Public and police concern about internet crimes against children has been primarily typified as a stranger danger problem. However, existing research suggests a variety of perpetrator ages and relationships to the victim. A more accurate estimate will help inform prevention efforts. This study provides a meta-analysis examining the identity of perpetrators in internet crimes against children. Databases were searched for published and unpublished studies using a detailed search strategy. In total, 32 studies met full inclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria was the following: (1) the victim sample consisted of children under the age of 18 years or young adults (18–25) asked to respond retrospectively; (2) the study victims experienced abuse through the use of technology; (3) the study reported the identity of the perpetrator, either the relationship to the victim or the age of the perpetrator; (4) the study was available in English. The overall proportion of offenders under the age of 18 as a proportion of all identified offenders was 44% (95% CI: 0.28–0.60). The overall proportion of acquaintance and family offenders as a proportion of all identified offenders was 68% (95% CI: 0.62–0.75). Between study variability was explained by data source, with higher proportion of juvenile offenders in studies using survey data. This meta-analysis confirms that most perpetrators of online crimes against children are not strangers to their victims and a large portion of perpetrators are juveniles. Prevention education needs to focus more on inappropriate behavior from anyone in addition to the dangers about communicating with strangers.
AshurstL.McAlindenA. M. (2015). Young people, peer-to-peer grooming and sexual offending: Understanding and responding to harmful sexual behaviour within a social media society. Probation Journal, 62(4), 374–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0264550515619572
2.
BarbareeH. E.MarshallW. L. (2008). The juvenile sex offender. Guilford Press.
3.
BarkerT. H.MigliavacaC. B.SteinC.ColpaniV.FalavignaM.AromatarisE.MunnZ. (2021). Conducting proportional meta-analysis in different types of systematic reviews: A guide for synthesisers of evidence. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 21(1), 189.
4.
*BergenE.DavidsonJ.SchulzA.SchuhmannP.JohanssonA.SanttilaP.JernP. (2014). The effects of using identity deception and suggesting secrecy on the outcomes of adult-adult and adult-child or-adolescent online sexual interactions. Victims & Offenders, 9(3), 276–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2013.873750
5.
BestJ. (1993). Threatened children: Rhetoric and concern about child-victims. University of Chicago Press.
6.
BolenR. M. (2000). Extrafamilial child sexual abuse: A study of perpetrator characteristics and implications for prevention. Violence Against Women, 6(10), 1137–1169. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010022183550
7.
BoydC.BromfieldL. (2006). Young people who sexually abuse: Key issues. Melbourne Australian Institute of Family Studies, National Child Protection.
8.
BryceJ. (2013). Online sexual exploitation of children and young people. In JewkesY.YarM. (Eds.), Handbook of Internet crime (pp. 320–342). Routledge.
9.
CaffoE.AstaL.ScandroglioF. (2021). Child abuse and exploitation: What we know about the problem and new perspectives. In CaffoE. (Ed.), Online child sexual exploitation: Treatment and prevention of abuse in a digital world (pp. 3–21). Springer International Publishing.
10.
*DavidsonJ.DeMarcoJ.BifulcoA.BogaertsS.CarettiV.AikenM.CheeversC.CorbariE.ScallyM.SchilderJ.SchimmentiA.PucciaA. (2016). Enhancing police and industry in the prevention of online CSA. Middlesex University.
11.
DavidsonJ.GottschalkP. (2011). Internet child abuse: Current research and policy. Taylor and Francis.
12.
DavidsonJ. C.MartellozzoE. (2005). Protecting children from sex offenders online: When strangers become ‘virtual friends’. Safety & Security in a Networked World: Balancing Cyber-Rights & Responsibilities, Oxford, UK.
13.
*ECPAT, INTERPOL, & UNICEF. (2021a). Disrupting harm in Kenya: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children.
14.
ECPAT, INTERPOL, & UNICEF. (2021b). Disrupting Harm in Uganda: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children.
15.
*ECPAT, INTERPOL, & UNICEF. (2022a). Disrupting harm in Ethiopia: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children.
16.
*ECPATI, NTERPOL, & UNICEF. (2022b). Disrupting harm in Philippines: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children.
17.
*ECPAT,INTERPOL, & UNICEF. (2022c). Disrupting harm in Tanzania: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children.
18.
*ECPAT,INTERPOL, & UNICEF. (2022d). Disrupting harm in Thailand: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children.
FinkelhorD.TurnerH.ColburnD. (2023). Which dynamics make online child sexual abuse and cyberstalking more emotionally impactful: Perpetrator identity and images?Child Abuse & Neglect, 137, 106020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2023.106020
23.
FinkelhorD.WalshK.JonesL.MitchellK.CollierA. (2021). Youth Internet safety education: Aligning programs with the evidence base. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 22(5), 1233–1247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020916257
24.
FritzN. J.AltheideD. L. (1987). The mass media and the social construction of the missing children problem. The Sociological Quarterly, 28(4), 473–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1987.tb00307.x
25.
Gewirtz-MeydanA.FinkelhorD. (2020). Sexual abuse and assault in a large national sample of children and adolescents. Child maltreatment, 25(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559519873975
26.
Greene-ColozziE. A.WintersG. M.BlaskoB.JeglicE. L. (2020). Experiences and perceptions of online sexual solicitation and grooming of minors: A retrospective report. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 29(7), 836–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2020.1801938
27.
Gregorisch-DempseyL. To Catch a Predator. (2004–2007, November11). To Catch a Predator [TV series]. NBC.
28.
*GuerraC.Pinto-CortezC.ToroE.EfthymiadouE.QuayleE. (2021). Online sexual harassment and depression in Chilean adolescents: Variations based on gender and age of the offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 120, 105219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105219
29.
*Helweg-LarsenK.SchüttN.LarsenH. (2011). Predictors and protective factors for adolescent Internet victimization: Results from a 2008 nationwide Danish youth survey. Acta Paediatrica (Oslo, Norway: 1992), 101, 533–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02587.x
30.
*IbrahimD. (2022). Online child sexual exploitation and abuse in Canada: A statistical profile of police-reported incidents and court charges, 2014 to 2020. Juristat: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 42(1), 1–36.
31.
*JonesL. M.MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD. (2013). Online harassment in context: Trends from three youth internet safety surveys (2000, 2005, 2010). Psychology of Violence, 3(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030309
32.
KloessJ. A.Hamilton-GiachritsisC. E.BeechA. R. (2019). Offense processes of online sexual grooming and abuse of children via internet communication platforms. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 31(1), 73–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063217720927
33.
MadiganS.WadeM.TarabulsyG.JenkinsJ. M.ShouldiceM. (2014). Association between abuse history and adolescent pregnancy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(2), 151–159.
34.
May-ChahalC. A.PalmerC. E. (2018). Rapid evidence assessment: Characteristics and vulnerabilities of victims of online-facilitated child sexual abuse and exploitation. Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.
35.
*MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD.WolakJ. (2005). The Internet and family and acquaintance sexual abuse. Child Maltreatment, 10(1), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559504271917
36.
MitchellK. J.JonesL. M.FinkelhorD.WolakJ. (2011). Internet-facilitated commercial sexual exploitation of children: Findings from a nationally representative sample of law enforcement agencies in the United States. Sexual Abuse, 23(1), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210374347
NyagaV.ArbynM.AertsM. (2017). Metaprop_one: Stata module to perform fixed and random effects meta-analysis of proportions. Statistical Software Components, S457781.
PageM. J.MoherD.BossuytP. M.BoutronI.HoffmannT. C.MulrowC. D.ShamseerL.TetzlaffJ. M.AklE. A.BrennanS. E.ChouR.GlanvilleJ.GrimshawJ. M.HróbjartssonA.LaluM. M.LiT.LoderE. W.Mayo-WilsonE.McDonaldS.McKenzieJ. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n160.
42.
ParkerR. J.SlateJ. J. (2014). Social media monsters: Internet killers. RJ Parker Publishing, Inc.
43.
*PatchinJ. W.HindujaS. (2020). Sextortion among adolescents: Results from a national survey of US youth. Sexual Abuse, 32(1), 30–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063218800469
*PereiraF.MatosM. (2016). Cyber-stalking victimization: What predicts fear among Portuguese adolescents?European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 22(2), 253–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-015-9285-7
46.
*PereiraF.SpitzbergB. H.MatosM. (2016). Cyber-harassment victimization in Portugal: Prevalence, fear and help-seeking among adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.039
47.
PrattR.MillerR. M.BoydC. R. (2012). Adolescents with sexually abusive behaviours and their families: Best interests case practice model: Specialist practice resource. Department of Human Services.
RadfordL.CorralS.BradleyC.FisherH.BassettC.HowatN.CollishawS. (2011). Child abuse and neglect in the UK today. NSPCC.
50.
RamiroL. S.MartinezA. B.TanJ. R. D.MarianoK.MirandaG. M. J.BautistaG. (2019). Online child sexual exploitation and abuse: A community diagnosis using the social norms theory. Child Abuse & Neglect, 96, 104080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104080
51.
*ReedE.SalazarM.BeharA. I.AgahN.SilvermanJ. G.MinnisA. M.RuschM. L. A.RajA. (2019). Cyber sexual harassment: Prevalence and association with substance use, poor mental health, and STI history among sexually active adolescent girls. Journal of Adolescence, 75, 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.07.005
52.
RichardsK. (2011). Misperceptions about child sex offenders. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 429, 1–8.
53.
RussellD. E. (1983). The incidence and prevalence of intrafamilial and extrafamilial sexual abuse of female children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 7(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0145-2134(83)90065-0
54.
SaewycE. M.PettingellS.MageeL. L. (2003). The prevalence of sexual abuse among adolescents in school. The Journal of School Nursing, 19(5), 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/10598405030190050401
55.
SaundersB. E.VilleponteauxL. A.LipovskyJ. A.KilpatrickD. G.VeronenL. J. (1992). Child sexual assault as a risk factor for mental disorders among women: A community survey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 7(2), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626092007002005
*ScottA. J.MainwaringC.FlynnA.PowellA.HenryN. (2022). Image-based sexual abuse among australian youths. In LimH. (Ed.), Interpersonal violence against children and youth (pp. 85–108). Rowman & Littlefield.
59.
SedlakA. (2002). National estimates of missing children: An overview. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
60.
*ShannonD. (2008). Online sexual grooming in Sweden—online and offline sex offences against children as described in Swedish police data. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 9(2), 160–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/14043850802450120
61.
*SheltonJ.EakinJ.HofferT.MuirheadY.OwensJ. (2016). Online child sexual exploitation: An investigative analysis of offender characteristics and offending behavior. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 30, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2016.07.002
62.
*SklenarovaH.SchulzA.SchuhmannP.OsterheiderM.NeutzeJ. (2018). Online sexual solicitation by adults and peers–results from a population based German sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 76, 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.11.005
63.
SnyderH. N. (2000). Sexual assault of young children as reported to law enforcement: Victim, incident, and offender characteristics. A NIBRS Statistical Report.
64.
UmbreitM. S.BradshawW. (1997). Victim experience of meeting adult vs. juvenile offenders: A cross national comparison. Federal Probation, 61(4), 33–39.
65.
*VakhitovaZ.WebsterJ.Alston-KnoxC.ReynaldD.TownsleyM. (2018). Offender–victim relationship and offender motivation in the context of indirect cyber abuse: A mixed-method exploratory analysis. International Review of Victimology, 24(3), 347–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758017743073
66.
*Van OuytselJ.WalraveM.De MarezL.VanhaelewynB.PonnetK. (2021). Sexting, pressured sexting and image-based sexual abuse among a weighted-sample of heterosexual and LGB-youth. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, 106630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106630
67.
*VillacampaC.GómezM. J. (2017). Online child sexual grooming: Empirical findings on victimisation and perspectives on legal requirements. International Review of Victimology, 23(2), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758016682585
WarnerK.BartelsL. (2015). Juvenile sex offending: Its prevalence and the criminal justice response. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 38(1), 48–75.
70.
WeissK. (2002). Authority as coercion: When authority figures abuse their positions to perpetrate child sexual abuse. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse: Research, Treatment, & Program Innovations for Victims, Survivors, & Offenders, 11(1), 27–49. https://doi-org.unh.idm.oclc.org/10.1300/J070v11n01_02
71.
WoddaA. (2018). Stranger danger!. Journal of Family Strengths, 18(1), 3.
72.
*WolakJ.FinkelhorD. (2013). Are crimes by online predators different from crimes by sex offenders who know youth in-person?. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(6), 736–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.06.010
73.
*WolakJ.FinkelhorD.MitchellK. (2005). The varieties of child pornography production. In QuayleE.TaylorM. (Eds.), Viewing child pornography on the Internet: Understanding the offense, managing the offender, helping the victims (pp. 31–48). Russell House Publishing. Print.
74.
*WolakJ.FinkelhorD.MitchellK. (2011). Child pornography possessors: Trends in offender and case characteristics. Sexual Abuse, 23(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210372143
*YbarraM. L.LeafP. J.Diener-WestM. (2004). Sex differences in youth-reported depressive symptomatology and unwanted Internet sexual solicitation. Journal of medical Internet research, 6(1), e907. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.1.e5
78.
*YbarraM. L.MitchellK. J.WolakJ.FinkelhorD. (2006). Examining characteristics and associated distress related to Internet harassment: Findings from the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics, 118(4), e1169–e1177. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-0815
79.
ZviL.BittonM. S. (2021). Perceptions of victim and offender culpability in non-consensual distribution of intimate images. Psychology, Crime & Law, 27(5), 427–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2020.1818236
