Situational Action Theory: Toward a Dynamic Theory of Crime and Its Causes

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per-Olof H. Wikström
Keyword(s):  
Action Theory ◽  
Dynamic Theory ◽  
Choice Process ◽  
Theory Of Crime ◽  
Rule Breaking ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Psychosocial Processes ◽  
Selection Mechanisms ◽  
Crime Causation ◽  
General Dynamic

Situational Action Theory (SAT) is a general, dynamic, and mechanism-based theory of crime and its causes. It is general because it proposes to explain all kinds of crime (and rule-breaking more generally). It is dynamic because it centers on analyzing crime and its changes as the outcome of the interactions between people and their environments. It is mechanism-based because its explanation focuses on identifying key basic processes involved in crime causation. SAT analyzes crime as moral actions and its explanation focuses on three basic and interrelated explanatory mechanisms: the perception–choice process (the situational mechanism) that explains why crime events happen; selection-mechanisms that explain why criminogenic situations occur; and mechanisms of emergence that explain why people develop and change their crime propensities (psychosocial processes), and why places develop and change their criminogeneity (socioecological processes).

Revisiting the role of self-control in Situational Action Theory

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Kroneberg ◽  
Sonja Schulz
Keyword(s):  
Action Theory ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Comprehensive Account ◽  
Theory Of Crime ◽  
Rule Breaking ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Crime And Delinquency ◽  
Crime Causation

Wikström’s Situational Action Theory of Crime Causation (SAT) aims at providing a comprehensive account of the action-generating mechanisms that underlie rule-breaking. Paying tribute to the longstanding criminological interest in self-control, SAT also entails a new view of this concept and its role in crime causation. SAT claims that morality is the more fundamental determinant of rule-breaking and that self-control should become relevant only when actors enter a process of deliberation on whether or not to break a rule. Our contribution is twofold: theoretically, we discuss the role of self-control in SAT and derive previously untested implications; empirically, we evaluate these implications based on data from a large German panel study and thereby advance our understanding of when and how self-control matters for crime and delinquency.

An experimental test of Situational Action Theory of crime causation: Investigating the perception-choice process

2021 ◽  
pp. 102693
Author(s):  
Sebastian Sattler ◽  
Floris van Veen ◽  
Fabian Hasselhorn ◽  
Guido Mehlkop ◽  
Carsten Sauer
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Test ◽  
Action Theory ◽  
Choice Process ◽  
Theory Of Crime ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Crime Causation

Analysing the perception–choice process in Situational Action Theory. A randomized scenario study

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lieven J.R. Pauwels
Keyword(s):  
Action Theory ◽  
Empirical Literature ◽  
Unique Contribution ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Choice Process ◽  
Response Propensity ◽  
Specific Rule ◽  
Rule Breaking ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Scenario Study

In Situational Action Theory (SAT), crime is seen as the result of the interplay between individual and setting characteristics. This replication study focuses on the perception–choice process. The perception–choice process refers to the process whereby one sees the breaking of rules (stated in laws) as an action alternative and deliberately (or habitually) carries out an act of rule-breaking, given that one sees the breaking of a specific rule as an action alternative. The unique contribution of this study to the empirical literature is that it tests the interaction between choosing a violent response, propensity, and exposure to scenario criminogeneity using a web-based randomized scenario study. The results indicate that individuals who have low levels of crime propensity rarely choose a violent response, independent of scenario criminogeneity (as measured by provocation and the absence of monitoring agents). The likelihood of choosing a violent response increases as a result of the interplay between scenario criminogeneity and crime propensity. The implications for future tests of SAT are discussed.

The nature and role of morality in situational action theory

2020 ◽  
pp. 147737082097709
Author(s):  
Jennifer Barton-Crosby
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Action Theory ◽  
Moral Rule ◽  
Personal Morality ◽  
Rule Breaking ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Perception Of Action

For situational action theory (SAT), morality is key to the definition of crime and the explanation for why and how acts of crime happen: acts of crime are acts of moral rule-breaking and personal morality guides individuals’ perception of moral rule-breaking as an option before controls become relevant. However, the nature and role of morality in SAT can be misread. Within this article I respond to misinterpretations of the theory by elaborating and adding further context to the concept of morality in SAT. I contend that the root of misunderstanding is grounded in alternative assumptions regarding human nature: SAT assumes a fundamentally rule-guided human nature, whereas the prevailing view within criminology is that people are primarily self-interested. In this article I delineate SAT’s assumption of a rule-guided human nature and set out how this assumption informs the definition of crime and personal morality in the theory. I further specify the nature and role of morality in the perception of action alternatives, and in so doing distinguish SAT from theories that view constraint as the measure of morality. Finally, I develop and clarify SAT’s position on the relationship between morality and the law.

22. Character, circumstances, and the causes of crime: towards an analytical criminology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per-Olof H. Wikström
Keyword(s):  
Action Theory ◽  
Wrong Thing ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Common Problems ◽  
Future Direction ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Causes Of Crime ◽  
The Right ◽  
Crime Causation

This chapter analyses and explains acts of crimes as moral actions (i.e., actions guided by what is the right or wrong thing to do) within an analytical criminology framework. It outlines some common problems of current mainstream criminological theorizing and research, such as the lack of a shared definition of crime, the poor integration of knowledge about the role of people and places in crime causation, the frequent confusion of causes and correlates, and the lack of an adequate action theory, and proposes a more analytical criminology as the remedy. The chapter introduces Situational Action Theory (SAT), a general, dynamic, and mechanism-based theory about crime and its causes, designed to address these problems and provide a foundation for an analytical criminology. It concludes by briefly discussing main implications for the future direction of policy and prevention.

Crime propensity, criminogenic exposure and violent scenario responses: Testing situational action theory in regression and Rasch models

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 307-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
DIRK-HINRICH HAAR ◽  
PER-OLOF H. WIKSTRÖM
Keyword(s):  
Youth Violence ◽  
Action Theory ◽  
Statistical Modelling ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Response Data ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Systematic Selection ◽  
Crime Causation ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Causal Variables

In this paper, we argue that quantitative empirical research to explain and predict criminal and related behaviour can benefit greatly from explicit theories of action linking individual and contextual factors in the causation of crime. Such theories foster a systematic selection of causal variables for data collection and hypothesis testing instead of a more indiscriminate accumulation of ‘risk factor’ correlates. Moreover, action theory encourages statistical modelling of crime causation beyond the most common linear regression. This paper illustrates both points by estimating two empirical models – a conventional logistic model and a Rasch model – on scenario response data concerning youth violence. The findings of this study show that the extent to which young people indicate a violent response to a provocation is dependent on their (law relevant) morality and ability to exercise self-control as well as the deterrent qualities (monitoring) of the setting.

Ecological Determinants of Situated Choice in Situational Action Theory

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olena Antonaccio ◽  
Ekaterina V. Botchkovar ◽  
Lorine A. Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Action Theory ◽  
Neighborhood Context ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Criminal Involvement ◽  
Criminal Propensity ◽  
Theory Of Crime ◽  
Multilevel Theory ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Eastern European Countries

Objectives: This study extends theoretical arguments from situational action theory (SAT) by focusing on the enduring effects of neighborhood context on individual criminal involvement and presents the first direct multilevel assessment of SAT in non-Western contexts using neighborhood data. Methods: Survey data from a random sample of 1,435 adults in 41 neighborhoods in Russia and Ukraine are used to assess the interplay between individual criminal propensity and moral and deterrent qualities of neighborhood environments in their effects on individual offending. Results: The results demonstrate that variations in neighborhood moral rules directly influence criminal involvement, confirming SAT’s extended argument that this type of neighborhood-level predictor of offending matters and has an enduring effect on misconduct. Furthermore, consistent with SAT’s propositions, principal individual-level predictors such as personal criminal propensity and individual perceptions of neighborhood informal sanctioning exert expected significant effects on criminal involvement. Results for cross-level interaction effects are inconclusive. Conclusions: SAT, a multilevel theory of crime, shows promise in various sociocultural contexts such as Eastern European countries of Russia and Ukraine.

scholarly journals Explaining cheating in schools with Situational Action Theory: Within-estimations using a German school panel

2021 ◽  
pp. 147737082110552
Author(s):  
André Ernst ◽  
Maria Gerth
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Action Theory ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Moral Norms ◽  
Personal Morality ◽  
German School ◽  
Rule Breaking ◽  
Situational Action Theory ◽  
Using Data

Wikström's Situational Action Theory (SAT) explains rule-breaking by reference to the cognitive perception-choice process, which indicates how a person's propensity to break rules interacts with the setting's criminogeneity. SAT's situational model claims that the interaction between personal morality and the moral norms of the setting, the so-called moral filter, is critical in the explanation of rule-breaking, and that the influence of self-control is subordinate to this process. Self-control becomes relevant when individuals whose personal morality discourages rule-breaking are exposed to settings in which the moral norms encourage rule-breaking, that is, if the moral filter is conflicted. Whereas most previous studies have equated the moral filter with personal morality, we consider the moral norms of the setting as well. This allows for a more rigorous test of the moral filter, and thus the conditionality of self-control. Here, we investigate student cheating, using data from two waves of a large-scale German school panel study, and we conceptualise the setting's moral norms by reference to the descriptive norm: other students’ cheating behaviour. This ensures the spatio-linkage between the setting's criminogeneity and rule-breaking, which is necessary for investigating SAT. Additionally, our estimation strategy – person and school fixed-effect models – controls for alternative explanations by the selection of people into settings with different levels of criminogeneity. Moreover, it controls for heterogeneity across persons and schools. The findings are in line with SAT's predictions. In cases of a correspondence between personal morality and the moral norms of a setting, students with rule-abiding morality are least likely to cheat, whereas students with a rule-breaking morality are the most likely to cheat. Also, in line with SAT, self-control only matters for students with rule-abiding morality when they are exposed to moral norms that encourage rule-breaking.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document