Rational Choice Theory: Sociological Determinism

Situational and social approaches to crime prevention are both proactive where they anticipate and prevent crime but are different in the way on how crime is prevented, each having their own strength and weaknesses. In this essay, I will briefly talk about what is crime prevention and how situational and social approaches are derived, followed by providing a critical comparison of situational and social approaches by first explaining what is situational and social approaches to crime prevention, the differences between the two approaches, their strength and weaknesses and lastly, to show understanding that besides situational and social approach, there are other approaches to crime prevention.

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

The third of the contemporary sociological theories is rational choice theory. In stark contrast to social conflict theory and social disorganization theory which are macro level theories, rational choice theory is a micro level theory (Kubrin, 2012). Rational choice theory focuses on the individual motivation behind criminal behavior. Specifically the idea that the choice to commit criminal behavior is a choice based on a type of risk reward scenario. The person contemplating a criminal act consciously weighs the risk associated with the crime against the reward they stand to gain from the crime.

Social disorganization theory was established by Shaw and Mckay (1942) in their famous work “Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas”. The main argument of the social disorganization theory is that, the place where people live will influence the individual’s behavior, and this may lead them to crimes. More precisely, certain characteristics of the neighborhood/community will strengthen or weaken the informal social control within the community, and this has mediating effect on crimes.

The rational choice theory and social disorganization theory contrast in so many ways. The rational choice theory is when wrongdoers choose to commit crimes and is punished severely. On the other hand, the social disorganization theory is differences in crime levels based on structure and culture factors that shape the nature of social order across communities. Furthermore, the difference between the two is that one of the is about a decision making process choice and the other is about how socialization controls criminal behavior.

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 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

To prevent crime, it is imperative that the law enforcement agencies and scholars examine why people commit crime. A number of theories have emerged and many still continue to be explored in exclusion and in combination to seek the best solutions that can ultimately reduce the types and the levels of crime. One such theory that is still being explored is social disorganization theory. According to this theory people's tendency to take part in criminal activities is largely determined by the neighborhood where they are brought up in especially if conditions favorable to crime and delinquency prevail in such places. When communities becomes incapable of realizing common goals and solve problems that its residents face, there is a high likelihood that its residents will engage in criminal activities (Sampson & Grove, 1989). Some of the problems that are likely to increase incidences of crime in neighborhoods when communities fail to address them are poverty, residential mobility, ethnic heterogeneity, and weak social networks. They decrease a neighborhood's capacity to control the behavior of people in public.

In his article, Crime as Social Control, Christian Parenti discusses crime’s impact on society. Crime acts as a deterrent and an incentive, in both cases adding to the concept of social control. As a deterrent, crime produces anticrime movements in neighborhoods throughout the states. However, fear of crime and the repercussions of combating crime block further mobilization. The result is an incentive towards increased criminal activity due to the incapability of society to get involved or focus on the actual issue. As social control, crime dwells into the fear of people, beckons society to stay away from the issues, and leaves minorities in the hands of government intervention. This leads to the fragmentation of neighborhood ties resulting in mistrust and broken family ties, especially when dealing

As is obvious, the subject is immense, and involves a range of justice, social, and psychological efforts and perspectives. In more recent years, there has as well been a greater emphasis on determining the mentioned causal factors, as a more comprehensive understanding of what generates crime must enable strategies to prevent its occurring. This in itself, however, creates dispute, as varying studies and opinions alternately support biological, sociological, and psychological forces as most responsible for criminality. Most arguments for each theory make strong cases, yet it is also arguable that each is in fact exponentially related to the others, if to differing levels of impact. As the following examines, then, biological, sociological, and psychological theories as to crime causation are by no means mutually exclusive, and the most valid awareness of what causes criminal behavior relies on applying

Crime occurs in society for a number of reasons. The reasoning behind the commission of an offense may not always be crystal clear. In certain cases theories as to the “Why” of a crime have been developed and numerous studies conducted to substantiate that particular idea. Theories like social learning and sociocultural behaviors focus largely on a learner being taught the manner in which they ought to behave. If a young child is shaped to be a certain person later in life, they will likely follow what they know to be right.

Rational choice theory and social control theory both show why an individual may commit a criminal act, but they both also draw criticism of their approach. Rational choice theory critics point out that “The first problem with the theory has to do with explaining collective action. That is, if individuals simply base their actions on calculations of personal profit, why would they ever choose to do something that will benefit others more than themselves?” (Crossman, 2015). The theory focuses only on the individual’s mindset and doesn’t take into account any of their social structure. The society an individual grows up in may make them more prone to commit crime. Social control theory, in particular the study conducted by Travis Hirschi, also

To start with, people commit crime because of social reasons. The social reasons are poor parenting skills, peer influence, drugs, and education failure. Poor parenting skills includes when children are neglected or abused. Also when there are parents who have a permissive or a neglecting style of parenting. Permissive style is when they have no control over their children

The social learning theory states that criminal behavior is learned. Criminals learn their bad behaviors from close relationships they may have with criminal peers (Siegel & Worrall, 2016). Children look up to their parents; they want to be just like them. So, if children grow up surround by crime, they think that it is both normal and acceptable, and it is likely that they will participate in criminal behavior when they are older. As a result of learning this behavior, it is passed down through generations and is never broken. This can also be learned from friendships people may have with negative influences. Young adults and children want to fit in with their peers, so if they are surrounded with those who commit crimes, they are probably going to do the same because “everyone is doing it”.

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