Adding the Temporal and Spatial Aspects of Routine Activities: A Further Test of Routine Activity Theory

Routine activity theory identifies the routine activities of individuals as important to understanding the convergence of elements necessary for a crime to occur. Two recent studies have demonstrated how geographically aware agent-based models can be used to provide a virtual rather than empirical laboratory for testing theory. Those studies trace the development of three versions of a basic street robbery model with different representations of routine activities (random, temporal constraints, and spatio-temporal constraints). This research uses the existing model to test whether the core premise of routine activity theory (i.e., as time away from home increases so will street robbery) holds true under the different versions of activity spaces. The findings indicate that temporal and spatial constraints have separate and unequal influences on the incidence of crime. These results substantiate the key role of spatio-temporal constraints in determining the opportunities for and incidence of street robbery events.

[1]  D. Dowling Experimenting on Theories , 1999, Science in Context.

[2]  David Harvey Explanation in Geography , 1969 .

[3]  Reginald G. Golledge Models of Man, Points of View, and Theory in Social Science , 2010 .

[4]  Patricia L. Brantingham,et al.  Computer Simulation as a Tool for Environmental Criminologists , 2004 .

[5]  Angela Lee,et al.  Perspectives on … Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc , 1997 .

[6]  Survivors Insurance,et al.  County business patterns , 1948 .

[7]  John E. Eck,et al.  Simulating Crime Events and Crime Patterns in a RA/CA Model , 2005 .

[8]  J. Hudson A DIAMOND ANNIVERSARY , 1979 .

[9]  Lin Liu Artificial Crime Analysis Systems: Using Computer Simulations and Geographic Information Systems , 2008 .

[10]  Howard Slavin,et al.  An integrated, dynamic approach to travel demand forecasting , 1996 .

[11]  John E. Eck,et al.  EXAMINING ROUTINE ACTIVITY THEORY: A REVIEW OF TWO BOOKS , 1995 .

[12]  Leigh Tesfatsion,et al.  Guest editorial agent-based modeling of evolutionary economic systems , 2001, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[13]  Eric Bonabeau,et al.  Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  Edmund Chattoe,et al.  Why Are We Simulating Anyway? Some Answers from Economics , 1995, Social Science Microsimulation.

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

[16]  G. Nigel Gilbert,et al.  Simulation for the social scientist , 1999 .

[17]  Jochen Albrecht,et al.  A New Age for Geosimulation , 2005, Trans. GIS.

[18]  Patricia L. Brantingham,et al.  Patterns in Crime , 1984 .

[19]  Glen E. P. Ropella,et al.  SOFTWARE ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL-BASED MODELS , 2008 .

[20]  T. Ostrom Computer simulation: the third symbol system , 1988 .

[21]  P. Forer,et al.  Computational agents and urban life spaces : a preliminary realisation of the time - geography of student lifestyles , 1998 .

[22]  C. Badcock,et al.  Simulating Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Phenomena , 1995 .

[23]  Mark A. Davenport,et al.  Using SPSS to Solve Statistical Problems: A Self-Instruction Guide , 2000 .

[24]  Ashton M. Shortridge,et al.  Exploring Complexity in a Human–Environment System: An Agent-Based Spatial Model for Multidisciplinary and Multiscale Integration , 2005 .

[25]  M. Macy,et al.  FROM FACTORS TO ACTORS: Computational Sociology and Agent-Based Modeling , 2002 .

[26]  J. Richard Harrison,et al.  Simulation in the Social Sciences , 2008, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.

[27]  Robert L. Axtell,et al.  WHY AGENTS? ON THE VARIED MOTIVATIONS FOR AGENT COMPUTING IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES , 2000 .

[28]  P. Brantingham,et al.  Nodes, paths and edges: Considerations on the complexity of crime and the physical environment , 1993 .

[29]  Thomas C. Schelling,et al.  Dynamic models of segregation , 1971 .

[30]  R. Clarke,et al.  Modeling Offenders' Decisions: A Framework for Research and Policy , 1985, Crime and Justice.

[31]  Ronald L. Akers,et al.  Criminological Theories : Introduction, Evaluation, and Application , 2000 .

[32]  M. Haklay,et al.  Agent-Based Models and Individualism: Is the World Agent-Based? , 2000 .

[33]  Joshua M. Epstein,et al.  Growing artificial societies , 1996 .

[34]  Pietro Terna,et al.  How to build and use agent-based models in social science , 2000 .

[35]  J. Ratcliffe A Temporal Constraint Theory to Explain Opportunity-Based Spatial Offending Patterns , 2006 .

[36]  Michael J. North,et al.  Experiences creating three implementations of the repast agent modeling toolkit , 2006, TOMC.

[37]  Elizabeth R. Groff,et al.  Simulation for Theory Testing and Experimentation: An Example Using Routine Activity Theory and Street Robbery , 2007 .

[38]  Donald E. Brown,et al.  A decision model for spatial site selection by criminals: a foundation for law enforcement decision support , 2003, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C.

[39]  Klaus G. Troitzsch,et al.  Social Science Microsimulation , 1997 .

[40]  Robert Lempert,et al.  Agent-based modeling as organizational and public policy simulators , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[41]  Richard E. Ewing,et al.  Two‐dimensional modeling of microscale transport and biotransformation in porous media , 1994 .

[42]  Elizabeth R. Groff,et al.  ‘Situating’ Simulation to Model Human Spatio‐Temporal Interactions: An Example Using Crime Events , 2007, Trans. GIS.

[43]  Marcus Felson,et al.  Linking Criminal Choices, Routine Activities, Informal Control, and Criminal Outcomes (1986) , 2010 .

[44]  William Rand,et al.  Spatial process and data models: Toward integration of agent-based models and GIS , 2005, J. Geogr. Syst..

[45]  OSVRTI I PRIKAZI,et al.  Rational Choice , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.