s recently introduced general theory of crime has received considerable empirical support. Researchers have found that low self-control, the general theory's core concept, is related to lawbreaking and to deviant behaviors considered by Gottfredson and Hirschi to be "analogous" to crime. In this article, we extend this research by assessing the effects of low self-control on crime and analogous behaviors and by using two distinct measures of self-control, an attitudinal measure and the analogous/behavior scale. Thus, following Gottfredson and Hirschi, we use analogous imprudent behaviors as outcomes of low self-control and as indicators of low self-control's effects on crime. We also examine an important but thus far neglected part of the theory: the claim that low self-control has effects not only on crime but also on life chances, life quality, and other social consequences. Consistent with the general theory, we found that both measures of self-control, attitudinal and behavioral, have effects on crime, even when controlling for a range of social factors. Further, the analysis revealed general support for the theory's prediction of negative relationships between low self-control and social consequences other than crime-life outcomes and quality of life. University of Cincinnati. We thank several anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. CRIMINOLOGY VOLUME 35 NUMBER 3 1997 475 476 EVANS ET AL.Starting with its publication in 1990 and continuing to the present, Gottfredson and Hirschi's A General Theory of Crime has generated considerable interest and much controversy (see, e.g.

This article assesses empirically whether Gottfredson and Hirschi's “general theory” can account for the “gender gap” in crime and, when rival theories are included in the analysis, can explain criminal behavior for both males and females. Based on a sample of 555 adults, the results indicate that the relationship of gender to crime becomes nonsignificant when self-control is introduced into the analysis. Further, when males and females are analyzed separately, self-control is related, albeit differently, to males' and females' criminal involvement. These results suggest that Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory should be incorporated into future empirical assessments of gender and crime.

Since Hirschi and Stark's (1969) surprising failure to find religious (“hellfire”) effects on delinquency, subsequent research has generally revealed an inverse relationship between religiosity and various forms of deviance, delinquency, and crime. The complexity of the relationship and conditions under which it holds, however, continue to be debated. Although a few researchers have found that religion's influence is noncontingent, most have found support—especially among youths—for effects that vary by denomination, type of offense, and social and/or religious context. More recently the relationship has been reported as spurious when relevant secular controls are included. Our research attempts to resolve these issues by testing the religion‐crime relationship in models with a comprehensive crime measure and three separate dimensions of religiosity. We also control for secular constraints, religious networks, and social ecology. We found that, among our religiosity measures, participation in religious activities was a persistent and noncontingent inhibiter of adult crime.

No abstract

No abstract