CYBER DEVIANCE

—Costuna, Franklin R.

What is cyber deviance?

Wherever there are constraints on personal expression, there will always be spaces, virtual or
otherwise, that allow people to feel secure in expressing their identities and validated in their
opposition of oppressive structures.

Cyber-deviance can be broadly defined as engaging in deviant or criminal behaviors with the
facilitation of technology (Furnell, 2003; Grabosky, 2001; Holt & Bossler, 2014).

Wherever there are constraints on personal expression, there will always be spaces, virtual or
otherwise, that allow people to feel secure in expressing their identities and validated in their
opposition of oppressive structures.

Virtual deviance encapsulates how deviant subculturists express themselves through online
media – how they interact with each other, how they game, and how they present their deviant
identities through anonymous and non-anonymous means.

Consistent with the age-crime curve approach (Moffitt, 1993b; Shulman et al., 2013; Farrington,
2017) which sustains that teenagers engage into deviant behaviors more often than other
categories, adolescence is worth considering in studying deviance. In addition, with the spread
of Internet technology, a new type of deviant behavior emerged, which is known as
cyber-deviance, particularly prevalent in adolescents' lives. As such, teenagers' online deviant
behavior has become a matter of grave concern for parents, educators, and researchers.

Nevertheless, like in the case of crime and deviance, there is no clear demarcation between
cybercrime and cyber deviance. This is because norm-breaking behaviors may be included in
the formal regulations at any time and certain behaviors that are sanctioned by law may not be
regarded as deviant in all contexts. In the study of cyber deviance as occurring in the
adolescent stage, scholars mostly focus on digital piracy (Udris, 2016), online harassment and
computer hacking (Lee, 2018), cyberbullying (Hinduja and Patchin, 2010; Holt et al., 2012; Lee,
2018), sexting and online sexual exposure (Karaian, 2012; Garcia-Gomez, 2017; Dodaj et al.,
2020).

Deviant behavior on the computer and the Internet is rising as technology use increases
(Hollinger, 1996b; Power, 2000; Vatis, 2000). Deviant behavior, when using computers and the
Internet, includes the same types of deviant activities performed before the popularity of
computers or the inception of the internet.

These activities include: using the Internet for illegal activities that violate local, state, and/or
federal laws, inappropriate use defined as a violation of the intended use of the Internet or
computer, and/or purpose and goal, obscene activities defined as entering a pornography
website or selling pornography goods on the Internet; using the Internet or computer to violate
copyrights laws or other contracts such as institutional or third party copyright, license
agreements and other contracts, intentionally disrupting the Internet traffic by spreading a
computer virus, spreading rumors about another person on the Internet, intimidating, stalking
and frightening another person on the Internet.

Other types of deviance under scrutiny are different types of aggression, antisocial disorders in
adolescents, sexual offenses, sexual deviance, social deviance, white-collar crimes,
delinquency, and cybercrime. With regards to the reviews conducted on the topic of deviance,
the main topics of interest are specific forms of offline deviance, namely, drug use, alcohol
abuse, violence, dating violence, sexual aggression, deviant sexual fantasies, illicit sexual
behaviors, sexual deviance, ritualistic child abuse, pornography exposure, self-injury, etc.

At the same time, researchers focus on different types of online deviance, such as cyberbullying
(including adolescent cyberbullying), Internet-based radicalization, online sexual deviance,
online negative user behavior, cyber dating abuse, social spamming, problematic social media
usage, and problematic use of the Internet.

Concerning online deviance, most of the systematic reviews refer to a specific type of behavior,
which is cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2014; Watts et al., 2017; Vale et al., 2018; Rosa et al.,
2019; Zych et al., 2019). While reviews on online deviance focus on main theories of deviance,
the systematic reviews in the field of online literature focus on specific online behaviors and their
correlates, including the predictors of offline deviance mentioned before, Internet access, and
computer use. Of particular interest is the systematic review of Estévez et al. (2020), which
provides a bridge between online and cyber-deviance by revealing similar patterns in the
development of bullying and cyberbullying behavior. In this sense, the authors show that risk
factors and protective factors of the two problematic behaviors mostly coincide.

With regards to the most common predictors of online deviance, they can be grouped into five
categories: family patterns (parental abuse, parental deviance, family history and abuse,
parenting style, etc.), socio-demographic aspects (gender and age effects, demographic and
socio-economic, etc.), victimization (offline victimization, traditional bullying, physical and offline
activities, exposure, etc.), school and individual factors (school problems, school bonding,
school involvement, empathy, school perception, school behavior, prosocial involvement, etc.)
and Internet and computer use (home Internet access, digital inequality, frequency usage of
Internet, technology information habitus, etc.).

In relation to cyber-deviance (see Figure 9), the frequent predictors for cyber deviance
encompass the following: traditional bullying, offline victimization, parental abuse, alcohol and
substance use, Internet access, Internet misuse, compulsive Internet use, substance use, online
exposure, parental control, school factors, self-efficacy, socioeconomic status, parenting, digital
inequality, information habitus, etc
Predictors of Deviance and Cyber-Deviance in Social Sciences

Given the high concern of researchers for the predictors of deviance and online deviance, we
have provided a more detailed review of these predictors. Therefore, the present review
attempted to provide more clarity on the most encountered predictors of deviance. To provide an
understanding and an overview of this field, we considered it necessary to categorize these
predictors, which are widely presented in the literature. The analyses presented show that the
most common predictors of deviance relate to family patterns, socio-demographic aspects,
socialization, victimization, and school and individual factors. Family, peer group, and school are
the main social spaces of adolescents. In addition, considering the impact of the Internet and
Web 2.0 technologies on socialization, identity formation, and leisure, we explored the
predictors of offline and online deviance.

Family Patterns
Family relationships have a major influence on teenagers' level of engagement in deviant acts
by loosening social constraints - Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber (1986), Thornberry (1987).
Centered on the impact of parents' deviant behavior and attitudes on children's delinquency,
deviant behaviors and attitudes paradigm analyzes family deviance, which includes family
disorganization, parental involvement in lawbreaking acts and parental deviant values, and
tolerating attitude related to dishonesty and criminality, as major risk factors of engagement in
deviant conducts.

Socio-Demographic Aspects
Researchers indicate a link between living in a certain area of a city and deviance. Grounded on
the seminal work of Wilson (2012) regarding the criminalization process of people living in poor
neighborhoods, the underclass, sociologists have noticed that there is a high rate of crimes and
delinquency in such disadvantaged neighborhoods, which are inhabited by jobless people. The
link between deviancy and the neighborhood context represents a factor that mediates the link
among peer influence, family context, and deviance (Sampson and Laub, 1997; Sampson et al.,
2002; Hwang and Sampson, 2014; Billings and Hoekstra, 2019). In addition, the structural
inequality mirrored by urban topology is amplified by network effects (DiMaggio and Garip,
2012).

Socialization
Association with deviant peers is related to the engagement in deviant and delinquent behavior
(Agnew, 1991; Warr and Stafford, 1991; Sutherland et al., 1992; Matsueda and Anderson, 1998;
Haynie and Osgood, 2005; Akers, 2017). The inquiry of whether one is deviant because one
belongs to a deviant group, encompassed in the socialization theories (Agnew, 1985, 1991;
Warr and Stafford, 1991; Dishion and Tipsord, 2011; Lin and Yi, 2016; Akers, 2017; McGloin and
Thomas, 2019; Schwartz et al., 2019), or whether one chooses to be a part of a group with
antisocial behavior because of a personal inclination for deviance, known as selection
mechanism (Matsueda and Anderson, 1998; Haynie and Osgood, 2005; Barnes et al., 2006;
Schwartz et al., 2019; Gallupe et al., 2020), helps capture this causal relationship.

Victimization
Researchers (Gorman-Smith et al., 1998) have established that there are significant
associations among the profiles of offenders and patterns of family involvement, with
non-offenders being more likely to have families with minimal problems, with serious chronic
offenders belonging to families with many problems, such as issues of neglect, and with
escalating offenders having a conflictual family background that is characterized by disruption.
In the case of escalating offenders, the influence of family functioning toward engaging in
deviant acts seems to be corroborated with peer deviance, the authors conclude.

School and Individual Factors

As Davies (1995, 1999) emphasizes, the socio-economic background is a weak predictor of
deviance, while difficulties with school, operationalized as lower grades and the likelihood to
drop out of school, strongly predict engagement in deviant acts. Despite the way the causal
relationship between academic failure and deviance is questioned (Phillips and Kelly, 1979),
there is no doubt that school deviance correlates to academic underachievement. Researchers
have found that socioeconomic status, cultural capital, and social capital have an impact on
academic results, even after controlling for family characteristics (DiMaggio, 1982).

Internet and Computer Use

Lee (2018) identifies two main theoretical frameworks that explain the occurrence of online
deviant behaviors: self-control and social learning theory. Rooted in the general theory of crime,
self-control theory asserts that individuals with low-level control have a higher chance of
engaging in online deviant acts such as computer piracy, online exposure to sexually explicit
materials, online harassment, and cyber deviance in general (Holt et al., 2012, 2015). Moreover,
teenagers who have a higher sensation-seeking attitude have a positive attitude toward
risk-taking and most often indulge in illegal downloading of music, games, and sexual content
(Weisskirch and Murphy, 2004). Deviant peer affiliation partially mediates the link between
adolescent sensation seeking and internet gaming addiction (Tian et al., 2019).

Association with deviant peers, including online interaction with virtual peers, is the main
predictor of cyber-deviance (Bossler and Holt, 2009; Burgess-Proctor et al., 2009; Bossler et al.,
2011; Holt et al., 2012; Lee, 2018). Subcultural theorists explain the mechanisms through which
cyberspace assists in justifying engagement in deviant acts such as computer hacking and
digital piracy, transferring social relationships from offline to online, and creating communities
and shared norms (Holt, 2007, 2020; Holt and Copes, 2010; McCuddy and Esbensen, 2020).

Computer proficiency and technology use correlate with cyber deviant acts, including hacking,
digital piracy, and online harassment (Lee, 2018). Therefore, we can conclude that the digital
world is a field where actors attempt to gain social, symbolic, and digital capital to ensure and
justify their power (Ragnedda and Muschert, 2013; Lindell, 2017; O'Neil and Ackland, 2020.
Cybercrimes And The Role Of The Social Worker

Preventive Role:
A social worker can play an important role in preventing cybercrime, especially among students,
especially school children. There are certain signs or behavioral changes that a social worker
can recognize and conduct counseling. A social worker can discuss things like cyberbullying
and how it affects an individual.

Counseling:
Cybercrime causes huge physiological problems in certain cases, especially when the victim
was emotionally attached to the cyberattacker. In cases of extortion where the victim has shared
personal photos or videos the victim may suffer from guilt and fear. In such cases, counselling is
very important as the victim lives in constant fear or guilt.