Rational Choice Theory

Criminology is the study of why individuals commit crimes. Several sociologists and criminologists have developed theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior and why it occurs. In earlier times, theories such as biological determinism and phrenology were often used to explain criminal behavior. Those theories have since been proven to be unreasonable and unrealistic. As time passed, sociologists and criminologists created more plausible theories including the rational choice, classical, conflict, labeling, life course, critical, strain, social disorganization, routine activity, social control, and positivist theories. In attempts to better understand these criminological theories, an individual could apply one (or more) of these theories to real-life events or things he/she has seen on television. I have chosen to apply the rational choice theory to the popular movie Taken starring Liam Neeson and explain the many examples found throughout the movie.

What are the deciding factors whether a person will commit a crime? Criminology Today An Integrative Introduction, written by Frank Schmalleger builds on a social policy theme by

This paper summarizes four theories of criminology. Rational choice theory states that criminals act based on a thought process that weighs the pros and cons of criminality. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that most criminals are people capable of having rational thoughts before committing a crime. Trait theory is the view of criminology that suggests criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that criminals choose to commit crime because of a brain anomaly or chemical imbalance. Social structure theory is “a view that disadvantaged economic class position is a primary cause of crime” (Seigel 139). Those who follow this theory often believe social forces can have a great effect on whether or not a person commits a crime. An example would be those who are poor are more being more prone to commit crime. Social process theory is a view that criminality depends on how a person interacts with different organizations and institutions and processes in society. For example, a family would be considered

This paper will cover two criminological theories and they will be applied to two types of criminality. The two theories chosen for the paper were developmental theory and rational choice theory. The two types of crimes that were chosen were organized crime, specifically focusing on gangs, and terrorism. Then the crimes will be compared and contrasted. Finally, the developmental theory will be applied to organized crime to explain why and how it happens. The rational choice theory will be applied to terrorism to explain what compels individuals to attempt this form of criminality.

It allows us to examine what makes crime acceptable and desirable in the minds of potential criminals, and it gives us the tools necessary to use a proactive rather than reactive approach to crime control. To look at crime from a psychological point of view is nothing new. However, use of this technique may lead to better methods of deterrence. To begin, we must understand what the concepts are that have shaped the average person’s mind. In general the average person is faced with the concepts of determinism, free will, and social identity as they mature into adulthood.

It is believed to be said that people commit crimes because of various reasons and aspects in their life. The community offers their citizens a secure and safe residence to live in. However, some argue that particular individuals are born with specific traits that determine how they react in a negative condition. Individuals make decisions in life that can lead them down the wrong path. An individual may choose to commit a crime, only looking at how it will benefit them. I also believe that people think before they commit any criminal activity. When an individual commits a crime, they act on their own free will. They’re aware of their consequences of their punishment. Also, people can commit crimes due to their society. Such conflicts arise

RCT is centered on the argument that criminal actions are not determined by environmental, psychological or biological factors which prompt the offender to commit the crime. The main assumption of this theory is that an individual’s actions are willingly and voluntarily executed by the person (Hastie & Dawes, 2010). According to RCT, offenders have a rational choice to make before committing a crime. Prior to committing the crime, an individual employs their logic to evaluate their options and make a decision on the action course. This assumption argues that the offender use their

Initially, the main belief was that criminal behavior was based on rational choice or thought, where criminals were believed to be intelligent beings and weighed the pros and cons before deciding to commit a crime; classicists Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham introduced this view. Essentially, these criminals would compare the risks of committing the crime, such as getting caught, jail or prison time, being disowned by family and friends, and so forth; and the rewards, such as money and new possessions. After making comparisons, the person would make a decision based on whether the risk was greater than the reward. This is like what is presented in an article on Regis University Criminology Program’s website, which states that a criminal “operates based on free will and rational thought when choosing what and what not to do. But that simplistic view has given way to far more complicated theories” (“Biological Theories Primer”). Nowadays, biological theories make attempts in explaining criminal behavior in terms of factors that are primarily outside of the control of the individual.

As a forensics graduate, the Rational Choice theory is a subject that needs more analogy and interest to pursue a better understanding. An example would be the current state of households within recent times. As time went on, the “worse” households are shown to produce much more troubling states of individuals. Most of these individuals, in regards to this theory, have the choices, like all humanity, in what happens to their lives. To note, some children born in harsh homes can leave, with proper ethical understandings. However the possibility that the same child with no moral implications and lack of societal realizations can cause miscued actions. In addition, objectively any criminal is looking to receive something for an imperfection

Akers, R. L. (1990). Rational Choice, Deterrence, and Social Learning Theory in Criminology: The Path Not Taken. The Journal Of Criminal Law And Criminology (1973-), (3), 653. doi:10.2307/1143850

For my first theory, I will be discussing the rational choice theory and how it can explain crime. This theory was founded way back in the late 19th century. And for my second theory, I will be discussing the positivist approach to explain crime. Founded by Cesare Lombroso, who is regarded as the father of criminology, back in the late 19th century as well, this school of thought is rather old.

As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.

Figuring out why people commit crimes is one of the central concerns of criminology. Do most criminals act rationally after weighing the costs of crime? Is society ever to blame for an individual to commit a crime? Do mental diseases or even genetics factor into whether a person will live a life of crime. Over the years, many people have developed theories to try to answer these questions. In fact, the number of theories of why people commit crimes sometimes seems to equal the number of criminologists. I explore these questions and much more in the paper that follow.

There are many perceptions of what defines crime. The definitions appear to change throughout history and are still changing today (Henry, S. and Lanier, M. M., 2001 ,p.139). For example, in the past marital rape was not considered a crime as it was thought that women were believed to be “sexual property” of the male and, therefore it couldn’t be classed as rape (Brownmiller, 1975, cited by Bergen, R.K., 1996, p.3). However, in the United States in 1978 a man was convicted of rape on his wife (Russell, 1990, cited by Bergen, R.K., 1996, p.4). This shows how it is hard to define crime due to the changes in views over time. Different cultures also have different perceptions of what is, or is not considered to be a crime. For example,

What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality