With advancements in computer and information technologies, criminals-terrorists in particular have devised new ways of committing crime through the internet sometimes without being detected, but with devastating impacts. A common type of digital crime that is used by internet hackers and terror gangs to compromise government and private organization information systems is cybercrime. Digital crimes are crimes committed to compromise the integrity, confidentiality and availability of computer systems or data (Jewkes & Yar, 2013). Digital criminals normally modify, alter, impair or interfere with the access to a digital or computer information system. Criminology theories such as rational choice, social disorganization, social learning, labelling, strain and social control theories have been used to try and explain the reason and motive behind criminal behavior for a long time now. However, with the emergence of a new category of digital crimes, other closely related theories have had to be formulated to try and explain what motivates digital criminals such as terrorists. According to Taylor, Fritsch and Liederbach (2014), these digital crime theories include psychological, social, process, social structure and political theories of crime. They argue that these theories may be used to understand why digital criminals and terrorists engage in this kind of criminal activities.
The Psychological Theory of Digital Crime
According to this theory, crime is mainly caused by individual influences such as personality, cognitive ability and impulsiveness. Under the personality element of this theory, it is believed that an offender’s personality in terms of their antisocial behavior and other traits may lead them to commit certain crimes such as digital crimes in order to satisfy their distorted thoughts and behaviors from which they derive pleasure (McGuire, 2004). Further, certain events that occur in an individual’s early childhood such as lack of parental approval and punishment makes one to be predisposed to commit crimes like digital crimes. Hence, according to this theory, incomplete cognitive development and negative experiences during one’s childhood years may lead them to engage in criminal activities that the society considers immoral. An example of a psychological theory of crime is the psychodynamic perspective of crime first propounded by Freud. According to Freud, there are certain human personality traits that drive people to take part in crime. One such trait is the pleasure principle whereby an individual participates in a criminal activity in order to satisfy unconscious personal selfish ends and drives and for self-gratification. Freud also talked about the ego trait that is the reality principle that takes social conventions and practicality into account before committing a crime.
Lastly, there is the superego which is the conscious part of us that helps us to understand moral standards and to distinguish wrong from right. There is also the behavior element of this theory which presumes that through experiences in life, people are able to develop or learn criminal tendencies even if they were not born with them. According to the psychological theory, crime represents internal conflicts and tensions that exist in individuals’ psyche and express themselves in form of violent and immoral acts such as computer hacking and cybercrimes (McGuire, 2004, p. 49). An example of a crime that could be explained using the psychological theories of crime is cyber-terrorism. Other forms of digital crime whose motivation may be explained using these theories include phishing, and malicious coding. Most of the offenders who commit these crimes have had certain psychological problems at some point in their lives thus usually want to express their psychopathic ideas by using the internet to harm their victims.
The Social Process Theory of Crime
This theory explains crime causation by reference to an individual’s social interaction with other people, processes and organizations. It is based on the premise or assumption that the kind of social relationships that people keep or maintain can greatly influence them to commit certain crimes. Further, the type of social, religious or political belief or ideology that one subscribes to may influence their decision to engage in criminal activities in order to fit into a social organization or group. This theory may be divided into social learning, labeling and social control theories. According to Siegel (2000), the social control theory is based on the society’s failure to rein on criminal tendencies. On the other hand, the social learning theory postulates that crime and criminal activity are learnt over time by people as they go about the socialization process with people from various social backgrounds. The labelling theory states that when individuals are negatively labelled or described in the society as being criminal, they are more likely than not to become criminals. Within the social process theory is also the differential association theory that was developed by Sutherland and which states that a person’s criminal acts and behavior may be explained by their perceptions and definitions that favor crime over conventional behavioral values. The most common example of digital crime whose causation may be explained using these social learning theories is computer or cyber-crime.
Rational Choice Theory
The other additional theory that a researcher could use to explain the cause of digital crime and non-digital crime is the utilitarian theory called the rational choice theory. According to this theory propounded by Clarke and Cornish but later developed by Cesare Beccaria, criminals being humans with the ability to reason and make informed decisions normally weigh options in terms of the social costs and benefits or between means and ends before they may make a rational choice to commit crime. Individuals engage in criminal acts if they have a belief that they would derive certain benefits from the criminal acts and possibly escape punishment (Higgins, 2007, p.36). For example, if the likelihood of being discovered or caught committing a crime is high, they will not commit the crime while if the costs or means justify the ends of the crime, then they will engage in the crime. An example of this crime is cybercrime whereby hackers have to make a rational choice between compromising internet or computer systems for their own ends and risks involved in the commission of the crime.
According to Taylor, Fritsch, and Liederbach (2014), in most cases, because computer crimes are difficult to discover and punish, cyber-criminal offenders will find it easier to commit the crime. This theory could also be used to explain the motive behind non-digital crime offenders such as robbers and fraudsters. After making a rational between the social costs involved in the commission of robbery and fraud, such offenders will commit such crime or not commits them at all. The main assumption according to Higgins (2007) that is made in the rational choice theory is that criminals are driven mainly by self-interest and individualism that enable them to advance their criminal goals and motives after rational calculation of the means or ends involved in the commission of a certain crime. Furthermore, such criminals normally carry out a cost benefit analysis in order to maximize their personal pleasures. Further, also closely related to this theory that has been used to explain causation in digital crime is the routine activity theory. According to Hutchings and Hayes (2009), this theory could be used to explain predatory crimes of cyber or digital piracy and phishing activities over the internet and computers. According to this theory, it is the presence of a suitable target near the reach of the offender that motivates them through their routine activities to commit the crime. An example would be the non-digital crime of rape or the digital crime of cyber bullying and sexual harassment that one is exposed to when they constantly surf the internet and expose their private information to routine cyber criminals who are lurking around.
References
Higgins, G. E. (2007, January). Digital piracy, self-control theory, and rational choice: An examination of the role of value. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1(1), 33-55.
Hutchings, A., & Hayes, H. (2009). Routine activity theory and phishing victimization: Who gets caught in the 'net'? Journal of Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 20(3), 1-20.
Jewkes, Y., & Yar, M. (2013). Handbook of internet crime. London & New York: Routledge.
McGuire, J. (2004). Understanding psychology of crime: Perspectives on theory and action. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Siegel, L. J. (2000). Social process theories. In L. J. Siegel, Criminology (pp. 220-253). Belmont, CA: Wordsworth Publishing Co.
Taylor, R. W., Fritsch, E. J., & Liederbach, J. (2014). Digital crime and digital terrorism. London: Pearson Education.
