SozTheo

Sozialwissenschaftliche Theorien

Sie befinden sich hier: Home / Theories of crime

Theories of crime

| zuletzt aktualisiert am von

Theories of crime are scientific theories that provide individual or societal explanations for normative deviant behaviour. But what exactly constitutes a scientific theory?

What is a theory?

The sciences are concerned with theories. But what exactly is a theory? Of course, we all have an idea of what a theory is. In our everyday life we operate daily – consciously or unconsciously – with theoretical assumptions; we refer to facts as “theoretical” or distinguish a theoretical from a practical approach (“So let’s think practically …”). However, these everyday theoretical assumptions are rarely expressed or explained. This is different in the sciences:

The word theory is derived from Greek (from Greek theoria = looking, looking at; theorein = to look at) and stands here as an antipole to the term practice (Greek praxis = activity; praxein = to act, to act).

Scientific theories are distinguished from everyday theories primarily in terms of their complexity. The former represent a system of concepts, definitions and statements and are based on considerations which are mostly based on an abstraction of a more complex context. In this way, hypothetical assumptions can be made, which can be generalized, verified and formulated as a law through repeated empirical testing (e.g. “Whenever A, then also B”). The theory established in this way is valid until an application is found which deviates from the assumed regularity (e.g. “If X, then if A, then B is not always also”). Now the initial theory is falsified and must be specified by further statements or restricting conditions (“If not X, then always if A, then also B”).

At the (preliminary) end of the theory formation there is a set of interrelated statements (the explanans) covering all conceivable and observable alternatives of the described state of affairs (the explanandum). Ideally, the formulated theory also allows a prediction of future processes and events.

What are theories of crime?

Theories of crime serve to explain norm deviating/criminal behavior. The theoretical considerations are usually tested in empirical studies. From many of the theories of crime, conclusions can be drawn as to how crime can be prevented and thus find their way into criminal policy practice.

Theories of crime are “more or less validated, methodologically ordered attempts to explain causal relationships of individual/ or society’s criminality and to draw conclusions for practice in prevention and repression with regard to their (crime’s) social control.”
(Breuer 1998, p. 56; quoted from: Pientka 2014, p. 190; translated by author).

Put simply, theories of crime – depending on their orientation – ask the question(s):

  • Why do some people become criminals?
  • Why do some people not become criminals?
  • Why do we label some people and their behavior as criminal?
  • Why are some areas and neighborhoods more crime-ridden than others?

A brief history of theories of crime

The search for the causes of crime is a core question of criminology and has occupied criminologists since the beginning of the discipline.

The first theories of crime were established in the 18th century (see: Classical School of Criminology) and are precursors of today’s approaches, known as rational choice approaches and deterrence theory.

Since then, countless explanations have been added.Many theories build on each other in the process. However, the history of criminology is also marked by conflicting paradigms and views on the explanation of criminal behavior.

Free Will vs. Determinism

The representatives of the Classical School of criminology explained criminality as the result of rational choice and a free-willed individual. In contrast, the Italian school of anthropological criminology assumed a biological determinism that left the “born criminal” with no freedom of choice. Other criminologists contrasted the assumption that criminality is an innate behavioral trait with the idea that criminality is learned – analogous to learning behaviorally conforming actions.

Crime as a consequence of individual pathologies vs. result of ascriptions

Most theories of crime see the causes of criminality as being rooted in an individual pathology. According to this conviction, the criminal exhibits a biological or psychological disorder or simply has the wrong circle of friends or a lack of self-control. Biological theories of criminality in particular see the behavior of criminal people as being conditioned by their predispositions. Other theories, however, explain criminality as the result of environmental conditions, such as social-structural inequalities. Strain theories, for example, assume that criminality is the result of a social situation of expectations. The individual cannot meet these expectations in a legitimate way and falls into criminal behavior.

Still other theories, such as the critical theories of crime, deny that it is individually determined pathologies that are causative for crime. They reject etiological theories and rather hold the social system and inequalities therein responsible for crime. From this perspective, a criminal act does not exist per se, but is always the result of a social definition. This power of definition, which distinguishes between right and wrong, is an expression of a social position of power. Crime is often defined as behavior that threatens these positions of power. When an act is labeled “criminal,” this attribution is tantamount to criminalizing an outsider group that behaves in the same way.

Rational decision vs. emotional involvement

Another line of conflict that runs between different theories of crime concerns, on the one hand, theories that view crime as the result of rational decisions and, on the other hand, theories that emphasize the emotional side of criminal behavior. One of the more popular contemporary approaches to explaining criminal behavior is the Routine Activity Theory. The approach particularly emphasizes the situational moment of a criminal act: in the absence of effective protection in a situation, a motivated offender will act on a suitable object of crime. As plausible as the theory sounds, it neglects motivational aspects on the offender’s side due to its analytical view of the situation. In contrast to the Routine Activity Theory or modern rational choice approaches in criminology, other theories emphasize emotionality as an explanatory factor of criminality. Theories such as Seductions of Crime, Cultural Criminology, the Edgework concept, or Anderson’s work on the Code of the Street emphasize precisely this phenomenological perspective on crime. The objective view of a situation from the outside gives way to an internal perspective that places the offender and his emotional involvement at the center of the analysis.

What are the benefits of theories of crime?

Theories of crime contribute significantly to explaining individuals’ behavior in relation to crime by analyzing various aspects of individual behavior, social interactions, and the underlying causes of criminal behavior.

Identifying causes and motives: Theories of crime examine the causes of crime, whether individual, social, economic, or psychological factors. They help to understand the motivations behind criminal behavior, whether they are individual choices, social circumstances, or specific incentives.

Risk Factor Explanation: These theories identify risk factors that may increase a person’s risk for criminal behavior. These include, for example, social disadvantage, low education, unemployment, unstable family circumstances, and other influencing factors.

Analyzing social contexts: Many theories of crime take into account the social context in which individuals live. They examine the influences of communities, social norms, social ties, social integration, and social control on criminal behavior.

Understanding individual decision-making processes: Some theories, particularly classical theories of crime, address the individual decision-making processes that lead to criminal behavior. They analyze how people weigh risks and make decisions that favor or counteract criminal acts.

Develop and evaluate prevention strategies: Theories can be used to develop and evaluate prevention strategies. By understanding the causes of crime, targeted prevention measures can be introduced to reduce the occurrence of criminal behavior.

Basis for crime policy and the criminal justice system: theories of crime form the basis for the design of crime policy and the criminal justice system. They can inform policymakers, help determine sentences, and develop programs to rehabilitate offenders.

Which crimes can be explained by theories of crime?

Theories of crime represent time- and place-dependent explanations and are thus dependent on social values and moral concepts. In addition, the various theories of crime differ in terms of their disciplinary approaches (e.g., (neuro)biology, psychology, social psychology/pedagogy, sociology, etc.). A further differentiation of the various theories can be seen in terms of their claim to validity. The majority of theories of crime can be described as “medium-range theories” (Robert K. Merton). Their explanatory potential goes beyond spatio-temporally narrowly defined phenomena, but they also do not represent comprehensive social theories. The claim to create a grand theory of crime has not yet been fulfilled. Such a theory would have to be able to explain all occurring forms of normative deviations independent of space and time. Even the General Theory of Crime (Gottfredson & Hirschi), which started with this claim, could not fulfill this promise in the end (see: Critical Appraisal).

Looking at the scope of theories of crime, it is noticeable that the majority of theories refer to the explanation of criminal acts, which can typically be assigned to juvenile and so-called street crime. Conversely, the explanation of wars and war crimes, state crime, crime of the powerful, white-collar crime, or even environmental crime represents a major void in criminology. Only in recent years has there been an increased focus on topics such as a Green Criminology or a Criminology of Genocide.

From a praxeological perspective, this discrepancy can certainly be explained by the fact that juvenile offenders have often been used in the empirical construction and testing of theories. From a research practice perspective, schoolchildren and prisoners are easier to interview and study than criminal hedge fund managers or internationally operating mercenary groups.

In contrast, from the perspective of Critical Criminology, this reveals a social power imbalance in which the powerful secure their hegemonic social position by criminalizing the lower social strata and further consolidate their power.

Overview of the most important theories of crime

Anomie/ strain

Anomie or strain theories are sociological and criminological concepts that examine how social structures and conditions can cause stress, frustration, and dissonance in individuals. These theories assume that individuals who face a discrepancy between their social goals (e.g., financial success or social recognition) and the means available to achieve those goals suffer from stress. This tension can lead to various forms of deviant behavior, such as crime, as individuals seek alternative ways to fulfill their desires and reduce tension.

Biology

Biological theories of crime emphasize the role of biological factors such as genetics, brain structure, and hormonal influences in understanding criminal behavior. These theories assume that people tend to engage in criminal behavior because of their biological predisposition, which may influence their tendency toward aggression, impulsivity, or antisocial behavior.

Career/ Developement/ Life Course

Theories of crime in the context of career, development, and life course are concerned with examining the emergence, development, and change of criminal behavior over a person’s life span. These theories emphasize that individual life events, positive or negative, can influence the course of criminality by modeling individual orientation and attachment to norm-conforming behavior.

Conflict-oriented theories of crime/ Labelling

Critical theories of crime, such as the Marxist theory of crime, the labeling approach, and Howard Becker’s theory of “outsiders,” focus on social inequality and power structures as major factors in criminal behavior. The Marxist perspective emphasizes economic disparities and sees crime as the result of social class conflict. The labeling approach analyzes how social labels can influence individual identities and push them into criminal behavior. Becker highlights how “outsiders” are criminalized through social stigmatization and thus pushed into deviant behavior.

Control/ social bonds

Criminological control theories address the factors that constrain or promote individual criminal behavior. These theories emphasize the importance of social ties, relationships, and control mechanisms in directing individual behavior toward norm-conforming behavior. Basically, these theories argue that people are potentially delinquent by nature but are held in check by social ties, moral values, supervision, and positive relationships. These ties can be to family, school, work, friends, and society as a whole. The stronger these ties are, the less likely a person is to become delinquent.

Culture/ Emotions/ Situations

Theories of crime in the context of culture, emotion, and situation focus on the cultural, emotional, and situational aspects that can influence and explain criminal behavior. These theories examine how cultural norms, emotions, and specific situations influence individual behavior and decisions regarding criminal acts.

Learning/ Subculture

Criminological learning and subcultural theories focus on how individual criminal behavior is influenced by learning processes and membership in particular social groups or subcultures. These theories assume that criminal behavior is learned and acquired through interaction with others. Learning processes include observation, imitation, reward, and punishment. Subcultures that have their own norms, values, and lifestyles can encourage criminal behavior by legitimizing it or portraying it as acceptable.

Rational Choice

Theories of crime in the context of rational choice theories focus on the idea that criminal behavior is the result of a rational decision. These theories assume that people act rationally in their behavior by weighing the costs and benefits before deciding to commit criminal acts. The costs may be legal consequences, social exclusion, or other risks, while the benefits may be rewards such as financial gain, status gain, or personal satisfaction.

Sanctioning

Theories of crime in the context of sanctioning address the consequences and effectiveness of sanctions applied to criminal behavior. These theories illuminate the interactions between sanctioning and individual behavior as well as the social context in which these sanctions take place.

One example is John Braithwaite’s Reintegrative Shaming Theory, which emphasizes that sanctions should not only focus on punishment, but should also aim to reintegrate the offender into the community. In this context, shame is used as a social control tool to confront the offender and make him take responsibility for his behavior and mend his ways.

Lawrence W. Sherman’s Defiance Theory examines how people respond to sanctions, particularly those that are perceived as unjust or undeserved. This theory emphasizes that the response to sanctions depends on the individual’s perception of the sanction and belief in the legitimacy of the sanctioning system.

Social Disorganisation

Theories of crime in the context of social disorganization address the social and spatial structures of a community and how these factors can influence criminal behavior. These theories assume that poor social organization, low socioeconomic status, weak social ties, and high spatial mobility can lead to a lack of social control, which in turn can encourage criminal behavior.

The Chicago School, particularly the ecology of the city, has played a central role in the development of theories of social disorganization. It emphasized the importance of neighborhood factors such as poverty, ethnic composition, educational attainment, and family structure in the emergence of crime. Influential researchers such as Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay have shown that certain neighborhoods are more prone to crime because of social instability and disorganization.