Multiple Causes and Multiple Factors in a Choice Theory of Crime

Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

Creating concrete operational indicators for narrative depictions of complex concepts, identifying and recruiting appropriate samples, and identifying designs permitting informed causal judgments in a largely nonexperimental field are among the most challenging intellectual achievements in the behavioral sciences. This chapter discusses misuses of self-control theory in research on crime and delinquency. It presents a critical evaluation of the “sole cause” and “spuriousness thesis” in depictions of self-control theory. Multiple factor and risk factor approaches as alternatives to general theories are discussed. In addition, the chapter examines how a choice theory integrates demographic factors and crime and the idea of family variables as a structural approach to crime theory. The integration of individual differences and sociological theory is also discussed.

Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

Control theory is consistent with the notion of situational crime prevention and many of the ideas that support it. This chapter discusses several contemporary issues in control theory, including the connection between self-control theory and social control theory, the connection between morality and crime, and the role and conception of the opportunity or situational factors in a choice theory of crime causation. It is concluded that self and social control are the same theory operating under common logic, assumptions, and terms. Efforts to show them as competing are misguided. How situational causes are integrated into control theory and the connections among belief, morality, and self control are explored.


Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

This chapter provides an overview of the self-control theory of crime and delinquency, including a critical review of research literature bearing on the validity of the theory. It discusses research on the origins of self control in the family and the relationships between levels of self control and delinquency and crime, school performance and misconduct, and other problem behaviors. General reviews of the theory in the literature and meta-analyses for self control, parenting and crime, and prevention studies focused on childhood are also discussed. In addition, the chapter reviews research on age and crime, generality effects, and self control over the life course. There is substantial research support for self-control theory and for the predictions it makes for the criminal justice system and for prevention of crime. Implications for global criminology, micro/macro integration of crime theory, and measurement of self control are discussed.


2018 ◽  
pp. 49-94
Author(s):  
David F. Greenberg ◽  
Robin Tamarelli ◽  
Margaret S. Kelley

Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson

Gottfredson and Hirschi advanced self-control theory in 1990 as part of their general theory of crime. Self-control is defined as the ability to forego acts that provide immediate or near-term pleasures, but that also have negative consequences for the actor, and as the ability to act in favor of longer-term interests. An individual’s level of self-control is influenced by family or other caregiver behavior early in life. Once established, differences in self-control affect the likelihood of delinquency in childhood and adolescence and crime in later life. Persons with relatively high levels of self-control do better in school, have stronger job prospects, establish more stable interpersonal relationships, and attain higher income and better health outcomes. Self-control theory was initially constructed to reconcile the age, generality, and stability findings of criminological research with the standard assumptions of control theory. As such, it acknowledges the general decline in crime with age, versatility in types of problem behaviors engaged in by delinquents and offenders, and the generally stable individual differences in the tendency to engage in delinquency and crime over one’s life-course. Self-control theory applies to a wide variety of illegal behaviors (most crimes) and to many noncrime problem behaviors, including school problems, accidents, and substance abuse. A considerable amount of research has been undertaken on self-control theory and on Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. As a result, self-control theory is likely the most heavily researched perspective in criminology during the past 30 years. Most reviews find substantial empirical support for the principal positions of the theory, including the relationship between levels of self-control and delinquency, crime, and other problem behaviors. These relationships appear to be strong throughout life, among most groups of people, types of crime, in the United States and other countries, and over time. The posited important role of the family in the genesis of self-control is consistent with substantial bodies of research, although some researchers argue in favor of important genetic components for self-control. The theory’s expectations about the age distribution of crime, versatility of offending, and stability of individual differences over long periods of time also receive substantial support. Researchers have long studied variations in age effects, particularly seeking continuously high levels of offending for the most serious offenders, but reviewers have found that the evidence for meaningful variability is not convincing. For public policy, self-control theory argues that the most promising approach for crime reduction focuses primarily on prevention, especially in early childhood, and secondarily on situational prevention for specific types of crimes. Gottfredson and Hirschi argue that self-control theory is inconsistent with reliance on the criminal justice system to affect crime levels. On the one hand, general reviews of the empirical literature on deterrence and incapacitation support the expectations of self-control theory by finding little support for severity of sanctions, sanctions long removed from the act, and selective incapacitation for “serious offenders.” On the other hand, experimental studies from education, psychology, and criminology generally support the idea that early-childhood family and educational environments can be altered to enhance self-control and lower expected delinquency, crime, and other problem behaviors later in life.


Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

Self control is a consistent, robust, and substantial cause of crime, and the foundational facts and other dimensions of the self-control theory of crime have found remarkable support in behavioral science. However, not all scholars view the evidence in the same way, and there have been several challenges to the expectations of the theory that merit consideration. Some of these challenges are important for what they say about the limits and contours of the theory; others are important for what they say about the process of theory testing in modern criminology. This chapter discusses methodological issues in testing general theories in criminology. This is followed by a discussion on how to conceptualize control variables and antecedent causes for research. Next, the scope and domain of a theory as relevant to its validity are discussed. In addition, the importance of the definitions of self control and crime is presented. The roles of prior record and of versatility in theory testing are then examined. Finally, a discussion of the tautology issue in self-control theory is presented.


Author(s):  
Adam M. Bossler ◽  
George W. Burruss

Though in recent years, a number of studies have been completed on hackers’ personality and communication traits by experts in the fields of psychology and criminology, a number of questions regarding this population remain. Does Gottfredson and Hirschi’s concept of low self-control predict the unauthorized access of computer systems? Do computer hackers have low levels of self-control, as has been found for other criminals in mainstream society? If low self-control can predict the commission of computer hacking, this finding would seem to support the generality argument of self-control theory and imply that computer hacking and other forms of cybercrime are substantively similar to terrestrial crime. This chapter focuses on the results of a study where we examined whether Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime is applicable to computer hacking in a college sample.


Cyber Crime ◽  
2013 ◽  
pp. 1499-1527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam M. Bossler ◽  
George W. Burruss

Though in recent years, a number of studies have been completed on hackers’ personality and communication traits by experts in the fields of psychology and criminology, a number of questions regarding this population remain. Does Gottfredson and Hirschi’s concept of low self-control predict the unauthorized access of computer systems? Do computer hackers have low levels of self-control, as has been found for other criminals in mainstream society? If low self-control can predict the commission of computer hacking, this finding would seem to support the generality argument of self-control theory and imply that computer hacking and other forms of cybercrime are substantively similar to terrestrial crime. This chapter focuses on the results of a study where we examined whether Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime is applicable to computer hacking in a college sample.


Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

In this chapter, the general theory of crime depicted in self-control theory is taken as valid, and the implications for criminal justice are explored. The historical connections between classical theory and criminal sanctions are described, and the relations between classical deterrence theories and control theory are examined. The classical theory assumption that deterrence places limits of effectiveness on state sanctions is used in conjunction with the modern notion of self control. The result is that modern control theory, supported by contemporary research on the effectiveness of criminal sanctions, explains why criminal sanctions have limited effectiveness for crime and sets limits on the appropriate use of criminal sanctions. Modern control theory, using classical school assumptions of human nature and choice, shows why public policy should focus on early socialization and prevention.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 31-53
Author(s):  
Brooke Mathna ◽  
Jennifer Roberts ◽  
Marthinus Koen

Research has shown a link between drug and alcohol behaviors and self-control; however, much of the research focuses on only the general theory of crime (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990), without regard to Hirschi’s (2004) self-control theory. The purpose of the current study is to examine three measures of Hirschi’s self-control theory and to understand the link between Hirschi’s self-control theory and drug and alcohol behaviors. This study draws from a sample of undergraduate college students (N = 640) to examine the role of Hirschi’s self-control in the explanation of drug and alcohol behaviors. The current study uses a previous measure of Hirschi’s self-control [i.e., decisional self-control (alcohol)] and two measures (i.e., decisional self-control (cheat) and bond-based self-control) created by the researchers to analyze drug and alcohol behaviors. Results indicated that self-control based in social bonds (i.e., bond-based self-control) was significantly related to all drug and alcohol behaviors. The cost/salience scale measuring cheating behaviors [i.e., decisional self-control (cheat)] was significantly related to marijuana/hashish use, and the cost/salience scale measuring drinking and driving [i.e., decisional self-control (alcohol)] was significantly related to zero drug and alcohol behaviors. Results indicate that developing strong social bonds as a form of self-control can reduce the likelihood of drug and alcohol behaviors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document