The first article that I am reviewing is “Cyber Violence with Biosocial Perspective and The Role of Preventive Legislative Mechanism” by Slamet Suhartono. 

This article relates to social science principles in my opinion in a few different ways.  First, it is looking at how different factors can contribute to criminal behavior whether they be environmental, social influence or biological and to me that is the very essence of social science – the study of people and how we interact with each other.  Secondly the goes a bit deeper with looking at how we can possibly influence people away from criminal behavior with legislation and that brings to mind several social science theories such as deterrence theory and others that explain how we can try to understand what causes some people to commit crime and others not to do so.  Thirdly I found it interesting how the author explores the biological aspect of criminal behavior to see if there is a genetic component that can predict future crime or at least risk factors.  The author is trying to find a way to improve the quality of life by protecting potential victims and therefore that again to me is a principle of social science.

The question of the article is whether the biosocial variable can be used to predict certain risk factors and be used to reduce crime against victims.  Specifically, the author is looking at biosocial risk factors with relation to cybercrime.  The author then wants to know if deterrence can be used to check the biosocial risk factor.

A number of scientific studies are referenced that have done research on biological and social elements and their relation to predicting risk factor for a “criminal nature”.   Several studies were discussed although not a lot of detail as to the findings was presented beyond a vague summary.  There was not a lot of focus on the data and analysis of the study beyond a general idea that there are biological risk factors and social risk factors and they can be used to prevent crime but the author does not do a good job of explaining specifics to make the data or the findings more clear beyond a broad statement. 

I think that one concept the article could relate to from class is determinism because if a criminal is biologically wired to commit a cybercrime then it could be argued that the crime was unavoidable.  The author does not share this theory but that is a concept from class that could be relevant.  Another concept from class that would be relevant is the research of the article itself.  The article has a scientific theory and sets out to test the hypothesis by gathering data and trying to interpret that information to see if there are social mechanisms that can be created as a solution.  A third concept the aspect of psychology to cybercrime.  The author mentions personality disorders as well as impulse control and that there is a link between those and cybercrime.   The fourth concept that could easily apply would be that of motive.  Cyberbullying can be for any of the reasons mentioned in our lecture whether it be the motive of entertainment, political ideology, revenge, boredom, etc.

The topic could relate to marginalized groups because cyberviolence is always a threat to anyone and most of all to protected groups as hate speech seems to become more prevalent online every day. 

The problem I have with this article would be its contribution to society as it does not give much in the way of an actual conclusion so the impact on society would be limited.  The conclusion is that biosocial theories can prevent crim but then says that they cannot distinguish cybercrime from normal crime/violence so if I was honest, I would say the contribution of this study to society would be minimal at best.