Beyond Traditional Crime: Routine Online Activity Theory in the Era of Big Data


Michaela Michalopulos, McGill University

This paper is a critical re-examination of Robert K. Mertons Strain Theory, viewed through the contemporary lens of Routine Online Activity Theory as revitalized by Travis C. Pratt, Kristy Holtfreter, and Michael D. Reisig (2010). It marks the first substantial application of this theoretical framework in over a decade, offering a perspective on the concept of strain in the era of Big Data, pulling on data from the 2022-2023 Survey of Canadians on privacy-related issues. This study ventures into the web of digital victimization and the evolving role of surveillance in criminology, emphasizing the exploitation of personal data. Revisiting the foundational principles of Mertons Strain Theory, particularly the adaptation individuals adopt in response to societal pressures, the research adapts them to the digital age. In this new landscape, individuals confront unique challenges as entities like Facebook and TikTok relentlessly harvest personal data. I argue that the digital epoch has fostered unprecedented societal pressures, compelling a reassessment of Mertons original Strain Theory. I introduce "digital strain surveillance," a term I coined to encapsulate the pressures and victimizations that emerge from routine online activities, dovetailing with Pratt et al.s theoretical modernization. The empirical evidence from the Survey of Canadians underscores how personal data has become central to individuals online routine activities, rendering them vulnerable to victimization through privacy breaches and identity theft. Notably, while 89% of Canadians express concern about social media platforms collecting their personal information for profiling, only half have taken action by deleting or discontinuing the use of a social media account due to privacy concerns. Additionally, a smaller fraction, 38%, have ceased business relations with companies or organizations after experiencing a privacy breach. My findings lend statistical support to the concept that users, despite a clear mistrust in the ability of big data conglomerates to protect their personal information, persist in their engagement with these platforms. This contradictory behavior exemplifies a current-day embodiment of Sykes and Matzas "neutralization theory" where individuals rationalize the use of digital platforms they deem insecure, despite the apparent privacy risks. The paper further examines the role of surveillance capitalism in intensifying this digital strain, suggesting that the commodification of personal data has engendered a pervasive environment of exploitation and vulnerability. This shift signifies a novel societal pressure that extends Merton’s Strain Theory into the digital ages unique challenges. Moreover, the study probes into the social and psychological repercussions of this strain, evaluating how the menace of data exploitation impairs individuals trust in digital platforms and their overall sense of security. A further aim of my paper is to situate surveillance within the field of criminology, disentangling it from its traditional association with crime deterrence and policing alone. Surveillance, in the digital age, transcends its conventional boundaries to include the mechanisms of data collection and analysis that constitute the backbone of big data operations. This broadened perspective of surveillance examines how it operates not only as a means of social control but also as a factor that influences and potentially facilitates the conditions for digital victimization. Through this lens, surveillance is understood as a complex construct that has profound implications for privacy, personal autonomy, and security within the digital landscape. At present, the issue of data rights is predominantly situated within the legal sphere, often framed in terms of policy debates and legislative measures designed to protect personal information in the digital age. However, my research argues for a broader conceptualization of data rights, integrating them into the criminological discourse as a fundamental aspect of understanding digital strain.

This paper will be presented at the following session: