Using Structural Equations to Test a Multi-Theoretical Framework with Data on Cyberstalking Victimization in Iran: Self-Control, Control Deficit, Peers’ Online Deviant Behaviors, and Online Deviant Lifestyles

Abstract

Although there exists a growing amount of empirical literature documenting the correlates of cyberstalking victimization, research has yet to elaborate on the potential mechanisms that can explain the risk for cyberstalking victimization. We proposed an integrated theory, which combined low self-control, control deficit, peers’ online deviant behavior, and online deviant lifestyles based on previous research. We tested this integrated theory specifically for cyberstalking victimization using original data from a sample of 408 Iranian college women. Relying on structural equation modeling, we found that low self-control and peers’ online deviant behaviors were significantly associated with cyberstalking victimization not only directly but also indirectly via online deviant lifestyles. Overall, our findings yielded strong support for the integrated model to explain cyberstalking victimization.

Low Self-Control and Cybercrime Victimization: An Examination of Indirect Effects Through Risky Online Behavior

“…Of note, while several different online behaviors were examined in this study, they were each entered separately as predictor variables, precluding an assessment of the specific behavior(s) through which low self-control might operate or the possibility that a cumulative measure of risky online behavior is predictive of cybercrime victimization. Additional studies by Reyns, Fisher et al (2018) and Kabiri et al (2021) focused on cyberstalking each found that the association between low self-control and cyberstalking victimization was mediated by such things as harassing someone online and viewing pornographic material. Lastly, Van Wilsem (2013b) identified an indirect association between low self-control and internet consumer fraud victimization operating through online shopping and visiting online forums.…”

“…Additionally, several studies have modeled individual online activities as separate predictor variables of cybercrime victimization (e.g., Holt et al, 2020; Van Wilsem, 2013b), making it difficult to assess through which behaviors (or a general construct of risky behavior) the influence of low self-control on cybercrime victimization might operate. Moreover, several studies have focused on only one type or just a few types of cybercrime victimization as outcomes (e.g., Kabiri et al, 2021; Reyns, Fisher et al, 2018; Van Wilsem, 2013b). Last, while analytic methods that enable a rigorous assessment of indirect effects have been used by some researchers (e.g., Álvarez-García et al, 2019; Kabiri et al, 2021; Mikkola et al, 2020), others have relied on methods that are less well suited to formally addressing this issue (Bossler & Holt, 2010; Holt et al, 2020; Van Wilsem, 2013b).…”

“…Moreover, several studies have focused on only one type or just a few types of cybercrime victimization as outcomes (e.g., Kabiri et al, 2021; Reyns, Fisher et al, 2018; Van Wilsem, 2013b). Last, while analytic methods that enable a rigorous assessment of indirect effects have been used by some researchers (e.g., Álvarez-García et al, 2019; Kabiri et al, 2021; Mikkola et al, 2020), others have relied on methods that are less well suited to formally addressing this issue (Bossler & Holt, 2010; Holt et al, 2020; Van Wilsem, 2013b).…”

“…To be clear, while some research has begun to address this issue, certain methodological shortcomings prompt the need for additional research. For example, some studies have relied on measures of cybercrime victimization that are restricted to narrowly focused and/or dichotomous outcomes (e.g., Kabiri et al, 2021; Mikkola et al, 2020; Van Wilsem, 2013a, 2013b), whereas Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) contend that the effects of low self-control should generalize to a wide variety of outcomes. Further, certain studies have included various online routine activities as separate variables in regression models rather than as part of a broader construct reflecting risky online behavior (e.g., Holt et al, 2020; Leukfeldt & Yar, 2016; Van Wilsem, 2013b), thereby obscuring the possibility that there might be a cumulative effect of risky online behavior on cybercrime victimization.…”

Using Structural Equations to Model the Relationships between Procedural Justice, Risky Lifestyles, and Violent Inmate Misconduct

“…The lifestyle and routine activities theories successfully explained different types of crime events, whether online and offline [41][42][43]. Although early studies drawing on these theories tended to focus on crime rates or victimization as outcomes, scholars began to extend the notion of opportunity to account for individual offending [44].…”