December 15, 2025
Crossing the line into cybercrime
As the most digitally connected generation so far, young people today face new challenges. Our latest Researchers of the Month, Professor Davidson and Dr Farr, have found that in the last decade, an increasing number of young people (particularly young men) have committed serious cybercrime offences, particularly hacking and money laundering. Their new book, written following a large research project funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, seeks to understand the drivers behind this trend. It explores a range of potential factors that may lead young people to engage in risky online behaviours, and to identify effective pathways for prevention.
Summary
The term "cybercrime" refers to a broad range of behaviours online that are considered to be illegal. Cybercrimes can be harmful to both those perpetrating the behaviour and those impacted by the behaviours.
In their landmark new book, our Researchers of the Month amalgamate findings from three distinct datasets exploring youth cybercrime, which were collected between 2021-2023. This includes in-depth interview data from 36 youth cybercrime experts worldwide, a large-scale survey exploring youth cybercrime conducted with 8000 teens across eight European counties, and interviews with convicted cybercriminals in criminal justice settings. These individuals were serving sentences for a variety of reasons including child sex offences, cyberstalking, running virtual market places, trading in illegitimate products, targeted phishing scams, fraud schemes and serious ransomware attacks.
Many young people have a high level of technical ability and spend a lot of time of internet connected devices (in particular via computers and game consoles). This can be enjoyable, productive and constructive, and involves the development of skills that are valuable and needed in the workplace. However, for some teens, this can also lead to increasing involvement in risky and illegal behaviours online.
Surprisingly, just under half of the young people surveyed (48% or 3808 teens) reported engaging in some form of criminal behaviour online.
Reassuringly, the vast majority of these perpetrated low level cybercrimes, such as digital piracy. However, a far smaller, though significant, proportion of young people engaged in more serious offences. Around 15% of participants had produced self-generated sexual images which they shared with other young people. Approximately 12% had engaged in money laundering having experienced grooming from criminal networks. Around 10% had used hate speech and a further 10% had been involved in hacking. The research also found significant use of risky online spaces, with 9% of young people using TOR, almost 12% having visited dark web forums, and 18% having used illegal virtual markets.
Whilst there is a male bias in the data, the researchers found significant numbers of females perpetrating cybercrime offences, something which Dr Farr is currently investigating further. The data showed considerable differences between males and females for some categories of behaviour. For example, females were much less likely to commit a hate crime or use revenge pornography compared to males, but there were some similarities. Females were slightly more likely to ‘track’ someone online than males and rates of sexting were relatively similar. Professor Davidson and Dr Farr also found a link between sexual offences (such as revenge pornography) and depression and other diagnosed mental health conditions amongst young people.
"It was a series of clicks, that was all."
Many of the interviews with convicted cybercriminals focused on the ease with which they became involved in illegal acts online.
Professor Davidson and Dr Farr emphasise that motivations for cybercrime such as hacking, are not always financial. Young people, particularly those with strong technological aptitude, may be drawn in by competition, curiosity and the thrill of solving complex challenges. Interviews with offenders revealed that many began with activities that felt only slightly risky, which gradually escalated into illegal behaviour. A strong interest in technology was common, with one participant describing spending up to 18 hours a day online from the age of 12.
Many offenders described unmonitored access to tutorials and step by step guides to committing serious crimes including hacking, which they found easily accessible on mainstream platforms. One interviewee even called one particular search engine their ‘best friend’ and ‘biggest mentor’. Many of the cyber offenders explored how they did not feel that their aptitude for technology was explored or harnessed in a safe environment when they were at school. Some explored feelings of frustration about the fact that they learned much more alone, online in their bedrooms. As one participant said, "I went alone out of curiosity. Everything is there, it’s just clicking on stuff".
Interviews with convicted cybercriminals revealed that many minimised the impact of their actions, using techniques of neutralisation to deny that any real-world harm had occurred and framing their behaviour as almost victimless. Interestingly, some also described voluntarily pausing their activities over Christmas, suggesting that moral boundaries were still present, even within illicit activity.
These findings can help us to understand young people’s online behaviour more generally. The relative anonymity of digital spaces can make actions feel detached from real-world consequences. When harm is not immediately visible, young people may be more likely to downplay the impact of their behaviour, viewing it as “just online” or harmless. This distancing can make it easier to cross boundaries that they would be unlikely to cross offline.
The cybercriminals’ accounts also highlight how moral frameworks can become distorted online. While values and empathy are not absent, they may be selectively applied, with ethical limits blurred by anonymity, lack of immediate feedback and the absence of visible victims. This helps explain why some young people might begin to engage in behaviours such as piracy, harassment or hacking without fully appreciating the real-world implications. Supporting young people to understand the human impact of online actions, to recognise harm even when it is not immediately visible and to develop ethical digital judgement is key.
Implications
What can parents and educators do?
Young people need to be supported and protected from making harmful choices in cyberspace. At school, awareness-raising campaigns, mentorship schemes and peer-to-peer work, particularly for those at risk or with a strong interest in technology, play an important role. Creating clear, accessible pathways for education and positive engagement is vital in helping young people develop safe, ethical digital behaviours.
Have non-judgemental, exploratory conversations about values and the consequences of risky online behaviours. Young people can easily access guides and instructions that may lead them to commit cyber-offences, often without fully understanding the implications. Creating space to explore the grey areas is important. Do they realise, for example, that piracy is a criminal offence? Do they understand the real-world consequences of online actions? Is it always clear what is legal or illegal online, especially as legislation in this area changes rapidly? Educate young people about cybercrime. Check that they are aware of what behaviours to avoid online to keep themselves and others safe.
Instil good cybersecurity practices. Teaching children basic cybersecurity skills, such as recognising suspicious links, using strong passwords, understanding privacy settings and thinking critically about what they share online, can act as a protective factor. By increasing their knowledge and confidence in navigating digital spaces safely, children are less likely to become involved in risky or illegal online behaviours. Encourage open conversations about online choices, model safe practices and perhaps be open if anything goes wrong for you.
Explore the practical repercussions of risky or illegal behaviours. The online world can make us feel anonymous or invisible, which might make us more likely to test boundaries or behave in ways we wouldn’t offline. Denying harm was a common theme for offenders. Exploring real life consequences for both victims and perpetrators is therefore key.
Remember that unmonitored access to digital devices is a definite risk factor for young people. Professor Davidson's and Dr Farr's research has shown that those who are involved in risky, harmful and illegal behaviours online are more likely to keep their devices near them overnight and have their sleep interrupted by their devices. They are also more likely to use a greater number of social media platforms and risky online spaces (certain chat rooms, online forums, illegal virtual marketplaces, peer-to-peer networks and the dark web). Encourage young people to keep digital devices out of reach overnight.
Explore the spaces that they are engaging with and try to cultivate open conversation about your children’s (and your own) online world. Take an interest in their games and the platforms that they use, how those spaces make them feel and whether they are in line with their fundamental values. Humour can help to open up conversations.
Make use of parental controls and create agreements around your digital values. Our activity might help.
Harness technological aptitude for good. Curiosity and technological aptitude emerged as a pathway into cybercrime in this study. However, these are also hugely desirable skills. Parents and teachers can actively nurture these passions positively, perhaps even encouraging tech-talented teens to pursue opportunities which might help them to build a future career in tech. Peer mentoring schemes, hackathons (where people come together to collaboratively solve problems, develop software or create technology-based projects) and courses are all really helpful. Professor Davidson recommends The Hacking Games, an organisation that aims to unlock the talents of gamers and builders, guiding them toward positive contributions in global cybersecurity missions. The organisation works extensively with the National Crime Agency and Interpol. Industries need talented young people with these skills and young people will benefit from exposure to these opportunities.
Empower young people to seek help. If they are worried about something they have done or seen online, they need to know how to reach out to someone they can trust. This activity might help.
Check out Professor Davidson and Dr Farr’s tools for young people, parents and educators. These include posters describing cybercrimes which include examples of what individuals can do to reduce their risky online behaviours, a cybercrime quiz for teens, and checklists for parents, caregivers and educators about potential online risks and helpful actions.
Tune in to our interview with Professor Davidson and Dr Farr here.
Acknowledgements
Professor Davidson and Dr Farr would like to thank the following people and organisations for their support and assistance with their research:
- The CC-Driver consortium, comprised of 13 EU partners, led by Trilateral Research (project lead Dr David Wright).
- Professor Mary Aiken, Professor of forensic-cyberpsychology, the core research team and partners at the University of Lausanne, plus all other UEL and ICC staff members who offered support, help and data analysis.
- The interviews with convicted cybercriminals and all ethical processes were significantly supported by UK Home Office researchers, the UK HMPPS Cyber Threat Team, prison staff and the interview participants who shared personal insights, experiences and suggestions for tackling future cybercrime.
Professor Julia Davidson OBE and Dr Ruby Farr
Professor Davidson is Professor of Criminal Justice and Cybercrime and Dr Farr is a Research Fellow, both at the University of East London
Julia Davidson OBE is Professor of Criminal Justice and Cybercrime and Executive Director of Research, Impact and Innovation. She is also Director of the Institute for Connected Communities and the Child Online Harms Policy Think Tank (launched 2025). She is one of the UK’s foremost experts on advocacy, policy and practice in child safeguarding, online harms/safety and youth cybercrime. She is Chair of the UK Council for Internet Safety Evidence Group and provides expert advice to international and national organisations such as the Technology Coalition, UNICEF, the US Sentencing Commission, and the UN ITU, the Home Office and the DCMS. She is a member of the Europol EC3 Expert Academic Advisory Committee and acted as Chair of the Research Ethics Committee to the Independent Inquiry into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse. Her expertise was key to the development of the national child protection policy and five year plan in Rwanda and continues to work with partners across Africa to safeguard and protect children online.
Dr Ruby Farr is a Research Fellow at the University of East London, Institute for Connected Communities, and a recognised scholar in the field of cyber violence and online harms, examining the intersection between evolving technologies and human behaviour. She has worked in the area of social justice for almost two decades, driving evidence-led policy and practice, with the past seven years dedicated to understanding and tackling harms in cyberspace. She holds an Honours degree in Criminology and a PhD awarded by scholarship in 2022, focused on understanding the long-term impacts of adverse childhood experiences (ACES). Throughout her career, Dr Farr has collaborated with Members of Parliament, law enforcement agencies, charities, academic institutions, Government authorities and other third-sector organisations. Her expertise explores how technology has reshaped criminality, societal norms, human behaviour and lived realities.
Professor Julia Davidson OBE and Dr Ruby Farr
Professor Davidson is Professor of Criminal Justice and Cybercrime and Dr Farr is a Research Fellow, both at the University of East London
Related Resources
Scroll our research gallery
Nov 16, 2025
Supporting Children’s Use of AI
Children and young people are now growing up surrounded by AI, and the landscape is shifting fast. In the UK, recent data from Ofcom and Internet Matters suggests that around half of children aged 8–17 regularly use generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Bard or Snapchat’s MyAI. Many describe these interactions as feeling like conversations with a friend. A recent report from Common Sense Media found that 33% of teens had actually chosen to talk to an AI companion instead of a real person about something important or serious. Whether children are asking voice assistants to answer their questions, relying on chatbots for bedtime stories, using learning apps for revision or engaging with large generative AI models, it’s essential to remember that most of these systems were built with adults in mind, not children. They often assume levels of attention, memory and emotional maturity that younger users simply don’t have. Even older children and teenagers, who increasingly use AI as a supportive confidante (often without adult supervision or knowledge), are still learning to navigate boundaries around trust, identity and emotion. Our latest Researcher of the Month, Dr Nomisha Kurian, wants this to change. She has developed a new framework called Developmentally Aligned Design (DAD), which outlines how AI can be built with children’s needs, vulnerabilities and strengths at its core. She also chatted to us at Tooled Up, sharing practical tips on recognising when children may be relying too heavily on AI for emotional connection, how to talk to them about healthy boundaries, and how parents and educators can help children and young people use AI tools safely, creatively and critically.
Oct 16, 2025
Algorithmised Girlhood: Teenage Girls and TikTok
As part of the early stages of her PhD study, our latest researcher of the month, Chiara Fehr, ran several focus groups about experiences of TikTok with eight 17 year old girls. Using creative methods, such as ‘TikTok show and tells’ a collaging session and a utopic mapping exercise, Chiara is exploring whether dominant narratives around growing up in a digitised world reflect the real life experiences of teens, and has summarised her findings so far in a recent article.
![“[They use devices] alllllllll day long”. What do children think about our tech use?](https://cdn.sanity.io/images/jxfh43in/content-prod-d2c/79f219275088655f59590f61ff29b6bc8b0d77f8-1100x733.jpg?w=3840&h=1920&q=70&fit=crop&crop=center&auto=format)
Sep 09, 2025
“[They use devices] alllllllll day long”. What do children think about our tech use?
We're all used to reading about children and young people's increasing use of digital tech. But what about adults' use? And what impact might our tech use have on family life? Parents today are spending an unprecedented amount of time on their devices. One study found that parents spend an average of nine hours per day engaged with screen devices. Over four hours of this is on smartphones, averaging 67 phone checks per day. Despite children's central role in family life, their voices and perspectives on the device use of the adults around them have been largely neglected in research. Along with colleagues, our latest Researcher of the Month, Professor Cara Swit, has published a fascinating study exploring the experiences and perceptions of children aged six to nine about their parents’ device use at home and its impact on them.
Aug 13, 2025
Students’ views on smartphone bans
In recent years, banning or restricting children’s access to smartphones and social media has grasped the attention of policy makers, schools and parents. A number of countries, including France, Turkey, Norway, Sweden, and regions of the US and Canada have introduced laws, policies or guidance for schools to ‘ban’ or heavily restrict the use of phones. Within Ireland, in 2024, the Minister for Education announced her intention to introduce smartphone bans in post-primary schools, whilst at the same time acknowledging that individual schools are best placed to decide on the scope and scale of restrictions for their students. Whilst these bans aim to protect children from harm, and teachers often anecdotally report seeing benefits, evaluations of existing research highlight a lack of evidence on their efficacy. At the moment, we simply don't know enough about the impact of bans. Evidence is hampered by the fact that technological developments and technology use is moving at a faster pace than research. Some studies suggest that bans are beneficial to academic outcomes and mental wellbeing. Others suggest no effects. However, many studies have methodological weaknesses, use small samples or retrospective data, and can't ascribe causal mechanisms. Our latest Researcher of the Month, Dr Megan Reynolds, has recently published a paper which explores young people's perspectives and experiences of smartphone bans in their schools. Unlike most previous research, it centres student voices in this high profile issue.
Jul 14, 2025
Do teens with mental health conditions use social media differently than their peers?
As Luisa Fassi, our new Researcher of the Month, comments, "The link between social media use and youth mental health is hotly debated, but hardly any studies look at young people already struggling with clinical-level mental health symptoms". In fact, Luisa's large systematic review and meta-analysis found that only 11% of papers published on the topic since 2007 focused on young people with clinical conditions. Her review also showed that the data used to evidence mental health conditions in these existing studies is not always strong or especially robust. Many report links between social media and mental health on the basis of short self-report questionnaires, where young people are asked about symptoms. Whilst this wasn't found as part of Luisa's review, it is also the case that very few papers in the field differentiate between different mental health conditions, or examine different symptoms or conditions (such as anxiety, ADHD or eating disorders) in isolation. To address this research gap, Luisa and colleagues have recently published a fascinating and nuanced paper. It analyses both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of social media use from a nationally representative survey of 3,340 teens in the UK aged between 11 and 19 years old, which was conducted by NHS Digital in 2017. Rather than gathering mental health data from self-report questionnaires, the young people in the survey underwent a full clinical screening, which included interviews with the young people, their parents and teachers. Information about social media use came from questionnaires completed by participants. They were not asked about specific platforms. Luisa used this data to gather novel insights into how social media and mental health are related in teens who both meet and do not meet diagnostic criteria for a wide range of mental health conditions. The study does not establish any causal links, but it does reveals a range of differences between young people with and without mental health conditions when it comes to social media.
Jun 17, 2025
Navigating the feed: younger adolescents' reflections on algorithmically curated social media
Our latest researcher of the month, Roxana Pomplun, has investigated the interactions, experiences and perceptions of younger adolescents, aged 11, 12, and 13, with algorithmically curated platforms such as TikTok, YouTube Shorts, Spotlight on Snapchat and Reels on Instagram. These kinds of platforms use algorithms to personalise and tailor feeds, harnessing user data to suggest content that the individual is most likely to be interested in and engage with. As such, young people have little control over what they are seeing in their feeds. Tech companies are not yet required to be transparent about the data that they are collecting, but it tends to include demographic information such as age, gender or location, along with use patterns. Whilst these sites dominate the digital lives of tweens and teens, until now they have received little dedicated research attention, particularly in relation to younger users, with most existing studies focusing on older teens. Whilst we know that most social media platforms have age limits of 13, we also know that many younger children are active users, particularly of algorithmically curated platforms like TikTok and YouTube Shorts. Given that early adolescence is a life phase marked by critical neurological development, identity development and heightened susceptibility to mental health issues, deepening our understanding of how younger adolescents engage with social media is vital. Roxana's qualitative research, where a group of young people eloquently explore their own experiences and perceptions, broadens our knowledge of social media use within an age group that appears increasingly aware of the digital influences shaping their online experiences, yet which is still in need of support to fully navigate these ecosystems.
May 15, 2025
Looking beyond smartphone bans
Over the last year or so, there has been a surge in public concern around smartphones and social media. Banning or restricting children’s access to smartphones and social media has grasped the attention of policy makers, schools and parents. A number of countries, including France, Turkey, Norway, Sweden, and regions of the US and Canada have introduced laws, policies or guidance for schools to ‘ban’ or heavily restrict the use of phones. In the UK, there are proposals to raise the age of ‘internet adulthood’ from 13 to 16, and to ban smartphones in schools. The third reading of a private members’ bill on this topic will be heard in parliament in July. Whilst these bans aim to protect children from harm, recent studies highlight a lack of evidence on their efficacy. Along with a team of international experts, our latest Researcher of the Month, Professor Victoria Goodyear, argues that, in isolation, banning smartphone and social media access fails to equip children for healthy use of technology. She suggests that there is a need to shift debates, policies and practices away from a sole focus on restricting smartphone and social media access, toward an emphasis on nurturing children’s digital skills for healthy technology use, and a rights-respecting approach which is underpinned by age-appropriate design and education.
Apr 22, 2025
Encouraging adventurous play in the preschool years
Tune into our podcast interview with April's researchers of the month here. As well as providing numerous opportunities for exploration, joy, and expression, outdoor and adventurous play - the type of play that allows children to take age-appropriate risks - is associated with a range of positive health behaviours and outcomes. Yes, we're talking about the kind of play that might leave us adults with our hearts in our mouths at times, as children start to disappear up a tree, or engage in a rough and tumble game of chase. But its benefits are wide-ranging and known impacts include increased levels of habitual physical activity alongside better mental health and positive mood. In 2019, Dr Hesketh was involved in the creation of physical activity guidelines in the UK, which explicitly note the importance of outdoor play for children in the preschool age group. We know quite a lot about the play habits of school-aged children, but until now, have had significantly less data on their younger counterparts. Our Researchers of the Month, Dr Kathryn Hesketh and Professor Helen Dodd set out to discover how much time preschool-aged children spend playing in a range of indoor and outdoor spaces, and how adventurously they are playing within them. In the first national survey of play in children of this age, they asked over 1000 parents of two to four year olds about their children’s play habits, finding that, on average, children aged two to four spend around four hours per day (outside of educational settings) playing. Just under 50% of this was spent playing outdoors. Their findings shed interesting light on some inequalities in play, even in the youngest age group, which may exacerbate existing inequalities in health.
Mar 17, 2025
Fostering a school culture against bullying: the KiVa Programme
Bullying is an extremely important public mental health risk. Around one in five primary school children report being bullied at least weekly. Children who are bullied are more likely to experience depression and anxiety, and are at heightened risk of mental health issues in adolescence and adulthood. Whilst schools in England and Wales are required to have anti-bullying policies, rates of bullying remain high. Bullying is preventable, but schools need more help to tackle it. Typically, school policies focus on how to handle bullying once it happens. However, evidence suggests that a comprehensive approach involving the entire school to prevent bullying, alongside clear strategies for addressing confirmed cases, is the most effective way to tackle the issue. KiVa is one such whole-school approach, developed in Finland by Professor Christina Samivalli. A large study in Finland which involved 28,000 primary school pupils found that adopting the KiVa programme in Finnish schools significantly reduced bullying and improved children's mental wellbeing. The programme has since been rolled out nationally by the Finnish government and ongoing use of KiVa in Finnish schools is associated with year-on-year incremental reductions in bullying. Along with colleagues, our researcher of the month, Professor Judy Hutchings OBE, has tested the effectiveness of the KiVa Programme in UK primary schools. The study involved over 11,000 children in Wales, Birmingham, Oxfordshire and Devon, and showed a 13% reduction in reported rates of bullying when compared with existing school approaches to tackle bullying.
Feb 12, 2025
When is the right age? Searching for age-appropriate ways to support children's online lives
Currently, children's and young people’s use of digital technology is rarely out of the news. Age limits are debated. Calls for stronger limits are made, and questions are raised regarding whether society should ban 'under-age' children from various aspects of the digital world. 13 years of age is often cited as a digital 'age of consent', though this varies in some countries. Commonly used age limits are largely arbitrary, based primarily on US legislation, rather than evidence. In a recent paper, our researcher of the month, Dr Kim Sylwander, and her co-author Professor Sonia Livingstone, consider age milestones and evaluate whether or not the evidence supports them. Are age limits the optimal way to regulate children’s digital experiences? Does it matter that they are widely contested and often poorly implemented? And are common boundaries even the “right” age, according to evidence from the field of children and digital media? Dr Sylwander persuasively argues that moving forward, a developmental approach can better support children’s rights.