IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jcjust/v101y2025ics0047235225001722.html

Sellin and Wolfgang revisited: A partial replication and expansion considering cybercrime

Author

Listed:
  • Engle, Timothy A.
  • Maher, Cooper A.
  • Nedelec, Joseph L.

Abstract

Perceptions of the seriousness of crime play a significant role in how stakeholders and victims respond to crime. Seminal work in this area was provided by Sellin and Wolfgang (1964) who sampled judges, police officers, and college students to assess perceptions of seriousness for a variety of crimes. Since that time, however, crime has evolved. While prior research has expanded Sellin and Wolfgang's work, previous examinations have not considered the emergence of cybercrime. The current study partially replicated and expanded upon Sellin and Wolfgang's analysis using a large online opt-in survey sample (n = 479). Respondents rated their perceptions of crime seriousness across a range of both terrestrial and cyber-based crime. The results generally replicated the findings of Sellin and Wolfgang and other previous works, with physically consequential crimes rated most serious relative to theft and nonviolent crimes. Additionally, certain cybercrime types were perceived as highly serious, relative to both online and terrestrial crimes. Multivariable regression analyses illustrated that a variety of correlates, including perceived victimization risk and some demographic characteristics, were associated with crime seriousness rankings. The findings are discussed in light of previous research and limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Engle, Timothy A. & Maher, Cooper A. & Nedelec, Joseph L., 2025. "Sellin and Wolfgang revisited: A partial replication and expansion considering cybercrime," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jcjust:v:101:y:2025:i:c:s0047235225001722
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2025.102523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235225001722
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2025.102523?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stylianou, Stelios, 2003. "Measuring crime seriousness perceptions: What have we learned and what else do we want to know," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 37-56.
    2. Page, Benjamin I. & Shapiro, Robert Y., 1983. "Effects of Public Opinion on Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 175-190, March.
    3. Andrew J. Thompson & Justin T. Pickett, 2020. "Are Relational Inferences from Crowdsourced and Opt-in Samples Generalizable? Comparing Criminal Justice Attitudes in the GSS and Five Online Samples," Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 907-932, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. McNealey, Rachel L. & Figueroa, Camille I. & Maher, Cooper A., 2025. "“Police can't help you”: Exploring influences on perceptions of policing cybercrime," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McNealey, Rachel L. & Figueroa, Camille I. & Maher, Cooper A., 2025. "“Police can't help you”: Exploring influences on perceptions of policing cybercrime," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    2. Eugene C.X. Ikejemba & Peter C. Schuur, 2018. "Analyzing the Impact of Theft and Vandalism in Relation to the Sustainability of Renewable Energy Development Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers, 2013. "Should We Trust in Values? Explaining Public Support for Pro-Environmental Taxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    5. Flory, Christopher M. & May, David C. & Minor, Kevin I. & Wood, Peter B., 2006. "A comparison of punishment exchange rates between offenders under supervision and their supervising officers," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 39-50.
    6. An, Youngeun & Lee, Youngsun & Oh, Soon-young & Lee, Jeong Youn, 2024. "How can young adults be civically engaged? The role of academic achievement standards in enhancing civic and social engagement in the case of South Korea," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    7. Jensen, Carsten & Naumann, Elias, 2016. "Increasing pressures and support for public healthcare in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(6), pages 698-705.
    8. Donald L. Jordan & Benjamin I. Page, 1992. "Shaping Foreign Policy Opinions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(2), pages 227-241, June.
    9. Douhou, Salima & Magnus, Jan R. & van Soest, Arthur, 2011. "The perception of small crime," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 749-763.
    10. Benjamin Michallet & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & François Facchini, 2015. "Greening Up or Not? The Determinants Political Parties’ Environmental Concern: An Empirical Analysis Based on European Data (1970-2008)," Working Papers 2015.25, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Liza G. Steele, 2015. "Income Inequality, Equal Opportunity, and Attitudes About Redistribution," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(2), pages 444-464, June.
    12. Najam uz Zehra Gardezi & Brent S. Steel & Angela Lavado, 2020. "The Impact of Efficacy, Values, and Knowledge on Public Preferences Concerning Food–Water–Energy Policy Tradeoffs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-20, November.
    13. Loréa Baïada-Hirèche & Ghislaine Garmilis, 2016. "Accounting Professionals’ Ethical Judgment and the Institutional Disciplinary Context: A French–US Comparison," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(4), pages 639-659, December.
    14. Hanna Ågren & Matz Dahlberg & Eva Mörk, 2007. "Do politicians’ preferences correspond to those of the voters? An investigation of political representation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 137-162, January.
    15. Filip Beule & Haiyan Zhang, 2022. "The impact of government policy on Chinese investment locations: An analysis of the Belt and Road policy announcement, host-country agreement, and sentiment," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(2), pages 194-217, June.
    16. Marco R. Di Tommaso & Stuart O. Schweitzer, 2013. "Industrial Policy in America," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13749.
    17. Kinda, Romuald, 2010. "Democratic institutions and environmental quality: effects and transmission channels," MPRA Paper 27455, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Aizpurua, Eva & Applegate, Brandon K. & Bolin, Riane M. & Vuk, Mateja & Ouellette, Heather M., 2020. "The sins of the child: Public opinion about parental responsibility for juvenile crime," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    19. Hannes R. Stephan, 2020. "Shaping the Scope of Conflict in Scotland’s Fracking Debate: Conflict Management and the Narrative Policy Framework," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(1), pages 64-91, January.
    20. repec:osf:osfxxx:y79u5_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Sarah D Kowitt & Seth M Noar & Leah M Ranney & Adam O Goldstein, 2017. "Public attitudes toward larger cigarette pack warnings: Results from a nationally representative U.S. sample," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jcjust:v:101:y:2025:i:c:s0047235225001722. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jcrimjus .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.