Research trends in cybercrime victimization during 2010–2020: a bibliometric analysis

Abstract

Research on cybercrime victimization is relatively diversified; however, no bibliometric study has been found to introduce the panorama of this subject. The current study aims to address this research gap by performing a bibliometric analysis of 387 Social Science Citation Index articles relevant to cybercrime victimization from Web of Science database during the period of 2010–2020. The purpose of the article is to examine the research trend and distribution of publications by five main fields, including time, productive authors, prominent sources, active institutions, and leading countries/regions. Furthermore, this study aims to determine the global collaborations and current gaps in research of cybercrime victimization. Findings indicated the decidedly upward trend of publications in the given period. The USA and its authors and institutions were likely to connect widely and took a crucial position in research of cybercrime victimization. Cyberbullying was identified as the most concerned issue over the years and cyber interpersonal crimes had the large number of research comparing to cyber-dependent crimes. Future research is suggested to concern more about sample of the elder and collect data in different countries which are not only European countries or the USA. Cross-nation research in less popular continents in research map was recommended to be conducted more. This paper contributed an overview of scholarly status of cybercrime victimization through statistical evidence and visual findings; assisted researchers to optimize their own research direction; and supported authors and institutions to build strategies for research collaboration.

Mapping the Research on Artificial Intelligence and Entrepreneurship

“…PRISMA outlines essential steps for systematically reviewing scientific literature, including the selection of indexed papers from bibliographical databases while excluding nonrelevant materials (Moher et al, 2009). Ho and Luong (2022), for example, used the PRISMA guidelines in a bibliometric study to analyze the research patterns and dissemination of publications across five major fields, encompassing time, prolific authors, notable sources, active institutions, and leading countries or regions.…”

How Should I Start Research in Cyber Security? Suggestions for Researchers According to Bibliometric Analysis Data

“…Some of these analyses have focused on applying cyber security in specific research areas such as healthcare (Bradea et al, 2015;Jalali et al, 2019). Others focus on the bibliometric analysis of various aspects and components of cyber security such as big data, malware (Razak et al, 2016), mobile forensics (Gill et al, 2018), cybercrime victimization (Ho & Luong, 2022), cyber behavior (Serafin-Plasencia et al, 2019), cyber security, cyber parental control (Altarturi et al, 2020). Ho and Luong (2022) examined the bibliometric analysis of 387 Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) articles on cybercrime victimization on the Web of Science database during 2010-2020 (Ho & Luong, 2022).…”

“…Others focus on the bibliometric analysis of various aspects and components of cyber security such as big data, malware (Razak et al, 2016), mobile forensics (Gill et al, 2018), cybercrime victimization (Ho & Luong, 2022), cyber behavior (Serafin-Plasencia et al, 2019), cyber security, cyber parental control (Altarturi et al, 2020). Ho and Luong (2022) examined the bibliometric analysis of 387 Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) articles on cybercrime victimization on the Web of Science database during 2010-2020 (Ho & Luong, 2022). Their study identified research trends and distribution of publications by five main areas, including time, prolific authors, leading sources, active institutions, and leading countries/regions.…”

Exploring the global geography of cybercrime and its driving forces

“…In 2017, the WannaCry ransomware attack affected more than 230,000 computers across 150 countries, resulting in economic losses of more than 4 billion dollars and posing a serious danger to the global education, government, finance, and healthcare sectors (Ghafur et al, 2019 ; Castillo and Falzon, 2018 ; Mohurle and Patil, 2017 ). Although there is currently no precise and universally accepted definition of cybercrime (Phillips et al, 2022 ; Holt and Bossler, 2014 ), it is generally acknowledged that the term covers both traditional crimes that are facilitated or amplified by utilising ICTs as well as new types of crimes that emerged with the advent of ICTs (Ho and Luong, 2022 ). Based on the role of technology in the commission of the crime, the most widely utilised typology divides cybercrime into cyber-dependent crime (such as hacking, distributed denial of service, and malware) and cyber-enabled crime (online fraud, digital piracy, cyberbullying) (Brenner, 2013 ; Sarre et al, 2018 ; McGuire and Dowling, 2013 ).…”