More Than Just Friends

• Author: Timothy McCuddy,Matt Vogel
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016814557010
• Published date: 01 June 2015
• Date: 01 June 2015
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

More Than Just Friends:

Online Social Networks

and Offending

Timothy McCuddy

1

and Matt Vogel

1

Abstract

The study of peer-group processes has a rich history in criminology. The dramatic growth in online

social network websites has fundamentally changed peer-group interaction; however, relatively little

research has considered how socialization processes observed in traditional interaction translate to

online interaction. Using a sample of 583 undergraduate students from a mid-southern university,

this study explores the concurrency between self-reported offending and exposure to criminal

behavior in social network websites. Results demonstrate a strong, positive association between

individual behavior and exposure to criminal behavior in online networks, suggesting that the pro-

cesses underlying traditional social interaction also characterize online interaction. These results

underscore the importance of online networks for understanding the etiology of criminal behavior.

Keywords

online social networks, peer networks, offending

Introduction

A wealth of criminological research has established peer influence to be among the strongest pre-

dictors of crime and delinquency (see Pratt et al., 2010, for a recent review). The concurrency

between individual and peer behavior is one of the most consistently reported findings in the liter-

ature (Pratt et al., 2010; Warr, 2002). This association has been observed for both self-report and

official data, across social contexts, and for a variety of antisocial and otherwise criminal behaviors.

The dramatic increase in online social networking websites (SNS for short) over the past two

decades fundamentally changed the ways in which adolescents and young adults interact with their

peers. Young people now spend considerably more time interacting digitally than even 5 years ago

(Lenhart, Purcell, Smith, & Zickhur, 2010; Smith & Brenner, 2012). The advent of SNS has altered

the composition of youth social networks. Adolescents and young adults typically have larger online

1

Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Missouri, St. Louis, MO, USA

Corresponding Author:

Timothy McCuddy, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Missouri, St. Louis, One University Blvd,

St. Louis, MO 63121, USA.

Email: tgmqn5@mail.umsl.edu

Criminal Justice Review

2015, Vol. 40(2) 169-189

ª2014 Georgia State University

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0734016814557010

cjr.sagepub.com

networks than personal networks and their friendships are no longer limited to the traditional geo-

graphic confines of the neighborhood and school (Acar, 2008).

SNS have the potential to serve as powerful agents of socialization, as youth are exposed to

diverse attitudes and models of behaviors from a wide range of actors. Indeed, emerging research

suggests certain health-related behaviors, such as medical decision making, are diffused throughout

SNS (Centola, 2010; Lefebvre & Bornkessel, 2013). It bears to reason that attitudes or messages sup-

porting maladaptive behaviors, like violence or substance use, may be similarly diffused throughout

virtual networks; however, the potentially criminogenic influence of SNS has received little atten-

tion in the empirical research.

The following analysis takes a step toward bridging this gap in the literature by examining the

association between exposure to criminal behavior in one’s SNS and self-reported offending. Most

contemporary explanations of peer influence focus on one of two competing processes: social learn-

ing and behavioral homophily. The social learning perspective suggests that attitudes and models of

behavior are transmitted through interpersonal interaction within social networks. The behavioral

homophily perspective argues that ‘‘birds of a feather flock together’’ or people tend to choose

friends who are similar to themselves.

While social learning and behavioral homophily may be viewed as competing hypotheses, both

reflect a degree of behavioral concurrency that is imperative to establish before further theoretical

tests are performed. Therefore, this study is oriented around a relatively straightforward question—

does the concurrency between individual and peer behavior observed in traditional social networks

exist in online social networks? The answer to this question is the first step to identifying how online

peer behavior might influence individual off-line offending. While scholars have previously consid-

ered the influence of traditional criminological theories on online offending, this study focuses spe-

cifically on off-line behavior. The empirical analyses unfold through a series of negative binomial

models regressing exposure to criminal behavioral on SNS on self-reported offending among a sam-

ple of students at a mid-southern university. The implications of the findings are discussed in terms

of their contribution to the broader criminological literature as well as in relation to the role of SNS

in the etiology of criminal behavior.

Theoretical Framework

Two theoretical perspectives are commonly employed to explain the concurrency between individ-

ual and peer behavior: social learning theory and behavior homophily. While they are often viewed

as competing explanations, both predict a strong degree of similarity between individual behavior

and the behaviors to which one is exposed to by peers. Social learning theory assumes attitudes

favoring deviance are the result of interaction with intimate social groups (Akers, 1998; Sutherland

& Cressey, 1974). The key premise of the theory revolves around the notion that ‘‘most of the learn-

ing in criminal and deviant behavior is the result of direct, and indirect, social interaction in which

the words, responses, presence, and behavior of other persons directly reinforces behavior’’ (Akers

& Jensen, 2006, p. 40). Differential reinforcement, or the balance of anticipated and actual rewards

or punishments following a behavior, will impact the likelihood the behavior will continue (Akers,

1998). Definitions in favor of and against law violation are learned through exposure to others and

serve as the content of what is differentially reinforced. These definitions encompass an individual’s

perception and attitudes toward various behaviors. Additionally, individuals may model or imitate

the behaviors of their peers, especially when these behaviors are positively reinforced. Evidence

suggests imitating both primary and secondary groups serves as a means of learning normative def-

initions, which may then affect delinquent behavior (Strayer, Wareing, & Rushton, 1979). While

social learning theory predicts that learning takes place in intimate social groups, larger peer groups

may have the capacity to influence behavior through the strength of weak ties (Granovetter, 1973).

170 Criminal Justice Review 40(2)