Security Journal (2021) 34:525–540

https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-020-00246-2

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what

remains unknown?

Abdullah Al Habsi1 · Michelle Butler1   · Andrew Percy1   · Sakir Sezer2

Published online: 4 April 2020

© Springer Nature Limited 2020

Abstract
Increasing numbers of people fall victim to blackmail on social media. Yet, there has
been little attempt to synthesise research on this topic. This study seeks to address
this gap by investigating what is currently known about blackmail and the disclosure
of sensitive information on social media. Two rapid reviews were conducted and
based on their findings those who disclose more information, are younger, female
and willing to use social media to create and distribute images are more likely to fall
victim to blackmail on social media. However, worry about privacy and the possibil-
ity of becoming a victim of blackmail on social media did not necessarily prevent
the disclosure of sensitive information. The implications of these findings for inter-
ventions and future research are discussed.

Keywords  Cybercrime · Social media · Blackmail · Self-disclosure · Social media

crime · Sensitive information

* Michelle Butler
michelle.butler@qub.ac.uk
Abdullah Al Habsi
aalhabsi01@qub.ac.uk
Andrew Percy
a.percy@qub.ac.uk
Sakir Sezer
s.sezer@qub.ac.uk
1
School of Social Sciences, Education and Social Work, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast,
Northern Ireland
2
School of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Queen’s University
Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland

Vol.:(0123456789)
 526 A. Al Habsi et al.

Introduction

Incidents of blackmail on social media are increasingly being reported to crimi-

nal justice agencies internationally (Al Qahtani et  al. 2018; Al Salehi 2016;
EUROPOL 2017; Office of National Statistics 2019). Yet, official figures are
believed to under-represent its true prevalence due to under-reporting (Ahmed
et al. 2017). While a substantial body of work exists examining blackmail, less is
known about its occurrence on social media. Addressing this gap in knowledge is
necessary to inform the design of interventions intended to reduce victimisation
and successfully capture and prosecute perpetrators of blackmail on social media.
For example, research indicates that people are at risk of becoming a victim of
blackmail on social media due to their tendency to disclose sensitive informa-
tion (Al Qahtani et al. 2018; Al Saggaf 2016; Kopecký 2017; Monaghan 2017).
Consequently, understanding why people disclose sensitive information on social
media could help with the design of more effective interventions to reduce vic-
timisation. This study seeks to begin to address this gap in knowledge by review-
ing existing research on blackmail on social media, as well why people disclose
sensitive information on social media.

Social media and blackmail

The terms blackmail, extortion and sextortion are regularly used interchange-
able, although their meaning varies. Blackmail differs from extortion as extor-
tion involves the use, or threatened use, of force/violence to obtain cash or other
valued commodities, while blackmail involves coercion by threatening to expose
information about the victim to others (Kopecký 2017). Sancho (2017) argues
that online extortion involves threatening victims with the destruction of prop-
erty or data, while online blackmail involves coercion by threatening to release
sensitive information about the victim that would harm their reputation. Sensi-
tive information has been defined as “information that can be used to enable pri-
vacy or security harm when placed in the wrong hands” (OHM 2015, p. 1133).
For instance, online extortion could involve criminals hacking a computer and
threatening to destroy data. In contrast, online blackmail may involve perpetra-
tors attempting to exert power over victims by threatening to release sensitive
information that would harm their reputation, if they do not meet their perpe-
trator’s demands. Sextortion refers to a specific type of online blackmail which
focuses on the use of data of a sexual nature to blackmail victims (National Crime
Council 2020). On social media, sensitive information can be obtained through
the harvesting of social media accounts, user negligence or deliberately and con-
sciously extracting such data from victims.
Blackmail on social media is gradually becoming more common, with infor-
mation typically being gathered from social media profiles or beguilingly extri-
cated from users themselves (Monaghan 2017). Kopecký (2017) revealed that
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 527

6–8% of Czech young people (aged 8–17) have experienced blackmail on social
media. Al Qahtani et al. (2018) have witnessed an increase in blackmail on social
media among adults in Saudi Arabia, with blackmailers requesting cash, sex and
numerous other items from victims. In Oman, the number of cases of blackmail
on social media has also risen, with some victims believed to have committed
suicide as a result of their victimisation (Al Salehi 2016). Ahmed et  al. (2017)
similarly report an increase in blackmail on social media in the Gulf Cooperation
Council (GCC) countries, with 30,000 such incidents being reported by the GCC
per annum and 80% of these incidents involving women being targeted with sex-
ual content. The blackmail of children on social media, where erotic evidence or
pictures are utilised to force further erotic material, sensual benefits or cash, has
also risen steeply in the last decade (EUROPOL 2017). Additionally, companies
may be subjected to blackmail on social media as individuals threaten to tarnish
their reputation (Raas 2015).
Blackmailers typically request cash, sexual favours or the performance of a legiti-
mate or illegitimate service (Alam 2018; Al Salehi 2016). Being a victim of black-
mail can have serious consequences (Alseyah 2011). It can tarnish a victim’s name
and family’s reputation, as well as lead to psychological distress and even suicide
(Al makrami 2015; Monaghan 2017). It can contribute to feelings of anxiety, fear,
depression or social adjustment disorders that may result in social isolation and/or a
fear of confronting people (Alseyah 2011). Among children, side effects can include
self-blame, invasive memories or feelings, unhappiness, low self-esteem, bad
dreams, sleepless, nervousness, anxiety attacks and educational difficulties. Despite
these consequences, research indicates that people are often vulnerable to becom-
ing a victim of blackmail on social media due to their tendency to disclose sensitive
information online (Al Qahtani et al. 2018; Al Saggaf 2016; Kopecký 2017; Mona-
ghan 2017).

Online self‑disclosure

Self-disclosure involves sharing sensitive information with other people (Derlaga

and Berg 1987). It is a deliberate activity in which a person shares their personal
practices, pictures, emotions, etc. with others (Bazarova and Choi 2014). Online
self-disclosure has been defined as self-disclosure occurring online (Bauer et  al.
2018). Online self-disclosure is promoted by social media platforms due to its com-
mercial worth (Abramova et al. 2017). Currently, the main social media platforms
are Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, YouTube, LinkedIn, Pinterest and Instagram
(Kapoor et al. 2018). Criminals and members of organised crime groups tend to be
more focused on using social media to blackmail users due to the greater tendency
of social media users to engage in self-disclosure on social media as compared to
other potential targets (Ali et  al. 2018; EUROPOL 2017; National Crime Council
2020).
Efforts to combat blackmail on social media have primarily sought to prevent
these crimes from occurring by raising public awareness and offering advice on
how to avoid becoming a victim of this activity (Al Lawati 2016; Sawer 2016).
 528 A. Al Habsi et al.

Frequently, these campaigns seek to discourage people from sharing sensitive

personal information on social media. Nevertheless, people continue to share
such information. Some of the reasons put forward to explain this continued
involvement in online self-disclosure include a failure to consider the potential
costs of sharing sensitive information, instead focusing on the enjoyment they
obtain from engaging in this activity and its potential to allow relationships to
develop (Bauer and Schiffinger 2016). Governments and criminal justice profes-
sionals have struggled to keep pace with social media and the new opportunities
it provides for crimes to occur, limiting their ability to reduce victimisation, as
well as police and prosecute crimes occurring on social media (Tow et al. 2010;
Williams et al. 2019; Yar 2018). This study seeks to help to address this gap by
synthesising existing research in this area to provide a more holistic understand-
ing of why people may disclosure sensitive information on social media, poten-
tially increasing their vulnerability to becoming a victim of blackmail on social
media.

The present study

The present study seeks to answer the following two research questions:
Research Question 1: What research has currently been conducted on the
occurrence of blackmail on social media?
Research Question 2: Why do people engage in self-disclosure on social media
and how may this relate to becoming a victim of blackmail on social media?
By reviewing this literature, it is hoped to identify what is currently known
about this behaviour, and what gaps in knowledge remain to be addressed, to
enhance our theoretical understanding of this phenomenon and improve our abil-
ity to reduce victimisation.

Methodology

Two separate rapid reviews were conducted to answer these research questions.
A rapid review is a faster method of synthesising evidence compared to stand-
ard systematic reviews (Khangura et al. 2012). Rapid reviews provide actionable
and relevant evidence in a timely and cost-effective manner, are especially useful
in new and emerging areas of research, and give conclusions that do not differ
greatly from those of a systematic review (Khangura et  al. 2012; National Col-
laboration Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) 2010; Tricco et  al. 2017).
Key stages of a rapid review involve developing a search strategy, identifying
appropriate databases to search, screening results against agreed inclusion crite-
ria, assessing the quality of the results, extracting key findings from the data and
providing a synthesis of the key themes emerging (Campbell et al. 2019).
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 529

Search strategy

Working in conjunction with a specialist librarian, two separate search strategies

were developed. For the first rapid review, examining the occurrence of black-
mail on social media, the following search terms were used: (“Social media” OR
Facebook OR Twitter OR Snapchat OR WhatsApp OR Pinterest OR YouTube OR
"social networks" OR "web 2.0” OR webcam OR Internet) AND (blackmail* OR
sext*). For the second rapid review, investigating why people engage in online self-
disclosure on social media, the following search terms were used: (“Social media”
OR Facebook OR Twitter OR Snapchat OR WhatsApp OR Pinterest OR YouTube
OR "social network*" OR "web 2.0” OR webcam OR Internet) AND ("self-disclo-
sure" OR "self disclosure” OR "selfdisclosure” Or disclosure OR "self-expression"
OR expression OR "self expression" OR "selfexpression" OR "Self presentation")
AND (motivat* OR factor* OR reason* OR photo* OR picture* OR Video*). Using
these search terms, 18 databases were searched during November 2018. These 18
databases included: International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS),
Sociological Abstracts, PsycInfo, SCOPUS, ProQuest, Social Services Abstracts,
Social Policy and Practice, Social Care Online, QUB PhD theses, ProQuest Dis-
sertations & Theses A&I, EMBASE, Sultan Qaboss University Library Database,
IEEE Xplore, Web of Sciences, ScienceDirect, Westlaw Uk, Jil Journal and Google
scholar. Conducting a search of these 18 databases using the search terms listed
above identified 4043 possible results for the first rapid review and 8612 possible
results for the second rapid review. These articles were imported into Mendeley then
screened for their eligibility to be included in the rapid reviews, using predefined
selection criteria.

Selection criteria

The articles identified during the database searches needed to meet the following
criteria in order to be eligible for inclusion: published from 2004 onwards, peer
reviewed, written in English or Arabic, involved primary data collection and exam-
ined blackmail or self-disclosure occurring on social media. Only studies published
from 2004 were eligible as social media is a recent phenomenon following the estab-
lishment of applications like Facebook in 2004, Youtube in 2005, Twitter in 2006,
WhatsApp in 2009 and Instagram in 2010. Peer-reviewed articles were included to
ensure that the studies were of a high standard. Articles written in English or Arabic
were eligible for inclusion as these were the languages spoken by the authors and
no funds were available for translation. There was a focus on primary data collec-
tion to identify what research had been conducted, what this research had found, as
well as what gaps in knowledge remained. Lastly, only those studies that focused on
blackmail and/or self-disclosure on social media were eligible for inclusion in line
with the study’s research questions. Articles were excluded from the rapid reviews
if they did not meet these criteria or duplicated existing articles. Only 10 articles
from the possible 4043 articles identified in the first rapid review were eligible for
 530 A. Al Habsi et al.

inclusion, while 67 articles from the possible 8612 articles identified in the second
rapid review were eligible for inclusion. Articles were reviewed for their edibility by
two members of the research team.

Data collection and analysis

The quality of the eligible articles was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal
Tool, which has been found to be a reliable tool to use when appraising quantitative,
qualitative and mixed research designs (Pace et al. 2012). All articles were deemed
to be of sufficient quality for their data to be extracted and analysed. A data extrac-
tion tool was developed to extract the data and thematic analysis was used to analyse
the data. The findings are presented as a narrative summary, providing an overview
of the breadth of research conducted in the area and the main findings that emerged.

Findings

Based on this analysis, the findings are presented in two sections. The first section
reviews the findings emerging from the first rapid review examining blackmail on
social media. The second section focuses on the findings emerging from the second
rapid review investigating self-disclosure on social media.

Blackmail on social media

The first finding to emerge from this rapid review was the scarcity of research that
has been conducted on this topic that met the study’s inclusion criteria. From an
initial 4043 results, only 10 articles met the selection criteria and were eligible for
inclusion, despite the growing prevalence of this behaviour in crime statistics inter-
nationally. Of these 10 articles, two focused directly on blackmail on social media.
The remainder focused on social media use more generally or sexual offences occur-
ring online, with these articles referencing the occurrence of blackmail in their find-
ings. This suggests that there is a dearth of research on this topic, which may hinder
the development of evidence-based policies, practices and interventions, as poli-
cymakers and practitioners do their best to tackle this behaviour in the absence of
research evidence specific to blackmail on social media.
Within these 10 articles, three key themes emerged: vulnerability to victimisa-
tion; cultural variation in awareness of blackmail on social media; and use of coer-
cive techniques by blackmailers on social media.

Vulnerability to victimisation

The studies identified several risk factors that could increase vulnerability to black-
mail on social media. Age, gender, tendency to engage in online self-disclosure
and willingness to use social media to send intimate images were identified as risk
factors for becoming a victim of blackmail on social media. Younger people were
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 531

more at risk of becoming a victim of this activity than older people, with those aged
between 15 and 25 years believed to be most at risk (Al Neyadi et al. 2015; Kopecký
2017). Females were also believed to be more at risk than males due to a tendency
for females to be put under more pressure to post intimate and sexualised images of
themselves on social media (Kopecký 2017; Monaghan 2017). Moreover, a relation-
ship was observed between engaging in self-disclosure on social media and becom-
ing a victim of blackmail on social media, with those disclosing more information
being at a greater risk of becoming a victim of blackmail (Kopecký 2016). Similarly,
those who were willing to share intimate personal photographs were also at risk of
becoming a victim of blackmail on social media (Hamilton-Giachritsis et al. 2017;
Kopecký 2017; Quayle et al. 2018; Van Ouytsel et al. 2017).
Other factors found to increase a person’s vulnerability to becoming a victim of
blackmail on social media included a lack of knowledge regarding the legal rami-
fications of creating and sharing intimate photographs of people under the legal
age of sexual consent, as well as the design and usability of social media applica-
tions (Hamilton-Giachritsis et al. 2017; Kennedy and Phippen 2018). For example,
young people were often unaware of the legal consequences of creating and shar-
ing intimate images online, when under the age of sexual consent, increasingly their
likelihood of creating and sharing such images and, consequently, falling victim to
blackmail (Kennedy and Phippen 2018). The design and usability of social media
applications could also increase vulnerability to blackmail through the promotion
of greater self-disclosure, ease of creating and distributing intimate images, perma-
nence of images and level of security and verification surrounding the creation of
social media accounts (Hamilton-Giachritsis et  al. 2017). Applications whose fea-
tures encouraged the disclosure of information and images, made the creation and
distribution of images easier, kept the images and allowed the creation of accounts
with false information could facilitate the occurrence of blackmail.

Cultural variation in awareness

Evidence of the important role that cultural norms could play in shaping people’s
attitudes towards and motivations for engaging in self-disclosure on social media
was also apparent, as well as their awareness of the potential to become a victim
of blackmail on social media. Studies conducted in Western countries indicated
that people often felt that cultural norms encouraged the publication of sexualised
content on social media accounts, as people sought to increase their attractiveness
and interactions with other users (Al makrami 2015; Monaghan 2017; Kennedy and
Phippen 2018). In particular, females reported being asked to share intimate photo-
graphs, with some stating that they felt pressurised into sharing such images in order
to maintain their interactions (Al makrami 2015). Nevertheless, social media users
in Western countries reported being less aware of the potential for blackmail or rep-
utational damage to occur as a result of sharing such information on social media
(Al makrami 2015). In contrast, cultural norms in Arabic countries tended to dis-
courage the publication of sexualised content on social media profiles (Al makrami
2015; Al Saggaf 2016). This was especially the case for women, as women tended to
face greater reputational damage and a reduced social status if they engaged in such
 532 A. Al Habsi et al.

behaviour (Al makrami 2015; Al Saggaf 2016). As a result, people living in Arabic
countries, especially women, reported being more aware of the potential for black-
mail and reputational damage to occur, if they shared sensitive personal informa-
tion on social media (Al Saggaf 2016). Indeed, these cultural norms and the poten-
tial social consequences that would follow such disclosures led to grave concerns
being expressed among Arabic women about their privacy on social media and how
the information they shared could be used to blackmail them by other social media
users, which was not witnessed to the same extent among females in Western coun-
tries (Al makrami 2015).
Yet, despite these fears, cultural norms restricting the development of offline
relationships in Arabic cultures, especially for women, were suggested to motivate
people to engage in more free and open self-disclosure on social media, as they
used social media to develop new relationships, free from the restrictions they faced
in their social interactions in the community (Al makrami 2015). Consequently,
despite the greater awareness for the potential for blackmail to occur and its serious
consequences, people in Arabic cultures continued to place themselves at risk of
being blackmailed on social media as they sought to initiate new desirable relation-
ships (Al makrami 2015). Such research raises questions about the extent to which
awareness-raising campaigns may be successful in changing behaviour and reducing
the risk of blackmail on social media, as well as demonstrate the need for further
research to understand how cultural norms, attitudes and beliefs interact with one
another to influence behaviour.

Use of coercive techniques

The coercive techniques that were used to blackmail both young people and adults
on social media were discussed in several articles (Hamilton-Giachritsis et al. 2017;
Kennedy and Phippen 2018; Kopecký 2016; Monaghan 2017; Van Ouytsel et  al.
2017). Two main tactics were employed by blackmailers to obtain sensitive infor-
mation from their victims. In the first instance, victims explained they were in a
relationship (occurring both online and offline) with their blackmailer and had cho-
sen to share sensitive information/images with the blackmailer and/or that the black-
mailer had recorded them while they voluntarily engaged in a sensitive activity via
webcam (Hamilton-Giachritsis et  al. 2017; Kennedy and Phippen 2018; Kopecký
2016; Monaghan 2017; Van Ouytsel et al. 2017). It was only when these relation-
ships broke down or when victims were no longer willing to share sensitive infor-
mation, images or videos with the perpetrator that the blackmail began, with vic-
tims being coerced into re-initiating the relationship and/or continuing to disclose
sensitive information, images or videos (Hamilton-Giachritsis et al. 2017; Kennedy
and Phippen 2018; Kopecký 2016; Monaghan 2017; Van Ouytsel et al. 2017). The
second tactic involved the blackmailer trying to emotionally manipulate the victim
into disclosing sensitive information by claiming to be depressed and/or suicidal and
attempting to induce a sense of guilt/obligation within the victim to help them by
sharing such data (Hamilton-Giachritsis et  al. 2017). The studies found that both
adults and young people were the victims of these coercive tactics.
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 533

Disturbingly, studies involving young people also suggest that young people who
are victims of blackmail on social media are more likely to report using these coer-
cive tactics against others, perpetuating a cycle of abuse (Kennedy and Phippen
2018; Kopecký 2016). However, it is unclear if adults experience a similar victim-
to-perpetrator cycle or what mechanisms may underlie this transformation.

Self‑disclosure on social media

A larger body of work had been conducted investigating self-disclosure on social

media. Of the 67 studies reviewed, the majority (41 out of 67) directly examined
why people engaged in self-disclosure on social media or the factors that could
increase an individual’s probability of engaging in this behaviour. The remain-
der focused on social media use more generally, with self-disclosure being refer-
enced within their findings. Only two articles considered how self-disclosure may
be related to becoming a victim of blackmail on social media, with these articles
suggesting that increased engagement in online self-disclosure increased the risk
of becoming a victim of blackmail on social media and highlighting how cultural
norms could shape attitudes towards and motivations for engaging in self-disclosure
on social media.
Reviewing the 67 articles identified three key themes: the need for relationships
and self-expression; the disconnect between privacy concerns and engagement in
online self-disclosure; and the impact of platform features on self-disclosure.

Need for relationships and self‑expression

One of the biggest factors found to influence self-disclosure on social media was
the person’s motivations for using social media. Many individuals involved in mak-
ing online self-disclosures reported being motivated to use social media to develop/
maintain relationships, resulting in these individuals engaging in online self-dis-
closure as they sought to deepen their friendships and gain social status, accept-
ance, support or validation (e.g. Al makrami 2015; Krasnova et  al. 2010). Often,
these individuals thought about their disclosures and sought to manage the impres-
sion they gave other users (Bronstein 2014). These individuals were mostly care-
ful to only disclose information that they believed would help them achieve their
relationship goals (Bronstein 2014). In contrast, those who were motivated to use
social media for the purpose of self-expression tended to make more spontaneous
disclosures as they sought to express themselves online (Seidman 2014). In particu-
lar, those who lived in cultures that endorsed social norms which restricted offline
behaviour tended to use social media as a means of expressing their ‘true’ selves and
engaged in online self-disclosure as a means of meeting their expressive and emo-
tional needs (Al makrami 2015).
Like the studies investigating blackmail on social media, several studies also
sought to identify the risk factors that increased the probability of people engag-
ing in self-disclosure on social media. These studies found that age, extraver-
sion, self-control and self-efficacy influenced the amount and type of information
 534 A. Al Habsi et al.

disclosed on social media. Those who were younger, more extravert, had lower
self-control and greater self-efficacy in their use and manipulation of social media
were more likely to disclose information (Krämer and Winter 2008; Orzech et al.
2017; Yu 2014). Consequently, the motivations underlying social media use,
as well as individual characteristics such as age, personality and psychological
attributes, could influence the amount and type of self-disclosure that people
engaged in on social media.

Disconnect between privacy concerns and engagement in self‑disclosure

The studies also revealed that people were concerned about their privacy on
social media. Nevertheless, in most studies investigating how privacy concerns
may affect the tendency to engage in self-disclosure on social media, these pri-
vacy concerns were not found to directly impact on self-disclosure behaviour. In
deciding when to disclosure information on social media, people tended to engage
in a cost–benefit analysis of the pros and cons they believed were associated with
engaging in online self-disclosure (e.g. Hallam and Zanella 2017; Salleh et  al.
2013). This analysis then informed their decision-making about whether to dis-
close information on social media or not. In most cases, the cons associated with
online self-disclosure were underestimated, while the potential benefits associ-
ated with self-disclosure for relationships and self-expression were overestimated
(Cheung, Lee and Chan 2015). However, privacy concerns could influence the
type of social media that individuals used and the extent to which individuals
used the privacy controls on social media applications (Heravi et  al. 2018). For
example, privacy concerns could encourage users to limit the visibility of their
social media profiles and/or the restrict their interactions with unknown users
(Heravi et al 2018). Yet, despite their privacy concerns, these individuals still dis-
closed personal information to social media users who could view their profiles
and with whom they already interacted (Heravi et al. 2018). In this way, privacy
concerns could influence what was publicly visible and with whom users inter-
acted but not necessarily what information they disclosed or how much informa-
tion they disclosed.
Moreover, rather than privacy concerns influencing the amount of self-disclosure
individuals engaged in on social media, the extent to which online self-disclosure
was a socially accepted norm amongst their peers appeared to play an important
role (Van Gool et al. 2015). If the making of self-disclosures was a socially accepted
norm amongst the users’ peers, then these social media users were more inclined to
engage in this activity (Van Gool et  al. 2015). These studies raise concerns about
the potential effectiveness of awareness raising interventions to reduce victimisation.
If these interventions are focused on increasing participants’ privacy concerns as a
means of reducing their potential victimisation, then these interventions may meet
with limited successful due to the disconnect between privacy concerns and engage-
ment in online self-disclosure witnessed in these studies. Instead, interventions may
have more success by tackling the social norms accepting and/or actively encourag-
ing self-disclosure on social media.
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 535

Impact of platform features on self‑disclosure

The final key theme to emerge from these studies was the impact that the plat-
form features of social media applications could have on the tendency to engage
in self-disclosure. The amount and nature of privacy controls available on differ-
ent social media applications were found to engender trust (Bevan-Dye and Akpo-
jivi 2016; Krasnova et al. 2010). The more trust users felt in these applications, the
more inclined they were to make online self-disclosures (Bevan-Dye and Akpojivi
2016; Malik et al. 2016; Salleh et al. 2013). Additionally, the extent to which indi-
viduals felt that they could trust other users of social media applications influenced
the amount of self-disclosure they engaged in, with greater feelings of trust linked
to more self-disclosures (Chen et  al. 2018). The extent to which content could be
encrypted, the ease with which images could be taken and shared with others and
whether content was temporary or permanent in nature also influenced the extent
of self-disclosure on social media. If the content was encrypted, it allowed users to
feel in control over who they were sharing their information with and could result in
more online self-disclosure (Ampong et al. 2018; Krasnova et al. 2010). This was
despite the possibility of other users sharing this content without their consent. Like-
wise, if social media applications were easy to use, free and facilitated the sharing of
images, these design features tended to encourage greater self-disclosure and image
sharing (Bazarova and Choi 2014). Additionally, if individuals believed that their
images/data were only going to be shared with others temporarily (e.g. Snapchat),
they tended to be more disinhibited in their online self-disclosures and engage in
more disclosures (Hofstetter et al. 2017). The different design and platform features
of social media applications could also influence what individuals used social media
application for and, consequently, the amount and type of online self-disclosure that
users engaged in on that application. Finally, if individuals were satisfied with the
design and platform features of social media applications, they were more likely
to make self-disclosures (Li-Barber 2012). In this way, it is necessary to consider
how the design and platform features of social media applications may differentially
impact on self-disclosure and, as a result, the potential vulnerability of social media
users to becoming a victim of blackmail on social media may vary depending on the
social media application they are using.

Discussion and conclusion

To answer the study’s first research question then, very little research has been con-
ducted on the occurrence of blackmail on social media, despite its growing preva-
lence in crime statistics internationally. This lack of research is important as it can
hinder the development of evidence-based polices, practices and interventions, as
well as our theoretical understanding of this behaviour. For instance, while criminals
and organised crime groups may play a role in victimising individuals by pretend-
ing to be in online relationships with victims and then blackmailing them, a focus
solely on criminals and organised crime groups will miss how ex-partners of offline
relationships can use social media to blackmail victims, as well as how and why
 536 A. Al Habsi et al.

young victims of this activity may go on to become perpetrators. This gap in our
knowledge, therefore, needs to be addressed to inform the development of effective
interventions, policies and practices in this area, by for example, ensuring we under-
stand how and when young victims of this activity might be at risk of going on to
blackmail others so that we can ensure they get the specialist support they need to
help prevent this cycle of abuse from occurring and others being victimised.
The second research question sought to understand why some people engage in
self-disclosure on social media and how this may relate to becoming a victim of
blackmail. In answer to this research question, the findings indicate that those who
are seeking a relationship/self-expression are younger, more extravert, have lower
self-control and greater self-efficacy in their use and manipulation of social media
will tend to disclose more information online. Those who disclose more informa-
tion online are at a greater risk of becoming a victim of blackmail on social media,
as well as those who are younger, female and willing to use social media to cre-
ate and distribute images. Interestingly, being concerned about one’s privacy and
being aware of the potential for blackmail to occur on social media did not necessar-
ily influence the amount of self-disclosure individuals engaged in on social media.
Instead, these concerns appeared to influence what was publicly visible on social
media profiles and with whom social media users interacted but not what informa-
tion they disclosed or how much information they disclosed. The design, usability
and features of different social media applications could also influence the amount
and type of self-disclosure individuals engaged in, resulting in the possibility that
some social media applications may place users at a greater risk of blackmail than
others.
So, what insights do these findings offer for those working to tackle this behav-
iour and reduce its occurrence? To begin with, these findings indicate that special-
ist interventions may be required to support young victims of blackmail on social
media to ensure that they do not go on to become perpetrators of this activity. While
further research is needed to understand the causal mechanisms underlying any pos-
sible victim-to-offender cycle, and if such a cycle can be witnessed among adults,
it may be worthwhile exploring if the experience of blackmail on social media
may influence what is perceived as ‘normal’ behaviour on social media and, con-
sequently, how these young people may go on to interact with other social media
users. In addition, these findings raise questions about the potential effectiveness of
awareness raising interventions. Most awareness-raising interventions seek to reduce
victimisation by raising people’s awareness of their potential to become a victim of
blackmail on social media and/or increase their privacy concerns (Al Lawati 2016;
Sawer 2016). Yet, the findings from this research suggest that such actions do not
necessarily influence an individual’s willingness to disclose sensitive information
or what information they disclose, as their need to develop relationships or express
themselves can override any caution they may experience as a result of privacy con-
cerns or worries about becoming a victim of blackmail (e.g. Al makrami 2015; Her-
avi et al 2018; Krasnova et al. 2010).
Based on these studies, interventions seeking to reduce victimisation should
attempt to address people’s underlying motivation for using social media. In
other words, interventions should seek to address users desire for self-expression,
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 537

relationships, social status, acceptance, support and/or validation, and seek to

inform users of how they can go about achieving these objectives safely, without
putting themselves at risk of blackmail. Additionally, the wider social norms within
society surrounding the acceptability of sharing information on social media, as well
as the creation and distribution of sexualised images, especially for women, should
be addressed to reduce the occurrence of blackmail on social media and the pres-
sure people feel to engage in self-disclosure online. It may also be worthwhile to
inform social media users of the coercive tactics employed by blackmailers to help
users recognise when these tactics are being used and help inoculate them against
their use. Finally, as the design, usability and features of social media applications
can influence self-disclosure and, as a result, vulnerability to blackmail, social
media companies may require legislation to encourage them to take greater care in
the development of platform features, how these features are used, the security and
verification processes surrounding the establishment of social media accounts and to
play a more pro-active role in policing the content that is created and shared on their
platforms. Through these actions, the potential to become a victim of blackmail on
social media may be lessened by reducing the ease with which sensitive information
can be shared, fake accounts created and self-disclosure on social media promoted
and encouraged.
Nonetheless, despite the insights offered by reviewing existing research on black-
mail on social media and self-disclosure on social media, there are several limita-
tions to this research that must be borne in mind. For example, those articles which
did not meet the study’s inclusion criteria were excluded from this research, with
the result that studies published in languages other than English or Arabic were not
examined. Similarly, the focus on published, peer-reviewed studies may result in
some of the findings being distorted by publication bias, as research which is not
novel or significant tends to go unpublished. Accordingly, the exclusion of research
which did not meet the study’s selection criteria may limit the potential generalis-
ability of the findings and distort the conclusions that can be drawn from these stud-
ies. Future research should seek to address these limitations.
Moreover, synthesising the existing research that has conducted on this topic has
identified several important gaps in our knowledge that remain unanswered. For
instance, few studies have investigated how differing motivations for using social
media may influence the risk of becoming a victim of blackmail on social media. As
a result, we do not currently know if those who are motivated to use social media
for the purposes of developing and/or maintaining relationships are more likely to
become a victim of blackmail on social media compared to those who use social
media for self-expression or other purposes. Similarly, whether the experience and
prevalence of being blackmailed on social media may vary depending on the type of
social media application used has not been investigated. Given that the design and
features of social media applications could influence the amount and type of online
self-disclosure engaged in, and what users tended to use that social media applica-
tion for, it is possible that the potential risk of becoming a victim of blackmail may
vary across different social media applications. While making users aware of the
potential for blackmail to occur on social media applications may not help to reduce
self-disclosure, given the disconnect witnessed in existing studies between fear of
 538 A. Al Habsi et al.

victimisation, privacy concerns and self-disclosure, such information may neverthe-

less influence the trust users experience in social media applications and reduce self-
disclosure as a result of the loss of trust experienced, rather than raising awareness
of blackmail or privacy fears. Furthermore, how cultural norms and beliefs about the
pros and cons associated with disclosing information on social media may affect not
only self-disclosure but the risk of becoming a victim of blackmail on social media
would benefit from further research. More research is also required on the victim-
to-offender cycle referred to in existing studies, to better understand the causal
mechanisms that might underlie its occurrence and its possible relevance to adults.
There are therefore significant gaps in our knowledge that remain unanswered, hin-
dering our theoretical understanding of this phenomenon and our ability to develop
evidence-based policies, practices and interventions on this topic. Future research
should seek to address these gaps in knowledge.

Compliance with ethical standards 

Conflict of interest  On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of
interest.

References
Abramova, O., A. Wagner, H. Krasnova, and P. Buxmann. 2017. Understanding self-disclosure on social
networking sites-A literature review. Americas Conference on Information Systems 23: 1–10.
Ahmed, A., E. Awad, S. Farouq, R. Ayesh, M. Mohammed, N. Alneqabi, M. Abdulahamiad, and J.
Ismail. 2017 Online blackmail. Crimes feed on the boom of social networking. https​://www.albay​
an.ae/acros​s-the-uae/news-and-repor​ts/2017-07-24-1.30090​66. Accessed 17 December 2019.
Al Lawati, H. 2016. Big jump in cyber blackmail cases in Oman. https​://times​ofoma​n.com/artic​le/93557​
Accessed 10 February 2020.
Al makrami, H. 2015. Online self-disclosure across cultures: A study of Facebook use in Saudi Arabia
and Australia. PhD Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Al Neyadi, A., A. Al Kaabi, L. Al Kaabi, M. Al Ghufli, M. Al Shamsi, and M. Khan. 2015. Internet
governance and cyber crimes in UAE. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research 4
(11): 350–357.
Al Qahtani, E., M. Shehab, and A. Aljohani. 2018. The effectiveness of fear appeals in increasing smart-
phone locking behavior among Saudi Arabians. https​://www.useni​x.org/confe​rence​/soups​2018/
prese​ntati​on/qahta​ni. Accessed 17 December 2019.
Al Saggaf, Y. 2016. An exploratory study of attitudes towards privacy in social media and the threat of
blackmail: The views of a group of Saudi women. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in
Developing Countries 75 (1): 1–16.
Al Salehi, B. 2016. Blackmailing reportage for year 2016, Information Technology Authority. Oman.
https​://ita.gov.om/ITAPo​rtal/Media​Cente​r/Docum​ent_detai​l.aspx?NID=109. Accessed 17 Decem-
ber 2019.
Alam, S. 2018. E-extortion: how do teenagers’ suicide? https​://www.ida2a​t.com/cyber​-extor​tion-how-do-
teena​gers-suici​de/. Accessed 17 December 2019.
Ali, S., N. Islam, A. Rauf, I. Din, M. Guizani, and J. Rodrigues. 2018. Privacy and security issues in
online social networks. Future Internet 10 (114): 1–12.
Alseyah, A. 2011. Symposium on extortion: Concept—causes—treatment. Centre for Women Studies.
Riyadh. https​://www.feqhu​p.com/uploa​ds/14561​23776​34481​.pdf. Accessed 17 December 2019.
Blackmail on social media: what do we know and what remains… 539

Ampong, G., A. Mensah, A. Adu, J. Addae, O. Omoregie, and K. Ofori. 2018. Examining self-disclosure
on social networking sites: A flow theory and privacy perspective. Behavioural Sciences 8 (6): 58.
Bauer, C. and M. Schiffinger. 2016. Perceived risks and benefits of online self-disclosure: Affected by
culture? A meta-analysis of cultural differences as moderators of privacy calculus in person-to-
crowd settings. https​://aisel​.aisne​t.org/ecis2​016_rp/68. Accessed 10 February 2020.
Bauer, C., K.S. Schmid, and C. Strauss. 2018. An open model for researching the role of culture in online
self-disclosure. https​://aisel​.aisne​t.org/hicss​-51/in/globa​l_issue​s/3/. Accessed 17 December 2019.
Bazarova, N., and H. Choi. 2014. Self-disclosure in social media: Extending the functional approach to
disclosure motivations and characteristics on social network sites. Journal of Communication 64
(4): 635–657.
Bevan-Dye, A.L., and U. Akpojivi. 2016. South African Generation y students’ self-disclosure on Face-
book. South African Journal of Psychology 46 (1): 114–129.
Bronstein, J. 2014. Creating possible selves: Information disclosure behaviour on social networks. Infor-
mation Research: An International Electronic Journal 19 (1): n1.
Campbell, A., T. Forbes, A. McLaughlin, G. Davidson, M. Butler, C. Blair, N. Menabney, and C. McK-
eaveney. 2019. Rapid evidence review: The relationship between alcohol and mental health prob-
lems. London: Alcohol Change UK.
Chen, S., B. Shao, and K. Zhi. 2018. Predictors of Chinese users’ location disclosure behavior: An empir-
ical study on WeChat. Information 9 (9): 219.
Cheung, C., Z.W. Lee, and T.K. Chan. 2015. Self-disclosure in social networking sites: The role of per-
ceived cost, perceived benefits and social influence. Internet Research 25 (2): 279–299.
Derlaga, V.J., and J.H. Berg. 1987. Self-disclosure: Theory, research, and therapy. London: Plenum
Press.
EUROPOL. 2017. Online sexual coercion and extortion as a form of crime affecting children: law
enforcement perspective. https​://www.europ​ol.europ​a.eu/publi​catio​ns-docum​ents/onlin​e-sexua​
l-coerc​ion-and-extor​tion-form-of-crime​-affec​ting-child​ren-law-enfor​cemen​t-persp​ectiv​e. Accessed
17 December 2019.
Hallam, C., and G. Zanella. 2017. Online self-disclosure: The privacy paradox explained as a temporally
discounted balance between concerns and rewards. Computers in Human Behaviour 68: 217–227.
Hamilton-Giachritsis, C., E. Hanson, H.C. Whittle, and A.R. Beech. 2017. Everyone deserves to be
happy and safe. A mixed methods study exploring how online and offline child sexual abuse impact
young people and how professionals respond to it. London: NSPCC.
Heravi, A., S. Mubarak, and K.K.R. Choo. 2018. Information privacy in online social networks: Uses and
gratification perspective. Computers in Human Behavior 84: 441–459.
Hofstetter, R., R. Rüppell, and L.K. John. 2017. Temporary sharing prompts unrestrained disclosures
that leave lasting negative impressions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 (45):
11902–11907.
Kapoor, K.K., K. Tamilmani, N.P. Rana, P. Patil, Y.K. Dwivedi, and S. Nerur. 2018. Advances in social
media research: Past, present and future. Information Systems Frontiers 20 (3): 531–558.
Kennedy, C., and A. Phippen. 2018. Sexting and sexting behaviour-“Oh you’re all children, children do
silly things. You’ll be fine. Get over it!”. Entertainment Law Review 28 (6): 1–13.
Khangura, S., K. Konnyu, R. Cushman, J. Grimshaw, and D. Moher. 2012. Evidence summaries: The
evolution of a rapid review approach. Systematic Reviews 1 (1): 10.
Kopecký, K. 2016. Czech children and Facebook: A quantitative survey. Telematics and Informatics 33
(4): 950–958.
Kopecký, K. 2017. Online blackmail of Czech children focused on so-called “sextortion” (analysis of
culprit and victim Behaviours). Telematics and Informatics 34 (1): 11–19.
Krämer, N.C., and S. Winter. 2008. Impression management 20: The relationship of self-esteem, extra-
version, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social networking sites. Journal of Media Psy-
chology 20 (3): 106–116.
Krasnova, H., S. Spiekermann, K. Koroleva, and T. Hildebrand. 2010. Online social networks: Why we
disclose. Journal of Information Technology 25 (2): 109–125.
Li-Barber, K.T. 2012. Self-disclosure and student satisfaction with Facebook. Computers in Human
Behaviour 28 (2): 624–630.
Malik, A., K. Hiekkanen, A. Dhir, and M. Nieminen. 2016. Impact of privacy, trust and user activity on
intentions to share Facebook photos. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society
14 (4): 364–382.
 540 A. Al Habsi et al.

Monaghan, A. 2017. The impact of Self-Generated Images in online pornography. Middlesex University:
Doctoral Dissertation.
National Crime Council. 2020. Sextortion. https​://www.natio​nalcr​imeag​ency.gov.uk/what-we-do/crime​
-threa​ts/kidna​p-and-extor​tion/sexto​rtion​-webca​m-black​mail Accessed 27 February 2020.
NCCMT. 2010. Methods: Synthesis 1. Rapid reviews: Methods and implications. Hamilton: National
Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools.
Office of National Statistics. 2019. Crime in England and Wales: Year ending December 2018. https​://
www.ons.gov.uk/peopl​epopu​latio​nandc​ommun​ity/crime​andju​stice​/bulle​tins/crime​ineng​landa​ndwal​
es/yeare​nding​decem​ber20​18 Accessed 27 February 2020.
Ohm, P. 2015. Sensitive information. Southern California Law Review 88 (5): 1125–1196.
Orzech, K.M., W. Moncur, A. Durrant, S. James, and J. Collomosse. 2017. Digital photographic prac-
tices as expressions of personhood and identity: Variations across school leavers and recent retirees.
Visual Studies 32 (4): 313–328.
Pace, R., P. Pluye, G. Bartlett, A.C. Macaulay, J. Salsberg, J. Jagosh, and R. Seller. 2012. Testing the
reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed
studies review. International Journal of Nursing Studies 49 (1): 47–53.
Quayle, E., L.S. Jonsson, K. Cooper, J. Traynor, and C.G. Svedin. 2018. Children in identified sexual
images-who are they? Self-and non-self-taken images in the international child sexual exploitation
image database 2006–2015. Child Abuse Review 27 (3): 223–238.
Raas, K.M.R. 2015. The threat of social media blackmailing in the hospitality industry: when customers
misuse their power. Bachelor’s thesis: University of Twente.
Salleh, N., R. Hussein, N. Mohamed, and I.J. Aditiawarman. 2013. An empirical study of the factors
influencing information disclosure behaviour in social networking sites. In 2013 International Con-
ference on Advanced Computer Science Applications and Technologies (pp. 181–185). IEEE.
Sancho, D. 2017. Digital extortion: A forward-looking view. https​://docum​ents.trend​micro​.com/asset​s/
wp-digit​al-extor​tion-a-forwa​rd-looki​ng-view.pdf Accessed 20 February 2020.
Sawer, P. 2016. Huge rise in ’sextortion’ by crime gangs using social media to entrap victims. https​://
www.teleg​raph.co.uk/news/2016/11/30/huge-rise-sexto​rtion​-crime​-gangs​-using​-socia​l-media​-entra​
p-victi​ms/ Accessed 27 February 2020.
Seidman, G. 2014. Expressing the “true self” on Facebook. Computers in Human Behaviour 31: 367–372.
Tow, W.N.F.H., P. Dell, and J. Venable. 2010. Understanding information disclosure behaviour in Aus-
tralian Facebook users. Journal of Information Technology 25 (2): 126–136.
Tricco, A.C., E.V. Langlois, and S.E. Straus. 2017. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and sys-
tems: A practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organisation.
Van Gool, E., J. Van Ouytsel, K. Ponnet, and M. Walrave. 2015. To share or not to share? Adolescents’
self-disclosure about peer relationships on Facebook: An application of the Prototype Willingness
Model. Computers in Human Behavior 44: 230–239.
Van Ouytsel, J., E. Van Gool, M. Walrave, K. Ponnet, and E. Peters. 2017. Sexting: Adolescents’ percep-
tions of the applications used for, motives for, and consequences of sexting. Journal of Youth Studies
20 (4): 446–470.
Williams, M., M. Butler, A. Jurek-Loughrey, and S. Sezer. 2019. Offensive communications: Explor-
ing the challenges involved in policing social media. Contemporary Social Science. https​://doi.
org/10.1080/21582​041.2018.15633​05.
Yar, M. 2018. A failure to regulate? The demands and dilemmas of tackling illegal content and behaviour
on social media. International Journal of Cybersecurity Intelligence & Cybercrime 1 (1): 5–20.
Yu, S. 2014. Does low self-control explain voluntary disclosure of personal information on the Internet.
Computers in Human Behavior 37: 210–215.

Publisher’s Note  Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.