Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:28:26.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

41 - Criminal Decision-Making

from Part V - Other Legal Decision-Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2024

By
Glenn D. Walters
Edited by
Monica K. Miller ,
Logan A. Yelderman ,
Matthew T. Huss  and
Jason A. Cantone
Monica K. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Reno
Logan A. Yelderman
Affiliation:
Prairie View A & M University, Texas
Matthew T. Huss
Affiliation:
Creighton University, Omaha
Jason A. Cantone
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Get access

Summary

People undertake a decision-making process when they perceive a criminal opportunity although these decisions are often not purely rational. To clarify this process, several theories have been developed to explain how criminal decisions are made. Three such theories – deterrence theory, rational choice theory, and routine activity theory – along with major concepts from each theory, are examined in this chapter. Among the topics covered are the celerity, certainty, and severity of punishment, the utility of cost–benefit analysis, and the necessity of considering the role of a motivated offender, a suitable target, and the absence of capable guardians in explaining a criminal event. The limitations of a purely rational approach to criminal decision-making and how opportunity, incentive, emotion, and irrational thinking affect these decisions are also discussed. Finally, the practical and policy implications of these results are explored, after which recommendations for future research focusing on the methodology and domains that influence these decisions are made.

Keywords

criminal decision-makingdeterrence doctrinerational choice theoryboundednessroutine activity theory
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making , pp. 634 - 646
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01093.x.Google Scholar
Armstrong, T. A., & Boutwell, B. B. (2012). Low resting heart rate and rational choice: Integrating biological correlates of crime in criminological theories. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.11.001.Google Scholar
Blakemore, S. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2012). Decision-making in the adolescent brain. Nature Neuroscience, 15(9), 1184–1191. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3177.Google Scholar
Boivin, R. (2018). Routine activity, population(s), and crime: Spatial heterogeneity and conflicting propositions about the neighborhood crime-population link. Applied Geography, 95, 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.04.016.Google Scholar
Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2014). The effects of hot spots policing on crime: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Justice Quarterly, 31(4), 633–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.673632.Google Scholar
Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09372-3.Google Scholar
Buchen, L. (2012, April 18). Arrested development. Nature, 484, 304–306.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. V. G., & Newman, G. R. (Eds.). (2005). Designing out crime from products and systems: Crime prevention studies (Vol. 18). Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589Google Scholar
Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. (Eds.). (1986). The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. Springer.Google Scholar
Crone, E. A., Bullens, L., van der Plas, E. A. A., Kijkuit, E. Z., & Zelazo, P. D. (2008). Developmental changes and individual differences in risk and perspective taking in adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 20(4), 1213–1229. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579408000588.Google Scholar
Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Putnam.Google Scholar
de Jong, E., Bernasco, W., & Lammers, M. (2020). Situational correlates of adolescent substance use: An improved test of the routine activity theory of deviant behavior. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 36(4), 823–850. https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.2038c252.Google Scholar
Delpech, D., Barrion, H., & Johnson, S. (2021). Systematic review of situational prevention methods for crime against species. Crime Science, 10, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-020-00138-1.Google Scholar
Erickson, M. L., Gibbs, J. P., & Jensen, G. F. (1977). The deterrence doctrine and the perceived certainty of legal punishments. American Sociological Review, 42(2), 305–317. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094607.Google Scholar
Gibbs, J. P. (1975) Crime, punishment, and deterrence. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Grasmick, H. G., & Bryjak, G. J. (1980). The deterrent effect of perceived severity of punishment. Social Forces, 59(2), 471–491. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/59.2.471.Google Scholar
Guerette, R. T., & Bowers, K. J. (2009). Assessing the extent of crime displacement and diffusion of benefits: A review of situational crime prevention evaluations. Criminology, 47(4), 1331–1368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2009.00177.x.Google Scholar
Hayward, K. (2007). Situational crime prevention and its discontents: Rational choice theory versus the “culture of now.” Social Policy and Administration, 41(3), 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2007.00550.x.Google Scholar
Hill, B., & Paynich, R. (2014). Fundamentals of crime mapping (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. B., Dariotis, J. K., & Wang, C. (2012). Adolescent risk-taking under stressed and non-stressed conditions: Conservative, calculating and impulsive types. Journal of Adolescent Health, 51(2 suppl), S34–S40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.04.021.Google Scholar
Lindegaard, M. R., Bernasco, W., Jacques, S., & Zenebergen, B. (2014). Posterior gains and immediate pains: Offender emotions before, during and after robberies. In van Gelder, J.-L., Elffers, H., Reynald, D., & Nagin, D. (Eds.), Affect and cognition in criminal decision-making (pp. 58–76). Routledge.Google Scholar
Lipsey, M. W., Wilson, D. B., & Cothern, L. (2000, April). Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Office of Justice Program, US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Little, G. L. (2004). Treating juvenile offenders and at-risk youth with MRT: Comprehensive review of outcome literature. Cognitive Behavioral Treatment Review, 13(2), 1–4.Google Scholar
Little, G. L. (2005). Meta-analysis of moral reconation therapy recidivism results from probation and parole implementations. Cognitive Behavioral Treatment Review, 14(1–2), 14–16.Google Scholar
Little, G. L., Robinson, K. D., Burnette, K. D., & Swan, E. S. (2010). Twenty-year recidivism results for MRT-treated offenders: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Community Corrections, 19(3–4), 15–16, 34.Google Scholar
Loughran, T. A., Paternoster, R., Chalfin, A., & Wilson, T. (2016). Can rational choice be considered a general theory of crime? Evidence from individual-level panel data. Criminology, 54(1), 86–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12097.Google Scholar
Lynch, M., Stretesky, P. B., & Long, M. A. (2018). Situational crime prevention and the ecological regulation of green crime: A review and discussion. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 679(1), 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716218789080.Google Scholar
Miljkovic, D. (2005). Rational choice and irrational individuals or simply an irrational theory: A critical review of the hypothesis of perfect rationality. Journal of Socio-Economics, 34(5), 621–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2003.12.031.Google Scholar
Miller, J. (2013). Individual offending, routine activities, and activity settings: Revisiting the routine activity theory of general deviance. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 50(3), 390–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427811432641.Google Scholar
Mulford, C. F., Blachman-Demner, D. R., Pitzer, L., et al. (2018). Victim offender overlap: Dual trajectory examination of victimization and offending among young felony offenders over seven years. Victims and Offenders, 13(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2016.1196283.Google Scholar
Nagin, D. S. (2013). Deterrence in the twenty-first century: A review of the evidence. Crime and Justice, 42(1), 199–263. https://doi.org/10.1086/670398.Google Scholar
Nagin, D. S., & Paternoster, R. (1993). Enduring individual differences and rational choice theories of crime. Law and Society Review, 27(3), 467–496. https://doi.org/10.2307/3054102.Google Scholar
Osgood, D. W., Wilson, J. K., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Johnston, L. D. (1996). Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 635–655. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096397.Google Scholar
Paternoster, R. (2010). How much do we really know about criminal deterrence? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 100(3), 765–824. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol100/iss3/6.Google Scholar
Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational choice theory, crime control policy, and criminological relevance. Criminology and Public Policy, 7(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00489.x.Google Scholar
Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2005). Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: A meta-analysis. Crime and Justice, 32, 373–450. https://doi.org/10.1086/655357.Google Scholar
Pratt, T. C., & Turanovic, J. J. (2018). Celerity and deterrence. In Nagin, D. S., Cullen, F. T., & Jonson, C. L. (Eds.), Deterrence, choice, and crime: Contemporary perspectives – Advances in criminological theory (Vol. 23, pp. 187–210). Routledge.Google Scholar
Raine, A., Venables, P. H., & Mednick, S. A. (1997). Low resting heart rate at age 3 years predisposes to aggression at age 11 years: Evidence from the Mauritius Child Health Project. Journal of the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry, 36(10), 1457–1464. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199710000-00029.Google Scholar
Sharp, C. (2008). Theory of mind and conduct problems in children: Deficits in reading the “emotions of the eyes.” Cognition and Emotion, 22(6), 1149–1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930701667586.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality (Vol. 2). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Soderstrom, H., Blennow, K., Sjodin, A.-K., & Forsman, A. (2003). New evidence for an association between the CSF HVA:5-HIAA ratio and psychopathic traits. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 74(7), 918–921. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.74.7.918.Google Scholar
Stafford, M. C., & Warr, M. (1993). A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427893030002001.Google Scholar
van Gelder, J.-L., de Vries, R. E., Demetriou, A., van Sintemaartensdijk, I., & Donker, T. (2019). The virtual reality scenario method: Moving from imagination to immersion in criminal decision-making research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 56(3), 451–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427818819696.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D. (2015). The decision to commit crime: Rational or nonrational? Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law, & Society, 16(3), 1–18.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D. (2017). Modelling the criminal lifestyle: Theorizing at the edge of chaos. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D. (2020). Neutralization, moral disengagement, and delinquency in adolescence: Testing the reciprocal effects of proactive criminal thinking and guilt on future offending. Justice Quarterly, 37(2), 210–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2018.1537401.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D., & Morgan, R. D. (2019). Certainty of punishment and criminal thinking: Do the rational and non-rational parameters of a student’s decision to cheat on an exam interact? Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 30(2), 276–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2018.1488982.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D., Morgan, R. D., & Scanlon, F. (2019). The moderating effect of criminal thinking on certainty of apprehension in decisions to engage in antisocial behavior: Replication and extension. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 64(3), 805–813. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13905.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D., Ponce, R., Piñero, M. A., & Ernest, K. D. (2021). Criminal thinking, certainty of apprehension, and the decision to engage in antisocial behavior: A study of day treatment program clients. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(2), 636–645. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14633.Google Scholar
Weaver, F. M., & Carroll, J. S. (1985). Crime perceptions in a natural setting by expert and novice shoplifters. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48(4), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786696.Google Scholar
Zafirovski, M. (2012). Beneath rational choice: Elements of “irrational choice theory.” Current Sociology, 61(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392112465872.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×