Rational Misbehavior? Evaluating an Integrated Dual-Process Model of Criminal Decision Making

Gelder, Jean‐Louis van; Vries, Reinout E. de

doi:10.1007/s10940-012-9192-8

Cited by 79 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is an important indication that making a criminal choice is dependent on the participants' personality, rational choice considerations, as well as emotions. This corresponds with recent informal models of criminal decision making [18,19,20]. Thereby the current findings strengthen these informal models.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…This trait refers to individual differences in the tendency to be interpersonally genuine, to be unwilling to take advantage of others, to avoid fraud and corruption, to be uninterested in status and wealth, and to be modest and unassuming. Recent research by Van Gelder and De Vries [20] suggests that the HEXACO model and its Honesty-Humility dimension in particular, is also a strong predictor of criminal behavior.…”

Section: Ratio and Affect In Criminal Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both scenarios were followed by a set of items measuring anticipated sanction probability and severity, negative affect, and criminal choice. For more information about the scenarios and the procedure, see [20]. For matching the data to the model, we transformed all obtained data to the domain [0, 1].…”

Section: Matching the Data To The Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Computational Model of Affective Moral Decision Making That Predicts Human Criminal Choices

Pontier

Gelder

Vries

2013

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.In the present paper we show that a computational model of affective moral decision making can fit human behavior data obtained from an empirical study on criminal decision making. By applying parameter tuning techniques on data from an initial sample, optimal fits of the affective moral decision making model were found supporting the influences of honesty/humility, perceived risk and negative state affect on criminal choice. Using the parameter settings from the initial sample, we were able to predict criminal choices of participants in the holdout sample. The prediction errors of the full model were fairly low. Moreover, they compared favorably to the prediction errors produced by constrained variants of the model where either the moral, rational or affective influences or a combination of these had been removed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Ratio and Affect In Criminal Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Computational Model of Affective Moral Decision Making That Predicts Human Criminal Choices

Pontier

Gelder

Vries

2013

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This should not be interpreted, however, to mean that criminal decision‐making is a purely rational exercise. The rational requirements of criminal decision‐making, as has been argued previously , are bounded by situational, emotional, and cognitive factors.…”

Section: Rational Requirements Of Criminal Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 87%

The Moderating Effect of Criminal Thinking on Certainty of Apprehension in Decisions to Engage in Antisocial Behavior: Replication and Extension

Walters

Morgan

Scanlon

2018

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explored whether the rational (certainty of punishment) and nonrational (criminal thinking) aspects of antisocial decision-making interact. A convenience sample of 319 undergraduates (106 men, 213 women) completed a measure of criminal thinking and responded to three fictional vignettes (i.e., cheating on a final examination in a class they were in jeopardy of failing, stealing $50 off a table in a dorm room, and selling marijuana for a friend) at three different levels of risk or certainty of apprehension (50%, 10%, and 1%). Results indicated that participants reported that they would be more likely to engage in antisocial behavior when the certainty of getting caught was low and the level of proactive (P) or reactive (R) criminal thinking was high. An interaction between certainty and criminal thinking was also observed in which the gap between lower and higher criminal thinking respondents grew as the probability of getting caught fell.

show abstract

“…What these language features have in common is that they evoke emotional arousal and, therefore, are encoded more effectively at both deep and shallow levels of processing. Scholars have argued that the emotions experienced at the moment of decision‐making can activate one of two modes of information processing that is more focused on the here and now, and less able to consider probabilities of certain outcomes (Loewenstein et al., ; Van Gelder & De Vries, , ). O'Brien et al.…”

Section: Situational Peer Influence and Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peers and offender decision‐making

Hoeben

Thomas

2019

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary Offender decision‐making generally occurs in social context. In this article, we discuss the potential for integrating insights on peer processes and decision‐making processes to advance our understanding on the decision to engage in crime. In particular, we address the developmental and situational influence of peers on perceptions, preferences, and dual‐systems processing. We contribute to this literature by elaborating on situational peer processes and discuss the ways in which peers can affect decision‐making through their mere presence as well as through their active involvement as instigators, conversational partners, and co‐offenders. Policy Implications Programs to effectively reduce crime and delinquency require a holistic approach that takes into account the interdependency between internal and external factors that impact behavior. The purpose of this article was to detail how our understanding of two prominent explanations of crime —peer influence and rational choice—can mutually benefit from such integration.

show abstract

Rational Misbehavior? Evaluating an Integrated Dual-Process Model of Criminal Decision Making

Cited by 79 publications

References 80 publications

A Computational Model of Affective Moral Decision Making That Predicts Human Criminal Choices

A Computational Model of Affective Moral Decision Making That Predicts Human Criminal Choices

The Moderating Effect of Criminal Thinking on Certainty of Apprehension in Decisions to Engage in Antisocial Behavior: Replication and Extension

Peers and offender decision‐making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About