3 Criminological Theories
Pamala
What is criminal behavior, and what causes it? How a society answers these fundamental questions plays an essential role in how it responds to crime, from developing crime prevention programs to designing incarceration systems and rehabilitating criminals. As part of this effort, criminologists and experts across related fields such as healthcare, sociology and psychology work toward an understanding of the causes of criminal behavior, both by proposing new theories and testing existing ones.
The U.S. justice system is largely influenced by a classical criminology theory, rational choice theory, which assumes that the choice to commit a crime arises out of a logical judgment of cost versus reward. This theory emphasizes punishment as the best means to deter individuals from committing crimes: Make the cost sufficiently outweigh the reward and individuals will decide that crime is not worth it.1
Many leading criminological theories problematically focus on individuals and communities as criminal rather than implicating structures and systems that perpetuate harm. We offer a nine-step protocol to invert and redefine three predominant deficits-based criminological theories. Our inversion method produced punitive provocation theory, critical environmental adaptation theory, and socio-structural induction theory, as theoretical inversions of deterrence, social disorganization, and self-control theory. We suggest different measurement options for each new inverted theory, including a focus on the structural antecedents of crime such as racial/ethnic discrimination, exclusion, surveillance practices, and divestment from communities. To ameliorate under-theorizing and create a more equitable and less harmful society, we urge theorists, researchers, and practitioners to adopt a more inclusive, critical, and reflexive approach to understanding human behavior.
N2 - Many leading criminological theories problematically focus on individuals and communities as criminal rather than implicating structures and systems that perpetuate harm. We offer a nine-step protocol to invert and redefine three predominant deficits-based criminological theories. Our inversion method produced punitive provocation theory, critical environmental adaptation theory, and socio-structural induction theory, as theoretical inversions of deterrence, social disorganization, and self-control theory. We suggest different measurement options for each new inverted theory, including a focus on the structural antecedents of crime such as racial/ethnic discrimination, exclusion, surveillance practices, and divestment from communities. To ameliorate under-theorizing and create a more equitable and less harmful society, we urge theorists, researchers, and practitioners to adopt a more inclusive, critical, and reflexive approach to understanding human behavior.
AB - Many leading criminological theories problematically focus on individuals and communities as criminal rather than implicating structures and systems that perpetuate harm. We offer a nine-step protocol to invert and redefine three predominant deficits-based criminological theories. Our inversion method produced punitive provocation theory, critical environmental adaptation theory, and socio-structural induction theory, as theoretical inversions of deterrence, social disorganization, and self-control theory. We suggest different measurement options for each new inverted theory, including a focus on the structural antecedents of crime such as racial/ethnic discrimination, exclusion, surveillance practices, and divestment from communities. To ameliorate under-theorizing and create a more equitable and less harmful society, we urge theorists, researchers, and practitioners to adopt a more inclusive, critical, and reflexive approach to understanding human behavior.
All content on this site: Copyright 2024 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors and contributors. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies. For all open access content, the Creative Commons licensing terms apply
LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.
Risk factors and protective factors exist for everyone with the ratio of one to the other determining behavior along with mental health issues or the presence of personality disorders. Acute risk factors are those happening in real time such as situational anger and access to weapons (Miller, 2012). Short-term risk factors occur within hours to weeks and include the onset of health or employment issues that create stress (Miller, 2012). Long-term risk factors are short-term factors that continue over months to years and continuously toll on mental and physical health (Miller, 2012). Direct risk factors include substance abuse, physical abuse, poor socioeconomic status with delinquent peer groups in a negative daily environment along with diminished education and poor coping skills (Miller, 2012). Other characteristics of an individual that perpetuate their draw toward criminal activity are impulsivity, antisocial traits, lack of meaningful relationships, and behavioral health diagnoses (Miller, 2012). In-depth analysis of these risk factors and characteristics along with the application of criminological theory can determine if the offender is amenable to treatment and able to function in society or, in the case of personality disorders, unable to be successfully treated requiring sequestration from society (Youngs, Ioannou & Eagles, 2016).
Burglaries are typically perpetrated for a secondary gain such as money or valuables to sell for money or trade for commodities such as drugs which would be classified as an instrumental crime (Youngs, Ioannou & Eagles, 2016). Ray does not seem to be motivated by the material gains achieved through burglary, but rather the sense of dominance over the vulnerable homeowner as Ray watches them sleep while he is their home. The emotional needs expressed by Ray and the gratification of those needs through his criminal behavior suggest that the hot burglaries perpetrated by Ray are expressive crimes (Youngs, Ioannou & Eagles, 2016).
Cary Stayner was a handsome, well-regarded male who was intelligent, diligent, and talented. His brother, Stephen, was kidnapped and held by a pedophile for many years and his parents were divorced (Laureate Education, 2016). He was close to his uncle with whom he lived, however, lost him to murder (Laureate Education, 2016). He enjoyed nature and was a loner who did not indulge in substance use except for marijuana at times (Laureate Education, 2016). Stayner had thoughts of killing women by decapitation and drew his visions of this act (Laureate Education, 2016). Stayner killed four women in Yosemite National Park where he worked. He decapitated, burned and slit the throat of the victims (Laureate Education, 2016). He confessed to the crimes, was sentenced to death, and continued to draw his thoughts of decapitating women which reportedly provided sexual stimulation to Stayner (Laureate Education, 2016). He offered an apology to the victims and their families immediately followed by a request for a movie to be made about him and his crimes and attempted to capitalize on his infamy by selling autographs suggesting psychopathy (Laureate Education, 2016, Hare, 1993).
In the case of Cary Stayner, he did have some static risk factors for criminality such as the trauma to him related to the divorce of his parents, the murder of a family member with whom he had a meaningful attachment, and the kidnapping and molestation over many years of his younger brother who eventually would be killed in an accident (Laureate Education, 2016, Miller, 2012). He did not have direct risk factors such as substance abuse, history of child abuse, poverty, low IQ or low socioeconomic status (Miller, 2012). He appeared to be a well-developed, amiable, intelligent person with appropriate coping skills that could have helped him deal with the traumatic events of his life. His criminality was born from a personality disorder, such as psychopathy, as evidenced by his protective factors outweighing his risk factors, his calculated method of carrying out the murders to satisfy his fantasies of decapitating women that did tie in to a sexually based gratification for him, and his attempt to capitalize on his notoriety as a killer by requesting a film be made about him and attempting to sell his autographs as he made a feeble attempt at apologizing for his crimes (Hare, 1993). His lack of remorse, self-serving apology, and attempt to attain fame and monetary gains from his crimes suggests anti-social personality or psychopathy which could be a risk factor for criminality (Hare,1993). The risk factors of his childhood consisting of detached parents and the traumatic loss of a meaningful attachment along with the trauma of the kidnapping of his younger brother by a pedophile which garnered massive public attention could have contributed to his criminal behavior as most psychopaths do not engage in violence (Hare, 1993). Cary Stayner is a criminal as he committed four premeditated murders to indulge his morbid thoughts of decapitating women.
Identifying risk factors and understanding their implications to individuals lacking in protective factors and coping skills assists in early intervention and mitigation possibly preventing criminal behavior (Miller, 2012). In the case of Luke, had his feelings of resentment toward the children who were bullying him been addressed early along with his lack of meaningful family relationships he may not have grown so enraged and disenfranchised that he murdered an innocent, young child. There are many facets to the reasoning behind criminal behavior which, if determined early through the use of crime analysis, criminological theories, and risk assessments, could be prevented by intervening in the lives of high-risk individuals.
c80f0f1006