Sanctions, situations, and agency in control theories of crime

Abstract

Control theory remains a prominent explanation for crime and delinquency, generating a considerable body of empirical studies and frequent theoretical discussion. Although much of this scholarship lends support to the perspective, important issues have been raised as the perspective is extended, modified, and refined; among these are that the theory places too much emphasis on compulsion and too little on choice in the causation of crime, that it neglects the role of morality in decisions about crime, and that the theory needs to be reconciled with results of research about criminal deterrence. This paper considers each of these issues. A framework is presented to describe essential elements of all control theories and finds no inconsistency between some types of control theory and evidence about situational effects, evidence of moral elements of decisionmaking, and the lack of severity effects in the deterrence literature for the criminal law.

Low Self-Control as a Source of Crime: A Meta-Study

“…(Cohen and Vila 1996). In a series of articles, Gottfredson and Hirschi have responded to their critics, have further explicated and slightly modified their theory (Hirschi and Gottfredson 1987;Hirschi and Gottfredson 1989;Hirschi and Gottfredson 1993;Hirschi and Gottfredson 1995;Hirschi and Gottfredson 2000;Hirschi and Gottfredson 2001;Gottfredson and Hirschi 2003;Hirschi 2004;Gottfredson 2008;Hirschi and Gottfredson 2008;Gottfredson 2011).…”

Antisocial cognition as a mediator of the peer influence effect and peer selection effect in antisocial adolescents

“…Taken together, this literature suggests that the impact of antisocial beliefs and attitudes on youth offending follows developmental trajectories and is embedded in high-risk peer ecologies. Our results suggest it may be beneficial to complement the longstanding attention paid to the dynamics of parent-child interactions in the development of childhood aggressive and rule-breaking behaviour [48], with further research into the cognitive processes that support peer conflict in the development of serious and persistent antisocial behaviour during adolescence.…”

The Interaction Between Self-Control and Perceived Sanction Risk: An Analysis From the Viewpoint of Different Theories

“…Many scholars have acknowledged the slightly disappointing empirical foundation of deterrence theory. In his comprehensive review of relevant research, Paternoster (2010, p. 819) noticed, “A puzzling question is why deterrent effects reported in the literature are not stronger.” Gottfredson (2011) noted explicitly that control theories expect more from deterrence and the risk of criminal punishment than has been discovered in previous research. The difficulty in establishing nonnegligible independent deterrent effects in the investigated populations may be the reason why the idea of differential deterrability (Hirtenlehner, 2019; Loughran, Paternoster, & Piquero, 2018; Piquero, Paternoster, Pogarsky, & Loughran, 2011) has become prominent in recent years.…”