Journal article Open Access

Patterns of Cyber Harassment and Perpetration among College Students in the United States: A Test of Routine Activities Theory

Wick, S. Elizabeth; Nagoshi, Craig; Basham, Randy; Jordan, Catheleen; Kim, Youn Kyoung; Nguyen, Anh Phuong; Lehmann, Peter

Editor(s)
K. Jaishankar

A sample of 298 college students at a large southwestern state university (female 68.8%) completed an online survey about their experiences of being victimized by and engaging in perpetration of cyber-harassment of romantic partners. The findings partially supported the application of Routine Activities Theory to understand the predictors of cyber-harassment for victims and victimizers. Victimization for women was associated with greater general risk-taking propensity and reported online exposure and disclosure. For both men and women, greater risk propensity and online disclosure were associated with greater reports of perpetrating such harassment. A significant interaction resulted from the effects of risk propensity in increasing the likelihood of engaging in cyber-harassment being attenuated for those high in online exposure.

Files (573.0 kB)
Name Size
Wicketallvol11issue1IJCC2017.pdf
md5:599543f89605747670c6f20237fc3058
573.0 kB Download
  • Alexy, E. M., Burgess, A. W., Baker, T., & Smoyak, S. A. (2005). Perceptions of cyberstalking among college students. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 5, 279-289. Anderson, K., (1997). Gender, status, and domestic violence: An integration of feminist and family violence approaches. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59, 655-669. Augustina, J. R. (2015). Understanding cyber victimization: Digital architectures and the disinhibition effect. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 9, 35-54. Behm-Morawitz, E., & Schipper, S. (2015). Gender, sexualization, and cyber- harassment in a virtual world. Journal of Media Psychology, 1–14. Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2005). Cyber-harassment: a study of a new method for an old behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32, 265–277. Blais, A.-R., & Weber, E. U. (2006). A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking DOSPERT) scale for adult populations. Judgment and Decision Making, 1, 33-47. Burke, S., Wallen, M., Vail-Smith, K., & Knox, D. (2011). Using technology to control intimate partners: An exploratory study of college undergraduates. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1162-1167. Campbell, M. A. (2005). Cyberbullying: An old problem in a new guise? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 15, 68-76. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (2014). Intimate partner violence: Definitions. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/ definitions.html Cercone, J. J., Beach, S. H., & Arias, I. (2005). Gender symmetry in dating intimate partner violence: Does similar behavior imply similar constructs? Violence & Victims, 20, 207-218. Chan, H. C., Heide, K. M., & Beauregard, E. (2011). What propels sexual murderers: A proposed integrated theory of social learning and routine activities theories. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55, 228–250. Clodfelter, T. A., Turner, M. G.,Hartman, J. L., & Kuhns, J. B. (2010). A test of Routine Activities Theory and a general theory of crime. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 455-481. Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608. Dempsey, A. G., Sulkowski, M. L., Dempsey, J., & Storch, E. (2011). Has cyber technology produced a new group of peer aggressors? Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 14, 297–302. Dixon, L., & Bowen, E. (2012). Intimate partner violence, technology, and stalking. In G. M. Davies & A. R. Beech (Eds.), Forensic psychology: Crime, justice, law, interventions (pp. 190 – 206). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Finn, J. (2004). A survey of online harassment at a university campus. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 468-483. Forde, D. R., & Kennedy, L. W. (1997). Risky lifestyles, routine activities, and the general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 14, 265–294. Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2005). Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. In Proceedings of the 2005 workshop on privacy in the electronic society (pp. 71-81). New York: ACM Press. Halder, D., & Jaishankar, K. (2011). Cyber gender harassment and secondary victimization: A comparative analysis of the United States, the UK, and India. Victims & Offenders, 6, 386–398. Huang, G. C., Unger, J. B., Soto, D., Fujimoto, K., Pentz, M. A., Jordan-Marsh, M., & Valente, T. W. (2014). Peer influences: The impact of online and offline friendship networks on adolescent smoking and alcohol use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54(5), 508–514. Jameson, S. (2008). Cyberharassment: Striking a balance between free speech and privacy. CommLaw Conspectus, 17, 231-266. Jasinski, J. L. (2001). Theoretical explanations for violence against women. In C. M. Renzetti, J. L. Edleson, & R. K. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 5-21). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jennings, W. G., Piquero, A. R., & Reingle, J. M. (2012). On the overlap between victimization and offending: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(1), 16–26. Kaukinen, C., Gover, A., & Hartman, J. (2012). College women's experiences of dating violence in casual and exclusive relationships. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 146-162. Kaukinen, C. (2014). Dating violence among college students: The risk and protective factors. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 15, 283-296. Klevens, J., Duque, L. F., & Ramirez, C. (2002). The victim-perpetrator overlap and routine activities: Results From a cross-sectional study in Bogota, Colombia. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 206–216. Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1073–137. Leisring, P. A. & Giumetti, G. W. (2014). Sticks and stones may break my bones, but abusive text messages also hurt: Development and validation of the Cyber Psychological Abuse (CPA) Scale. Partner Abuse, 5, 323-341. Lyndon, A., Bonds-Raacke, J., & Cratty, A. D. (2011). College students' Facebook stalking of ex-partners. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 711–716. Maxfield, M. G. (1987). Lifestyle and routine activity theories of crime: Empirical studies of victimization, delinquency, and offender decision-making. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3(4), 275–282. Melander, L. A. (2010). College students' perceptions of intimate partner cyber harassment. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(3), 263–268. Miller, C. (2006). Cyber harassment: Its forms and perpetrators. Law Enforcement Technology, 33, 26-30. Miller, J. (2012). Individual offending, routine activities, and activity settings: Revisiting the Routine Activity Theory of general deviance. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 50, 390–416. Mustaine, E., & Tewksbury, R. (1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women's stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43-62. Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2000). Comparing the lifestyles of victims, offenders, and victim-offenders: A Routine Activity Theory assessment of similarities and differences for criminal incident participants. Sociological Focus, 33(3), 339–362. National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (2007). National statistics. Retrieved from: http://www.ncadv.org/learn/statistics Ngo, F. T., & Paternoster, R. (2011). Cybercrime victimization: An examination of individual and situational level factors. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 5, 773-793. Pew Research Center (2014). Internet user demographics. Retrieved from: http://www.pewinternet.org/data-trend/internet-use/latest-stats. Osgood, D. W., Wilson, J. K., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Johnston, L. D. (1996). Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. American Sociological Review, 61, 635–655. Reich, S. M., Subrahmanyam, K., & Espinoza, G. (2012). Friending, IMing, and hanging out face-to-face: Overlap in adolescents' online and offline social networks. Developmental Psychology, 48, 356–368. Reyns, B., Henson, B., & Fisher, B. (2011). Being pursued online: Applying cyberlifestyle-routine activities theory to cyberstalking victimization. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 1149-1169. Sasse, S. (2005). "Motivation" and Routine Activities Theory. Deviant Behavior, 26, 547–570. Schenk, A. M., & Fremouw, W. J. (2012). Prevalence, psychological impact, and coping of cyberbully victims among college students. Journal of School Violence, 11, 21–37. Smith, D. J., & Ecob, R. (2007). An investigation into causal links between victimization and offending in adolescents. British Journal of Sociology, 58, 633–659. Spitzberg, B., & Hoobler, G. (2002). Cyberstalking and the technologies of interpersonal terrorism. New Media & Society, 14, 71-92. Southworth, C., Finn, J., Dawson, S., Fraser, C., & Tucker, S., (2007). Intimate partner violence, technology, and stalking. Violence Against Women, 13, 842-856. Straus, M. A. (2008). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 252-275. Tewksbury, R., & Mustaine, E. E. (2000). Routine activities and vandalism: A theoretical and empirical study. Journal of Crime and Justice, 23, 81–110. Tilyer, M., & Wright, E., (2014). Intimate partner violence and the victim-offender overlap. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51, 29-55. Walker, C. M., Sockman, B. R., & Koehn, S. (2011). An Exploratory Study of Cyberbullying with Undergraduate Students. Tech Trends, 55(2), 31–38. Welsh, A., & Lavoie, J. (2012). Risky ebusiness: An examination of risk-taking, online disclosiveness, and cyberstalking victimization. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 6(1), article 1.
54
14
views
downloads
All versions This version
Views 5454
Downloads 1414
Data volume 8.0 MB8.0 MB
Unique views 5151
Unique downloads 1212

Share

Cite as