Scientist and psychology have gone beyond just trying to understand the type of person and there level of expertise. Three types of criminal theory have been developed to better understand criminal behavior from a computer-thief point of view. The three theories are psychoanalytic theory, learning theory and control theory. These three basically support that man is not responsible for his actions most of the time this is known as positivist. The classical theorist stand point is that man is responsible for his actions 100% of the time. The psychoanalytic theory is more of a broad based theory of why criminal acts are committed in general. When this theory was first brought to light it encompassed all criminal activity including computer crime. This theory generally states that criminals are the result of an unhappy childhood. When siblings have a distant relationship with their parents they tend to exhibit a more anti-social behavior which is what they were initially brought in this world having in the first place. Since we are born we work towards being more social with our peers. Most computer criminals spend hours in front of the computer locked away from normal communication this could obviously be a direct result from there childhood
The second type of criminal theory is the learning theory which again can be subdivided into several other divisions. Operant conditioning is a type of learning theory that deals with the self gratification one has in committing crime. Computer-thieves are usually gratified because of accomplishment or being able to venture places they haven’t been and then brag about it. Differential Reinforcement is a theory based on the level of negative impact one receives from breaking the law. If the level of punishment is by far less than that of reward then the computer-thief will keep on attacking. In most cases if the thief is arrested and jailed then of course the person will have no choice to stop. But in some cases prestige rains in over the circumstances and will make it difficult to stop even after incarceration.
Last, is the social learning theory which was derived and worked on by ALbert Bandura. The Social learning Theory postulates that behavior can be learned at the cognitive level through observing other peoples actions. This theory states that criminal activity is derived from other sources like family, culture or environment in general. This theory is relevant by means of understanding how computer-criminals evolve but was intended for describing criminals who assault or steal.
The control theory concerning computer crime does not discuss why individuals commit crimes but why isn’t everyone a criminal. The first Sub-theory of Control Theory is Moral Development (Kolberg). Kohlberg believed that socializing is linked to moral development. Moral Development basically assumes that development is done in three stages as the person grows up. If one is stage does not become fully developed then later the individual might exhibit a deficiency in justice, rights or principles. The second sub control theory is Eysenck’s theory which basically states that by heredity some individuals have some biological difference that prevent them from becoming part of their environment. This means that the individual is incapable of following rules and norms set up by society. There are three different dimensions concerning Eysenck’s theory psychoticism, extraversion (E) and neuroticism (N). Every person exhibits both dimensions at one time or another and typically fall in the middle. Criminals have a high rating in (E) and (N) fall off the lower end of (P) this relates to there character as poor socialization skills and wanting to avoid confrontation or human contact at any point.
Do to the direct lack that computer criminals have with the outside world it is increasingly hard for physiologists to define what group hackers fit into. Since there are many different types of criminals hackers in general don’t fit under any one physiological profile. How computer criminals interact with society seems more dependant on what level there knowledge of hacking is than anything else.
The accurate profile of the computer-criminal is dependent on the understanding of the psychological profile. You must also properly identify what the computer-criminal is able to do in respect to his knowledge and motivation. Corporations should become familiar of the inside threat more than the outside. Both of these points must be made before defining how dangerous the computer criminal exactly is. Those hackers that are not that dangerous towards society should not be condemned for meaningless browsing the network. Hackers that vandalize sites or destroy computer software and equipment can be dealt with more harshly.
by. Greg Conklin