1932

Abstract

Criminology is a smorgasbord of disparate theory and poorly integrated research findings. Theories tend to focus either on people's crime propensity or the criminogenic inducements of environments; rarely are these two main approaches effectively combined in the analysis of crime and its causes. Criminological research often either avoids questions of causation and explanation (e.g., risk factor approach) or is based on research designs that yield highly partial accounts (e.g., place-oriented experimental work). To advance knowledge about crime and its causes and prevention, we argue that there is a need for an analytic criminology that allows key theoretical insights and central empirical findings about people's crime propensities and environments’ criminogenic inducements and their combination to be integrated based on an adequate action theory. In this review, we outline this approach and its main methodological implications and discuss how its focus on why and how questions leads to a characteristic integration of theory development, methods, and research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030920-091320
2022-01-13
2024-07-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/criminol/5/1/annurev-criminol-030920-091320.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030920-091320&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Akers RL 1989. A social behaviorist's perspective on integration of theories on crime and deviance. Theoretical Integration in the Study of Deviance and Crime: Problems and Prospects SF Messner, MD Krohn, AE Liska 23–29 Albany, NY: SUNY Press
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Becker GS. 1968. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J. Political Econ. 76:169–217
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beier H. 2016. Wie wirken “Subkulturen der Gewalt”? Das Zusammenspiel von Internalisierung und Verbreitung gewaltlegitimierender Normen in der Erklärung von Jugendgewalt. Kölner Z. Soziol. Sozialpsychol 68:457–85
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bernard TJ, Snipes JB. 1996. Theoretical integration in criminology. Crime Justice Rev. Res. 20:301–48
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bernasco W, Ruiter S, Bruinsma GJ, Pauwels LJ, Weerman FM. 2013. Situational causes of offending: a fixed-effects analysis of space-time budget data. Criminology 51:895–926
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bersani BE, Doherty EE. 2018. Desistance from offending in the twenty-first century. Annu. Rev. Criminol. 1:311–34
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Birkbeck C, LaFree G. 1993. The situational analysis of crime and deviance. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 19:113–37
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bouffard JA, Niebuhr N 2017. Experimental designs in the study of offender decision making. The Oxford Handbook of Offender Decision Making W Bernasco, J-L van Gelder, H Elffers 479–95 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bowers KS. 1973. Situationism in psychology: an analysis and critique. Psychol. Rev. 80:307–36
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brantingham PJ, Brantingham PL. 1984. Patterns in Crime New York: Macmillan
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brauer JR, Tittle CR. 2017. When crime is not an option: inspecting the moral filtering of criminal action alternatives. Justice Q 34:5818–46
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bunge M. 1999. The Sociology-Philosophy Connection New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bunge M. 2001. Scientific Realism: Selected Essays by Mario Bunge Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Bunge M. 2004. How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philos. Soc. Sci. 34:182–210
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bunge M. 2006. Chasing Reality: Strife over Realism Toronto: Univ. Toronto Press
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Buyalskaya A, Gallo M, Camerer CF. 2021. The golden age of social science. PNAS 118:5e2002923118
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Choy O, Raine A, Hamilton RH 2018. Stimulation of the prefrontal cortex reduces intentions to commit aggression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, stratified, parallel-group trial. J. Neurosci. 38:296505–12
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Clarke RV, Cornish DB. 1985. Modeling offenders’ decisions: a framework for research and policy. Crime Justice Rev. Res. 6:147–85
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Cohen LE, Felson M. 1979. Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activity approach. Am. Sociol. Rev. 44:588–608
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Coleman JS. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cornish DB, Clarke RV. 2014. The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cullen FT, Pratt TC, Graham A. 2019. Why longitudinal research is hurting criminology. Criminologist 44:21–7
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Cullen FT, Wright JP, Blevins K 2008. Introduction: taking stock of criminological theory. Taking Stock: The Status of Criminological Theory FT Cullen, JP Wright, K Blevins 1–34 New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Dollard J, Miller NE, Doob LW, Mowrer OH, Sears RR. 1939. Frustration and Aggression New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ehrlich E. 2008. 1936. Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Eifler S, Petzold K. 2019. Validity aspects of vignette experiments. Expected ‘What-If’ differences between reported and actual behavior. Experimental Methods in Survey Research: Techniques that Combine Random Sampling with Random Assignment PJ Lavrakas, ED de Leeuw, AL Holbrook, C Kennedy 393–416 Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Ejbye-Ernst P, Lindegaard MR, Bernasco W 2020. A CCTV-based analysis of target selection by guardians intervening in interpersonal conflicts. Eur. J. Criminol. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370820960338
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  28. Ellis L, Farrington DP, Hoskin AW. 2019. Handbook of Crime Correlates Cambridge, MA: Academic, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Exum ML, Bouffard JA 2010. Testing theories of criminal decision making: some empirical questions about hypothetical scenarios. Handbook of Quantitative Criminology AR Piquero, D Weisburd 581–94 New York: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Farrington DP. 2000. Explaining and preventing crime: the American Society of Criminology 1999 presidential address. Criminology 38:1–24
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Farrington DP 2013. Longitudinal and experimental research in criminology. Crime and Justice in America 1975–2025 M Tonry 453–527 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Farrington DP, Loeber R, Welsh BC 2010. Longitudinal-experimental studies. Handbook of Quantitative Criminology AR Piquero, D Weisburd 503–18 New York: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Farrington DP, Lösel F, Braga AA, Mazerolle L, Raine A et al. 2020. Experimental criminology: looking back and forward on the 20th anniversary of the Academy of Experimental Criminology. J. Exp. Criminol. 16:649–73
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Farrington DP, Kazemian L, Piquero AR 2019. The Oxford Handbook of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Felson M. 2006. Crime and Nature Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Findley MG, Kikuta K, Denly M. 2021. External validity. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 24:365–93
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Fried EI. 2020. Lack of theory building and testing impedes progress in the factor and network literature. Psychol. Inq. 31:4271–88
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Gelman A, Hill J, Vehtari A 2020. Regression and Other Stories New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Gottfredson M, Hirschi T. 1990. A General Theory of Crime Stanford, CA: Stanf. Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Greenwood PW. 2006. Changing Lives: Delinquency Prevention as Crime-Control Policy Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Hardie B. 2020. Studying Situational Interaction: Explaining Behaviour by Analysing Person-Environment Convergence New York: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Heckhausen J, Heckhausen H 2018. Motivation and action: introduction and overview. Motivation and Action J Heckhausen, H Heckhausen 1–14 New York: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Hedström P. 2005. Dissecting the Social: On the Principles of Analytical Sociology Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Hedström P, Bearman P 2009. What is analytical sociology all about? An introductory essay. The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology P Hedström, P Bearman 3–24 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Heo M, Leon AC. 2010. Sample sizes required to detect two-way and three-way interactions involving slope differences in mixed-effects linear models. J. Biopharm. Stat. 20:4787–802
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Keizer K, Lindenberg S, Steg L 2008. The spreading of disorder. Science 322:59081681–85
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Kirk DS. 2015. A natural experiment of the consequences of concentrating former prisoners in the same neighborhoods. PNAS 112:226943–48
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Kroneberg C 2014. Frames, scripts, and variable rationality: an integrative theory of action. Analytical Sociology: Norms, Actions, and Networks M Gianluca 97–123 Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Kroneberg C, Heintze I, Mehlkop G 2010. The interplay of moral norms and instrumental incentives in crime causation. Criminology 48:259–94
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Laub JH. 2004. The life course of criminology in the United States: the American Society of Criminology 2003 presidential address. Criminology 42:11–26
    [Google Scholar]
  51. List JA. 2011. Why economists should conduct field experiments and 14 tips for pulling one off. J. Econ. Perspect. 25:33–16
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Leung AK-Y, Cohen D. 2011. Within- and between-culture variation: individual differences and the cultural logics of honor, face, and dignity cultures. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 100:3507–26
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Lieberson S, Horwich J 2008. Implication analysis: a pragmatic proposal for linking theory and data in the social sciences. Soc. Methodol. 38:11–50
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Liska AE, Krohn MD, Messner SF 1989. Strategies and requisites for theoretical integration in the study of crime and deviance. Theoretical Integration in the Study of Deviance and Crime: Problems and Prospects SF Messner, MD Krohn, AE Liska 1–20 Albany, NY: SUNY Press
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Loughran TA, Paternoster R, Chalfin A, Wilson T 2016. Can rational choice be considered a general theory of crime? Evidence from individual-level panel data. Criminology 54:86–112
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Matsueda RL. 2017. Towards an analytical criminology. The micro-macro problem, causal mechanisms, and public policy. Criminology 55:493–519
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Matsueda RL, Kreager DA, Huizinga D. 2006. Deterring delinquents: a rational choice model of theft and violence. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71:95–122
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Matza D. 1964. Delinquency and Drift New York: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  59. McCarthy B. 2002. New economics of sociological criminology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 28:417–42
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Merton RK. 1987. Three fragments from a sociologist's notebooks: establishing the phenomenon, specified ignorance, and strategic research materials. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 13:1–29
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Morgan SL, Winship C. 2007. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1st ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Nagin DS, Paternoster R. 1993. Enduring individual differences and rational choice theories of crime. Law Soc. Rev. 27:467–96
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Nagin DS, Pogarsky G. 2001. Integrating celerity, impulsivity, and extra-legal sanction threats into a model of general deterrence: theory and evidence. Criminology 39:865–91
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Nagin DS, Pogarsky G. 2003. An experimental investigation of deterrence: cheating, self-serving bias, and impulsivity. Criminology 41:167–94
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Nagin DS, Sampson RJ. 2019. The real gold standard: measuring counterfactual worlds that matter most to social science and policy. Annu. Rev. Criminol. 2:123–45
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Nguyen H, Loughran TA. 2018. On the measurement and identification of turning points in criminology. Annu. Rev. Criminol. 1:335–58
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Opp K-D. 2020. Analytical Criminology: Integrating Explanations of Crime and Deviant Behavior New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Opp K-D, Pauwels L. 2018. Die weite Version Theorie rationalen Handelns als Grundlage einer Analytischen Kriminologie. Monatsschr. Kriminol. Strafrechtsreform Sonderh. 101:3–4223–50
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Osgood DW 2012. Some future trajectories for life course criminology. The Future of Criminology, ed. R Loeber, BC Welsh 3–10 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Pajevic M. 2020. Low Heart Rate and Crime: Exploring the Link from an Analytical Perspective PhD Diss., Cambridge Univ. Cambridge, UK:
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Pauwels LJR, Svensson R, Hirtenlehner H. 2018. Testing situational action theory: a narrative review of studies published between 2006 and 2015. Eur. J. Criminol. 15:132–55
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Petzold K, Wolbring T. 2019. What can we learn from factorial surveys about human behavior? A validation study comparing field and survey experiments on discrimination. Methodology 15:119–30
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Piquero AR, Farrington DP, Blumstein A. 2007. Key Issues in Criminal Career Research Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Piquero AR, Paternoster R, Pogarsky G, Loughran T 2011. Elaborating the individual difference component in deterrence theory. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 7:335–60
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Popper K. 1963. Conjectures and Refutations London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Popper K. 1983. 1956. Realism and the Aim of Science London:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Proctor KR, Niemeyer RE. 2019. Mechanistic Criminology Abingdon, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Psillos S. 2002. Causation and Explanation Montreal: McGill-Queen's Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Reiss AJ. 1986. Why are communities important in understanding crime?. Crime Justice Rev. Res. 8:1–33
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Rutter M. 2007. Proceeding from observed correlation to causal inference: the use of natural experiments. . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2:377–95
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Salmon WC. 1998. Causality and Explanation Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Sampson RJ. 1999. Techniques of research neutralization. Theor. Criminol. 3:4438–51
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Sampson RJ. 2010. Gold standard myths: observations on the experimental turn in quantitative criminology. J. Quant. Criminol. 25:489–500
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Sampson RJ. 2012. Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Sampson RJ, Morenoff JD, Gannon-Rowley T. 2002. Assessing “neighborhood effects”: social processes and new directions in research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 28:443–78
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Schulz S. 2014. Individual differences in the deterrence process: Which individuals learn (most) from their offending experiences?. J. Quant. Criminol. 30:3215–36
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Sherman LW. 2007. The power few: experimental criminology and the reduction of harm. J. Exp. Criminol. 3:299–321
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Sherman LW, Gartin PR, Buerger ME. 1989. Hot spots of predatory crime: routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27:27–56
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Sutherland EH. 1947. Principles of Criminology Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 4th ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Sweeten G, Piquero AR, Steinberg L. 2013. Age and the explanation of crime, revisited. J. Youth Adolesc. 42:6921–38
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Timmer A, Antonaccio O, French MT 2020. Hot or cool processing? Adolescent decision-making and delinquency. Justice Q 38:6961–94
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Tittle CR. 1995. Control Balance: Toward a General Theory of Deviance Boulder, CO: Westview Press
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Tonry M, Ohlin LE, Farrington DP. 1991. Human Development and Criminal Behavior New York: Springer-Verlag
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Treiber K 2013. A neuropsychological test of criminal decision making: regional prefrontal influences in a dual process model. Affect and Cognition in Criminal Decision-Making J van Gelder, H Elffers, D Reynald, D Nagin 193–220 London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Trinidad A, Vozmediano L, San-Juan C. 2018. A systematic review of the situational perspectives’ literature. Crime Psychol. Rev. 4:45–71
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Vaisey S, Miles A. 2017. What you can—and can't—do with three-wave panel data. Sociol. Methods Res. 46:144–67
    [Google Scholar]
  97. van Gelder JL, de Vries RE 2014. Rational misbehavior? Evaluating an integrated dual-process model of criminal decision making. J. Quant. Criminol 30:1–27
    [Google Scholar]
  98. van Gelder JL, de Vries RE, Demetriou A, van Sintemaartensdijk I, Donker T 2019. The virtual reality scenario method: moving from imagination to immersion in criminal decision-making research. J. Res. Crime Delinquency 56:3451–80
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Weisburd D, Groff ER, Yang S-M. 2012. The Criminology of Place and Our Understanding of the Crime Problem New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Weisburd D, Piquero AR. 2008. How well do criminologists explain crime? Statistical modelling in published studies. Crime Justice Rev. Res 37:453–501
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Wikström P-O. 1990. Age and crime in a Stockholm cohort. J. Quant. Criminol. 6:61–84
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Wikström P-O. 1991. Urban Crime, Criminals, and Victims New York: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Wikström P-O 2004. Crime as alternative: towards a cross-level situational action theory of crime causation. Beyond Empiricism: Institutions and Intentions in the Study of Crime J McCord 1–37 New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Wikström P-O 2010. Explaining crime as moral action. Handbook of the Sociology of Morality S Hitlin, S Vaysey 211–39 New York: Springer-Verlag
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Wikström P-O 2011. Does everything matter? Addressing the problem of causation and explanation in the study of crime. When Crime Appears: The Role of Emergence JM McGloin, CJ Sullivan, LW Kennedy 53–72 London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Wikström P-O 2017. Character, circumstances, and the causes of crime. The Oxford Handbook of Criminology A Liebling, S Maruna, L McAra 501–21 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Wikström P-O. 2019a. Explaining crime and criminal careers: the DEA model of situational action theory. J. Dev. Life-Course Criminol. 6:188–203
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Wikström P-O 2019b. Situational action theory: a general, dynamic and mechanism-based theory of crime and its causes. Handbook on Crime and Deviance M Krohn, GP Hall, AJ Lizotte, N Hendrix 259–81 New York: Springer, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Wikström P-O 2022. Towards a true social ecology of crime: on the limitations of a criminology without people. Crime, Justice, and Social Order: Essays in Honour of A. E. Bottoms A Liebling, J Shapland, R Sparks, J Tankebe Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Wikström P-O, Sampson RJ 2003. Social mechanisms of community influences on crime and pathways in criminality. The Causes of Conduct Disorder and Serious Juvenile Delinquency BB Lahey, TE Moffitt, A Caspi 118–48 New York: Guilford Press
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Wikström P-O, Sampson RJ 2006. The Explanation of Crime: Context, Mechanisms and Development Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Wikström P-O, Treiber K. 2013. Towards an analytical criminology: a situational action theory. Kriminologie–Kriminalpolitik–Strafrecht K Boers, T Feltz, J Kinzig, LW Sherman, F Streng, G Trug 318–30 Heidelberg, Ger: Mohr Siebeck
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Wikström P-O, Treiber K 2015. Situational theory: the importance of interactions and action mechanisms. The Handbook of Criminological Theory A Piquero 415–44 Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Wikström P-O, Treiber K 2017. Beyond risk factors: an analytical approach to crime prevention. Preventing Crime and Violence B Teasdale, MS Bradley 73–87 New York: Springer-Verlag
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Wikström P-O, Treiber K 2019. The dynamics of change: criminogenic interactions and life-course patterns of crime. The Oxford Handbook of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology DP Farrington, L Kazemian, A Piquero 272–94 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Wikström P-O, Treiber K, Roman G 2022. Character, Circumstances and Criminal Careers: Towards a Dynamic Developmental and Life Course Criminology Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Wikström P-OH 2006. Individuals, settings, and acts of crime: situational mechanisms and the explanation of crime. The Explanation of Crime: Context, Mechanisms and Development P-OH Wikström, RJ Sampson 61–108 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Wikström P-OH, Mann RP, Hardie B. 2018. Young people's differential vulnerability to criminogenic exposure: bridging the gap between people- and place-oriented approaches in the study of crime causation. Eur. J. Criminol. 15:110–31
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Wikström P-OH, Oberwittler D, Treiber K, Hardie B. 2012. Breaking Rules: The Social and Situational Dynamics of Young People's Urban Crime Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030920-091320
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030920-091320
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error