Risky online behaviors and cybercrime awareness among undergraduate students at Al Quds University: a cross sectional study

Abstract

The rate of cybercrime among Palestinian university students is unknown. This study is the first to examine cybercrime awareness among Palestinian undergraduate students. A cross-sectional design was used to investigate cybercrime awareness, risky online behaviors, and the prevalence of cybercrime among these students. Participants were selected using convenience sampling. Invitations were sent via Google Forms to complete an online questionnaire. The findings revealed that a sizable proportion of participants (52.4%) had either been victims of cybercrime or knew someone who had. High-risk online behaviors included using social media for social interaction, using mobile apps, engaging in excessive social media use, and failing to report criminal activity to law enforcement authorities. The study found a lack of awareness about cybercrime, particularly regarding knowledge, perceived causes, cybersecurity measures, and emotional responses. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified significant relationships between cybercrime exposure and factors such as students' knowledge of cyberstalking and cybercrime harassment, perceptions of being threatened by cybercrime, the need for university cybercrime awareness programs, and experiences with sextortion, social media harassment, and cyberstalking. Accepting friend requests only from known individuals could reduce their vulnerability to cybercrime. Fear and indifference decreased the likelihood of being exposed to cybercrime, while anger increased the risk. Thus, incorporating cybercrime awareness program, which includes information security awareness, education, and training, into universities' overall security management strategies is critical. This will effectively reduce the risks associated with cyberattacks for students.

Introduction

Cybercrime is a widespread issue with significant negative impacts on society at both the national and international levels. The increasing use of the internet and other computerized technologies, such as laptops, tablets, and mobile phones coincides with a rise in global cybercrime victims (Afrozulla, 2018). While the concept of “cybercrimes” encompasses various interpretations in research papers, Halder and Jaishankar (2011) provide a definition that characterizes cybercrimes as offenses perpetrated against individuals or collectives to tarnish their reputation or cause physical or psychological harm to them, either directly or indirectly, using modern telecommunication networks such as the Internet (including chat rooms, emails, notice boards, and groups) and mobile devices. Examples of cybercrimes include data theft, dissemination of false information, deception, account hacking, cyberbullying, cyber harassment, cyber-stalking, phishing, cyber-pornography, cyber-impersonation, and sexting (Ossip, 2017).

The education sector is the second most vulnerable industry to cybercrimes and cybersecurity attacks (Demers et al., 2017). Cyberspaces provide a variety of digital platforms for academic institutions to manage teaching, learning, research, community development, and administration (Taylor, 2017). Universities rely on computer networks and technologies to provide their students with access to news, events, calendars, courses, faculty, grades, and other personal information stored on campus computers. Protecting these systems from threats such as malware, spyware, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and phishing requires security tools like antivirus software, regular password updates, avoiding sharing personal information with strangers, and protecting the privacy of social networking profiles on platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram (Adegbola & Fadara, 2022; Wilshusen, 2012). Students aged 18 to 23 are more likely to fall victim to cybercrime (Sheng et al., 2010). A study conducted by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (2016) found that 60.8% of internet users attended college or university and that young adults in Malaysia used the Internet extensively. Instead of using cumbersome reference books in the library, students can access vast amounts of information online, allowing them to complete academic assignments (Vranna, 2012). Students also communicate and interact extensively on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017). However, it is critical to realize that social media platforms are vulnerable to a wide range of online threats, including malware, phishing attacks, identity theft, and scams (Ossip, 2017). As a result, students may be vulnerable to cybercrime due of their risky online behavior (Gamez-Guadix et al., 2016).

Cybercrimes and online risky behaviors

The increased availability and use of online communication may lead to a rise in hazardous online activities, making students more vulnerable to cybercrime. Students engage in a variety of risky online behaviors, including accessing hazardous websites, confronting unfamiliar individuals face-to-face, risky sexual behavior, internet abuse, and disclosing personal information to strangers (Gamez-Guadix et al., 2016). An individual who spends more than four hours per day on online activities is classified as a heavy internet user or someone who uses social media inappropriately. Problematic internet users (PIUs) are often referred to as behavioral addicts due to their excessive internet usage, which can cause symptoms similar to addiction (Paulus et al., 2022). Internet addiction is characterized by compulsive Internet use, a sense of losing control over one's Internet use, psychological, social, or professional conflicts, and an obsession with the Internet even when not using it. Other criteria may include withdrawal, mood regulation, tolerance, and craving/anticipation (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017; Van Rooij & Prause, 2014). According to research, there may be a link between cybercrime and PIUs, particularly those with Internet addiction (Aiken, 2017). During natural disasters, ongoing crises, large public events, or the COVID-19 pandemic, attackers seize opportunities to maximize their profits (Lallie et al., 2021). For instance, the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown significantly impacted people’s lives, particularly in terms of internet addiction and cybercrime (Hawdon et al., 2020). This was because more students were homebound, engaging in online activities and using the internet to access services they would normally receive in person (Hawdon et al., 2020). Physical distancing and stay-at-home quarantines increased students’ use of electronic devices (Scarabel et al., 2021). These measures required students to spend significant time at home, increasing their internet use for non-academic activities such as gaming and socializing (Hawdon et al., 2017). As a result, cybercriminals took advantage of the increased internet access and online activity during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the anxiety and sense of imprisonment caused by the lockdown. Feldmann (2021) showed that the global COVID-19 lockdown increased internet usage by 50%, leaving more people vulnerable to cybercrime.

Increasing cybercrime awareness is an effective method to safeguard oneself from becoming vulnerable to cybercriminal activities (Mwiraria et al., 2022). Cybercrime awareness is the state of having comprehensive knowledge about various criminal activities and computer security incidents that occur on the Internet (Nzeakor et al., 2022). According to Reeves et al. (2020), the rise of cyberattacks is due to a lack of risk awareness and knowledge of potential threats. For example, if students have a thorough understanding of the importance of information security measures against cybercrime, such as firewalls, antivirus software, password management, and security awareness training, and are aware of the dangers of engaging in risky online activities, their chances of being exposed to cybercrime are reduced (Moallem, 2018). Nzeakor et al., (2022) revealed that two-thirds of students had sufficient knowledge about cybercrime, indicating a high level of awareness about the issue. However, other research has found that university students have limited knowledge or awareness of cybercrime, as well as ineffective strategies for protecting their data (Moallem, 2018). Some studies have suggested that the primary issue is not a lack of awareness, but rather the quality or content of the awareness (Nzeakor et al., 2022). For example, while Nigerian undergraduates demonstrated a high level of awareness, it was only superficial (Nzeakor et al., 2022).

Theoretical background

Hindelang et al., (1978) developed the lifestyle exposure theory (LET) to study crime, which can also be applied to cybercrime victimization. LET seeks to understand how social context influences lifestyle choices and victimization. Numerous studies have used LET on cybercrime victims (Holt & Bossler, 2008; Vakhitova et al., 2016). Hindelang et al. (1978) define lifestyle as the combination of routine daily activities, including both vocational activities such as work, school, and household chores, as well as leisure activities. For example, daily cyberspace use, such as visiting unfamiliar websites, downloading files or software, clicking icons without taking precautions, and using online chat rooms and social media, can expose people to crime or increase their vulnerability to it (Meier & Miethe, 1993). Studiesshow that people who spend more time online are more vulnerable to cybercrime. For instance, spending more time on websites that allow file downloads, personal information sharing, or credit card input increases the risk of malware infection (Alshalan, 2006). In Addition, frequently communicating with strangers on social media and disclosing personal information raises the risk of cybercrime (Craig et al., 2020; Gámez-Guadix et al., 2016; Reyns et al., 2011a, b). Furthermore, studies have shown a link between excessive smartphone use and the occurrence of cybercrime (Herrero et al., 2022).

Further, it was found that different demographics such as gender, marital status, family income, and race may have different role expectations and structural constraints that influence lifestyle choices such as housing, association, and entertainment, increasing the risk of victimization. (Hindelang et al., 1978) Studies indicate that crime rate, demographics, lifestyle activities, security tools, and prior victimization all influence risk perception and behavior. As a result, perception or awareness of cybercrime may alter lifestyle patterns (Rontree, 1998; Rountree & Land, 1996).

The current study used lifestyle exposure theory, which focuses on individuals who have been victimized by crime rather than those who engage in criminal behavior (Hindelang et al., 1978). This theory aligns with our study's goal and hypothesis. We hypothesize that risky lifestyle behaviors, such as the type of internet access device used, daily internet usage hours, purpose of internet usage (leisure activity), and failure to report exposure to cybercrime to authorities, may expose undergraduate students to cybercrime. We also assume that students who are aware of cybercrime, including its causes, experience, safety precautions, attitudes, and emotions, are less likely to be victimized by cybercrime because they are aware of their risky behaviors.

Cybercrimes in Palestine

Since Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories in 1967, it has exerted increased control over the country's information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, impeding its development and hindering the establishment of an autonomous network for the purpose of suppressing and regulating Palestinians. Israel is entitled to a share of each call made by businesses to customers in the West Bank and Gaza, as the Palestinians are required to establish communication with an Israeli company (7amleh, 2017). The frequency of cybercrimes in Palestine has witnessed an increase in recent years, primarily attributed to the growing prevalence of Internet and social media usage, coupled with the absence of legislation aimed at deterring such illicit activities. In 2018, the police recorded a total of 2568 cases, while in 2019, they reported 1478 cases. The incidence of cybercrime was higher among individuals aged 18 to 25 (Al-Najah News, 2019; PCBS, 2020). In response to the escalating prevalence of cybercrimes, the Palestinian Authority established the cybercrime unit within the Palestinian Police in 2014 (Amro, 2018). Data indicates that 80% of cybercrimes in Palestine remain unreported to law enforcement, with victims often opting to remain silent (Amro, 2018).

There is a lack of research that assesses the prevalence and awareness of cybercrimes among Palestinian undergraduate students. Undergraduate students are a highly active segment of the computer user population. (Bidgoli et al., 2016). Studies highlight the importance of cybersecurity skills in searching for information, data processing, organizing information, presenting oneself online, and understanding digital hazards (Moallem, 2018). However, most students are unaware of cybercrime and cyber security, increasing their victimization (Prathima Mathias & Suma, 2018). Additionally, awareness of cyber security incidents and their consequences among undergraduate students is crucial due to the potential impact on academic institutions' sensitive personal and financial data. According to Yeo et al. (2007), the lack of awareness is a significant barrier for organizations and should be thoroughly evaluated as part of the organization's overall security management and assessment strategy. To better understand Palestinian students’ cybersecurity awareness, it is important to investigate their attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors, as well as the factors that influence them. Based on current knowledge, our study will be the first to examine cybercrimes that specifically targeting Palestinian undergraduate students.

This study aims to investigate the prevalence of cybercrimes and the factors that influence them among students et al. Quds University. Also, we have examined the following research questions:

• 1. What are students' risky online lifestyle behaviors that make them vulnerable to cybercrimes?

• 2. Are undergraduate students aware of cybercrime, including their knowledge, experience, perceived causes, safety measures, attitudes, and emotions?

Materials and methods

Study design and sampling

A descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out in December 2022 among undergraduate students et al. Quds University. Al Quds University, one of the largest Palestinian universities, offers a wide range of academic programs. It has 15 faculties, 55 baccalaureate programs, 45 master's programs, and a student body of 9500 undergraduate students. Based on a 95% confidence level, 0.05 significance level, and 0.05 accuracy, the study sample consisted of 370 students. Participants were selected using convenience sampling. The collection of data was conducted through an anonymous online self-administered survey. The chosen participants were sent a Google Forms questionnaire and an introductory invitation via email. A total of 602 undergraduate students completed the questionnaire by accessing the web link through platforms such as Facebook, social media, and WhatsApp groups.

Tool and measures

Participants in this study were requested to complete a self-reported questionnaire that was developed using previous cybercrime studies found in a literature review (Abdulai, 2016; Afrozulla et al., 2018; Akanda et al., 2019; Ertuğrul, 2017; Igba, 2018; Kirwan, 2017; Ossip, 2017; Phillips, 2015; Riaz & Riaz, 2015; Rogers, 2001; Solak et al., 2015; Sreehari et al., 2018). The scale comprised 6 sections, encompassing a total of 71 questions. These sections were designed to assess risky online lifestyle behaviors, knowledge of cybercrime, familiarity with safety measures, awareness of the causes of cybercrime, exposure to different types of cybercrimes, attitude towards cybercrimes, and the emotions experienced as a result of cybercrime. Cronbach's alpha was computed for each section to assess the internal consistency of the questionnaire.

To assess risky online lifestyle activities or behaviors, a data sheet was included to gather socio-demographic and internet use information. This data sheet collected information including the participant's age, gender, education level, field of study, income, place of residence, marital status, faculty, and religion. Additionally, questions were added regarding the primary devices individuals utilize to connect to the internet, the duration of their daily internet usage, the purposes behind their internet usage, and the authority to whom they would report cybercrime incidents. Furthermore, additional questions were incorporated, including: Which social applications do you employ most frequently? Have you ever experienced cybercrime? Are you acquainted with anyone who has experienced cybercrime? Are you experiencing a sense of danger or vulnerability due to cybercrime? To what degree do you believe your university has adequately prepared you to address cyber threats? Do you need a cybercrime awareness program?

For assessing participants’ awareness of cybercrimes, the scale was divided into the following six sections:

Section 1: Cybercrime knowledge related questions: These questions comprised ten items aimed at assessing participant’s knowledge of cybercrimes. The answers to these questions were “Yes = 1” and “No = 2”. The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) was 0.70.

Section 2: Safety measures questions: Which consisted of 11 questions to assess safety precautions adopted by respondents. Each question had a 5-point scale (0 = rarely; 1 = never; 2 = sometimes; 3 = often; 4 = always). The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) was 0. 814.

Section 3: Perceived causes of cybercrime questions: It included 12 questions aimed at assessing the participant's perspective on possible causes of cybercrime. Each question had a 5-point scale (0 = rarely; 1 = never; 2 = sometimes; 3 = often; 4 = always). The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) was 0.82.

Section 4: Cybercrime experience questions: It consisted of 19 questions to assess different types of cybercrimes that the participants were exposed to. Each question had a 5-point scale (0 = rarely; 1 = never; 2 = sometimes; 3 = often; 4 = always). The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) was 0.94.

Section 5: Attitude toward cybercrimes: It consisted of 6 questions to assess the attitude of participants toward cybercrimes. Each question had a 4-point scale (1 = Strongly refuse, 2 = Sometimes refuse, 3 = Sometimes accept, and 4 = Strongly accept). The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) was 0.90.

Section 6: Cybercrime-related emotion questions. The participants were asked about how they currently felt about having been exposed to cybercrimes in the past or how they would feel if they were exposed to them in the future. It consisted of 13 questions about the emotional impacts of different forms of cybercrimes. Each question had a 5-point scale (0 = rarely; 1 = never; 2 = sometimes; 3 = often; 4 = always). The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) was 0.90.

The overall internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) for the scale was 0.83. A committee of four mental health experts reviewed the scale's contents to ensure cultural appropriateness, as it had not been previously tested in Palestinian culture, and no changes were made. The scale was first translated into Arabic by the research team, and then it was back-translated to English by a licensed translator. At the pilot stage, we administered the tool to 50 undergraduate students to test for language clarity. Both the original English questionnaire and the back-translated version were examined to ensure that the translation was accurate.

Data analysis

The data was analyzed using SPSS version 25 (IBM Corp., Chicago, IL, USA). Analyses of frequencies, means, and standard deviations were utilized. To determine whether there is a significant association between two categorical variables, Pearson’s chi-square and Fisher’s exact test were used according to the variable’s cells counts. In addition, a multivariate logistic regression model was developed that included all factors determined to be significant (with a p-value less than 0.05) in the bivariate study. Cronbach's alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the questionnaire's five components.

Results

Section 1: study descriptive and bivariate analysis

Participants’ demographics

The study's online survey was completed by a total of 602 undergraduates. Table 1 shows that a majority of the participants were female students (n = 446, 74.3%), aged 18–20. Most of the participants (n = 551, 91.5%) were unmarried. In addition, 52% were village residents and 38.9% had a monthly family income ranging from 600 to 900 US dollars. The health faculties had the highest number of participants (n = 267, 44.4%), followed by art faculties (n = 229, 38.1%).

Table 1 Association between exposure or knowing someone exposed to cybercrime and study demographic variables

Cybercrime exposure and risky lifestyle behaviors

The results indicated that 12.0% (n = 72) of the participants experienced cybercrime, while 40.4% (n = 243) knew someone who had. The majority of participants (n = 548, 91%) utilized the internet on their mobile devices, with 96.7% (n = 582) engaging in this activity daily. Furthermore, over half of the participants (n = 343, 57%) spent five hours or more using the internet on their mobile devices. Regarding social media usage, a majority of students (n = 274, 45.5%) used Facebook and Instagram for communication and social interaction. Instagram was the most popular platform (n = 298; 49.5%). Regarding reporting incidents, 40.0% (n = 236) indicated they would disclose negative online incidents to their parents, while 10.3% (n = 61) would report it to a police officer. In terms of university preparedness and awareness, 55.6% (n = 331) expressed dissatisfaction with their university's preparation for cyber threats, and 69.6% (n = 412) indicated a need for a cybercrime awareness program. Moreover, Table 1 demonstrates a notable disparity between participants who reported experiencing or knowing someone who experienced cybercrime, and those who reported no exposure, concerning faculty (P = 0.001), daily internet usage (P = 0.017), perceived threat of cybercrime (P = 0.000), perception of their university's preparedness for handling cyber threats (P = 0.044), and the person they would trust in if they encountered a negative incident (P = 0.019).

Cybercrime awareness findings

This section provided an overview of the findings related to participants’ knowledge about cybercrime, the safety measures taken, perceived causes of cybercrime, personal experiences with cybercrimes, attitudes towards cybercrime, as well as the emotions experienced as a result. The majority of participants demonstrated a moderate level of cybercrime knowledge, as indicated in Table 2. For the term “cybercrime,” 56.4% (n = 337) of respondents were knowledgeable, and 62.5% (n = 368) correctly identified it as an offense committed using a computer, network, or other computer-enabled devices. Participants showed awareness of various types of cybercrimes, including “cyberstalking” (52.6%), “identity theft” (74.2%), “Internet auction fraud” (83.1%), “cyber-harassment” (84.7%), and “impersonation” (70.2%). Nevertheless, 42.0% accurately recognized that both males and females are exposed to a significant risk of cybercrime, whereas 53.9% were unaware of the term “phishing act.”

Table 2 Participants’ knowledge about cybercrime

Figure 1 shows that a majority of participants engaged in unsafe practices while using social media and the internet. For instance, a mere 22.2% of individuals indicated that they often and always changed their email or social media passwords, whereas 34.8% sometimes did so. Furthermore, 27.2% and 26% reported often and always utilizing antivirus software on their computers, or mobile devices, respectively. In addition, 54.6% of the participants opened email attachments, while the same percentage opened attachments received through instant messaging. Most participants (75.7%) agreed to friend/chat requests only from individuals they were familiar with, and 64.3% often and always limited the personal information they disclosed to strangers on social media or chat rooms.

Fig. 1

Distribution of safety measures the participants use while using social media and the internet

According to Fig. 2, the main reasons or motivations behind cybercrime, as perceived by the participants, were as follows: making money (64.5%), lack of punishment (64.4%), seeking fun and spending time (55.2%), and psychological factors such as low self-control and antisocial personality disorder (54.3%).

Fig. 2

Participants, perception of causes of cybercrime

Figure 3 indicates that the majority of participants reported minimal involvement in cybercrimes. Specifically, 72.2% stated that they had never or rarely engaged in activities such as creating and distributing harmful software online. Additionally, 79.2% claimed to have never or rarely committed online fraud by stealing financial information and passwords or losing money. Furthermore, 79.1% reported never engaging in the act of sending explicit messages, emails, or images. Participants also reported experiencing the distortion of their reputation on social media or the internet (77.9%), as well as instances of being subjected to bullying (67.3%).

Fig. 3

Ever experienced any cybercrime types

A negative attitude toward cybercrime was evident in all of the findings in Fig. 4. For example, the majority of participants expressed strong disapproval of using personal photos or pornographic clips to extort money (87.9%), illegally acquiring someone's credit card number without their knowledge or permission (86.2%), or sharing someone else's password (84.8%).

Fig. 4

Participants’ attitude toward cybercrimes

Finally, based on Table 3, participants always and often experienced feelings of unsafety (54.8%), anger (49.3%), anxiety (49.7%), scaring (44.6%), and fear (43.5%) when faced with cybercrimes, whether in the past or anticipated in the future.

Table 3 If you experienced cybercrime in the past or in the future, how did/do you feel?

Section 2: multivariate logistic regression model

The multivariate regression analysis in Table 4 revealed that students who were familiar with the terms cyberstalking (AOR: 1.606, P = 0.032) and cybercrime harassment had a significantly greater likelihood of having been exposed to cybercrimes or knowing someone who had experienced them. (AOR: 2.244, P = 0.010). Furthermore, students who perceived cybercrime as a threat were five times more likely to have been exposed to cybercrimes or knew someone who experienced such incidents (AOR: 5.627, P < 0.05). In contrast, students who accepted friend requests only from people they knew were less likely to be exposed to cybercrime or to know someone who had been exposed (often: AOR:0.306 and always: AOR:0.317, P = 0.025).

Table 4 Multivariate logistic regression model for the associations between exposure to crimes and demographic factors, awareness, knowledge

Additionally, students who often and sometimes received sexual texts, emails, or photos were at a four times higher risk of being exposed to cybercrimes compared to those who never received such messages. Conversely, students who reported sometimes sending sexual messages, emails, or photos had a lower risk of cybercrime than those who never did (AOR: 0.204, P = 0.002). Moreover, students who reported experiencing harassment or cyberstalking on social media or the internet were twice as likely to be exposed to cybercrimes. Furthermore, those who often or always experienced harassment or cyberstalking had a significantly higher probability of being exposed to cybercrimes (AOR: 6.428, P = 0.000).

Lastly, feelings of fear often or always, as well as indifference, decreased the likelihood of being exposed to cybercrimes or knowing someone exposed (AOR: 0.436, P = 0.008, AOR: 0.393, P = 0.003 respectively) but feeling anger often/always increased it (AOR: 1.976, P = 0.031).

Discussion

Insufficient knowledge about cybercrime can increase vulnerability, whereas awareness empowers students to protect themselves effectively (Amankwa et al., 2014). The focus of our study was to examine the prevalence of cybercrime, adoption of high-risk online behaviors, and awareness levels among students regarding cybercrime. In the current study, 52% of participants had either personally experienced cybercrime or knew someone who had. This finding is supported by other studies (Abanikannda, 2019; Bidgoli, 2016; Walker et al., 2011). For instance, Bhatnagar and Pry (2020) reported a 29% cybercrime victimization rate among university students in Bangladesh, while another study found 74.2% were affected by cybercrime (Das, 2022). The high prevalence of cybercrime adversely impacts students' academic performance, often due to excessive online engagement, such as chatting activities. Addressing these issues requires enhanced collaboration with law enforcement, which may result in student absences affecting ongoing exams and assessments (Adegbola & Fadara, 2022). Therefore, universities should actively promote awareness and preventive measures against cybercrime to safeguard undergraduate students.

Moreover, the study revealed that significant numbers of the students engaged in numerous risky behaviors linked to their lifestyle, potentially rendering them susceptible to cybercrimes. The first risky behavior examined in the study was the use of mobile apps, which represents a new frontier for cybercrime. Consistent with prior research, 91% of the participants in this study used mobile devices to access the Internet (Afrozulla et al., 2018; Prathima & Suma, 2018). According to NIST , personal computers (PCs) typically provide higher levels of privacy and security in comparison to smartphones (Jansen and Scarfone, 2008). This is primarily because mobile devices lack firewalls, antivirus software, and encryption. However, only 26.4% of participants in this study indicated that they "often" or "always" had antivirus software installed on their phones. This lack of protection increases the potential for undergraduate students to be exposed to cybercrime.

Engaging in excessive social media use, identified as the second risky online lifestyle activity, is associated with problematic usage and increases the exposure undergraduate students to cybercrime (Kuss and Griffiths, 2017). The majority of study participants reported spending a minimum of five hours per day on online activities. Afrozulla et al. (2018) found that 36% of the participants used the internet for three to five hours per day, while 45% used it for a longer duration. Similarly, Ozdamli and Ercag (2019) reported that around half of the participants devoted a combined duration of six hours to engage in online activities. Excessive internet use can lead to addiction, skipping classes, being late, and lying about usage (Afrozulla et al., 2018; Hadlington, 2017).

Socializing instead of studying was identified as the third risky online lifestyle activity that exposed students to potential encounters with strangers and cybercrime. According to our study, only20.6% of students used Facebook and Instagram for educational purposes, while the majority utilized these platforms for socializing and keeping up with current events. Previous research has consistently shown that frequent interactions with strangers on social media and disclosing personal information increase vulnerability to cybercrime (Craig et al., 2020; Gámez-Guadix et al., 2016; Reyns et al., 2011a, b). Therefore, implementing a cybercrime awareness program for undergraduate students is crucial to educate them about the risks associated with online socializing and the use of social networking platforms.

Failing to report cybercrimes to the police is the fourth risky online activity that could put undergraduate students at greater risk of cybercrime. In this study, 40.0% of participants said they would inform their parents about online incidents, while only 10.3% said they would tell the police. Walker (2011) found that 71% of students reported cybercrime to parents or other responsible adults. Rajan and Babu (2020) revealed that 79.7% of participants planned to call the police. Research suggests that stigma can influence the propensity of crime victims to disclose their experiences (Anderson, 1999; Baumer, 2002). Additionally, individuals who are dissatisfied with how the police handle their cases may exhibit greater hesitancy in reporting crimes (Anderson, 1999; Baumer, 2002). Furthermore, in Palestinian patriarchal culture, female victims of cybercrime are often blamed for their victimization. Since law enforcement relies significantly on victim reports, it is crucial for students to report incidents of cybercrime. Their knowledge of such crimes greatly helps the police in effectively supporting the victims.

In addition, the current study found a lack of cybercrime awareness in terms of knowledge, perceived causes, cybersecurity measures, and emotions. Regarding knowledge, more than 50% of participants knew the term “cybercrime” and chose the correct definition. Most were familiar with “cyberstalking,” “identity theft,” “Internet auction fraud,” “cyber-harassment,” and “impersonation”. Afrozulla et al. (2018) found that 68% of participants were moderately familiar with “cyber-crime”. However, most participants in this study were unfamiliar with the term “phishing act,” and only 42.0% correctly identified that both men and women are vulnerable to cybercrime. Previous studies have also shown a lack of knowledge about cybercrime (Rajan & Babu, 2020; Saima, 2014). Research indicates that individuals who have been victims of cybercrime possess a higher level of knowledge and awareness regarding this phenomenon (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017; Omoniyi, 2019; Nzeakor et al. 2020) found a negative correlation between Internet users' cybercrime knowledge and their risk of being victimized.

Moreover, the majority of the participants in this study denied being exposed to or involved in different types of cybercrimes. Most participants stated that they had either never or rarely committed cybercrimes, such as creating and spreading viruses on the internet or stealing financial and password information. Prior studies have indicated that students are more prone to engaging in cybercriminal activities rather than utilizing the internet for academic purposes (2015, Igba et al (2018). Liebel (2013) found a negative correlation between the probability of falling victim to cybercrime and one's awareness of it. For instance, individuals who were aware of the potential financial losses linked to opening emails from criminal hackers located overseas and making payments for fraudulent offers were less inclined to participate in such activities. Our study's findings could be explained by the participants' personal experiences with cybercrimes, their hesitation to discuss those experiences, or their cultural and religious convictions that forbid engaging in cybercrimes.

In addition, the majority of study participants neglected to implement safety measures while utilizing social media and the Internet. Less than half of the participants rarely changed their social media and email passwords. Furthermore, a significant number of participants indicated that they rarely or never utilized antivirus software on their personal computers or mobile devices. Moreover, more than half of the participants regularly opened email or instant messaging attachments. Other studies have reported similar findings (Afrozulla et al., 2018; Taha & Dahabiyeh, 2021). Velki and Romstein (2019) found that individuals who engaged in risky online activities exhibited limited awareness regarding the potential hazards to their online security. Those lacking awareness regarding cyber-security were found to be more vulnerable to becoming victims of cybercrime (Nzeakor et al., 2020). Slusky and Partow-Navid (2012) argued that the issue did not lie in students' awareness of security, but rather in their implementation of that awareness. Therefore, the undergraduate participants in this study may lack awareness of current security measures or proficiency in their use, rendering them vulnerable to cybercrimes.

Regarding perceived causes, most study participants were aware that cybercrime risks were primarily related to financial gain and the lack of punishments for the criminals. They lacked awareness of the impact of peer influence, fame, popular recognition, and social and environmental encouragement on criminal behavior. Cross et al. (2008) divided cybercrime motivations into financial, emotional, intellectual, curiosities, deviant behavior, and copyrighted material. However, other studies suggest that hackers were not primarily motivated by financial gain (Adegbola & Fadara, 2022; Igba et al., 2018). According to Alsaeed et al. (2023), students who were educated about financially risky cybercrimes exhibited reduced susceptibility to such crimes. Thus, planners and decision-makers can utilize this knowledge of cybercrime motivations to instruct undergraduate students and enhance victim awareness to minimize the risk of cybercrime (Smith, 2013).

Additionally, the study revealed a negative attitude toward cybercrimes among participants. The majority expressed strong disapproval towards the act of possessing or acquiring someone else's credit card number, using their password without permission, or revealing it. They also strongly opposed the use or threatening the use of personal information or pornographic material to steal money. This suggests that these students are aware of their attitudes towards cybercrime. Negative attitudes can safeguard personal information by discouraging the disclosure of sensitive data and limiting online usage (Gruchoła & Szulich-Kałuża, 2022). Other studies demonstrated a positive attitude toward cybercrime (Abanikannda, 2019) and Omoniyi et al., (2019) found no relationship between attitude and cybercrime.

The final section of the scale examined participants' emotions. They reported feeling unsafe, angry, anxious, scared, and afraid when confronted with cybercrimes. In contrast, Stevens et al. (2021) found that cybercrime victims often felt anxiety, depression, sadness, anger, fear, shame, embarrassment, isolation, low self-esteem, and fear of others. The Ossip study (2017) found that encouragement, indifference, and embarrassment were the most common emotions. These findings indicate that Palestinian undergraduate students who have been targeted by online crimes require psychological interventions and support.

Further, the results showed a significant relationship between cybercrime exposure, perception of threat, and the need for a university cybercrime awareness program. Similar results were found in Ossip study (2017). Abassi et al (2016) revealed that insecure people are not always vigilant and protective. The findings showed a significant relationship between students' familiarity with the terms cybercrime and cybercrime harassment and their likelihood of being exposed to or knowing someone who has been exposed to cybercrime. According to research, individuals who have engaged in cybercrime have a higher level of knowledge about these types of crimes (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017; Omoniyi, 2019). Therefore, these students may have encountered cybercrimes, thereby enhancing their knowledge.

Moreover, the results revealed that students who were exposed to sexual texts, emails, or photos were susceptible to cybercrime. Engaging in sexting can encourage risky sexual behaviors and aggression. (Quadara et al., 2017). Furthermore, there is a significant correlation between sexting and cyber victimization (Reyns et al., 2011a, b). Also, students who occasionally sent sexual messages, emails, or photos to others were less susceptible to cybercrime than those who did not. According to Velki et al (2014), people with more knowledge and awareness of security risks use information systems more riskily. Saridakis et al (2016) found that awareness reduced cybercrime vulnerability and victims may also withdraw from society, take extra security measures, and be more cautious (Hindelang et al., 1978). Kaur et al (2021) indicated that people who received intimidating, demeaning, or harassing online messages changed their behavior, which may reduce cybercrime.

The results also showed that students who experienced harassment or cyberstalking on social media or the internet had a significant level of exposure to cybercrime. High levels of Internet usage, a lack of self-discipline, and active participation in multiple social media platforms are linked to an increased likelihood of encountering harassment or cyberstalking (Bae, 2017). Loneliness can increase an individual's susceptibility to victimization by depriving them of social support and companionship (Christiansen & Evans, 2005). Therefore, enhancing cybercrime awareness, particularly among individuals who heavily rely on the internet, could potentially decrease the likelihood of becoming a victim (Abassi et al., 2016).

Additionally, the results found that accepting friend requests from known friends significantly reduced students’ risk of cybercrime or knowing someone exposed to it. Friending strangers may bring motivated offenders near victims, increasing cybercrime risk (Reyns et al., 2011a, b). The findings also showed that anger increased cybercrime risk, while fear or indifference decreased it. Fear or indifference may prompt self-defense (Bada & Nurse, 2020). Victimization and cybercrime fear were positively correlated in one systematic review (Brands & van Doorn, 2021). However, Afrozulla et al. (2018) found that students reported cybercrimes fearlessly. Victimization can also cause anger, which lowers cyber confidence and decreases the use of technology, increasing cybercrime risk (Nurse, 2018). Angered victims may also be reluctant to report crimes to police or their families, increasing their victimization (Weijer et al., 2020). Thus, undergraduate emotion regulation and anger control management may improve emotional awareness and coping.

Finally, the results indicated that exposure to cybercrime was not influenced by sociodemographic characteristics or risky online lifestyle activities. On the other hand, Hindelang et al. (1978) found that victimization rates are influenced by lifestyle activities and other factors such as age, sex, marital status, family income, and race. Therefore, additional research is needed to assess other online risky behaviors that contribute to student cybercrime involvement.

Limitations

This study had some limitations. Making causal inferences is hindered by convenient sampling and cross-sectional designs. In addition, a self-reported questionnaire was used, which makes it liable for reporting bias. Further, since only Al Quds University was involved in this study, it is possible that the results cannot be generalized to other undergraduate students at Palestinian universities. Nevertheless, despite these limitations, our study on cybercrimes among undergraduate students still contributes significantly to the literature because it is the first to evaluate these crimes among undergraduate students in the Palestinian universities.

Conclusion and future research

Our findings contribute to undergraduate students' limited cybercrime knowledge and awareness. The findings revealed that many participants had personally experienced cybercrime or knew someone who had. High-risk online lifestyle behaviors included using social media for social interaction, using mobile apps, excessive social media use, and failing to report criminal activity to law enforcement. Cybercrime awareness was lacking in knowledge, perceived causes, cybersecurity measures, and emotional responses. The findings revealed significant links between cybercrime exposure and students' knowledge of cyberstalking and cybercrime harassment, perception of being threatened by cybercrime, the need for university cybercrime awareness programs, and personal experiences with sextortion, social media harassment, and cyberstalking. Accepting only friend requests from known people may reduce cybercrime risk. Fear and indifference decreased cybercrime risk, whereas anger increased it.

The study findings also have practical implications for improving responses to cybercrimes. Results show the urgent need for a well-organized awareness initiative, including educational and training programs, workshops, seminars, and posters to prevent cybercrime, promote safe online behavior, and emphasize cybersecurity. Cybercrime awareness programs at universities should target risky online behavior. These programs should target university students, especially those who fear cybercrime and need to learn more. A computerized program to educate Palestinian undergraduate students about cybercrime should be created and implemented using the latest technologies. This program aims to improve their security knowledge and encourage safe computer and mobile device usage. The program should be accessible via university accounts. In addition, a cybersecurity chapter could be added to the curriculum. Universities must also have a clear cybercrime protocol and a safe place for students to report incidents. The study emphasizes the importance of psychological support and intervention for students who may have experienced cybercrime and require a safe space to express their negative emotions, particularly anger. Future research is needed to delve deeper into cybercrime knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions. Additionally, other risky online behaviors that predispose students to criminal activity must be investigated. Finally, future research should examine the factors that contribute to students’ reluctance to report cybercrime incidents to law enforcement and their involvement in sextortion.