CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Cybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentSexual Assault and Victimization Studies

Sextortion: Prevalence and correlates in 10 countries

Open access
Henry, Nicola, Umbach, Rebecca·2024·Computers in Human Behavior
DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2024.108298
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The growing threat of sexual extortion ("sextortion") has garnered significant attention in the news and by law enforcement agencies around the world. Foundational knowledge of prevalence and risk factors, however, is still nascent. The present study surveyed 16,693 respondents, distributed equally across 10 different countries, to assess prevalence of victimization and perpetration of threatening to disseminate intimate images. Weighted by gender, age, region, and population, 14.5% of respondents indicated at least one experience of victimization, while 4.8% of respondents indicated perpetration of the same. Demographic risk factors for perpetration and victimization were also assessed. Consistent with findings from other studies, men (15.7%) were 1.17 times more likely to report being victimized as compared to women (13.2%), and 1.43 times more likely to report perpetration. LGBTQ+ respondents were 2.07 times more likely to report victimization compared to non-LGBTQ+ respondents, and 2.51 times more likely to report offending behaviors. Age was significantly associated with victimization and perpetration experiences, with younger participants more likely to report both victimization and perpetration experiences. The most common type of perpetrator, as reported by victims, was a former or current partner. Despite the strong likelihood of under-reporting given the topic area, the study found that experiencing threats to distribute intimate content is a relatively commonplace occurrence, impacting 1 in 7 adults. Implications for potential mitigation are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2024.108298

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The data from law enforcement or online safety agencies are likely to be an underestimate of the true prevalence of sextortion.

    “Moreover, the data from law enforcement or online safety agencies are likely to be an underestimate of the true prevalence of sextortion.”

    From Sextortion: A Scoping Review (2025) · cites this paper as Henry & Umbach, 2024

  • Many victims under-report their experiences due to factors such as shame, a lack of evidence, difficulty identifying the perpetrator, fear of not being taken seriously by authorities, or a desire to protect a perpetrator known to them, such as an intimate partner.

    “Research shows that many victims under-report their experiences due to factors such as shame, a lack of evidence, difficulty identifying the perpetrator, fear of not being taken seriously by authorities, or a desire to protect a perpetrator known to them, such as an intimate partner (Henry & Umbach, 2024; Patchin & Hinduja, 2020; Wolak et al., 2016).”

    From Sextortion: A Scoping Review (2025) · cites this paper as Henry & Umbach, 2024

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Henry, N., & Umbach, R.
Affiliations
  • RMIT University (AU)
  • Google (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Henry, Nicola
ORCID
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-09
Volume
158
Pages
108298
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.chb.2024.108298
OpenAlex
W4396887581
Cited by
32
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 3
FWCI
12.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (FT200100604)
  • Google LLC
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Keywords
sextortion, intimate image sharing, victimization prevalence, perpetration, risk factors, gender differences, LGBTQ+ people, age differences, intimate partner perpetrators, underreporting, cross-national comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review