Journal article Open Access

Out of the Beta Phase: Obstacles, Challenges, and Promising Paths in the Study of Cyber Criminology

Diamond, Brie; Bachmann, Michael

Abstract
The article provides an overview of the current state of cyber criminological study with regard to theory, research, and teaching. In contrast to the vast knowledge about technical aspects of cyber crimes, behavioral research on these offenses is currently still in its infancy with few data sources or publication outlets. This article will detail the fundamental issues and problems facing researchers involved in the young discipline of cyber criminology, ranging from definitional to methodological problems. There remains argument amongst cyber crime scholars over how best to define the focus of the field and numerous theoretical explanations compete for preference with the scholarly community. These issues pose significant obstacles and need to be addressed for the discipline to advance. Suggestions of how to address some of the primary issues are provided and potential solutions are presented.

Files (545.0 kB)
Name Size
DiamondBachmann2015vol9issue1.pdf
md5:47eaed2d29d72970fc6c19a817b1fd27
545.0 kB Download
  • Amoroso, E. G. (2011). Cyber attacks: Protecting national infrastructure. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
  • Bachmann, M. (2010). Deciphering the hacker underground: First quantitative insights. In T. Holt & B. Schell (Eds.) Corporate hacking and technology-driven crime: Social dynamics and implications (pp. 105-127). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  • Bachmann, M., & Corzine, J. (2009). Insights into the hacking underground. In T. Finnie, T. Petee & J. Jarvis (Eds.), The future challenges of cyber crime (Pp. 31-41). Volume 5: Proceedings of the Futures Working Group. FBI, Quantico, VA. 2010.
  • Brenner, S. (2004). Toward a Criminal Law for Cyberspace: Distributed Security. Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law, 10(2), 1-112.
  • Cohen, L. E. & Felson, M. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review. 44, 588-605.
  • Douglas, D. & Timberg, C. (2014, February 9). Experts warn of coming wave of serious cyber crime. The Washington Post. Retrieved on 12th October 2014 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/target-breach-could-represent-leading-edge-of-wave-of-serious-cybercrime/2014/02/09/dc8ea02c-8daa-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html.
  • Furnell, S. (2002). Cyber crime: Vandalizing the information society. London, United Kingdom: Addison Wesley.
  • Grabosky, P. N. (2001). Virtual criminality: Old wine in new bottles? Social and Legal Studies, 10(2), 243-249.
  • Gunter, W. D. (2011). Criminological predictors of digital piracy: A path analysis. In K. Jaishankar (Ed.), Cyber criminology: Exploring internet crimes and criminal behavior (p. 173-191).
  • Hafner, K. & Markoff, J. (1995). Cyberpunks: Outlaws and hackers on the computer frontier. Toronto: Simon and Schuster.
  • 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.
  • Higgins, G. E. (2004). Can low self-control help with the understanding of the software piracy problem? Deviant Behavior, 26(1), 1-24.
  • Holt, T. J. & Bossler, A. M. (2008). Examining the applicability of lifestyle-routine activities theory for cyber crime victimization. Deviant Behavior, 30(1), 1-25.
  • Holt, T. J. (2010). Crime on-line: Correlates, causes, and context. Raleigh, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
  • Holt, T. J., Bossler, A. M. & May, D. C. (2011). Low self-control, deviant peer association, and juvenile cyberdeviance. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(3), 378-395. DOI: 10.007/s12103-011-9117-3.
  • 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(2), 31-61.
  • Jaishankar, K. (2007). Cyber criminology: Evolving a novel discipline with a new journal. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1(1), 1-6.
  • Jaishankar, K. (2008). Space transition theory of cyber crimes. In F. Schmalleger & M. Pittaro (Eds.), Crimes of the Internet (pp. 283-301). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Jaishankar, K. (2010). The future of cyber criminology: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 4(1&2), 26-31.
  • Jaishankar, K. (2011). Cyber criminology: Exploring Internet crimes and criminal behavior. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • Jewkes, Y. (2007). Crime online. Cullompton, United Kingdom: Willan.
  • McManus, D. (2014, April 14). Edward Snowden: A whistle-blowing outlaw, now with a Pulitzer Prize to his name. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from 12th October 2014 http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-pulitzer-prize-edward-snowden-nsa-20140414,0,3959573.story.
  • Mitra, A. (2003). Cybernetic Space: Our new dwelling place. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on Social Sciences June 12 - 15, 2003. Retrieved on December 20 2006, from www.hicsocial.org/ Social2003Proceedings/AnandaMitra.pdf.
  • Morris, R. G. & Blackburn, A. G. (2009). Cracking the code: An empirical exploration of social learning theory and computer crime. Journal of Crime and Justice, 32(1), 1-34.
  • Morris, R. G. & Higgins, G. E. (2010). Criminological theory in the digital age: The case of social learning theory and digital piracy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 470-480.
  • Morris, R. G. (2011). Computer hacking and the techniques of neutralization: An empirical assessment. In. T. J. Holt & B. H. Schell (Eds.). Corporate hacking and technology-driven crime: Social dynamics and Implications (pp. 1-17). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.
  • Nhan, J. & Bachmann, M. (2010). Developments in cyber criminology. In M. Maguire & D. Okada (Eds.), Critical issues of crime and criminal justice: Thought, policy, and practice (pp. 164-177). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. (2011). Traditional and nontraditional bullying among youth: A test of general strain theory. Youth and Society, 43(2), 727-751.
  • Pati P. (2003) Cyber crime. Retrieved on December 15 2006, from http://www.naavi.org/pati/pati_cyber crimes_dec03.htm.
  • Pratt, T. C., Holtfreter, K., & Reisig, M. D. (2010). Routine online activity and internet fraud targeting: Extending the generality of routine activity theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 267-296.
  • Shaw, Clifford R. & McKay, Henry D. (1942). Juvenile Delinquency in Urban Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Simpson, S. & Piquero, N. L. (2002). Low self-control, organizational theory, and corporate crime. Law and Society Review, 36(3), 509-548.
  • Smith, R. G., Grabosky, P., & Urbas, G. (2004). Cyber criminals on trial. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American sociological review, 664-670.
  • The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2009). Remarks by the President on securing our nation’s cyber infrastructure [Press release]. Retrieved on 12th October 2015 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-securing-our-nations-cyber-infrastructure.
  • Thomas, D. & Loader, B. (2000). Introduction. In D. Thomas and B. Loader (Eds.), Cyber crime: Law enforcement, security and surveillance in the information age (pp. 1-13). London: Routledge.
  • United States Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 2004. ICPSR04572-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2007-02-28. DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR04572.v1.
  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS), 2007. ICPSR31161-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2011-07-07. DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR31161.v1.
  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Statistics. National Crime Victimization Survey, 2012. ICPSR31202-v2. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2013-10-28. DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR34650.v1.
  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Statistics. National Crime Victimization Survey: Identity Theft Supplement, 2012. ICPSR34735-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2014-02-20. DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR34735.v1.
  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Survey of Campus Law Enforcement Agencies, 2004-2005: [United States]. ICPSR27261-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2010-03-09. DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR27261.v1.
  • United States Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. DIRECTORY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, 1996: [UNITED STATES]. Conducted by U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor], 1998. DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR02260.v1.
  • Wall, D. S. (1999). Cyber crimes: New Wine, No Bottles?, in P. Davies, P. Francis and V. Jupp (eds), Invisible Crimes: Their Victims and their Regulation (pp. 105-39). London: Macmillan.
  • Williams, M. (2005) Cyber crime. In J. Mitchell Miller (Ed.) Encyclopaedia of Criminology, London: Routledge.
  • Yar, M. (2005). The novelty of ‘cyber crime’: An assessment in light of routine activity theory. European Journal of Criminology, 2, 407-427.
  • Yar, M. (2006). Cybercrime and society. London, United Kingdom: Sage.

Share

Cite as