scholarly journals General Theory, Public Policy, and the Limits of Criminal Justice

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.

Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

Modern Control Theory and the Limits of Criminal Justice updates and extends the authors’ classic general theory of crime (sometimes referred to as “self-control theory”). In Part I, contemporary evidence about the theory is summarized. Research from criminology, psychology, economics, education, and public health substantially supports the lifelong influence of self control as a significant cause of problem behaviors, including delinquency and crime, substance abuse, school problems, many forms of accidents, employment instability, and many poor health outcomes. Contemporary evidence is supportive of the theory’s focus on early socialization for creation of higher levels of self control and other dimensions of the theory, including the roles of self control, age and the generality or versatility of problem behaviors, as well as the connections between self control and later teen and adult problem behaviors. The book provides methodological assessments of research on the theory, contrasting the control theory perspective with other developmental perspectives in criminology. The role of opportunity, the relationship between self and social control theory, and the role of motivation are addressed. In Part II, control theory is taken to be a valid theory and is used to explore the role of criminal sanctions, especially policing and prisons, and policies about immigration, as methods to impact crime. Modern control theory provides an explanation for the general lack of effectiveness of formal, state sanctions on crime and instead provides substantial justification for prevention of delinquency and crime by a focus on childhood. The theory effectively demonstrates the limits of criminal sanctions and the connection between higher levels of self control and positive life-course outcomes.


Author(s):  
Michael Gottfredson ◽  
Travis Hirschi

Research on self control from several disciplines demonstrates that relatively high levels of self control, emerging from childhood, create considerable personal advantages that accumulate throughout life. This chapter summarizes modern control theory and discusses directions for future development. It highlights the advantages of control theory, including disciplinary-free definitions of human nature and self control and the focus on childhood socialization. The potential for advances in measurement and application is described. Contributions of the theory to public policy are summarized. The role of higher levels of self control for lifelong advantages and the benefits of prevention are described as expectations of the theory worthy of considerable attention. The value of the theory for macro and comparative criminology is discussed.


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 R. Gottfredson

AbstractContemporary research from around the world provides a body of consistent findings, making it an indispensable tool for the evaluation of crime theory. To be valid, general theories of crime must now be able to accommodate the results of this cross-national research. Modern Control Theory is used as an illustration for conceptualizing this body of research. Research from three critical areas relevant to general theories of crime are used to illustrate the critical nature of this research: (1) results from self-report surveys of offending and victimization; (2) research on the lack of effectiveness of criminal justice sanctions in affecting rates of crime and interpersonal violence; and (3) prevention research that is focused both on early childhood and on the settings in which much crime occurs. Each is consistent with the expectations of Modern Control Theory (Gottfredson and Hirschi in Modern control theory and the limits of criminal justice, Oxford University Press, New York, 2019) and each demands the attention of any general theory purporting to explain crime and interpersonal violence.


2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Estrella Romero ◽  
Antonio Go´mez-Fraguela ◽  
A´ngeles Luengo ◽  
Jorge Sobral

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document