Moral Acceptability as a Predictor of Trolling and Cyber-Vandalism

• In Event: Cyberharassment & Victimization

Abstract

Perceptions of moral acceptability are known to impact offending propensities, but the predictive value of acceptability might vary across cybercrimes. Using an original dataset of 960 adult American Internet users derived from a Qualtrics panel survey (2021), the current study compared the predictors of two forms of online offending—trolling (online harassment) and cyber-vandalism (web defacement)—that differ in terms of their methods and targets. Respondents were asked about their likelihood of engaging in both trolling and cyber-vandalism as described by vignettes, and our analyses assessed individual-level predictors of each offense, including the level of moral acceptability attributed to each offense, the perceived consequences of participating in each offense, and the attitudes/values toward each offense held by significant others. Preliminary findings revealed that trolling and cyber-vandalism are differently predicted by our key independent variables, suggesting differences in the relative explanatory power of moral acceptability for predicting engagement in various forms of online offending, and further emphasizing the distinction between cyber-enabled and cyber-dependent offenses. We also discuss both the theoretical and practical implications of our research for understanding and addressing online offending.

Authors

• Andrew D. Nevin, University of Guelph

• Jin R. Lee, George Mason University

• Dylan Reynolds, Cape Breton University