No abstract

Research Summary Deterring crime is often considered to be a process of information transmission (e.g., Geerken & Gove, 1975). Economic notions on incentives and choice have meshed well with this perspective (Becker, 1968; Matsueda, 2013). Behavioral economics, however, represents a source of further insights on offender decision‐making, particularly regarding information transmission to promote conformity. Pogarsky, Roche, and Pickett (2018) reviewed behavioral economic studies of offender decision‐making in criminology. In their review, they focused on prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), a behavioral economic model of decision‐making. More recently, Kahneman (2003, 2011) highlighted the dual‐process nature of behavioral economics, and Thaler and Sunstein (2009) elaborated some principles of nudging. These notions underscore dimensions of offending decisions beyond the perceived costs, risks, and benefits of crime. Policy Implications From a behavioral economic standpoint, there is a choice architecture to offending decisions that permits various prosocial nudges. We analyze these ideas for possible theoretical innovations and alternative perspectives on crime policy.

Objectives Criminological research increasingly aims to better understand criminal behavior in context. Recent advancements demonstrate how perceptions of legal sanction risk are anchored in reality and influence offending decisions. Yet research on extralegal considerations involving morality has not kept pace. Such research has downplayed situational moral dynamics in offending decisions. This study presents and tests a conceptual framework on personal and situational morality that features situational rather than decontextualized moral evaluations of crime opportunities. Enduring personal morality is captured with the concept of moral identity. Findings are presented on the interrelationship between situational inputs, moral evaluations, and moral identity. Methods Data are collected with a survey containing randomized experiments to a nationwide sample of respondents ( n = 502). Findings Situational moral evaluations of specific crime opportunities vary positively with the presence of circumstances conducive to rationalizing the misconduct. There is also some indication that rationalization processes are more pronounced for individuals with stronger moral identities. Conclusions Criminological research should more closely target situational moral dynamics to better understand crime decision-making.