Digital Behavior and Cybercrime Vulnerability in the United States: A Review of Sociological Determinants of Identity Theft and Online Fraud
TL;DR
The reviewed literature indicates that cybercrime vulnerability is shaped not only by technical weaknesses but also by online routines, trust-based decision-making, risk perception, digital guardianship and structural inequalities.
Abstract
Digital environments have reshaped patterns of cybercrime vulnerability in the United States, particularly in relation to identity theft and online fraud. This narrative review examines recent literature on how digital behaviour and sociological determinants contribute to unequal exposure to cybercrime victimisation. The review focuses on studies published between 2020 and 2026 and synthesises evidence from criminology, sociology, behavioural science and information systems. The analysis is organised around four major themes: digital routine activities and behavioural exposure, socioeconomic and demographic stratification of vulnerability, behavioural and cognitive mechanisms of victimisation, and platform-mediated and algorithmic cyber risks. The reviewed literature indicates that cybercrime vulnerability is shaped not only by technical weaknesses but also by online routines, trust-based decision-making, risk perception, digital guardianship and structural inequalities. Age, socioeconomic status, education, income and digital literacy appear to influence both exposures to cyber threats and the ability to adopt protective practices. Older adults may face risks linked to limited digital familiarity and targeted scams, whereas younger users may experience risk through high engagement, overconfidence and frequent online activity. The review also highlights emerging concerns related to social media, financial technologies, algorithmic environments, artificial intelligence and automated deception. Although awareness and education remain important, the evidence suggests that knowledge alone is insufficient to prevent victimisation. More integrated approaches are needed, combining user education, behavioural interventions, platform responsibility and equitable policy design. The review identifies major gaps in longitudinal research, intersectional analysis, platform governance and sociotechnical theory development.