Crime & Delinquency 56(2)

Opportunities, Rational Choice, and Self-Control: On the Interaction of Person and Situation in a General Theory of Crime
Christian Seipel and Stefanie Eifler

In this article, deviant action is analyzed on the basis of ideas derived from Gottfredson and Hirschi’s self-control theory. Presumedly, self-control in interaction with opportunities can explain deviant action. This assumption is elaborated using the concept of high- and low-cost situations from rational choice theory. From this point of view, the hypotheses are that self-control predicts deviant action in low-cost situations, whereas utility predicts deviant action in high-cost situations. Two test strategies are employed in an empirical examination of these hypotheses. A standardized questionnaire was presented to a sample of 494 German adults aged 18 to 80. The results of both test strategies show that the assumptions of an interaction effect between self-control and opportunities are fundamentally supported.

Explaining Victim Self-Protective Behavior Effects on Crime Incident Outcomes: A Test of Opportunity Theory
Rob T. Guerette and Shannon A. Santana

Prior research on victim self-protective behavior (VSPB) has largely been void of a theoretical basis. Accordingly, it remains unclear why it would be expected that victim actions might mitigate crime incident outcomes or under which circumstances such actions might be most successful. Using data from the National Crime Victimization Survey for periods 1992 to 2004, this study uses a nested logistic regression analysis to test the predictive utility of opportunity theory in explaining outcomes of VSPB during incidents of robbery and rape. The results suggest that opportunity theory provides a useful framework for understanding the effect of victim resistance on crime outcomes. Greater levels of victim resistance increase the effort needed by offenders, resulting in some cases in a 93% and 92% decrease in the odds of a robbery and rape being completed, respectively, compared to when no resistance is used. Implications for crime prevention practice are discussed.

Defiance Theory and Life Course Explanations of Persistent Offending
Leana Allen Bouffard and Nicole Leeper Piquero

Criminologists have long grappled with the varying effect of sanctions. In an effort to clarify these divergent effects, Sherman (1993) delineated a general theory of sanction effects, termed defiance theory. Defiance theory anticipates that there are four necessary conditions for defiance to occur: (a) the sanction must be perceived as unfair; (b) the offender must be poorly bonded; (c) the sanction must be perceived as stigmatizing; and (d) the offender denies the shame produced by the sanction. This study provides one of the first empirical assessments of defiance theory. In addition, defiance theory is examined within the life-course perspective, and analyses address trajectories of offending. Using data from the 1945 Philadelphia Birth Cohort, the results yield promising support for the theory.

Testing Incapacitation Theory: Youth Crime and Incarceration in California
Christina Stahlkopf, Mike Males, and Daniel Macallair

Under incapacitation theory, higher incarceration rates are expected to correlate with accelerated reductions in crime. California’s contemporary incarceration patterns offer an opportunity to analyze the validity of this theory, particularly as it applies to young people. This study focuses on California’s juvenile incarceration and crime trends during the past half century. The findings of this study fail to demonstrate reduced crime rates through higher levels of juvenile incarceration, calling deterrence and incapacitation theories into serious question as effective youth crime reduction strategies and demonstrating the urgent need for California policy makers and legislators to consider alternative theories in response to crime and sentencing.

Trust and Confidence in the Courts: Does the Quality of Treatment Young Offenders Receive Affect Their Views of the Courts?
Jane B. Sprott and Carolyn Greene

It is assumed that legitimacy of the legal system is important, yet almost nothing is known about how young offenders view this institution. A sample of youths were interviewed at their first appearance in court and asked about their feelings regarding how they have been treated (procedural justice) by their lawyer, by the crown attorney, and by the judge, as well as their views on the overall legitimacy of the legal system. Youths were again interviewed at sentencing, using the same questionnaire, to explore changes in their views over time. Generally, it appears that how youths feel they have been treated— specifically, by their own lawyer and by the judge—affected broad views of legitimacy, even when controlling for their overall satisfaction of the outcome of their case.

Interdistrict Disparity in Sentencing in Three U.S. District Courts
Jawjeong Wu and Cassia Spohn

Research examining disparities in sentencing outcomes under federal sentencing guidelines has focused almost exclusively on aggregate national data. Although these studies contribute considerably to the criminological literature on sentencing disparity, their findings may have masked contextual variation in relation to case processing across jurisdictions. With data from the U.S. District Courts for Minnesota, Nebraska, and Southern Iowa for 1998 through 2000, this article assesses whether interdistrict variations in sentence outcomes exist and whether the factors that affect these outcomes vary across jurisdictions. It also attempts to determine whether disparities in sentence outcomes can be attributed to downward departures. The findings raise questions about the validity of the assumption of uniformity in the federal sentencing process and the use of aggregate data to study federal sentence outcomes.

Crime & Delinquency, April 2010: Volume 56, Issue 2