|
|
International Journal of Cyber Criminology | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
Analysis These data will be analyzed in three phases. First, the prevalence of music piracy is calculated for 8th and 11th grade students using percentages. This includes rates in varying timeframes, including lifetime, past year, and past month. Second, these rates are separated by demographic and other characteristics of the respondents and compared to each other.[7] These analyses compare responses by gender, race/ethnicity, and other background characteristics. The significance of any differences found is determined using chi-square (or gamma for ordinal predictors) tests. Third, logistic regression is used to explore which measures reveal the likelihood of performing music piracy. Importantly, the amount of missing data for variables ranges from 1 to 7 percent, and a list wise deletion strategy for handling this would remove nearly 15 percent of cases. Consequentially, missing data are addressed using multiple imputations for regressions. This method uses other variables in the dataset to predict a value for each instance of missing data. This is generally preferable to list wise deletion, which removes cases with missing data entirely, and mean replacement, and can cause regression slopes to be overly shallow (Allison, 2002). The SAS version of multiple imputation (PROC MI), used here, has the additional benefit of using maximum likelihood estimations with several iterations. Regression analyses are performed on each dataset produced by each iteration, and the results are averaged to form a final set of coefficients. The coefficients from different models will then be compared using the equality of regression coefficients test (Paternoster, Brame, Mazerolle, & Piquero, 1998).
Results An analysis of the prevalence of piracy for 8thgrade students indicates that 52.2 percent have pirated in their lifetime, 44.0 percent have pirated in the past year, 35.1 percent have pirated in the past month, and 16.1 percent pirate daily. For 11th grade students, those number increase dramatically. Specifically, 72.3 percent have pirated in their lifetime, 63.8 percent have pirated in the past year, 52.8 percent have pirated in the past month, and 25.0 percent pirate daily. Unfortunately, meaningful comparisons to previous studies of piracy are difficult to make. In addition to the limited number of studies on music piracy overall (rather than software, video, or other forms of piracy), several simply do not report the actual prevalence rates for music piracy (e.g., Gunter, 2008; Gunter, 2009a; Higgins, Wolfe, & Ricketts, 2009; Wolfe, Higgins, & Marcum, 2008). Of those empirical studies that have reported prevalence rates, the rates apply to college undergraduates. Thus, this comparison is made to provide an initial investigation into whether piracy rates increase, decrease, or are stable as students’ transition from high school to college. A study by Hohn, Muftic and Wolf (2006) found that 80 percent of undergraduate students had pirated music at least once in their lifetime, which indicates that the prevalence continues increasing after 11th grade (72 percent). Morris and Higgins (2009) reported that past year prevalence for college students was 57 percent, which is slightly lower than 11th grade and indicates that there may be fewer college students downloading than high school students. For past month piracy, a study by Gunter (2009b) reported a relatively low rate of 29 percent. Though this large decrease in comparison to past month high school (53 percent) could be the result of methodological differences, the much higher rate of past year piracy in college (57 percent) suggests it may alternatively indicate that college students continue to pirate, but do so more sporadically than high school students. It is also possible that people who pirate are more or less likely to continue onto college than students who do not pirate music. Table 2 presents the piracy prevalence by the demographics in the 8th grade. Overall, 52.2 percent of all 8th grade students pirated in their lifetime. The data reveal a biological sex difference in piracy in their lifetime, with 55.4 percent of males having pirated verses 49.1 percent of females. The data show limited racial and ethnic differences in piracy in lifetime piracy, with only one significant difference among the five categories. The results also show that economics is an important issue for lifetime piracy. Specifically, 48.9 percent of impoverished individuals, and 54.0 percent of individuals not living in poverty pirated in their lifetime. Individuals that earned lower grades pirated more in their lifetime, as students with A grades are the least likely to have pirated and students with D/F grades being the most likely. Pirating in the past month naturally has lower percentages of participation across all of the groups, but the patterns seem to be similar. Overall, the data show that 35.1 percent of the individuals pirated. As with the lifetime data, these data show a biological sex difference in piracy in the past month (39.0 percent of males and 31.4 percent of the females). Additional racial/ethnic differences emerge in this timeframe, with Hispanics significantly more likely to pirate than Whites. The data also show that economics are an issue with piracy in the past month, with 32.4 percent of the impoverished individuals pirated in the past month and 36.5 percent of the individuals not living in poverty pirated in the past month. Individuals with lower grades were again more likely to pirate, with 29.2 percent of A students pirating and 43.9 percent of D/F students pirating. Table 2 also presents the eleventh grade results. The percentages are somewhat higher, as one would expect for most crimes when comparing these age groups. By 11th grade, more than 70 percent of students have pirated in their lifetime. For lifetime piracy, the data show a biological sex difference in piracy, with 77.9 percent of the males and 67.0 percent of the females having pirated. Additional racial/ethnic differences have emerged for lifetime piracy by 11th grade, with White and Asian students significantly more likely to pirate than Black and Hispanic students. The data reveal an economic difference in piracy, in which 66.3 percent of individuals living in poverty pirated in their lifetime, compared to 74.4 percent of those not living in poverty. As before, individuals that earned lower grades were more likely to have pirated in their lifetime, but this effect was not significant for this timeframe for this age. The results also indicate that 52.8 percent of the eleventh graders pirated in the past month. The data show that 60.4 percent of the males and 45.7 percent of the females pirated in the past month. With regard to racial/ethnic categories, Asian students were significantly more likely to pirate music than White, Black, or Hispanic students. The individuals living in poverty were again less likely to pirate, with only 46.9 percent pirating compared to 54.7 percent of the individuals not living in poverty. The effect of grades is once again significant, with 46.6 percent of A students pirating and 60.4 percent of D/F students pirating. Table 3 presents the logistic regression analysis that provides an indication of which individuals are most likely to perform music piracy. In the eighth grade, the results shows that female are less likely than males (b=-0.322, Exp(b) = 0.725) to pirate music in the past month. With regard to race, Blacks are more likely than Whites (b=0.316, Exp(b) = 1.372), and Hispanics are more likely than Whites (b=0.375, Exp(b) = 1.455) to pirate music in the past month. The individuals that live in poverty are less likely to pirate music in the past month (b=-0.323, Exp(b) = 0.724). For the educational measure, individuals that have college aspirations are more likely to pirate music (b=0.252, Exp(b) = 1.287), yetindividuals who have higher grades are less likely to pirate music in the past month (b=-0.076, Exp(b) = 0.927). Individuals with higher levels of self-control are less likely to pirate music in the past month (b=-0.703, Exp(b)=0.495).
Also presented in Table 3 are the logistic regression results for the lifetime correlates of eighth grade music piracy. Six measures are significant correlates of lifetime music piracy. Two measures increased the likelihood of lifetime music piracy in this group, including being Asian (b=0.436, Exp(b) = 1.547) and planning to attend college (b=0.445, Exp(b) = 1.561). Four measures reduce the likelihood of music piracy during someone’s lifetime in 8th grade. Specifically, being female (b=-0.237, Exp(b)=.789), living in poverty (b=-.256, Exp(b)=.774), having higher grades (b=-0.067, Exp(b)=0.935), and having higher levels of self-control (b=-0.703, Exp(b)=0.495) correspond with a decrease in the probability of having ever performed music piracy by the 8th grade. The logistic regression analysis that explores the correlates of music piracy of individuals in the past month in the 11th grade is also presented in Table 3. It shows that three measures are likely to increase the likelihood of music piracy, including being Black (b=0.208, Exp(b)=1.231), being Asian (b=0.643, Exp(b)=1.901), and planning to attend college (b=0.365, Exp(b)=1.441). The table shows that four measures reduce the likelihood of music piracy, including being female (b=-0.474, Exp(b)=0.623), living in poverty (b=-0.293, Exp(b)=0.747), having higher grades (b=-.114, Exp(b)=0.892), and having higher levels of self-control (b=-0.488, Exp(b)=0.614). Finally, Table 3 also presents the logistic regression analysis that explores the correlates of music piracy in the individual’s lifetime in the 11th grade. It indicates that three measures reduce the likelihood of music piracy of the individual’s lifetime in the 11th grade. These measures include being female (b=-0.431, Exp(b)=0.650), living in poverty (b=-0.318, Exp(b)=0.728), and having higher levels of self-control (b=-0.537, Exp(b)=0.584). The data show that two measures increase the likelihood of pirating music in one’s lifetime in the 11thgrade, including being Asian (b=0.435, Exp(b)=1.546) and having plans to attend college (b=0.471, Exp(b)=1.022).
Discussion and Conclusion Few would argue that adolescence is not a difficult and important time of life for most individuals. This is a time of exploration and experimentation. Thus, during this period of life, many will perform behaviors that may be criminal. One form of criminal behavior is music piracy. The purpose of the present study is to provide an understanding of adolescent music piracy. To date, only one study, to our knowledge, exists concerning music piracy of adolescents. Thus, the present study is important because it provides insight into the prevalence of piracy of adolescents. Further, this study also provides insights as to the correlates of music piracy of adolescents. The results show some interesting patterns. When comparing the prevalence of music piracy, a smaller percentage of 8th graders than 11th graders performed music piracy. The same trend persists for all of the different times (i.e., past year, past month, and daily). One could speculate that 11th graders are likely to have more access to computers. At this stage of life, 11th graders are likely to see computers being more central to their lives; thus, the additional access to computers may provide them with more opportunity to perform music piracy. In addition, music may be more important with this group, the lack of personal income may provide the necessary motivation to perform music piracy. Other forms of crime and deviance also generally see an increase as adolescents’ age and move closer to adulthood. The trends from the overall group seem to persist for the individuals. When comparing the lifetime and past month prevalence of music piracy for 8th and 11th graders, more males than females pirated. This is consistent with the research from college student samples (Hollinger, 1988, 1993; Husted, 2000). This result is consistent with the evidence that suggests that males are more likely to perform criminal acts than females, and is another behavior where an apparent biological sex and possible a sociological gender gap exist in offending. This is one of the first studies to explore the prevalence of race and ethnicity directly in the context of music piracy. The research here shows that music piracy takes place in all racial and ethnic categories for 8th and 11th graders. Specifically, Asian individuals were the most likely to perform music piracy. This suggests that a cultural difference may be present in music piracy. The results indicate that piracy is a behavior that more often occurs among individuals not living in poverty. These individuals may be likely to be concerned with music; whereas, the individual that is impoverished is less likely to access a computer or have an Internet connection. The results also indicate that many students who earned better grades in school engaged in music piracy, but were less likely to do so overall. This shows that individuals may be spending more time performing other behaviors, such as piracy, than pay attention academic pursuits. The measure of self-control produced results consistent with theory and previous research from the college student data. To be clear, across all the periods of life, those with higher levels of self-control were less likely to perform music piracy. As a note of caution, the measures included here are not without flaws. First, the measurement of self-control captured impulsivity and risk seeking, but not the remaining aspects of self-control. A standard measure of self-control may provide different results. Second, our study did not use a measure of delinquent peer association. The use of self-control in this study, however, was not intended to test self-control theory (i.e., it was merely used as a control), so delinquent peer association is not necessary in the present study. The present study provides some insights into the correlates most likely to reduce or increase the likelihood of music piracy, which is an advance in our understanding given that very little has been produced using these types of samples. While these results are an important advance, the present study has several limits. First, the study comes from only one state. However, the results from the present study are nonetheless novel to the criminological literature concerning music piracy. Second, the study does not include important measures about computer usage and skill that limit the results. It is conceded that a study that includes measures like this would be stronger, but no such study of this population to date, to our knowledge, exists in the empirical literature. Third, the use of self-control is an unconventional use of the measure and a different way to measure the concept. Yet others have used self-control in a similar manner, and other criminologists use self-control in differing methods and for differing purposes. Despite the limits, this study contributes to the literature by investigative the prevalence of music piracy by examining the performance of the behavior of adolescents and the important measures have links with the performance of this behavior. Specifically, the results indicate that music piracy is prevalent among adolescents and that gender, race, college aspirations, grades, and poverty all have important links with music piracy. Future studies that use different measures of self-control, delinquent peer association, skill and other theoretical measures from different states will be particularly useful in our understanding.
Acknowledgements The data used in this research were collected by the University of Delaware’s Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies as part of a study supported by the Delaware Health Fund and by the Division of Substance Abuse and Mental Health, Delaware Health and Social Services. The views and conclusions expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the University of Delaware or the sponsoring agencies.
References Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing Data (Sage University Papers Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Anderson, N. (2010, October 7). US anti-P2P law firms sue more in 2010 than RIAA ever did. Ars Technica. Retrieved October 8, 2010, from http://arst.ch/mq8 Bachmann, M. (2007). Lesson spurned? Reactions of online music pirates to legal prosecutions by the RIAA. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1, 213-227. Borland, J. (2003, September 10). P2P group: We'll pay girl's RIAA bill. CNET News. Retrieved August 2, 2008, from http://news.cnet.com/P2P-group-Well-pay-girls-RIAA-bill/2100-1027_3-5074227.html Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies. (2008). Alcohol, Tobacco& Other Drug Abuse Among Delaware Students, 2008. Retrieved October 31, 2008, from http://www.udel.edu/ delawaredata/2008%20State%20Report.pdf Gopal, R. D., Sanders, G. L., Bhattacharjee, S., Agrawal, M., & Wagner, S. C. (2004).A behavioral model of digital music piracy. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 14, 89-105. Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990).A General Theory of Crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., Bursik Jr., R. J., & Arneklev, B. J. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 5-29. Gunter, W. D. (2008). Piracy on the high speeds: A test of social learning theory on digital piracy among college students. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 3, 54-68. Gunter, W. D. (2009a). Internet scallywags: A comparative analysis of multiple forms and measurements of digital piracy. Western Criminology Review, 10, 15-28. Gunter, W. D. (2009b). Piracy of the New Millennium: An Application of Criminological Theories to Digital Piracy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware, Newark, DE. Higgins, G. E. (2005). Can low self-control help with the understanding of the software piracy problem? Deviant Behavior, 26, 1-24. Higgins, G. E. (2007). Examining the original Grasmick scale: A Rasch model approach. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 157-178. Higgins, G. E., Fell, B. D., &Wilson, A. L. (2006). Digital piracy: Assessing the contributions of an integrated self-control theory and social learning theory using structural equation modeling. Criminal Justice Studies, 19, 3-22. Higgins, G. E., & Makin, D. A. (2004). Self-control, deviant peer association, and software piracy. Psychological Reports, 95, 921-931. Higgins, G. E., Wolfe, S. E., & Ricketts, M. L. (2009).Digital piracy: A latent class analysis. Social Science Computer Review, 27, 24-40. Hinduja, S. (2001). Correlates of Internet software piracy. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 17, 369-382. Hinduja, S. (2003).Trends and Patterns among Online Software Pirates. Ethics and Information Technology, 5, 49–61. Hinduja, S. (2006). Music Piracy and Crime Theory. New York: LFB. Hohn, D. A., Muftic, L. R., & Wolf, K. (2006). Swashbuckling students: An exploratory study of Internet piracy. Security Journal, 19, 110-127. Hollinger, R. C. (1988). Computer hackers follow a Guttman-like progression. Sociology and Social Research, 72, 199-200. Hollinger, R. C. (1993). Crime by computer: Correlates of software piracy and unauthorized account access. Security Journal, 4, 2–12. Husted, B. W. (2000). The impact of national culture on software piracy. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 431-438. International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). (2008). Recording Industry in Numbers 2008. Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_resources/rin/rin.html Koen, C. M., & Im, J. H. (1997).Software piracy and its legal implications. Security Journal, 31, 265-272. Malin, J., & Fowers, B. J. (2009).Adolescent self-control and music and movie piracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 718-722. Morris, R. G., & Higgins, G. E. (2009). Neutralizing Potential and Self-reported Digital Piracy: A Multi-theoretical Exploration among College Undergraduates. Criminal Justice Review, 34, 173-195. Oberholzer-Gee, F., & Strumpf, K. (2007). The effect of file sharing on record sales: An empirical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 115, 1-42. Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859-866. Payne, B. K., & Chappell, A. T. (2008).Using Student Samples in Criminological Research. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19, 177-194. Piquero, A. R., Macintosh, R., & Hickman, M. (2000). Does self-control affect survey response? Applying exploratory, confirmatory and item response theory analysis to Grasmick et al.’s self-control scale. Criminology, 38, 897-930. Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38, 931-964. Sims, R., Cheng, H. K., & Teegan, H. (1996). Toward a profile of student software pirates. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 839–849. Solomon, S.L., O'Brien, J. A. (1990).The effect of demographic factors on attitudes toward software piracy. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 30, 41-46. Tibbetts, S. G., & Gibson, C. L. (2002). Individual propensities and rational decision-making: Recent findings and promising approaches. In A. R. Piquero and S. G. Tibbetts (Eds.), Rational choice and criminal behavior: Recent research and future challenges (pp. 3–24). New York: Routledge. Wall, D. S. (2005). The Internet as a conduit for criminal activity. In A. Pattavina (Ed.), Information technology and the criminal justice system (pp. 78-94). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wolfe, S. E., Higgins, G. E., & Marcum, C. D. (2008). Deterrence and digital piracy: A preliminary examination of the role of viruses. Social Science Computer Review, 26, 317-333. Zuckerman, M. (1979).Sensation Seeking: Beyond the Optimum Level of Arousal. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies, University of Delaware, 257 East Main Street, Suite 110, Newark, DE 19716, United States of America. Email: wgunter@udel.edu [2] Associate Professor, Department of Justice Administration, 2301 South 3rd Street, 208, Brigman Hall, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40292, United States of America. Email: gehigg01@louisville.edu [3] Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies, University of Delaware, 257 East Main Street, Suite 110, Newark, DE 19716, United States of America. [4] These samples are analyzed separately for several reasons. First, 8th and 11th grade are discrete and come from different populations (high school vs. middle school) and there is no reason to believe they are similar. In fact, the results indicate different prevalence rates and correlated between grades/ages. Second, given the large sample sizes in each grade (over 5,000), there is little to gain from further increases in sample size. [5] Given that this question does not specify any particular method of transmission (direct downloading from website, peer to peer, etc.) or for any particular purpose (e.g., burning to CDs, iPod use), this measure is not limited to specific methods or purposes beyond illegal Internet-based music downloading. However, because it only specifies “without paying for it,” there is a possibility that some legal downloading, such as promotional downloads, may inadvertently be included. [6] Lifetime piracy is defined by an individual who provide any response other than “never.” Past year piracy is defined by a response other than “never” or “before but not in past year.” Past month piracy is defined by a response of “once or twice a month,” once or twice a week,” or “almost every day.” Finally, daily piracy is defined by a response of “almost every day.” These dichotomous indicators are therefore not mutually exclusive. [7] Due to limited space only lifetime and past month piracy are used for bivariate and multivariate analyses. These variables were selected because they correspond with ever having experimented with piracy and being a current pirate, which are the two most clearly distinguished types of pirates based on the available timeframes.
| | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||