Rational Choice Theory (criminology) - Elements

Elements

The theory is related to earlier drift theory (Matza: 1964) where people use the techniques of neutralization to drift in and out of delinquent behavior, and the Systematic Crime Theory (an aspect of Social Disorganization Theory developed by the Chicago School), where Edwin Sutherland proposed that the failure of families and extended kin groups expands the realm of relationships no longer controlled by the community, and undermines governmental controls. This leads to persistent "systematic" crime and delinquency. He also believed that such disorganization causes and reinforces the cultural traditions and cultural conflicts that support antisocial activity. The systematic quality of the behavior was a reference to repetitive, patterned or organized offending as opposed to random events. He depicted the law-abiding culture as dominant and more extensive than alternative criminogenic cultural views and capable of overcoming systematic crime if organized for that purpose (1939: 8). In a similar vein, Cohen and Felson (1979) developed Routine Activities Theory which focuses on the characteristics of crime rather than the characteristics of the offender. This is one of the main theories of environmental criminology as an aspect of Crime Prevention Theory. It states that for a crime to occur, three elements must be present, i.e. there must be:

• an available and suitable target;
• a motivated offender; and
• no authority figure to prevent the crime from happening.

Routine Activities Theory relates the pattern of offending to the everyday patterns of social interaction. Between 1960 and 1980, women left the home to work which led to social disorganization, i.e. the routine of leaving the home unattended and without an authority figure increased probability of criminal activity. The theory is supplemented by the crime triangle or the problem analysis triangle which is used in the analysis both of a crime problem by reference to the three parameters of victim, location, and offender, and of an intervention strategy by reference to the parameters of target/victim, location and absence of a capable guardian with the latter helping to think more constructively about responses as well as analysis.The theory avoids speculation about the source of the offenders’ motivation, which distinguishes it immediately from most other criminological theories Support for theory Many features of rational choice perspective make it particularly suitable to serve as a criminological “metatheory” with a broad role in the explanation for a variety of criminological phenomena Since rational choice can explain many different components; it is broad enough to be applied not only to crime but everyday life circumstances. Studies involve offenders being interviewed on motives, methods and target choices Research involves burglars (Walsh, 1980; Maguire 1982; Cromwell et al., 1991) bank and commercial robbers ( New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 1987; Nugent et al., 1989) and offenders using violence (Morrison and O’ Donnell, 1996).The rational choice perspective has provided a framework under which to organize such information so that individual studies produce more general benefits Rational Choice Theory insists that crime is calculated and deliberate. All criminals are rational actors who practice conscious decision making, that simultaneously work towards gaining the maximum benefits of their present situation.Another aspect of rational choice theory is the fact that many offenders make decisions based on bounded/limited rationality. Bounded/Limited Rationality Ideas of limited rationality emphasize the extent to which individuals and groups simplify a decision because of the difficulties of anticipating or considering all alternatives and all information Bounded rationality relates to two aspects, one part arising from cognitive limitations and the other from extremes in emotional arousal Sometimes emotional arousal at the moment of a crime can be acute, therefore would be offenders find themselves out of control, and rational considerations are far less salient

Crime therefore can be influenced by opportunity Opportunity of a crime can be related to cost benefits, socioeconomic status, risk of detection, dependent on situational context, type of offence and access to external benefits. In addition, opportunities are dependent on the individual’s current surroundings and consequential factors. This theory better explains instrumental crimes rather than expressive crimes. Instrumental crimes involve planning and weighing the risks with a rational mind. An example of an instrumental crime can include: tax evasion, traffic violations, drinking and driving, corporate crime, larceny and sexual assault. On the other hand, expressive crime includes crimes involving emotion and lack of rational thinking without being concerned of future consequences. Expressive crimes can include: non pre-mediated murder such as manslaughter, and assault. As a result, punishment is only effective in deterring instrumental crime rather than expressive crime.

In 2000, O’Grady et al. performed a study which examined the illegal sale of tobacco products to underage youth. With the use of a rational mind merchants and clerks weigh out the cost benefits and risk factors which are involved in selling cigarettes to underage youth. Due to the minimal risk of police patrol after 5pm, merchants and clerks felt a diminished sense of risk, therefore allowing them to sell their products illegally to underage youth.

According to O’Grady (2011) the three main critiques of Rational Choice Theory include:

• Assumes that all individuals have the capacity to make rational decisions

• The theory does not explain why the burden of responsibility is excused from young offenders as opposed to adult offenders

• This theory contradicts the Canadian Criminal Justice System. This theory does not support the idea that all individuals are rational actors because of cognitive inability. An example of individuals who lack a rational mind include those who are Not Criminally Responsible on Account Due to Mental Disorder (NCRMD).