مقاله انگلیسی آیا جرایم سایبری روی میز است؟
Abstract
Keywords
Introduction
Cybercrime offending versatility and specialization
Data and methods
Findings
Discussion and conclusions
Credit statement
References
ABSTRACT
Criminologists have frequently debated whether offenders are specialists, in that they consistently perform either one offense or similar offenses, or versatile by performing any crime based on opportunities and situational provocations. Such foundational research has yet to be developed regarding cybercrimes, or offenses enabled by computer technology and the Internet. This study address this issue using a sample of 37 offender networks. The results show variations in the offending behaviors of those involved in cybercrime. Almost half of the offender networks in this sample appeared to be cybercrime specialists, in that they only performed certain forms of cybercrime. The other half performed various types of crimes on and offline. The relative equity in specialization relative to versatility, particularly in both on and offline activities, suggests that there may be limited value in treating cybercriminals as a distinct offender group. Furthermore, this study calls to question what factors influence an offender’s pathway into cybercrime, whether as a specialized or versatile offender. The actors involved in cybercrime networks, whether as specialists or generalists, were enmeshed into broader online offender networks who may have helped recognize and act on opportunities to engage in phishing, malware, and other economic offenses.
Introduction
Criminologists have frequently debated whether offenders are specialists, in that they consistently perform either one offense or similar offenses, or versatile by performing any crime based on opportunities and situational provocations (Britt, 1994, pp. 173–191; DeLisi, 2003; Moffitt, 1993; Piquero, Farrington, & Blumstein, 2007; Wolfgang, Figlio, & Sellin, 1972; Youngs & Canter, 2012). The issue of offense specialization or versatility is often examined in the context of developmental theories of crime (e.g. Moffitt, Caspi, Rutter, & Silva, 2001: Laub & Sampson, 1993) as a way to assess the development and progression of a criminal career. Contradictory evidence is presented by researchers who support the general theory of crime (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990) or rational choice frameworks (Cornish and Clarke, 2014; Guerette, Stenius, & McGloin, 2005), who argue the absence of specialization is a result of individuals acting on opportunities when available.