Rational Choice Theory Essay

The rational choice theory elucidates scenarios where the person is not aware whether the act is a crime or not, and before performing the act, he or she compares the act to the alternative and finally assesses the outcome of committing the act and the outcome of failing to commit the act. McLaughlin (2001) argues that criminal offenders have the goal of benefitting themselves via their criminal acts, which involves making decisions and evaluating alternatives. Within time constrains, availability of information and ability, criminals perceive these behaviors as rational. As a result, the probability of attaining financial success purges the struggle of failing to have that financial success. For instance, lacking that success and inadequate social worth increases the worth of getting caught. This does not imply that getting caught is the result taken into consideration, there is the probability that imposing a harsher punishment can help in preventing the rise of such crimes (Gottschalk, 2009). The rational choice theory maintains that if the outcome of performing a criminal act is harsher than the veracity of failing to commit the act, then individuals are less likely to commit crime. The truth of the matter, however, is that emphasis on white-collar is not a traditional one. Most corporations focus on charging fines instead of imprisonment (Blickle, 2006). As a result, imbalance exists between the responsibility faced by white-collar and blue-collar criminals. White-collar criminals are punished by paying fines whereas street criminals face imprisonment. Socially, there is a larger stigma associated with street crimes. Street criminals face the wrath of shame, which is not the same fate for white-collar criminals, which

In this essay I will be comparing and contrasting the Rational Choice Theory(s) and the Trait Theory(s). We will start with the history of the two theories and progress toward some of the individual principles in the theories. Next step will be explaining how each theory contributes to criminal behavior. My closing paragraph will conclude the essay as well as give detailed information on how society punishes the crimes committed.

"The concept of white-collar crime was certainly not invented in order to provide comfort for standard approaches to causation in criminology," (Nelken, 2007, p. 744). White-collar crime is certainly a complex issue to study from a theoretical perspective, not least because of the inherent diversity among the types of white collar crimes, among the types of white collar criminals, and among the types of victims. Certainly, the same theories that address crimes such as domestic theft and burglary can have some bearing on understanding white-collar crime. Both white-collar and other types of theft-like activities involve the deliberate breaking of laws, social codes, and norms. There may be at play similar variables such as psychopathology. Prevailing theories of crimes like burglary and domestic theft can also be applied equally as well to white-collar crime. For example, strain theory and control theory can both be relevant to the study of white-collar crime.

Edwin Sutherland coined the term ‘white-collar crime’ and defined it as “crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation.” (Black, 2010). While Sutherland focused on the perpetrator and his/her characteristics and roles in committing the crime, there were flaws within this definition in that it would not endure the progression of white-collar crime. By focusing on the individual and paying more attention to the actual crime, criminologist and scientist Herbert Edlehertz defined white collar crime as; “an illegal act or series of illegal acts committed by nonphysical means and by concealment and guile, to obtain money or property, to avoid payment or loss of money or property, or to obtain business or personal advantage.” (source) This is a significant modification because there is an increase in junior ranking individuals committing white-collar crimes. Although there are still convictions of executives, crime such as credit card fraud, forgery, identity theft, internet schemes and telemarketing fraud, do not necessarily require the perpetrator to be management personnel within a company. One other important shift in the understanding of white-collar crime, which this journal aims to contradict, is the notion that white-collar crimes are non-violent and are committed by people who are non-violent in nature. This journal’s purpose is to debunk this and discuss this misconception as it implies all white-collar crimes

Rational choice theory asserts that one’s personal choice is the reason why he/she engages in deviant behavior. Consequently, an offender weighs the costs and benefits of committing a crime and makes a “rational” choice to engage or not engage in criminal behavior. This theory also assumes that crime is, essentially, designed to meet the criminal’s needs (i.e., money, sex, social status, etc.) and the criminal will make decisions or choices based on limitations, ability, and the availability of relevant information (Holmes, Maahs, & Vito, 2005). These individuals seek to avoid pain and maximize pleasure. The essence of the theory is that people are rational beings who have the ability to control their behavior. Offenders can be persuaded to not engage in criminal activity for fear of punishment and, thus, punishment should only be used in a way that would deter people from engaging in crime. Personal choices and situational factors such as the victim’s vulnerability, presence of witnesses, and available guardians or police are what aid the criminal in committing the crime, so criminal choices are strongly dependent on the social environment and those situational variables.

There are so many different forms of crime that occurs today, but there are also many different theories of crime which help clarify why people are committing these crimes. Rational choice theory explains that people are capable and do make knowledgeable and conscious decisions. In this article the researches have chosen to use the rational choice theory to better understand and analyze airline hijackings. They believe that since this theory supposes that criminals fully think out their likelihood of successfully committing the crime, that rational choice theory would be the best way when dealing with and researching hijacking and hijackers. These researches developed multiple hypothesis, one being, that the dangers of upcoming hijacking attempts

The theory of rational choice is based on the analysis of human behavior which was established by the Italian scholar Marchese Beccaria (Cesare Beccaria -1986). The theory of rational choice differs from many other criminal theories, mainly due to its main principal that defines crime as an exclusive individual choice. Using the 'Rational Choice Theory' Mass surveillance ‘supporters, in order to support their argument they note that the attacker (cybercriminal) follows a set of logical steps, in order to achieve his goal (compromise the target system and steal/modify data, disrupt services).Also the attacker is considered a rational individual that always plans an attack with the aim of gaining the maximum profit while the risk of being captured

There are three main points that are reinforced in rational choice theory (Cornish and Clarke, 1986). First, it may work better or worse for different types of crime, yet it is thought that there are rational choices in every type of crime even impulsive and pathologic crimes. Second, the theory should be applied on a crime-specific basis. Hence, burglaries can’t be grouped together in among residential and commercial categories. Rather, they must be broken into smaller facets such as public housing burglaries or wealthy residential neighborhoods. Finally, a distinction is made between criminal involvement and criminal events. Criminal involvement describes how individuals get involved in crime and further continue or abstain from

A preliminary investigation of the relationship between strain and select white-collar offenses, “data was collected from the “Nature and Sanctioning of White Collar Crimes” studies. The subjects of the study were convicted white-collar offenders. There were 30 individuals in the study who were convicted of crimes such as bribery, bank embezzlement, mail and wire fraud, tax fraud, false claims and statements, credit and lending institutional fraud, postal theft, and postal forgery. The researchers looked at the independent variables; strain and motivation and dependent variable: offense type. The strain variable, the researchers looked at the “number of legal marriages and the description of the defendant’ neighborhood.” In the motivation variable, researchers wanted to know what motivated these criminal to commit such offense. In conclusion, they found that strain was positively correlated with financial motivation for committing offense. Thus a person undergoing a lot of strain was more susceptible in reporting financial reasons to commit white-collar crime and also reported individuals with higher levels of strains were more likely to engage corporate crime

Social Learning Theory and Neutralization can be useful explanations for white collar crimes. Operant Conditioning first identified by B.F. Skinner, suggests that changing a behavior is determined by the use of reinforcement (increase the likelihood the behavior will be repeated), punishment (decreases the likelihood the behavior will be repeated), and a neutral operant (neither increase of decrease the likelihood of the behavior being repeated). In order to reinforce the behavior positively an individual would require a reinforcement that the individual feels is rewarding. In most white collar crimes money is the reinforcer or incentive, whether that is for the individual or the group. Psychologically, white collar criminals share the same

There have been studies that have confirmed that the estimated costs and benefits of crime are influenced by such factors as the individuals’ level of self-control, moral beliefs, strains, emotional state and association with delinquent peers. There have been countless of other studies that have examined whether peoples’ estimates of the costs and benefits of crime influence their levels of offending or their intentions to offend. Such studies have examined the perceived likelihood that crime will result in official sanction, condemnation by family, and friends, feelings of guilt and shame, physical harm and economic problems. These studies have examined as well a range of benefits, including the perceived likelihood that crime will result in monetary benefits, thrills and excitement, and status. The rational choice perspective argues that individuals’ frequently choose to engage in crime based on a consideration of costs and benefits. Crimes are the result of rational choices that are based on the analyses of anticipated costs and benefits, which mainly is trying to maximize their benefits and minimize their costs (Cullen and Agnew, 2011, pp. 387-388, 400).

The rational choice theory of criminology says that people make logical choices about under what circumstances to commit crime. Rational choice theory originated during the late 18th century with the work of Cesare Beccaria. The rational choice perspective has been applied to a wide range of crimes, including robbery, drug use, vandalism, and white-collar

White collar crime is not a victimless crime. People’s lives can be ruined through the loss of a job, loss of savings and loss of assets. It is hard to not hear about white collar crime when looking at news. While not a justification for illegal actions, pressure is very high for companies to perform well and show growth. This pressure can lead people to commit crimes to falsify results or to enrich themselves. Laws and regulation, such as Sarbanes-Oxley have been implemented to provide greater transparency and accountability. However, the crime has become more sophisticated and complex. Many examples of such crimes involve greed and feelings of entitlement. One such

White collar crime is a problem that we do not really see the full extent of; Geis and Stotland (1980) present the argument that the seriousness of victimisation caused by many corporations is much greater than that caused by common crimes however the public seem much less interested and concerned with white collar crime. Some traditional criminological theories have attempted to prove that white collar crime is not a different and separate phenomenon to common, every day crime. Robert Merton’s Strain Theory is applied to everyday crime, however his theory was in fact set up as an economic theory that he believed could explain all types of corporate crimes as well as traditional crimes. Gottfredson and Hirschi also provided what they understood to be a ‘General Theory of Crime’ with Control Theory, which they also believed to be relevant to both white collar and traditional crimes. I am going to discuss these theories in detail and show how they do, and do not provide sufficient explanations of white collar crimes. I am also going to include Organizational Theory in my discussion which looks at the issue of understanding crime in a different way. Traditional theories such as strain theory and control theory form a certain understanding of the issue, on the contrary some argue that these theories are not appropriate and need twisting to fit the issue, some suggesting a completely separate way of thinking is needed to understand white collar and corporate crime.

Blais, A. (2000). To vote or not to vote?. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press.