Advertisement

Understanding Internet Fraud: Denial of Risk Theory Perspective

  • Martin OffeiEmail author
  • Francis Kofi Andoh-Baidoo
  • Emmanuel Ayaburi
  • David Asamoah
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 558)

Abstract

Internet fraud has become a global problem attracting the attention of researchers, practitioners and policy makers. Existing empirical theoretical studies on internet crimes have mostly used neutralization and deterrence theories. Despite the insights from these theories, we are still observing an increase in the number of internet crimes. We argue that Denial of Risk theory may provide new insights on internet crimes such as internet fraud. We examined how each of the three dimensions of Denial of Risk theory (scapegoating, self-confidence and comparing of risk) serve as antecedent of the intention to commit internet fraud. Using responses from 350 individuals from internet fraud hotspots, we showed that scapegoating, self-confidence and comparing of risk are positively related to intention to commit internet fraud. The study offers theoretical and practical contributions to research in the spectrum of internet fraud and the theoretical application of denial of risk in cybercrime research.

Keywords

Internet fraud Denial of risk theory Scapegoating Self-confidence Comparing of risk 

References

  1. Apostolidis, T., Fieulaine, N., Simonin, L., Rolland, G.: Cannabis use, time perspective and risk perception: evidence of a moderating effect. Psychol. Health 21(5), 571–592 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boateng, R., Longe, O., Isabalija, R.S., Budu, J.: Sakawa - cybercrime and criminality in Ghana. J. Inf. Technol. Impact 11(2), 85–100 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. Boyle, K.M., Walker, L.S.: The neutralization and denial of sexual violence in college party subcultures. Deviant Behav. 37(12), 1392–1410 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brooks, G.: Explaining corruption: drifting in and out of corruption and techniques of neutralization. In: Criminology of Corruption, pp. 107–125. Palgrave Macmillan, London (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chatterjee, S., Kar, A.K., Dwivedi, Y.K., Kizgin, H.: Prevention of cybercrimes in smart cities of India: from a citizen’s perspective. Inf. Technol. People (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-05-2018-0251
  6. Choo, K.K.R.: Cyber threat landscape faced by financial and insurance industry. Trends Issues Crime Crim. Justice 408, 1 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. Choudrie, J., Dwivedi, Y.K.: Investigating the research approaches for examining technology adoption issues. J. Res. Pract. 1(1), 1 (2005). http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/viewFile/4/7
  8. Gottschalk, P., Smith, R.: Criminal entrepreneurship, white-collar criminality, and neutralization theory. J. Enterp. Commun.: People Places Glob. Econ. 5(4), 300–308 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grabosky, P.: Organized cybercrime and national security. In: Cybercrime Risks and Responses, pp. 67–80. Palgrave Macmillan, London (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harris, L.C., Dumas, A.: Online consumer misbehavior: an application of neutralization theory. Mark. Theory 9(4), 379–402 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hutchings, A.: Hacking and fraud: qualitative analysis of online offending and victimization. In: Global Criminology: Crime and Victimization in the Globalized Era, pp. 93–114 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jegede, A.E., Olowookere, I.E., Elegbeleye, A.O.: Youth identity, peer influence and internet crime participation in Nigeria: a reflection. IFE Psycholog 24(1), 37–47 (2016a)Google Scholar
  13. Jegede, A.E., Oyesomi, K., Olorunyomi, B.R.: Youth crime and the organized attributes of cyber fraud in the modern technological age: a thematic review. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Hum. Rev. 6(1), 153–164 (2016b)Google Scholar
  14. Koay, K.Y.: Understanding consumers’ purchase intention towards counterfeit luxury goods: an integrated model of neutralization techniques and perceived risk theory. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logistics 30(2), 495–516 (2018)Google Scholar
  15. Kubic, T.T.: Internet Fraud Complaint Center (2001). https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/internet-fraud-crime-problems
  16. Lazarus, S.: Birds of a feather flock together: the Nigerian cyber fraudsters (Yahoo Boys) and hip hop artists. Criminol. Crim. Justice Law Soc. 19(2), 63–80 (2018)Google Scholar
  17. Li, W., Cheng, L.: Effects of neutralization techniques and rational choice theory on internet abuse in the workplace. In: PACIS, p. 169 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. McMullan, J.L., Rege, A.: Online crime and internet gambling. J. Gambl. Issues (24), 54–85 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. Mekonnen, S., Padayachee, K., Meshesha, M.: A privacy preserving context-aware insider threat prediction and prevention model predicated on the components of the fraud diamond. In: 2015 Annual Global Online Conference on Information and Computer Technology (GOCICT), pp. 60–65. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  20. Morris, R.G., Higgins, G.E.: Neutralizing potential and self-reported digital piracy: a multitheoretical exploration among college undergraduates. Crim. Justice Rev. 34(2), 173–195 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Odou, P., Bonnin, G.: Consumers’ neutralization strategies to counter normative pressure: the case of illegal downloading. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), 29(1), 103–121 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Park, J., Sung, C.: The effect of online piracy deterrence on self-control and piracy intention, PACIS, Jooyeon Park, School of Business, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea (2015)Google Scholar
  23. Peretti-Watel, P.: Neutralization theory and the denial of risk: some evidence from cannabis use among French adolescents*. Br. J. Sociol. 54, 21–42 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shareef, M.A., Dwivedi, Y.K., Kumar, V., Davies, G., Rana, N., Baabdullah, A.: Purchase intention in an electronic commerce environment: a trade-off between controlling measures and operational performance. Inf. Technol. People (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-05-2018-0241
  25. Sigala, M.: How “Bad” are you? Justification and normalisation of online deviant customer behaviour. In: Schegg, R., Stangl, B. (eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2017, pp. 607–622. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51168-9_44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Siponen, M., Vance, A.: Neutralization: new insights into the problem of employee information systems security policy violations. MIS Q. 34, 487–502 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith, W.R., Torstensson, M., Johansson, K.: Perceived risk and fear of crime: gender differences in contextual sensitivity. Int. Rev. Victimol. 8(2), 159–181 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sugiura, L.: Challenging the risks in online medicine purchasing: respectable deviance. In: Respectable Deviance and Purchasing Medicine Online, pp. 101–138. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vida, I., Kos Koklič, M., Kukar-Kinney, M., Penz, E.: Predicting consumer digital piracy behavior: the role of rationalization and perceived consequences. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 6(4), 298–313 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Offei
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francis Kofi Andoh-Baidoo
    • 2
  • Emmanuel Ayaburi
    • 2
  • David Asamoah
    • 3
  1. 1.Koforidua Technical UniversityKoforiduaGhana
  2. 2.University of Texas Rio Grande ValleyEdinburgUSA
  3. 3.Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and TechnologyKumasiGhana

Personalised recommendations