Risky lifestyles, routine activities, and the General Theory of Crime

Gottfredson and Hirschi's A General Theory of Crime proposes that low self-control is a cause of criminal behavior. Several recent studies, showing mixed support, test this theory for understanding crime and imprudent behavior. In this paper we reassess the general theory of crime and highlight the importance of proximate causes, including routine conflict, in explaining the propensity toward violence. Drawing from the insights provided by routine activities theory, we operationalize risky behavior. We analyze data collected in 1994 in a survey of respondents from two Canadian provinces. Our results show that elements of low self-control do not directly affect crime, although measures of self-control have strong effects on imprudent behavior which relate, in turn, to offending. Adding measures of proximate causes, we are better able to understand criminal offending and victimization by respecifying the general theory of crime.

[1]  Robert J. Sampson,et al.  Deviant Lifestyles, Proximity to Crime, and the Offender-Victim Link in Personal Violence , 1990 .

[2]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  Practical Issues in Structural Modeling , 1987 .

[3]  Stephen W Baron,et al.  Routine Activities and a Subculture of Violence: A Study of Violence on the Street , 1993 .

[4]  Michael R. Gottfredson,et al.  A control theory interpretation of psychological research on aggression. , 1993 .

[5]  Lawrence E. Cohen,et al.  Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach , 1979 .

[6]  Leslie W. Kennedy,et al.  ROUTINE ACTIVITIES AND CRIME: AN ANALYSIS OF VICTIMIZATION IN CANADA * , 1990 .

[7]  H. Barlow,et al.  Explaining Crimes and Analogous Acts, or the Unrestrained Will Grab at Pleasure Whenever They Can , 1991 .

[8]  Austin Sarat,et al.  The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, Claiming . . . , 1980 .

[9]  Michael R. Gottfredson,et al.  The Generality of Deviance , 1995 .

[10]  M. Felson,et al.  Crime and Everyday Life , 1998 .

[11]  Michael R. Gottfredson,et al.  Commentary: Testing the General Theory of Crime , 1993 .

[12]  Michael R. Gottfredson,et al.  A general theory of crime. , 1992 .

[13]  David F. Luckenbill,et al.  STRUCTURAL POSITION AND VIOLENCE: DEVELOPING A CULTURAL EXPLANATION* , 1989 .

[14]  J. S. Long,et al.  Social Differentiation in Criminal Victimization: A Test of Routine Activities/Lifestyle Theories , 1987 .

[15]  Terance D. Miethe,et al.  Crime and its social context : toward an integrated theory of offenders, victims, and situations , 1995 .

[16]  Harold G. Grasmick,et al.  Low self-control and imprudent behavior , 1993 .

[17]  Harold G. Grasmick,et al.  Testing the Core Empirical Implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's General Theory of Crime , 1993 .

[18]  Karl G. Jöreskog,et al.  LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications , 1988 .

[19]  R. Tremblay,et al.  Can disruptive boys be helped to become competent? , 1991, Psychiatry.

[20]  D. Forde,et al.  Pathways to aggression: A factorial survey of “Routine conflict” , 1994 .

[21]  Thomas J. Bernard.  ANGRY AGGRESSION AMONG THE “TRULY DISADVANTAGED”* , 1990 .

[22]  Robert J. Sampson,et al.  TURNING POINTS IN THE LIFE COURSE: WHY CHANGE MATTERS TO THE STUDY OF CRIME* , 1993 .

[23]  N. Hatton.  ASKING QUESTIONS , 1979, The Medical journal of Australia.

[24]  John J. Gibbs,et al.  Self-control and its manifestations among university students: An empirical test of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory , 1995 .

[25]  R. Akers.  Self-control as a general theory of crime , 1991 .