Towards the normalization of cybercrime victimization: A routine activities analysis of cybercrime in europe

Junger, Marianne; Montoya, Lorena; Heydari, Maliheh

doi:10.1109/cybersa.2017.8073391

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(73 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another important aspect that has to be kept in mind when interpreting the results is that the internet penetration and the intensity of internet usage might differ between the populations that have been studied. A higher internet usage gives a higher risk of becoming a victim of cybercrime, as several studies showed (Choi 2008;Holt and Bossler 2008;Junger et al 2017;Pratt et al 2010;Reyns and Henson 2015;van Wilsem 2013a, b). 3 For nearly all countries that are included in this survey the percentage of the population that uses the internet slightly increased during our study period (Eurostat 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Victims of cybercrime in Europe: a review of victim surveys

Bergh

Junger

2018

Crime Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Review the evidence provided by victim surveys in order to provide a rough estimate of the personal crime prevalence of the main types of cybercrime. Methods: We performed a search in databases, searched online, and contacted several Offices for National Statistics in Europe and selected surveys that provided information about individual victims of crime which were representative for a general population. Six types of cybercrime have been distinguished, namely online shopping fraud, online fraud banking/payment, other cyber fraud (such as advanced fee fraud), cyber threats/harassment, malware, and hacking. For every survey the questions on cybercrime are presented and the crime prevalence estimates are compared. Results: Nine surveys were included. Annual crime prevalence rates ranged from 1 to 3% for online shopping fraud, from less than 1 to 2% for online banking/payment fraud. Less than 1% of the population is a victim of other types of fraud and a maximum of 3% of the population experiences some sort of online bullying such as stalking (1%) or threatening (1%). 1-6% is a victim of hacking. The estimates for being a victim of malware range from 2 to 15%. For all offences it cannot be estimated how much of the differences are due to variation in methods and questioning between the studies or real differences between countries or change over time. Conclusions: As yet there have been very few well performed randomised sampled studies on cybercrime amongst the general population. Cybercrime prevalence (and its trend) can only be well measured if the questions are frequently updated and adequately address new aspects of cybercrime. To adequately monitor cybercrime in the future it is advisable to develop some fairly abstract main categories that are of durable validity, whilst allowing for up-todate illustrations. Furthermore, ideally the questioning in the ongoing surveys in the different countries should be standardised and there should be a uniform categorisation of the different cyber offences. A screening question in order to permit more accurate dating is essential to reduce telescoping bias. Surveys should ask about the impact on or damage to the victims.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Victims of cybercrime in Europe: a review of victim surveys

Bergh

Junger

2018

Crime Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Target attractiveness has been measured using several sociodemographic factors. For example, in cybercrimes, age, income, education, race, and residential setting have been used for representing target attractiveness [3,[32][33][34]. Furthermore, besides social demographics, some behavioural measures are also used to represent target attractiveness.…”

Section: Routine Activities Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The essence of this theory is that when an individual possesses characteristics that attract the offender and is exposed to the motivated offender coupled with lack of protection from the attacker, he or she is likely to be the victim of a crime. Since this theory is initially used to explain physical crime, it is unclear whether it can be applied to online crime [3]. One of the issues plaguing cybercrime research is whether the concepts and constructs in the physical world can be applied and interpreted similarly in a virtual environment [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Literature Review of Routine Activity Theory’s Applicability in Cybercrimes

Ahmad

Ramayah

2022

JCSANDM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cybercrimes are increasing at an alarming rate and cause detrimental effects to the victims. Routine Activity Theory (RAT) is commonly used to understand the factors influencing cybercrime victimization. However, there have been inconsistent findings on the applicability of RAT theory. This study performs a Systematic Literature Review analysis to consolidate and provide a coherent analysis of the related studies employing RAT theory for cybercrime victimization. The articles were also differentiated based on the cybercrimes topologies being investigated; (a) cybercrime dependent (hacking and malware) and (b) cybercrime enabled (phishing, fraud and identity theft). The findings suggest that a refined specification and operationalization of RAT’S construct tailoring to the types of cybercrimes can arguably yield more accurate application and interpretation of RAT Theory in cybercrimes. Consequently, this will address the inaccurate measurement issues of some of the RATS’s constructs, leading to inconclusive effects on cybercrime victimization. In addition, there is a need for more longitudinal studies to disentangle the effect of RAT’s construct during pre and post cybercrimes. Security advocates can apply the findings of this research to formulate relevant cybercrime awareness programs. The findings also shed some insights into which groups should be targeted for different cybercrime educational and awareness programs. This study can increase the awareness among citizens in terms of their online activities, their attributes and the types of protection from becoming cybercrime victims.

show abstract

“…Taip pat gali būti atliekamos specifinės viktimologinės apklausos tik apie elektroninius nusikaltimus, į jas įtraukiama daugiau klausimų apie tyrimo dalyvių elgesį in-ternete (žr. Jones, Mitchell, Finkelhor 2012;Junger, Montoya, Hartel, Heydari 2017;Näsi, Oksanen, Keipi, Räsänen 2015; viktimologines apklausas apie elektroninius nusikaltimus apžvelgia Reep-van den Bergh, Junger 2018; rutininių veiksmų teorija paremtus viktimologinius tyrimus apžvelgia Reyns 2015, p. 399-400;Arntfield 2015). Šiais tyrimais mokslininkai siekia išsiaiškinti, kiek žmonių patiria elektroninius nusikaltimus, tikėdamiesi, kad apklausų dalyviai praneš ir apie tuos atvejus, kai susidūrė su nusikaltimais, tačiau jų nepranešė teisėsaugos institucijoms.…”

Section: Elektroninių Nusikaltimų Tyrimai Pagal Proceso Dalyviusunclassified

Social Research about Online Crime: Global Range of Topics and a Systematic Analysis of Research in Lithuania

Šupa

2021

CrimLithuan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social research about online crime is a multi-disciplinary field addressing a wide array of topics since its inception in the 1980s. Based on a broad review of state-of-the-art literature and gaps identified in review publications (Holt, Bossler 2014; Stratton, Powell, Cameron 2017; Maimon, Louderback 2019, and others), in this paper I outline 41 key topic in social research about online crime, classified into four broad categories: 1) research focusing on specific types of online crime, 2) research about perpetrators, victims, and law enforcement, 3) research about online crime discourses and public perceptions, 4) research putting the local and global specifics of online crime into perspective. Based on the topic map, I undertook a systematic review of literature on research about online crime published in Lithuania from the empirical social scientific perspective. The results show that very few such studies are carried out in Lithuania. From 2004 to 2020, 26 publications have been found in total. 10 of them were theoretical briefs, while 16 were based on empirical data. Out of the 41 key topic, 14 were covered in the publications, while 29 or roughly two thirds remained unaddressed. The dominant contributors were legal scholars writing about the social aspects of online crime across a variety of topics, and mostly focusing on specific crime types. The most developed topic was cyberbullying, with contributions by scholars mostly from the fields of psychology and education. To fill in these glaring gaps, it is vital to develop this field of research with an emphasis on both wider and deeper research agendas, complex, valid and reliable research data and critical theoretical approaches, inviting systematic contributions from criminology, sociology, communication and media studies, and political science.

show abstract

Towards the normalization of cybercrime victimization: A routine activities analysis of cybercrime in europe

Cited by 18 publications

References 38 publications

Victims of cybercrime in Europe: a review of victim surveys

Victims of cybercrime in Europe: a review of victim surveys

A Systematic Literature Review of Routine Activity Theory’s Applicability in Cybercrimes

Social Research about Online Crime: Global Range of Topics and a Systematic Analysis of Research in Lithuania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About