Introduction

Public sentiment acts as a crucial gauge of societal viewpoints, encompassing a spectrum of opinions, attitudes, emotions, and priorities (Bratton et al. 2005; Fan et al. 2024; Reich, 1988). Historically, mass media played a pivotal role in shaping these sentiments. However, in the era of digital transformation, social media has emerged as a key influencer, fundamentally altering how public opinion is formed and expressed (Anstead and O’Loughlin, 2015; Burbach et al. 2020; Li, 2023). Concurrently, the widespread adoption of digital technologies has expanded the scope of cybercrime, introducing more complex threats that endanger not only individual privacy and safety but also national security, economic integrity, and overall public welfare (Chen et al. 2023; Dave et al. 2023; Luong, 2023; Raman et al. 2024; Achuthan et al. 2024). In this context, deciphering public perceptions of cybercrime becomes essential for developing effective prevention strategies, fostering cyber resilience, and ensuring that cybersecurity measures resonate with public concerns and expectations (Kostyuk and Wayne, 2021; Snider et al. 2021a). Driven by the imperative to explore these public perceptions, our research seeks to illuminate the societal foundations of awareness and reaction toward cybercrime.

Public perception and social media

In advanced industrial democracies, public opinion has driven the shaping of public policy (Erikson et al. 2002; König et al. 2022; Phoenix et al. 2019). Their political landscape is heavily influenced by public sentiment and electoral outcomes are often reflections of the public’s mood (Stimson, 2018) on various issues. Deciphering the shifting tides, revealing what issues resonate with the public, their anxieties, and aspirations is pivotal as public sentiment shapes perceptions, beliefs and behavior. Capstick et al. (2015) analyzed how public views on climate change have changed internationally over 25 years. Their research showed that, while concern has grown in many regions, skepticism increased in some developed countries that shifted perceptions of climate change ultimately affecting the global trends. This phenomenon underscores the broader impact of public opinion, which today infiltrates virtually every facet of society, including consumer behavior. Understanding public sentiment allows businesses to tailor their marketing and product development to better align with consumer needs, as perceptions significantly sway purchasing decisions (Kamal and Himel, 2023; Revella, 2015).

Public sentiment not only acts as a sensitive gauge but also as a catalyst for positive societal transformation. By tuning into these collective concerns, decision-makers can develop policies and services that resonate more deeply with the public, enhancing trust and inclusivity (Kim and Krishna, 2018a). The role of social media in shaping this sentiment is complex, extending across various scenarios from crises to environmental debates. For instance, in emergencies, it has evolved from a mere communication platform to an indispensable tool in emergency management, improving coordination yet raising questions about information accuracy (Reuter and Kaufhold, 2018). The analysis by Abramova et al. (2022) and Han et al. (2023a) revealed a shift in public engagement from individual understanding and action planning to broader expressions of hope and community support, fostering collective resilience in health crises. Moreover, An et al. (2021) showed how stakeholders in public events shape sentiment dissemination on social platforms, with government and media playing pivotal roles. Contrastingly, Ai et al. (2023) found that, in the aftermath of natural disasters, personal social media narratives, rather than official updates, have a profound influence on tourists’ perceptions and intentions, underscoring the impact of individual stories in steering public sentiment and actions.

Appraisal theory has offered profound insights into social media research, decoding the intricacies behind cognitive assessments, emotional reactions, and action tendencies across various digital platforms. According to appraisal theory, a person’s assessment or appraisal of an event or situation triggers emotional reactions. If an event is appraised favorably, positive emotions will follow. Conversely, a negative appraisal triggers negative emotions such as fear and anger (Vespa et al. 2022). The theory helps dissect the emotional pull of narrative ads, revealing how specific emotions and their cognitive underpinnings (Hamby and Jones, 2022a) shape persuasive power. It’s not just about the emotional response but understanding the triggers behind these emotions that enhance narrative influence, offering a richer perspective on audience engagement. Further applying the theory to sentiment analysis (Soo-Guan Khoo et al. 2012) in online news, has proven invaluable for unpacking the layers of emotion and stance in political discourse, offering a more comprehensive outlook for automated sentiment detection and analysis in digital content. Vespa et al.’s (2022) exploration of renewable energy dialogs on Instagram also taps into the theory’s potential to understand public sentiment, particularly highlighting how emotional dynamics shape discussions around sustainability on social platforms.

Cybercrime and public sentiment

Cybercrime refers to illegal or deviant activities conducted using digital technologies or in cyberspace such as with cyberattacks or cyberthreats. They encompass traditional crimes adapted to digital contexts, unique online offenses, and technological abuses (Payne, 2020, Achuthan et al. 2022). Several studies illustrate the relationship between cyberattacks, public sentiment, and the subsequent implications for policy. Bada and Nurse (2020), as well as Shandler et al. (2023), collectively underscore the profound psychological distress and social impacts of cyberattacks, making them comparable to traditional political violence. The study by Shandler et al. (2022), reveals that emotional responses, particularly anger, play a crucial role in galvanizing public support for retaliation, underscoring the emotional underpinnings of public sentiment toward cyber threats. These studies advocate for the integration of cyberpsychological insights to mitigate the broader societal disruptions caused by cyber threats.

The complexity of public opinion formation in response to cybercrime, especially under conditions of uncertainty, is explored in Jardine et al. (2024). The study elucidates how the lack of clear attribution and the interplay between the attacker’s identity and the respondent’s biases affect public support for retaliatory actions. The role of media cannot be underestimated, especially in shaping public perceptions of cyber threats as pointed out by Makridis et al. 2024. Highlighting media biases and the selective emphasis on novel techniques or specific targets, this study points to the significant influence of media coverage in potentially distorting public understanding and the debates surrounding policy responses to cyber threats. Addressing the conceptual ambiguity surrounding cyberterrorism, Shandler et al. (2023) shed light on the factors that influence public classification of cyber incidents as acts of terrorism. This exploration contributes to a deeper comprehension of public perceptions within the cybersecurity realm, with significant implications for policy and international relations.

Finally, few studies address the erosion of public trust in government following cyberattacks and the critical role of public perception in the acceptance of cybersecurity policies. While Shandler and Gomez (2023) highlight how cyber incidents can undermine trust in democratic institutions, leading to social upheaval, Snider et al. (2021b) emphasize the necessity of addressing public concerns to ensure the effective implementation of cybersecurity measures. Together, they advocate for a holistic approach in formulating cybersecurity policies that not only address technical vulnerabilities but also consider the broader societal and psychological impacts of cyber threats.

While these studies provide invaluable insights, they primarily capture public sentiment at discrete moments, offering a set of snapshots rather than a continuous narrative. Often grounded in surveys or interviews, such research tends to depend on limited datasets or smaller respondent groups, potentially skewing the broader applicability of the findings. The scarcity of longitudinal research further compounds this issue, leaving a significant gap in our comprehensive understanding of the evolving dynamics of cyber incidents and public perceptions over time.

Reddit as a mirror of public sentiment during crises

Platforms like Reddit (Anderson, 2015) have become crucibles of public opinion, hosting vibrant discussions that span a myriad of subjects. Reddit, a vast online forum, facilitates content curation (Medvedev et al. 2019) and community engagement through its system of upvotes and downvotes, allowing users to democratically regulate the visibility and relevance of posts. Structured into thousands of “subreddits,” each dedicated to a specific topic, Reddit offers a tailored experience to its users (Proferes et al. 2021), enabling them to navigate through a wide array of content areas, from news to technology and beyond. This structure has proven particularly valuable for analyzing public engagement and sentiment around cybersecurity issues (Achuthan et al. 2025a).

Several studies capture sentiments expressed during natural disasters and health crises, particularly the COVID-19 pandemic and other notable natural events like earthquakes, offering a look into public mood, coping mechanisms, and evolving emotions. Reddit discussions during COVID-19 showed significant shifts in emotional expression as the pandemic progressed (Hao et al. 2024). Initially, conversations in travel-focused communities were marked by fear, uncertainty, and skepticism regarding travel risks, health safety, and information reliability. As the pandemic continued, Reddit users’ concerns moved from broader pandemic-related topics to personal and day-to-day struggles, such as mental health impacts, isolation, and disruptions to regular life. Emotion analysis, indicated that while fear and anxiety were dominant early on, emotions of trust, sadness, and even anger became more prevalent (Basile et al. 2021). During the Ridgecrest earthquake sequence, sentiment analysis on subreddits revealed a blend of emotions driven by both the immediate impact of the earthquake and underlying concerns about future quakes (Ruan et al. 2022). Sentiment analysis showed that fear and anxiety were most prominent. There was also a level of curiosity, with some users discussing the scientific aspects of earthquakes while others speculated about future seismic events. Sentiment analysis of Reddit discussions on wildfires (Arvandi, 2023) revealed a predominant trend of neutral and negative sentiments, with positive sentiments appearing less often. The neutral tone suggests that many conversations are focused on factual exchanges or express concern and dissatisfaction over the issue. The sporadic positive sentiments indicate an opportunity to encourage more solution-oriented discussions that propose constructive actions. In summary, user interactions on Reddit act as a gauge for the severity of an emergency. The volume and intensity of discussions reflect public concern and the impact of the wildfires. Fluctuations in post and comment frequency—especially sharp increases in activity—can indicate worsening conditions, offering a real-time assessment of the crisis’s scale.

Present study

Previous research has utilized computational methods to analyze Reddit data, often focusing on social sciences problems (Amaya et al. 2021), mental health (Boettcher, 2021), natural disasters, and community-specific discussions (Shatz, 2017). However, comprehensive studies that specifically address the public discourse on Reddit surrounding cybercrime are lacking. This research aims to bridge this gap by leveraging Reddit’s diverse discussions to gain insights into the public’s sentiment and thematic concerns regarding cybercrime over an extensive period. Several key contributions distinguish our work. Firstly, our research offers an extensive analysis of Reddit discussions related to cybercrime, encompassing a broad time frame from 2008 to 2022. This longitudinal approach allows us to track evolving public sentiments and thematic concerns over time, providing a comprehensive understanding of how perceptions of cybercrime have changed in response to emerging threats and incidents. Secondly, our study leverages advanced computational text analysis techniques, including sentiment analysis, topic modeling, and emotion classification. The application of the Gemini Large Language Model (LLM) for emotion classification represents a novel approach to analyzing Reddit discussions. This advanced method allows us to capture a wide spectrum of emotions, from anger and fear to more complex states like sarcasm and curiosity. Thirdly, our research identifies and categorizes the dominant emotional responses within the cybersecurity discourse on Reddit. By analyzing upvote patterns and emotional expressions, we unravel the collective emotional response of the community to various cybersecurity topics. This aspect of our work sheds light on the emotional dynamics driving community engagement and reactions to cyber incidents. Fourthly, we offer a comprehensive analysis of the fluctuating landscape of emotional expression, highlighting how anger, fear, sadness, sarcasm, and neutrality coalesce in the public discourse on cyber threats. This understanding of emotional dynamics offers valuable insights into the complex interplay between emotion and communication in digital platforms. Lastly, this study extends the application of appraisal theory to the domain of cybersecurity, providing a novel framework for understanding how individuals cognitively assess cyber threats and the resulting emotional reactions. Given their novelty, at least as it affects the self, their unpleasantness, and their perceived uncontrollability, threats to cybersecurity are generally appraised negatively and, therefore, would be expected to be accompanied by emotions of fear and anger.

The research questions explored in this context include:

RQ1: What catalyzes significant public engagement and intense emotional responses in online discussions about cybercrime?

RQ2: How does the public stance in social media discourses about cybercrime manifest, and what are the prevailing sentiments?

RQ3: In what ways do emotional profiles within digital discussions on cybersecurity topics evolve over time, and what factors contribute to these changes?

RQ4: How does the presence of fake news, influence community engagement patterns and emotional responses within cybersecurity discussions?

Methodology

To understand public perceptions of cybercrime, we leveraged data from Reddit since its inception over a 14-year period between 2008 and 2022. We specifically focused on data from subreddits with a high propensity for discussions on cybercrime or cyberattacks. These subreddits include r/news, r/worldnews, r/technology, r/technews, and r/politics. Each of these communities had a significant user base, exceeding 700,000 members. A schematic of the methodology used in this work is depicted in Fig. 1. The steps for data extraction and text analysis are outlined below.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram of subreddit data processing and text classification.

Full size image

Data extraction and pre-processing

The data for subreddits in Table 1 was retrieved from the Pushshift Reddit Archive, a publicly accessible repository located at https://the-eye.eu/redarcs/. Upon acquisition, the initial processing step involved cleaning the post titles. This data pre-processing step involved several cleaning actions to ensure data consistency and relevance to our research theme. First, we performed special character removal, eliminating extraneous symbols from the post titles. This improved data quality and streamlined analysis. Next, we conducted missing title Removal, discarding posts with missing or deleted titles to maintain data integrity. Finally, we implemented cybercrime or cyberattack keyword filtering. This process involved filtering the remaining posts based on a comprehensive list of keywords related to cybercrime and cyberattacks. These keywords included terms like “cyberattack,” “phishing,” “ransomware,” “data breach,” and others relevant to the study (Appendix A). By implementing these pre-processing steps, we ensured our analysis focused on relevant and well-formatted post titles, laying a solid foundation for subsequent text analysis techniques. Table 1 summarizes the data obtained post-extraction and pre-processing. The total posts and comments analyzed were 6787 and 105,348 respectively. The number of contributing authors to these posts and comments was 4337 and 84,050, respectively.

Table 1 Summary of subreddits: posts, comments, and unique authors.
Full size table

Text analysis pipeline

The text analysis employed a three-step process to gain comprehensive insights from the Reddit post data: sentiment analysis, topic modeling, and emotion classification.

Sentiment analysis

The initial step involved sentiment analysis to gauge the overall emotional tone of the posts. We utilized VADER (Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner), a lexicon and rule-based tool specifically designed for sentiment analysis in social media contexts (Hutto and Gilbert, 2014). After employing VADER to calculate sentiment scores for each post, we filtered the data to focus specifically on posts expressing negative sentiment. VADER assigns sentiment scores ranging from −1 (most negative) to 1 (most positive), with 0 indicating neutrality. In this study, we specifically focused on analyzing social media reactions to negative cybercrime news. To achieve this, we selected posts with sentiment scores ranging from −1 (most negative) to 0 (neutral) generated by VADER. This decision aligns with the growing body of research highlighting the significant impact of social media on emotional well-being. (Ostic et al. 2021; Valkenburg, 2022). Negative emotional expressions and experiences online, particularly in response to concerning events like cybercrime, can have potential societal consequences (Bada and Nurse, 2020). A sample of post titles along with their sentiment scores is presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Sample posts and sentiment scores.
Full size table

Topic modeling

To gain a deeper understanding of the thematic structure within the cybercrime discussions, we utilized topic modeling with BERTopic (Grootendorst, 2022). We expected this analysis to reveal the overarching themes or categories that users were discussing in relation to cybercrime news. BERTopic leverages pre-trained Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) embeddings to capture semantic relationships within the text data (Egger and Yu, 2022). Additionally, BERTopic incorporates class-based TF-IDF (Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency) to identify the most significant words within each topic cluster. This combination of techniques allows BERTopic to generate interpretable topic clusters, facilitating the identification of meaningful themes present in the content of the Reddit posts.

The versatility of BERTopic within the field of natural language processing is well-established, with applications in document categorization, research paper analysis, and social media content analysis (Varavallo et al. 2023). Recent studies have demonstrated its effectiveness in analyzing cybersecurity discussions and identifying sustainability-related themes in security contexts (Achuthan et al. 2025b). Leveraging BERTopic’s ability to identify thematic clusters, we applied it to the post titles to uncover the overarching themes within the discussions. This process identified 20 distinct topics, including a “general” category for posts that didn’t fit neatly into other clusters. We labeled these topics based on the most prominent keywords associated with them. Notably, some of the key themes identified included data breaches, cyberattacks, and country-specific attacks. Table A1 (See Appendix) presents a breakdown of these prominent topics, including the percentage of posts belonging to each topic, along with a sample post for illustration.

Emotion classification with the Gemini API

To explore the emotional subtleties inherent in the comments, we utilized the Gemini, a LLM developed by Google (Pichai, 2023). LLMs present distinct advantages over conventional methodologies, such as lexicon-based approaches, which often struggle to interpret complex emotions such as sarcasm or curiosity (Choi et al. 2023; Přibáň et al. 2024). Gemini, distinguished by its extensive training corpus and sophisticated deep learning architecture, exhibits an adeptness in contextual comprehension and interpretation. Its ability to process lengthy sequences and discern intricate semantic relationships are qualities paramount for deciphering intricate emotional states (Team et al. 2023).

The development of a robust classification system involved an iterative prompt engineering approach. The process began with an initial classification prompt incorporating pre-defined emotional categories, followed by systematic refinements through multiple iterations. During each iteration, two researchers independently reviewed sets of classified comments and compared their manual annotations with Gemini’s output. This iterative validation process enabled the identification of patterns in classification errors and facilitated prompt optimization, particularly for challenging cases like sarcasm detection. After several refinement cycles, the optimized prompt achieved an accuracy of 83% when validated against human annotations. The final classification prompt leveraged Gemini’s zero-shot classification capabilities to categorize comments into pre-defined emotional states: fear, anger, sadness, sarcasm, disgust, toxic, offensive, hate, curious, and neutral (see Appendix 2 for the full prompt).

While Gemini successfully classified almost all comments (over 98%) within these categories, a small portion (less than 1%) expressed a broader range of emotions not included in the prompt, such as violence, doubt, or confusion. To ensure our analysis focused on the core emotional responses to cybercrime news relevant to our study, we decided to exclude comments with emotions outside the defined categories. To ascertain the precision of Gemini’s classifications pertaining to our core emotional categories, a cohort of human experts conducted a manual reassessment of a random subset of the comments. This manual inspection corroborated the reliability of Gemini’s classifications for our dataset. Table 3 contains the sample comments and emotions classified by Gemini API.

Table 3 Sample comment and emotion inferred from the comment.
Full size table

Results

Triggers of global cybersecurity debates

This section delves into the incidents and themes that have catalyzed widespread discussions. Figure 2 highlights certain events that stand out as key triggers for expansive cybersecurity debates as a function of time.

Fig. 2: Number of comments per month over the years for topics cyber attacks, DdoS attacks, data breach, and ransomware attacks.
figure 2

Cyberattack posts that generated the most comments are: 1. Trump Diverts Cyber Budget for Wall 2. Russia Accuses US of Cyber Assault 3. Anonymous Declares Cyber War on Putin 4. Russian Breach Threatens US Elections 5. Wikipedia Under DDoS Attack 6. Live DDoS Attack Monitoring 7. Mystery Hackers Target Core Internet 8. WikiLeaks DDOS Attack 9. Russian Hackers Leak Voter Data 10. Facebook Silent on Data Leak 11. Zuckerberg Summoned Over Breach 12. Amazon’s Roomba Acquisition Concerns 13. Microsoft Blasts NSA Over WannaCry 14. US Prioritizes Ransomware as Terrorism 15. Ransomware Skips Russian Computers 16. US Pipeline Closed After Cyberattack.

Full size image

The discourse around malicious cyberattacks in the digital domain is heavily influenced by geopolitical tensions and the actions of nation-states. Notably, topics such as “Trump Diverts Cyber Budget for Wall” and “Russia Accuses US of Cyber Assault” highlight how cybersecurity is increasingly intertwined with political strategies and national security agendas. The redirection of funds meant for cyber defense to other political projects underscores the complex prioritization challenges faced by governments, while mutual accusations between powerful nations like the US and Russia reveal the cyber domain as a new battlefield for international disputes. The narrative of state-sponsored cyber activities is further enriched by instances like “Anonymous Declares Cyber War on Putin” and “Russian Breach Threatens US Elections,” where both non-state actors and foreign governments are implicated in attempts to influence political outcomes and public opinion through cyber means. These incidents underscore the growing significance of cyber capabilities in achieving political objectives and the vulnerability of democratic processes to digital interference.

Cyberattacks on infrastructure and services, such as “Wikipedia Under DDoS Attack” and “US Pipeline Closed After Cyberattack,” demonstrate the tangible impact of cyber threats on everyday life and the global economy. The targeting of essential services not only disrupts normalcy but also instills a sense of vulnerability within societies, highlighting the critical need for robust cybersecurity measures to protect public and private assets. The narrative also touches on the role of corporations in the cybersecurity ecosystem, as seen in “Facebook Silent on Data Leak” and “Amazon’s Roomba Acquisition Concerns.” These topics raise questions about data privacy, corporate responsibility, and the potential misuse of personal information in the age of digital commerce. The involvement of tech giants in cybersecurity dialogs reflects the blurring lines between corporate interests and public welfare, challenging traditional notions of privacy and security.

Furthermore, the mention of ransomware attacks in “Microsoft Blasts NSA Over WannaCry” and “US Prioritizes Ransomware as Terrorism” brings to light the evolving nature of cyber threats and the challenges in attributing and combating such attacks. The international community’s response to these incidents, ranging from public condemnation to treating cyberattacks as serious crimes, indicates a shift towards a more aggressive stance against cybercriminals and state-sponsored hackers.

The recurring themes across these discussions reveal the intersection of cybersecurity with geopolitics, economics, and societal norms. The pattern of state involvement, either as perpetrators or victims of cyberattacks, suggests a growing recognition of cyber capabilities as essential instruments of national power. Moreover, the frequent targeting of public infrastructure and services highlights the strategic value of disrupting daily life and economic activities as a means of exerting pressure or demonstrating capabilities. The involvement of private corporations in cybersecurity incidents raises critical questions about accountability, regulatory oversight, and the ethical use of technology.

Analyzing emotions in cybersecurity dialogs

The analysis of over 100,000 comments across five distinct subreddits offers a deep dive into the public’s emotional landscape concerning cybersecurity issues as shown in Fig. 3. This comprehensive examination uncovers not just the predominant emotion of anger but also the significant presence of sarcasm, and fear, curiosity, and a notable quantity of neutral comments, indicating a complex tapestry of public reaction to cybersecurity topics.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Emotional spectrum of cybersecurity discourses, Percentage of comments emotion over topics.

Full size image

Anger emerges as the most pervasive emotion, consistently present across various topics. This intense feeling is primarily directed toward actions perceived as breaches of trust, privacy violations, and inadequate responses to cyber threats. For instance, discussions surrounding the FCC and Net Neutrality witness the highest level of anger, pointing towards a collective dissatisfaction with policies seen as endangering the principles of a free and fair internet. Similarly, topics like Chinese Hacking and Russian Hacking Charges evoke strong resentment, reflecting concerns over national security and the integrity of information.

Sarcasm stands out as the second most prevalent emotion, serving as a lens through which the community expresses skepticism and disillusionment with official narratives, policies, and the effectiveness of cybersecurity measures. This sentiment is particularly striking in the discourse on North Korean Cyber Operations, where ~30% of the comments are tinged with irony, highlighting a cynical view of the information disseminated by governments and organizations.

Fear, while less dominant than anger and sarcasm, underscores the community’s apprehensions about the implications of cyber threats on personal and national security. Topics like Kaspersky Lab Software and Ransomware Attacks elicit notable fear, reflecting worries about the risks posed by software vulnerabilities and the potential for widespread disruption caused by ransomware. Curiosity follows closely, with the community showing a robust interest in delving into the specifics of cybersecurity incidents and understanding the mechanics behind cyber threats. This is evident in discussions about DDoS Attacks, where a significant portion of comments reflects an eagerness to explore the motives and methods behind such cyber assaults.

An important aspect not to be overlooked is the substantial presence of neutral comments, which suggests that a portion of the discussion remains focused on objective reporting, technical analysis, and factual information sharing. These neutral comments are crucial as they often provide the foundational knowledge and context that inform the more emotionally charged discussions within the community.

The high percentage of disgust (3.91%) associated with the Murdoch phone hacking scandal suggests a deep public aversion to the violation of personal privacy inherent in such acts. Similarly, the significant level of hate (2.85%) surrounding the Iran-Israel cyber conflict points towards the intense emotions fueled by the deep political and ideological divides between the two nations, further amplified in the online sphere.

The prevalence of offensive comments (2.58%) regarding cyberbullying and online threats reflects the public’s distress at the increasingly negative nature of online interactions. Anonymity appears to embolden perpetrators to engage in harmful behavior, leading to a rise in offensive content.

Finally, the presence of toxic emotions (1.36%) in discussions about the Iran-Israel cyber conflict underscores the complex and volatile nature of geopolitical tensions in the digital age. Entrenched historical divisions and a lack of constructive dialog likely contribute to the overall toxicity of online discussions surrounding this topic.

The diverse emotional responses unveil a public that is not only reactive but also deeply engaged with topics related to cyber events and digital crime.

Community reaction: upvotes and emotions

Emotions play a crucial role in how online communities react to cyber incidents. By analyzing upvote patterns (Fig. 4), insights into the emotional undercurrents that drive these conversations are analyzed in this section. This analysis maps the dominant emotions present in discussions of various cybersecurity topics, shedding light on the collective emotional response within the community. On Reddit, users can upvote or downvote comments to express their opinions. To understand how emotions play a role in these discussions, we calculated the average upvote score for comments classified into different emotions within each topic.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Average upvote for comments (emotions by topic).

Full size image

Arrests and Guilty Pleas are met with strong negative reactions in the community, evidenced by high average upvotes for anger (28.56) and disgust (22.16). While curiosity (6.32) suggests some interest in the details of the cases, there’s also moderate support for neutral comments (10.75), indicating a desire for informative discussion alongside the emotional response.

CIA and Hacking discussions evoke strong emotions, with fear (36.26) and sadness (24.92) being the most upvoted. This indicates a deep community concern about CIA hacking activities. Anger (14.91) and disgust (15.66) are also present, but to a lesser extent, reflecting disapproval rather than hostility.

Chinese Hacking discussions focus on understanding the incidents (curiosity: 7.15) with a neutral tone (7.35). Interestingly, the presence of negative average upvotes for emotions like hate (−0.83) and toxic (−3.88) suggests a lack of community endorsement or engagement with comments expressing hostility or toxicity regarding Chinese hacking.

Discussions about Cisco systems and NSA trigger strong emotions, with fear (31.08) and sadness (25.44) being the most upvoted. Additionally, emotions like hate (6.21) and offensive (9.73) receive moderate average upvotes. However, emotions like curiosity (3.4) and disgust (0.08) receive relatively lower average upvotes, indicating lesser community interest or agreement with comments.

Regarding cyber attacks, online communities are fired up with anger (13.58) and keep a watchful eye (neutral: 21.21). While some delve deeper with curiosity (5.87), a shadow of fear (5.47) lurks. However, emotions like hate (3) and sadness (7.52) receive relatively lower average upvotes, indicating lesser community engagement or agreement with comments expressing strong negative sentiments or sadness regarding cyber-attacks.

Cyberbullying and online threats hit a nerve in online communities. People overwhelmingly express disgust (21.44) and strong negativity (toxic: 21.67) towards these issues. Fear (15.42) and sadness (9.06) are also present, showing the impact these threats have. There’s less focus on curiosity or hate, suggesting a strong sense of community against cyberbullying.

DDoS attacks trigger a firestorm of negativity online! People vent with extreme toxicity (93.43) and hatred (70.65). Sarcasm (24.85) and curiosity (14.82) are also high, suggesting a mix of anger and confusion. Interestingly, there’s less focus on disgust or taking personal offense, but a strong sense of community outrage prevails.

Fear dominates discussions about Data Breaches, with high upvotes for fear (25.25) and anger (16.91) indicating strong community concern. There’s also some sadness (13.84) and curiosity (10.69) about the implications. However, emotions like disgust (18.33) and hate (9.77) receive relatively lower average upvotes. Overall, the focus is on fear and anger, with some desire to understand the consequences.

Discussions about the Iran-Israel Cyber Conflict are highly emotional. Sadness (33.02) and sarcasm (35.91) lead the responses, suggesting both despair and cynicism. Disgust (28.76) and hate (29.04) also receive high upvotes. Overall, negativity with a focus on sadness and sarcasm marks this discussion.

Discussions surrounding Election Security are less emotionally charged, with fear (4) and sadness (8) leading, but at a lower intensity. This suggests concern, but not the same level of outrage seen in other topics. Curiosity (1.33) is also low. Overall, there’s less intense engagement compared to other cybersecurity topics.

Curiosity (5.17) and sadness (7.83) lead discussions on FCC and Net Neutrality, suggesting a desire to understand and some negativity. Anger (4.14) and sarcasm (2.76) are also present, but less pronounced. Overall, there’s a focus on understanding the issue with a touch of sadness and frustration.

Sadness (45.88) is the dominant emotion in discussions surrounding Kaspersky Lab Software, indicating a sense of loss or disappointment within the community. Anger (23.25) follows, suggesting frustration or betrayal. There’s some curiosity (3.12). Conversely, emotions such as disgust (1.82) and hate (0.83) receive lower average upvotes. Overall, sadness and anger color the reactions to this topic.

Discussions categorized as General center around fear (21.88), suggesting a sense of unease and apprehension about the unknown. Curiosity (8.78) and a neutral stance (11.69) are also present. Overall, the focus is on fear, with a desire to understand the nature of these diverse threats.

The Murdoch Phone Hacking Scandal evokes strong sadness (19.33) within the community, indicating empathy for those affected and a sense of injustice. Anger (11.23) and disgust (15.74) also score high. Overall, sadness and a sense of moral outrage dominate the emotional landscape of this discussion.

Sarcasm (46.87) leads the response to North Korean Cyber Operations, suggesting cynicism and disbelief within the community. Surprisingly, there’s also some sadness (12.64), perhaps reflecting the consequences of these attacks. Overall, discussions are marked by a mix of cynicism and some concern.

Discussions about Phishing Scams focus heavily on a neutral stance (7.02), likely indicating a desire for factual information and mitigation strategies. There’s also a desire to understand (curiosity: 5.75) how these attacks work. Overall, a focus on knowledge and practicality drives the community response.

Fear (44.53) is the driving force behind Ransomware Attack discussions, highlighting the sense of vulnerability and helplessness felt by the community. Anger (19.62) and disgust (20.36) are also present, suggesting a strong desire for retaliation. Overall, fear dominates, with a significant undercurrent of anger and frustration.

Curiosity (4) and neutrality (0.71) are the most prevalent sentiments surrounding Russian Hacking Charges, suggesting a desire to understand the issue without strong emotional investment. However, other emotions such as anger (−0.25), disgust (1), fear (0.5), hate (−2), offensive (1), sadness (0), sarcasm (1.75), and toxic (0) receive lower or negative average upvotes, suggesting comparatively lesser community engagement or agreement with comments expressing these sentiments. Overall, the focus is on gathering information rather than expressing strong reactions.

Discussions about Trojan Horse Malware are driven by fear (17.74), highlighting the hidden and insidious nature of this threat. There’s also a touch of hate (9.75) potentially aimed at the creators of such malware. Overall, the focus is on fear, with some contempt for those responsible.

Curiosity (58.7) dominates discussions about Trump-related hacking, suggesting a strong desire to unravel the details and implications of this complex issue. Anger (27.97) and fear (11.32) are also present. emotions like hate (−5) and toxic (3.67) receive lower average upvotes, indicating lesser community engagement or agreement with comments expressing these sentiments. Overall, a focus on discovery underlines the discussions, accompanied by a degree of anger and apprehension.

Emotional dynamics in digital communication

Figure 5 offers a compelling insight into the fluctuating landscape of emotional expression in digital conversations. These visualizations capture the complex tapestry of human emotions, highlighting the presence of anger, sadness, fear, sarcasm, neutrality, and curiosity in digital cybersecurity dialogs. Each graph is a temporal snapshot, mapping the intensity and prevalence of these emotions over time. Each data point on the graph represents the proportion of comments containing a specific emotion in a given month. The proportion is calculated by dividing the number of comments containing that emotion by the total number of comments in that month (range 0 to 1). The use of color intensity signifies the depth of discussion; darker shades signal areas of heightened emotional engagement, where discussions may have become more passionate, heated, or involved.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Proportion of emotions over the years.

Full size image

Anger in cybersecurity discussions often stems from a perceived lack of security, deception, or malicious actions. Accusations against nation-states for hacking activities (“Trump blames China for campaign hacking”) highlight anger directed at foreign adversaries. Anger towards government policies or inaction (“FCC lied to Congress about made-up DDoS attack”) reveals a sense of betrayal and frustration within the cybersecurity community. Data breaches that expose personal information (“Comcast Data Breach Leaks Thousands of Unlisted Phone Numbers”) and ransomware attacks that disrupt critical services (“The City Of Baltimore Blew Off A $76,000 Ransomware Demand…”) incite anger toward criminal actors.

Fear frequently arises from direct threats posed by attackers. Titles warning of malware (“Discord malware is a persistent and growing threat”) and phishing scams (“Gmail is awash with bait attack phishing emails”) instill fear of victimization. Vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure (“Major Cyber Attack On U.S. Power Grid Is Likely”), raise deep-seated fears about national security. Furthermore, fear of government intrusion (“Cisco posts kit to empty houses to dodge NSA chop shops”) and corporate negligence (“U.S. enables Chinese hacking of Google”) suggest a lack of protection from those entrusted with power.

Titles evoking sadness often center around the loss of privacy (“Google Chief: My Fears for Generation Facebook”) and the devastating consequences of cyberbullying (“New York Tween Kills Herself After Cyberbullying”). The human cost of cyberattacks transcends financial loss, as seen in titles describing the tragic outcomes of ransomware (“A man who found his computer infected with ransomware…decided to take his own life”). Sadness is further fueled by a sense of government incompetence (“States Take On Election Hacking. Washington Ignores It”) and a lack of transparency (“FCC lied to Congress about made-up DDoS attack”).

Sarcasm is a common response to perceived failures in cybersecurity. Titles mocking ineffective security measures (“Poodlecorp threaten to take Pokemon Go offline… ‘because they can’“) highlight a lack of confidence in basic defenses. Scapegoating and deflecting responsibility by those involved in cyber incidents (“Pegasus spyware seller: Blame our customers, not us, for hacking”) often elicit sarcastic responses. Hyperbole, political point-scoring, and ironic situations (“Melania Trump: Critics will not stop me from fighting cyberbullying”) all underscore the cynical view of cybersecurity held by many within the community.

Neutral titles focus on factual reporting, technical details, investigations, and geopolitical events. They objectively describe the consequences of cyberattacks (“Cyberattack hobbles major hospital chain’s US facilities…”), provide specific information about attack methods (“Windows Trojan BackDoor.TeamViewer.49 caused by…”), report on law enforcement actions (“US charges four Russian spies for hacking…”), and cover geopolitical cyber conflicts without assigning blame (“Iran blames foreign country for cyberattack…”).

Posts sparking curiosity explore emerging threats and the unknown consequences of cybercrime. They question the nature of reality (“Tech billionaires are asking scientists for help hacking humans out of the computer simulation…”), examine the potential dangers of AI-driven attacks (“AI cyberattacks will be almost impossible for humans to stop”), and delve into the geopolitical aspects of cyberwarfare (“North Korea ships malware-infected games…”). Curiosity also extends to the legal and political ramifications of cybercrime (“If Israel and Russia were both caught hacking the US, why is Russia the only one getting in trouble?”) as well as the ongoing human cost (“Cyberbullying follows teen to the grave”).

Other emotions such as toxicity, hate, offensive and disgust were found to be sparse over the entire period.

To capture recent trends, the analysis focused on the proportion of anger-related comments from 2019 to 2022, as visualized in Fig. 6. The daily values showed substantial fluctuations, but the 7-day moving average highlighted more persistent trends in public sentiment. The figure revealed several prominent peaks in the proportion of anger comments. The five highest peaks were annotated based on the post with the most comments during the surrounding week. These annotated peaks coincided with major incidents, such as the hacking of Disney+ accounts, a DDoS attack on a school, the US Cybersecurity Director’s refusal to edit election hacking myths, tensions between the US and Russia over Crimea and cyberattacks, and the revelation of a “cyber warfare” startup.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Proportion of Anger comments over time (2019–2022).

Full size image

The temporal dynamics of other emotional responses, including fear, sarcasm, and curiosity, are presented in Figs. A2, A3, respectively, in the Supplementary Materials.

Fake news narratives and community engagement

To address RQ4, the analysis examined posts containing the term “fake news” in comparison to the broader dataset. The study identified 21 posts that explicitly contained the “fake news” keywords in their titles and analyzed their engagement metrics and emotional characteristics.

As shown in Table A5 (see Appendix), the collected posts predominantly focused on the intersection of fake news with cybersecurity themes, particularly around hacking incidents and election security. Notable examples include “Washington Post’s initial report on Russian hacking revised” and “France concerned over Russian interference in elections amid reports of hacking, fake news.” Several posts specifically addressed social media platforms’ roles, such as “Facebook has behaved like ‘digital gangsters,’ says a UK report on fake news and data privacy.” The analysis also revealed multiple instances of regulatory responses from different countries, including Indonesia’s threat to shut down Facebook if it failed to control fake news during elections and the EU’s warning to tech firms about potential regulations.

As illustrated in Fig. 7, the analysis revealed distinct patterns in community engagement between fake news-related posts and the general post population. Figure 7A shows that posts containing “fake news” terminology received significantly lower average upvote scores (119.2) compared to the overall average across all posts (908.9). Similarly, Fig. 7B demonstrates that the average number of comments on fake news-related posts (20.5) was notably lower than the general post average (77.5).

Fig. 7: Community engagement and emotional response patterns in fake news vs. general posts.
figure 7

A Average upvote score per post type. B Average number of comments per post type. C Distribution of emotions across post types.

Full size image

The emotional response analysis, depicted in Fig. 7C, revealed several distinct patterns in how the community responded to fake news-related content. Anger emerged as the predominant emotion in fake news-related posts, with a proportion of 0.42 compared to 0.33 in general posts. Neutral sentiment appeared as the second most common response, with proportions of 0.27 for fake news posts versus 0.24 for general posts. Sarcasm manifested less frequently in fake news posts (0.13) compared to general posts (0.18). Other emotions, such as curiosity, disgust, and fear, showed varying but generally lower proportions across both categories.

Discussion

In recent years, social media has provided a vehicle for people to connect and interact with one another online (Thakur et al. 2019). Social media provides multiple platforms for people to share their thoughts and feelings about a myriad of different issues and concerns and to respond to others’ postings. In this way, social media has provided a powerful means of influencing people’s opinions about a wide array of issues (e.g., Hong and Nadler, 2011; Lintner et al. 2023; Xiong and Liu, 2014). While providing many benefits, these platforms not only open up users to negative information they might have otherwise avoided, but they also expose them to potential threats, including cyber threats (Thapa, 2022). According to (Thakur et al. 2019), “cyber criminals can now weaponize social media sites and their data”. Anyone who has experienced a cybersecurity breach can attest to the emotional reactions that such threats trigger, including fear and anger (Achuthan et al. 2023). In line with appraisal theory (Hamby and Jones, 2022b; Vespa et al. 2022), these emotional reactions then affect people’s cognitive evaluations of the threats, which can then direct behavioral responses. As people share their emotional reactions to cyber threats online, an emotional contagion can result that has the potential to affect community sentiment and engagement. In light of this, the current study analyzed Reddit discussions to understand public sentiments on cybersecurity, classifying emotions within common topics related to cybercrime.

Catalysts for public engagement and emotional responses

RQ1 explored catalysts for significant public engagement and intense emotional responses in online discussions about cybercrime. The most common triggers for discussion gleaned from the Reddit posts across the subreddits were cyber attacks, DDoS attacks, data breaches, and ransomware attacks. Of the 16 most popular posts that fell within these four topic areas, 10 occurred following COVID-19. This uptick in key topics following the COVID-19 crisis is fitting given that this was a time of considerable uncertainty and relative uncontrollability, feelings that may have contributed to the emotional responses seen in the current study in response to cyber criminal activities. According to (Vespa et al. 2022), “appraisal criteria involved in eliciting emotions include the novelty and pleasantness of events, their controllability, and evaluation” (Vespa et al. 2022, p. 2).

Consistent with this, given their novelty, at least as it affects the self, their unpleasantness, and their perceived uncontrollability, threats to cybersecurity are generally appraised negatively and, therefore, would be expected to be accompanied by emotions of fear and anger. Renaud et al. (2021), for example, found that emotional reactions in discussions about cybersecurity were predominantly negative and included feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, insecurity, and anger. Reflective of the negativity surrounding cybersecurity threats, de Bruijn and Janssen (2017) referred to cybersecurity as “the new form of war” and suggested that it be “viewed as the next platform in modern warfare”.

In line with appraisal theory and suggestions by Vespa et al. (2022) regarding the relationship between novelty, unpleasantness, uncontrollability, and negative appraisals, findings in the current study are consistent with this inherent negativity associated with emotional responses to cybersecurity threats. Across virtually all of the 20 key topic areas, the predominant emotions were anger, fear, curiosity, and sarcasm, with anger being the primary emotion across all topics. Indeed, across the five most common topics, anger and sarcasm were consistently the most common emotions, with fear and curiosity vying for third and fourth place depending on the type of threat. The only exception to this pattern of four emotions across topics was the association of sadness instead of fear with arrests and guilty pleas.

Community support for comment emotionality

The public stance in social media discourses about cybercrime that is reflective of community support for the emotions expressed in comments and that is discerned by the number of upvotes and downvotes (RQ2) was not only specific to the topic (e.g., arrests and guilty pleas), but also somewhat variable within a particular topic. Across most topics, the greatest community support appeared to be for comments reflecting negative emotions, such as fear, anger, sadness, disgust, sarcasm, or toxicity. Comments conveying curiosity, however, received the greatest number of upvotes for the topics of Russian Hacking, FCC and Net Neutrality, and Trump-Related Hacking. These findings suggest (a) a high level of community engagement with the comments and (b) a particular draw to comments reflecting negative emotionality, not surprising given the severity of the cyber threats.

Evolving nature of emotional profiles

In a test of RQ 3 regarding the extent to which the emotional profiles evolve over time and the factors that contribute to these changes, the key themes reflected in comments with high emotionality reflect both individual and group-level concerns. For example, the emotions of sadness and curiosity reflect more of an individual focus with comments connoting predominantly sadness reflecting concerns with a loss of privacy and identity and the human costs associated with cyber threats, such as suicides. Similarly, themes of comments in which curiosity was the prevailing emotion also include, among other things, a focus on human stories. Importantly, comments defined by anger and fear had a broader focus, often toward governmental agencies for their perceived failure to implement appropriate cybersecurity measures or provide sufficient aid. Many of these comments conveyed an underlying distrust that was also reflected in comments for which sarcasm was a dominant emotion. The sarcasm stemmed from a distrust of cybersecurity measures that had purportedly been implemented.

Previous research has demonstrated two effects of negative emotionality toward an attitude object. First, according to (Liang and Xue, 2009), feelings of uncertainty and fear may lead to reduced engagement and avoidance. Thus, people engage in a primary and secondary appraisal process when confronted with cybersecurity threats (De Kimpe et al. 2022). People who perceive high threat levels but lack strong coping strategies may disengage from discussions of the topic online and be less likely to take proactive steps to reduce their cybersecurity vulnerability. Second, previous research has highlighted the role that emotions can play in facilitating rumor-mongering. Specifically, in response to the COVID-19 crisis, (Wu et al. 2022) found that the emotions of fear, anger, disgust, and surprise affected rumor-mongering. The spread of rumors sparked by arousal-inducing emotions may lead to panic, reduced trust, and further rumor spreading (Wu et al. 2022). Alternatively, reduced trust can promote rumor spreading (Y.-Q. Wang et al. 2013) as a means to acquire information or express dissatisfaction with how a cyber threat is handled by an entity.

Top cybercrime concerns

Although 20 topics emerged from the topic modeling analysis, the five most frequently endorsed focused on data breaches, cyber-attacks, ransomware attacks, trump-related hacking, and DDoS attacks. Comment volume not surprisingly increased in response to major cybercrime events, DDoS events, major data breaches, and significant ransomware attacks. This suggests that increased public interest and media coverage of cybercrime may indicate a lack of trust fueled by these incidents. For example, in the analysis of cyber attacks, public interest was clearly reactive with people’s attention to cybercrime driven primarily by major headlines and events. People became more engaged when they perceived an immediate threat or something particularly noteworthy happened. As suggested in the trust literature (Goles et al. 2009; Rao and Lee, 2007), people are reaching out to online communities to help discern the correct attribution to make for the trust violation and to gauge the amount of damage created by the cybercriminal activity. Similarly, spikes in comments following DDoS attacks could indicate heightened public awareness of the attacks and the potential consequences when these attacks target major infrastructure. The spike in comments after data breaches and ransomware likely reflects public outrage when attacks are large-scale or cause significant disruption.

In addition to the broad increased awareness following cybersecurity incidents, there was also a specificity in response across the different types of responses. For example, different cybercrime events trigger different conversations. For instance, the “Trump Diverts Cyber Budget” comment peak focused on policy, while the “Anonymous Declares Cyber War” comment surge revolved around hacktivism’s role in conflicts. The focus on attacks against Wikipedia and WikiLeaks suggests the public may be more interested in DDoS attacks targeting prominent organizations compared to generic attacks. The focus on Facebook data breaches suggests the public may be more critical of social media platforms’ data privacy practices. Additionally, discussions around “US Prioritizes Ransomware” suggest potential public interest in how governments tackle ransomware threats. Consistent with the literature on consumer trust (Goles et al. 2009), this level of specificity is targeted toward understanding and reacting to the response offered by the platform or agency affected.

Responses to the cybersecurity attacks also reflect concerns that these attacks may be tied to broader issues. For example, examples of cybercrime attacks highlight how cybercrime discussions sometimes intertwine with large, ongoing issues. The Russia-Ukraine war and the 2016 US elections provide contexts and a backdrop for the specific cybercrime events mentioned. Similar broad concerns emerged with data breaches. The inclusion of the Roomba acquisition, for example, suggests discussions about data collection practices expanding beyond traditional tech companies. Similarly, the “Ransomware Skips Russian Computers” event might have sparked discussions about the targeting methods used in ransomware attacks and the role of international relations.

Implications

Most of the policies and procedures directed at addressing cybersecurity to date have been reactive, addressing breaches and threats as they arise rather than focusing on preventing threats before they occur (de Bruijn and Janssen, 2017). This somewhat one-sided approach may account for some of the emotional responses of sarcasm observed in the current study. Consistent with previous research (e.g., Kim and Krishna, 2018b), the emotional classifications that emerged in the current study have implications for the importance of decision-makers creating policies and procedures that not only address existing cyber threats but also minimize future occurrences. In this way, trust can be established, which will encourage greater community engagement and action on the part of individuals to thwart cyber attacks on a personal level (Han et al. 2023b). In the event that trust is not established, speculation about current or impending cyber threats and the accompanying negative emotions may proliferate on social media, leading to rumor-mongering.

Additional implications include a pressing need for comprehensive educational initiatives, improved reporting practices, and enhanced public support systems. Educationally, there’s a dire need for programs that deepen public understanding of cyber threats and protective measures, bridging the knowledge gap and demystifying cybersecurity. Media professionals are urged to adopt responsible reporting practices that provide balanced, factual insights into cybercrime, avoiding sensationalism that can fuel unnecessary panic. Additionally, a robust support framework is essential, where stakeholders across the board—from tech companies to community organizations—actively engage with the public, offering guidance, resources, and tools to navigate and safeguard against cyber threats. These combined efforts are crucial for fostering a well-informed, resilient community capable of confronting the evolving landscape of cybercrime effectively.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

The current study relied on a single social media platform, Reddit, for data extraction. Although not atypical for studies extracting data from social media platforms (Vespa et al. 2022), the study should be replicated using other online platforms to provide additional support for the findings in the current study. Other platforms may offer distinct perspectives on cybercrime, as each has unique structures, demographics, and user interactions that could influence sentiment and discourse. By including a broader range of social media sources, future studies could validate the observations from this study, thereby enhancing the generalizability of findings. This approach, however, would require careful methodological adaptations to account for the unique data formats, access constraints, and privacy considerations specific to each platform. This would also circumvent any sampling issues associated with users of a particular platform. For example, according to a Pew report (Barthel et al. 2016), Reddit users are more likely to be male than female and more likely to represent a younger as opposed to an older age demographic. Additionally, although we specifically screened for posts with a negative sentiment score due to the adverse impacts of negative emotional expression online, future research could examine the relationship between the broader range of sentiment, including positive and neutral posts, and emotional responses. Future research should also examine how to translate emotion into action. Many people feel it is the responsibility of governments or companies to provide protection against cybersecurity threats (de Bruijn and Janssen, 2017). While this is partly true, individuals also need to correctly appraise their own role in protecting themselves against threats to cybersecurity. Future studies should delve into emerging threats such as those associated with digital transformation (Achuthan et al. 2023; Guembe et al. 2022; P. Wang et al. 2021) Gemini’s zero-shot text classification capability through prompts presents a significant advancement in emotional analysis. However, it is essential to acknowledge certain limitations associated with this approach. One notable limitation is the reliance on pre-defined emotional categories within the prompt. While these categories cover a broad spectrum of emotions, future research could explore ways to dynamically adapt the prompt to refine and expand the emotional categories, thereby enhancing the model’s sensitivity to diverse emotional states.

Conclusions

In this detailed examination of public sentiment toward cybercrime through Reddit discussions, our analysis uncovered a fertile ground of community reactions, themes, and emotions spanning from 2008 to 2022. Utilizing a robust methodological framework that combined sentiment analysis with BERTopic modeling and emotion classification via the Gemini LLM, we delved into over 6700 posts and 100,000+ comments across five pivotal subreddits. Our findings reveal a landscape dominated by concerns over ransomware attacks, state-sponsored hacking activities, particularly by China, and the geopolitical tensions between Iran and Israel, among other themes. These topics not only captivated the community’s attention but also elicited a wide array of emotions, with anger and fear being particularly prominent, highlighting the public’s profound psychological response to cyber threats.

Quantitatively, our sentiment analysis identified a significant skew toward negative sentiments, with posts expressing negative emotions such as anger or fear constituting over 39% of the analyzed content. This suggests a prevailing sense of alarm and discontent within the online discourse surrounding cybercrime. Additionally, our topic modeling efforts unveiled that discussions around data breaches and cyberattacks from nation-states were particularly engaging, drawing in extensive commentary and engagement from the Reddit community. The emotional classification further enriched our understanding, revealing that beyond anger and fear, there were notable expressions of sarcasm (17%), pointing to a degree of cynicism or disbelief among participants regarding the efficacy of responses to cyber threats. Curiosity and neutral responses also surfaced in about 31% of the comments, indicating a segment of the community keen on dissecting the technicalities or factual underpinnings of cyber incidents without a pronounced emotional overlay.

This comprehensive exploration suggests the interactive nature of cyber threats and public sentiment. The prevalence of anger and fear underscores the public’s perception of cybercrime as not only a personal threat but also a societal and national security concern. The sarcasm and curiosity, meanwhile, reflect a critical and inquisitive stance among participants, perhaps signaling a desire for more effective measures or a deeper understanding of cyber threats.

In conclusion, our study highlights the complexity of public sentiment toward cybercrime, characterized by a spectrum of emotions and concerns that extend beyond individual incidents to encompass broader geopolitical and societal implications. These insights not only contribute to academic discourse but also offer valuable perspectives for policymakers, cybersecurity professionals, and media practitioners in crafting responses that resonate with public sentiment and address the multifaceted nature of cyber threats.