Terrie Moffitt 's Dual Pathway Theory Essay

(M1)-The perception that crime has become one of the most serious problems facing society has led to determined efforts by many researchers to find the causes of criminal behavior. Researchers have focused on biological causes, believing that a biological basis of criminality exists and that an understanding of the biology will be useful in predicting which people are predisposed to become criminals. Judging the case of Jonathan Tregar, we can use the Lombroso theory to determine his case accordingly. This theory assumes that criminal behavior is inborn, associated with physical body features, and that criminals have body features which are different from non-criminals. Among the many

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.

Routine activity theory states that for a crime to be committed, three important factors need to be present including: a motivated offender, an accessible target, and the absence of a capable guardian against a violation. Marcus Felson and Lawrence E. Cohen introduced the routine activity theory in 1979, where they believed that an individual who has these three characteristics gives them a greater possibility of committing a crime. Moreover, situational crime prevention is known as strategies of ways for preventing or reducing the opportunities for criminals to commit crimes that derive from the routines of an individual’s everyday life. Ronald V. Clarke introduced situational crime prevention theory in 1983, where he believed that removing the situation instead of removing the criminal could prevent crime. In this paper, I will be discussing what routine activity/situational crime prevention theory is, and apply two peer-reviewed articles from Google Scholar that test the routine activity/situational crime prevention theory by discussing what the authors are trying to figure out and discuss their findings, and lastly, tie the routine activity/situational crime prevention theory articles to our textbook in hopes to fully understand in depth what the theory encompasses.

Using criminological terms and concepts, focus on a jurisdiction, neighborhood, or geographic locale with which you are familiar. Regarding a human behavior which you select to focus on in that geographical space, write two concise yet comprehensive paragraphs on how social disorganization theory can inform your understanding of behavior and place, and one weakness which would find your understanding somehow lacking, and why. Then write two equally compelling paragraphs on how routine activities theory would foster your understanding, and one weakness which might leave your understanding lacking, and why.

The routine activities theory is based on the concept of the crime triangle. This triangle consists of a “motivated offender a suitable target and the lack of guardianship” (Cohen & Felson, 1979). When Hot spot policing is employed its focus is directed at two of the three elements of the triangle. Those elements are the suitable target and the lack of a capable guardian (Hoover, 2014). Some of the major tenants of this perspective are geographic targeting, focused patrol, saturation patrol, and interactive programs. There are other tenants such as simple visibility and foot patrol but I will focus on the three mentioned above. Geographic targeting uses techniques which address crime based on the “hot spot” theory. Hot spots are another

Routine activity theory was first proposed by Cohen and Felson in trying to address the rise of criminal rates in the 1970s within a social context. This theory attempts to explain the possibility of crime that is influenced by our daily routines,

Juvenile delinquency is a strong predictor of adult criminality. Therefore, professionals aiming to reduce overall crime can benefit by seeking preventative and early intervention methods with troubled youth. This article seeks to address the “psychosocial and psychopathological risk factors as predictors of adult criminal outcomes” (Aebi et al., 2013). The design of the study replicates an older longitudinal study performed by Zurich Adolescent Psychology and Psychopathological Study, or ZAPPS. First, the researchers utilized data from the original study to determine which risk factors have the possibility impacting future adult criminal behavior. Next, the coping strategies of offenders are analyzed to determine if poor coping skills attribute to long-term antisocial behavior.

Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson (1979) expanded on these principles and introduced routine activities theory as an ecological perspective on criminal behavior. Furthermore, the quintessence of routine activity theory is the assertion that there are three necessary components that must be present for crime to occur: the motivated offender(s) (individuals seeking/able/willing to commit offenses), presence of

The Nature and Nurture debate, one of the oldest debates in the history of psychology, questions whether or not criminal behaviour is a result of the nature of a person, meaning something that lies in their genes causing a person to act in a certain way, or nurture, the environment, therefore criminal behaviour as a result of a person’s life experiences (Sincero, 2012). This essay shall look in depth and answer to how the four areas of criminal behaviour, which are biological, sociological, psychological and environmental, as part of the nature and nurture debate, can explain criminality and deviance. This will be done by discussing a number of theories and experiments that have come to the surface over time. Researching the nature and nurture debate, it is shown that the debate continues to interest people today, mainly because of what is thought will be the outcome of these findings, which is preventing people turning to criminal behaviour by understanding people’s genetics, how they were born and avoid situations that lie in the environment to stop them interacting with criminal activities.

When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).

In 1979, Lawrence E. Cohen and Marcus Felson published “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activities Approach”; this was the first paper introducing routine activities theory. Most criminological theories before routine activities theory focused more specifically on the socioeconomic factors affecting crime such as poverty, race, etc. Felson and Marcus believed instead that the routine activities of individuals and groups are the driving force behind crime.

Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy suggests that many people behave antisocially but this can either be temporary or persistent. Temporary antisocial behavior is common among adolescents and many of them grow out of it. If the antisocial behavior is persistent, it can later predict criminal behavior down the road. Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy is an integrated theory made up of strain and social learning theories with a positivism approach. Consistent, stable antisocial behavior is found among a small amount of males whose behavior is extremely problematic (Moffitt, 1993). Temporary versus persistent antisocial persons have two qualitatively different types of individuals and none of them, up to this point, have obtained the research of

Crime has existed in societies across the world for centuries, and is defined as any offense harmful against the public. However, the true nature of crime is more complex as there are many different motives and causes behind a criminal act, which cannot be contributed to a single factor (Barlow & Decker, 2010). Within the field of criminology, a number of theories exist that attempt to explain why some individuals commit crime, while others abstain from it. Some theories attribute crime to the specific environment; they believe that an individual commits crime when certain ecological conditions are met (Felson, 2001). Others argue that crime is caused by the individual themselves; that criminals are the result of unrestrained thoughts and low self-control (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 2001). This paper will analyze aspects of a real world scenario using both routine activity theory and low self-control theory, for the purpose of better understanding and evaluating certain criminal behavior.

Lifestyle Theory is a theory in Criminology created by Glenn Walters in 1990. Unsurprisingly this theory is just as the name would suggest, a lifestyle choice to be a criminal. This theory focuses heavily on the biological factors that influence a person’s ability to commit crime. Walters wrote three concepts to his theory: conditions, choice, and cognition. To start, I will address conditions. In Walters’s theory, he discusses the environmental and biological conditions that are involved in entering the criminal lifestyle. The environmental condition is based around your environment like the name suggests. What that means is that the decision to commit crime is due in part by your living situations and needs. This

Lifestyle theory shows victims’ exposure to their own lifestyle choices. This exposure can lead them to the criminal attacker and situations with their own choices. Examples of such actions are as follows: going out at night alone, living in a bad part of town, associate with known felons, promiscuous, excessive alcohol use, doing drugs, going down a dark alley, etc. Crimes taken place are not random, but a part of the lifestyle choices the victim has portrayed. This impulsive behavior or low self-control comes at a high risk for victimization. (2006) This style of life offers more opportunities for the crime to occur.