Offender–victim relationship and offender motivation in the context of indirect cyber abuse
| Published date | 01 September 2018 |
| Author | Danielle Reynald,Michael Townsley,Clair Alston-Knox,Julianne Webster,Zarina Vakhitova |
| DOI | 10.1177/0269758017743073 |
| Date | 01 September 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Offender–victim relationship
and offender motivation in the
context of indirect cyber abuse:
A mixed-method exploratory
analysis
Zarina Vakhitova
Griffith University, Australia
Julianne Webster
Griffith University, Australia
Clair Alston-Knox
Griffith University, Australia
Danielle Reynald
Griffith University, Australia
Michael Townsley
Griffith University, Australia
Abstract
Cyber abuse can be executed directly (e.g. by sending derogatory emails or text messages
addressed to the victim) or indirectly (e.g. by posting derogatory, private or false information,
documents, images or videos about the victim online). This exploratory, mixed-method triangu-
lated study examines cyber abuse crime events with the goal of identifying factors associated with
the increased risk of personal victimization from both direct and indirect methods of cyber abuse.
First, in-depth qualitative interviews with cyber abuse victims (n¼12) were conducted. The
interviews were analysed using thematic analysis to generate hypotheses. These hypotheses were
then tested using content analysis of newspaper reports (n¼110) and victims’ posts on online
Corresponding author:
Zarina Vakhitova, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, 176 Messines Ridge Road, Mt Gravatt, Brisbane QLD
4122, Australia.
Email: Zarina.Vakhitova@GriffithUni.edu.au
International Review of Victimology
2018, Vol. 24(3) 347–366
ªThe Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0269758017743073
journals.sagepub.com/home/irv
forums (n¼91) describing incidents of cyber abuse. Logistic regression using Bayesian Model
Averaging analysis revealed that the combination of a prior offender–victim relationship and
expressive motivation best predicts the use of indirect methods of cyber abuse, while direct
methods of cyber abuse are more likely to occur when the offender does not know the victim and
is motivated by instrumental ends. Implications for crime prevention are also discussed.
Keywords
Cyber abuse, offender–victim relationship, offender motivation, Bayesian Model Averaging, logistic
regression
Introduction
Advances in computer and telecommunication technologies over the past several decades have
drastically improved the way people communicate with each other, at the same time producing
new opportunities and novel methods for interpersonal aggression. Internet-enabled devices make
it easier to stalk and harass a larger pool of potential victims, as King (2006) says:
What makes cyber bullying so dangerous ...is that anyone can practice it without having to confront
the victim. You don’t have to be strong or fast, simply equipped with a cell phone or computer and a
willingness to terrorize.
In addition to eliminating the need for direct physical confrontation with the intended victim,
some methods of cyber abuse (a broad term for cyber stalking and cyber harassment) eliminate the
need for any online contact between the offender and the victim. This type of indirect cyber abuse
can be committed by posting derogatory, private or false information (in the form of comments,
documents, images, videos, etc.) about a person on online forums, social media or specially
designed websites. Revenge porn (‘the sharing of nude or sexual images without consent’ (Powell
et al., 2017) is an example of indirect cyber abuse. Despite its indirect nature, as one victim’s story
illustrates, it can have devastating, long-lasting effects on the victim’s life:
A ten-year nightmare...I am now 24. The guy that took the pictures (and whose penis is shown in
the pics) is now 33. He posts the pics online with my full name to humiliate me. Search my name, and
his links are among the top results. I have since tried to move on with my life ...He still lurks.
I seriously can’t escape him in this life, no matter what I accomplish. All these years and he still posts
his revenge pics of me and taunts me like he just took them recently ...This guy is going to kill me
one day. I’ve moved f rom my hometown, from my home state. I have no permane nt phone number.
I don’t talk to anyone from high school, I don’t make new friends. I try to hide, but he finds me.
(Experience Project, 2014)
Indirect cyber abuse appears to be particularly difficult to prevent and control because most
currently available crime preventionstrategies are rooted in the assumptionthat cyber abuse requires
at least someonline contact between the offenderand the victim for the abuseto occur (Reyns, 2010).
Subsequently, crime prevention strategies are designed to reduce the likelihood of cyber stalking by
eliminating the opportunity for the offender to contact the victim to perpetrate the abuse. For
example, Reyns (2010: 110) recommends that online users ‘do not make [their] email address
348 International Review of Victimology 24(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial