarcumC. D. (2011). Digital piracy: An integrated theoretical approach. Carolina Academic Press.
21.
HigginsG. E.WilsonA. L.FellB. D. (2005). An application of deterrence theory to software piracy. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 12, 166–184.
22.
HigginsG. E.WolfeS. E.MarcumC. D. (2008). Music piracy and neutralization: A preliminary trajectory analysis from short-term longitudinal data. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 2, 324–336.
23.
HoltT. J.BosslerA. M. (2009). Examining the applicability of lifestyle-routine activities theory for cybercrime victimization. Deviant Behavior, 30, 1–25.
24.
HoltT. J.BosslerA. M. (2016). Crime science series: Cybercrime in progress: Theory and prevention of technology-enabled offenses. Routledge.
25.
HoltT. J.BurrussG. W.BosslerA. 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.
26.
HoltT. J.BurrussG. W.BosslerA. M. (2015). Policing cybercrime and cyberterror. Carolina Academic Press.
27.
KongJ.LimJ. (2012). The longitudinal influence of parent-child relationships and depression on cyber delinquency in South Korean adolescents: A latent growth curve model. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 908–913.
28.
Kos KoklicM. K.VidaI.BajdeD.CulibergB. (2014). The study of perceived adverse effects of digital piracy and involvement: Insights from adult computer users. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33, 225–236.
29.
KoziarskiJ.LeeJ. R. (2020). Connecting evidence-based policing and cybercrime. Policing: An International Journal, 43, 198–211.
30.
KranenbargM. W.HoltT. J.van GelderJ. (2019). Offending and victimization in the digital age: Comparing correlates of cybercrime and traditional offending-only, victimization-only and the victimization-offending overlap. Deviant Behavior, 40, 40–55.
31.
LeeB.JeongS.PaekS. Y. (2019). Determinants of digital piracy using deterrence, social learning and neutralization perspectives. International Journal of Comparative & Applied Criminal Justice, 43, 295–308.
32.
LeeJ. M.HongJ. S.YoonJ.PegueroA. A.SeokH. J. (2018). Correlates of adolescent cyberbullying in South Korea in multiple contexts: A review of the literature and implications for research and school practice. Deviant Behavior, 39, 293–308.
33.
MarcumC. D.HigginsG. E. (2019). Examining the effectiveness of academic scholarship on the fight against cyberbullying and cyberstalking. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 44, 645–655.
34.
MarcumC. D.HigginsG. E.PoffB. A. (2016). Exploratory investigation on theoretical predictors of the electronic leash. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 213–218.
35.
MarcumC. D.HigginsG. E.RickettsM. L.WolfeS. E. (2014). Hacking in high school: Cybercrime perpetrated by juveniles. Deviant Behavior, 35, 581–591.
36.
MoonB.McCluskeyJ. D.McCluskeyC. P. (2010). A general theory of crime and computer crime: An empirical test. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 767–772.
37.
MoonB.McCluskeyJ. D.McCluskeyC. P.LeeS. (2013). Gender, general theory of crime and computer crime: An empirical test. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57, 460–478.
38.
MorrisR. G.BlackburnA. G. (2009). Cracking the code: An empirical exploration of social learning theory and computer crime. Journal of Crime and Justice, 32, 1–32.
39.
NaginD. S. (2013). Deterrence in the twenty-first century. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 42, 199–263.
PaternosterR. (1987). The deterrent effect of the perceived certainty and severity of punishment: A review of the evidence and issues. Justice Quarterly, 4, 173–217.
42.
PaternosterR. (2018). Perceptual deterrence theory. In NaginD. S.CullenF. T.JohnsonC. L. (Eds.), Deterrence, choice, and crime, volume 23: Contemporary perspectives (pp. 81–106). Routledge.
43.
PayneB. K.ChappellA. (2008). Using student samples in criminological research. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19, 175–192.
44.
PeaceA. G.GallettaD.ThongJ. Y. L. (2003). Software piracy in the workplace: A model and empirical test. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20, 153–177.
45.
PrattT. C.CullenF. T.BlevinsK. R.DaigleL. E.MadensenT. D. (2006). The empirical status of deterrence theory: A meta-analysis. In CullenF. T.WrightJ. P.BlevinsK. R. (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 367–396). Transaction.
46.
RogersM.SmoakN. D.LiuJ. (2006). Self-reported deviant computer behavior: A big-5, moral choice, and manipulative exploitive behavior analysis. Deviant Behavior, 27, 245–268.
47.
SiponenM.VanceA.WillisonR. (2012). New insights into the problem of software piracy: The effects of neutralization, shame, and moral beliefs. Information & Management, 49, 334–341.
48.
SkinnerW. F.FreamA. M. (1997). A social learning theory analysis of computer crime among college students. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34, 495–518.
49.
UdrisR. (2016). Cyber deviance among adolescents and the role of family, school, and neighborhood: A cross-national study. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 10, 127–146.
50.
Van RooijB.FineA.ZhangY.WuY. (2017). Comparative compliance: Digital piracy, social norms, and duty in China and the United States. Law & Policy, 39, 73–93.
51.
WolfeS. E.HigginsG. E.MarcumC. D. (2008). Deterrence and digital piracy: A preliminary examination of the role of viruses. Social Science Computer Review, 26, 313–333.
52.
YoonC. (2011). Theory of planned behavior and ethics theory in digital piracy: An integrated model. Journal of Business Ethics, 100, 405–417.
53.
YoungR.ZhangL.PrybutokV. R. (2007). Hacking into the minds of hackers. Information Systems Management, 24, 281–287.
54.
ZhangL.SmithW. W.McDowellW. C. (2009). Examining digital piracy: Self-control, punishment, and self-efficacy. Information Resources Management Journal, 22, 24–44.
