Skip to main content

Identifying risky Internet use: Associating negative online experience with specific online behaviours

Sally M Gainsbury ; Matthew Browne ; Matthew Rockloff (2018) — New Media & Society

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1177/1461444818815442 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Australia
Tags:   AI-Enabled Fraud, Australia, Cybercrime, Internet Use, Measurement, Online Dating, Online Victimization, Platform Policy, Privacy Behavior, Risk Factors, Romance Scams, Targeted Scams, Victim Experience
What do these research terms mean?
Preprint
A manuscript shared before formal peer review and publication. Check whether a later published version is available.
Dataset
A collection of data or examples for others to inspect or reuse. It can appear in Library search and topic mapping, but RSRC does not use dataset records as evidence in Research Insights.
Dissertation or thesis
Research submitted for an academic degree. This describes its format, not its reliability.
Journal article
An article published in a journal. This label alone does not establish peer review, study quality, or how well the findings apply elsewhere.
Qualitative research
Examines experiences, meanings, or processes, often through interviews or observations. It can explain how something happens without estimating how common it is.
Quantitative research
Uses numerical measurements to describe patterns or test relationships. A relationship between two measurements does not by itself show that one causes the other.
Systematic review
Uses a planned, documented method to find and assess research addressing a question. Its conclusions still depend on the included studies and what the search covered.
Meta-analysis
Statistically combines results from multiple studies. Combining studies does not remove weaknesses in their design or make unlike populations interchangeable.
Not classified
This record has no recognized label in this filter. It does not mean the publication used no method, or that no research exists.

Definitions draw on DataCite resource types; Cochrane review methods; NLM: association and causation. RSRC’s dataset and classification rules are explained in our methodology.

Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
Source updates

                

                    No notice found at last check
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Source updates

                    

                    
No incoming update notice was found in the dated Crossref response. Coverage is incomplete, particularly for corrections and expressions of concern; this is not a guarantee that the source is valid or unchanged.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Last source-status attempt:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Synopsis generation recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
An authenticated administrator approved the bibliographic record for public Library display. This is not a review of every research claim.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Approved for public display:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
This study investigates how negative online experiences relate to distinct online activities, aiming to identify a practical framework for understanding online victimisation. The researchers surveyed Australian adults (N = 1,773; mean age around 42) to examine a broad range of online harms and the specific behaviors engaged in online. They sought to uncover an underlying structure of negative outcomes and determine how particular online activities map onto different types of harm, in order to inform policy, prevention, and education. Using an author-developed measure of 25 negative online consequences and a separate set of items describing online activities, the study employed factor analysis to reveal four subgroups of negative experiences: hacking/identity theft, abuse/harassment, non-targeted scams, and targeted scams. The results indicated that non-targeted scams were the most prevalent category, followed by abuse/harassment, with hacking/identity theft and targeted scams forming additional, distinct risk domains. The analysis also showed that participation in certain online activities was differentially associated with these harm subtypes. In particular, engagement with online pornography, multiple discussion forums, and actions such as online dating and gaming were linked to higher victimisation risk across several categories; while diversity and expenditure on specific activities (e.g., dating, pornography, online games) were associated with greater exposure to fraud and abuse. The findings emphasize that overall Internet involvement alone does not predict victimisation; rather, the risk is more closely tied to the particular mix of activities and the level of engagement with each. The authors acknowledge limitations, including the cross-sectional design and non-representative online panel, which constrain temporal inferences and generalizability. They propose that the results offer a framework to guide ongoing research, educational messaging, and policy development focused on reducing online harms through targeted protective behaviors and site security practices.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
Research has insufficiently differentiated cybercrime types and linked distinct negative online experiences to specific risk activities. The mechanisms and causal variables underlying associations between online behaviors and victimization, including privacy and psychological factors, were not examined. The authors also identify a need for consumer-recognizable website-security indicators and strategies that preserve connectivity benefits while reducing exposure to victimization.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
A cross-sectional online survey of 1,773 Australian adults who used the Internet at least monthly measured self-reported negative online consequences in the prior year and participation, diversity, frequency, and spending across online activities. The authors used polychoric correlations, exploratory and hierarchical factor analysis, reliability estimates, lasso predictor selection, and logistic regression on binary harm-category outcomes.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
Cross-sectional data prevent temporal or causal inference, including whether negative experiences changed later online behavior. The online-panel sample is not representative of Australian adults. Self-report has limited accuracy, and complex online behaviors were measured with few items, which may have caused misreporting. The study examined behaviors rather than mechanisms, including underlying psychological processes.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Assess consumer-identifiable indicators of website security and methods to encourage use of secure sites for financial transactions. Examine how privacy behaviors reduce victimization risk during potentially risky online activities. Study psychological factors underlying risky online engagement, and design and evaluate risk communications that encourage protective behaviors.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.