Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Term paper theories of crime
Victimization in criminology
Sological theories of crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Term paper theories of crime
Rational choice theory, also known simply as choice theory, is the assessment of a potential offender to commit a crime. Choice theory is the belief that committing a crime is a rational decision, based on cost benefit analysis. The would-be offender will weigh the costs of committing a particular crime: fines, jail time, and imprisonment versus the benefits: money, status, heightened adrenaline. Depending on which factors out-weigh the other, a criminal will decide to commit or forgo committing a crime. This decision making process makes committing a crime a rational choice. This theory can be used to explain why an offender will decide to commit burglary, robbery, aggravated assault, or murder.
It is 9:00am on a warm July morning. John Smith is dropped off near an affluent neighborhood. He creeps down a side street and enters the back yard of a large home. John uses a pry bar he had hidden in his pants to break open the door. Once inside he heads for the upstairs. When he reaches the second floor he finds the door to the master bedroom and enters to find the jewelry he had come for. John takes the watches, bracelets, necklaces, and rings and stuffs them into a small duffle bag. He quickly turns and when he exits the bedroom is confronted by a teenage girl, who he knows to be the daughter of the home owner. John makes a quick decision and hits the girl in the head with the pry bar and she falls to the floor. John now panicky flees the home.
The above scenario can be explained by the rational choice theory. John it turns out is twenty years old and met the homeowner while working at a jewelry store at his local mall. He used the employer computers to gain access to the woman’s personal information finding that she was divor...
... middle of paper ...
...e: season, neighborhood, age, and economy will allow police departments to target areas for police presence. Overall I feel that no one theory can explain all crime. No one individual is the same and cannot be grouped into one category. Understanding all theories of crime along with insight into victimization will better enable a police department to develop crime prevention strategies.
Works Cited
Findlaw: Assault/Battery. Thomson Reuters, 2011. Web. 7 May. 2011.
Ciccarelli, Saundra, and White, J. Noland. Psychology Second Edition. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc. 2009. Print.
Siegel, Larry J. Criminology: The Core Fourth Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. 2008. Print.
---. Essentials of Criminal Justice Seventh Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. 2009. Print.
Debra’s crime is a perfect example of the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory is best defined as when an individual rationally decides to commit a crime. The individual’s decision to commit a crime or not is based on the potential gains and potential losses. Debra embezzled nearly 2 million dollars so she most likely decided to commit the crime based on potential gains. In addition, Debra must have known that her chances of getting caught would be slim. Since she was smart enough to commit such a crime, she most likely funnelled the money to an offshore
Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational Choice theory, criminal control policy, and criminology relevance. Policy essay, 43-52.
Kody Scott, later known as Shanyika Shakur, was born in Los Angeles in 1963. Before last imprisonment he committed various crimes, such as, robbery, assault, and murder. Kody’s childhood was pretty rough. He grew up as the fifth of six children in a broken home. His mother, Birdy Scott, worked odd jobs and long hours to support her children. While his father, Ernest Scott, left the family in 1970 and was completely out of Kody’s life by 1975. Shortly after completing sixth grade at Horace Mann, Kody joined a subgroup of the infamous L.A. Crips on June 15th, 1975. Kody committed his first murder on the night of his initiation. This would be the start of Kody’s descent into becoming “Monster Kody”. It was two years after his initiation that Kody first donned the name Monster. Scott had beaten a robbery victim so bad that the police said it was “The work of a
Myers, D. G. (2013). Psychology: Tenth Edition in Modules. New York: Worth Publishers. Retrieved May 5th, 2013
Rational Choice, Deterrence, Incapacitation and Just Desert In seeking to answer the question, "Why do people engage in deviant and/or criminal acts?", many researchers, as well as the general public, have begun to focus on the element of personal choice. An understanding of personal choice is commonly based in a conception of rationality or rational choice. These conceptions are rooted in the analysis of human behavior developed by the early classical theorists, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. The central points of this theory are: (1) The human being is a rational actor, (2) Rationality involves an end/means calculation, (3) People (freely) choose all behavior, both conforming and deviant, based on their rational calculations, (4)
Wade, C., Tavris, C., Garry, M. (2011). Psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
According to Clarke and Cornish (2001, p. 34), “the rational choice perspective was explicitly developed to assist policy thinking … specifically through detailed modeling of criminal decision making. The theory theorizes that offenders who have chosen to commit criminal acts, do so because of the reward it brings to them. Coupled with the different conditions that are needed for specific crimes to occur, with its emphasizes on the role of crime opportunities in causation.
There are numerous theories as to why a crime is committed. Rational choice theory, which is a subset of classical theory, says that before people commit a crime they think about what they are going to do. They weigh the pros and cons before committing the criminal act. The rational choice theory is well suited for the causation of burglary. The support for this theory is that burglars do not commit crime for the fun of it or just because they want to. It is usually because they need money to keep their heads above water. In their situation, they do not see any other way than to steal to make a living. The opposition for rational choice theory is that criminals do not think before they act as they may be incapable of thinking rationally in the first place.
...ifferent crime patterns and thought processes of criminals. The reasons can only come from these theories and will help the justice systems become more prepared to react towards different crimes. However, with adding some enhancements, projects and experiments these two theories have the potential to change the criminology realm forever.
Gazzaniga, Michael, and Todd F. Heatherton. Psychological Science. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2003.
Crime exists everywhere. It is exists in our country, in the big cities, the small towns, schools, and even in homes. Crime is defined as “any action that is a violation of law”. These violations may be pending, but in order to at least lower the crime rate, an understanding of why the crimes are committed must first be sought. There are many theories that are able to explain crimes, but three very important ones are rational choice theory, social disorganization theory and strain theory.
One element that the rational-choice perspective and the routine-activity approach have in common is the consideration of target vulnerability. The rational-choice perspective assumes that an offender thinks about a variety of factors such as how vulnerable is the target, before committing the crime. According to the routine-activity approach that for a crime to occur there has to be a suitable target.
Kalat, J. W. (2011). Introduction to psychology (9th ed.). Pacific Grove, Calif.: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co..
Classical Theory, now known as Rational Choice Theory or Choice theory was founded over two hundred years ago in the 18th century by two philosophers, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Both used theories to correlate with criminal justice, to interpret reasoning for actions and a concept on the connection between carrying out illegal actions.
Although rational choice theory has made considerable advances in other social sciences, its progress in sociology has been limited. Some sociologists' reservations about rational choice arise from a misunderstanding of the theory. The first part of this essay therefore introduces rational choice as a general theoretical perspective, or family of theories, which explains social outcomes by constructing models of individual action and social context. "Thin" models of individual action are mute about actors' motivations, while "thick" models specify them ex ante. Other sociologists' reservations, however, stem from doubts about the empirical adequacy of rational choice explanations. To this end, the bulk of the essay reviews a sample