Opportunities, Rational Choice, and Self-Control

Abstract

In this article, deviant action is analyzed on the basis of ideas derived from Gottfredson and Hirschi’s self-control theory. Presumedly, self-control in interaction with opportunities can explain deviant action. This assumption is elaborated using the concept of high- and low-cost situations from rational choice theory. From this point of view, the hypotheses are that self-control predicts deviant action in low-cost situations, whereas utility predicts deviant action in high-cost situations. Two test strategies are employed in an empirical examination of these hypotheses. A standardized questionnaire was presented to a sample of 494 German adults aged 18 to 80. The results of both test strategies show that the assumptions of an interaction effect between self-control and opportunities are fundamentally supported.

Bullying and Substance Use in Early Adolescence: Investigating the Longitudinal and Reciprocal Effects Over 3 Years Using the Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model

“…Moreover, the General Theory of Crime posits that deviant actions are more likely to occur when a person with low self-control has the opportunity of misconduct ( Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990 ; Seipel and Eifler, 2010 ). Nonetheless, they did not specify how this context-related factor should be operationalized and what are the relationships with self-control ( Seipel and Eifler, 2010 ).…”

“…Moreover, the General Theory of Crime posits that deviant actions are more likely to occur when a person with low self-control has the opportunity of misconduct ( Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990 ; Seipel and Eifler, 2010 ). Nonetheless, they did not specify how this context-related factor should be operationalized and what are the relationships with self-control ( Seipel and Eifler, 2010 ). In this vein, bullies may engage in substance use as a way to gain social status and to be perceived as “cool and attractive” ( Spijkerman et al, 2005 ) in front of other deviant peers ( Cook et al, 2010 ).…”

The utility of joint use of the Low Self-Control Scale and the Brief Self-Control Scale in explaining adolescent deviance

“…Second, although the general theory of crime claims to be valid across cultures, research has revealed that the utility of self-control in explaining deviance varies across countries. For instance, research has found that self-control fails to explain significant deviant acts in some countries or when social factors are controlled for (for example, Cheung and Cheung, 2008; Li et al, 2019; Seipel and Eifler, 2010). This implies that, although low self-control can be seen as a marker of risk for deviance, future work needs to incorporate other key constructs to examine youth deviance and take into account the influence of cultural background.…”

The Perceived Role of General Self-Regulation and Prosocial Support on the Decision Not to Act Among Men Sexually Attracted to Children

“…In considering the differences in the decision not to act between men sexually attracted to children who have and have not acted on their attractions, understanding the role of self-regulation strengths may prove useful. Selfregulation is targeted in most empirically supported treatment models for sex offenders (Hanson & Yates, 2013;Marshall & Marshall, 2014), and there is emerging evidence to suggest that self-control in general and problem-solving skills specifically may decrease the likelihood of criminal behavior among both general and sexual offenders (de Kemp et al, 2009;de Vries Robbé & de Vogel, 2012;Moffitt et al, 2011;Pratt & Cullen, 2000;Seipel & Eifler, 2010;Vazsonyi, Pickering, Junger, & Hessing, 2001). For example, techniques for coping with everyday problems have been found to improve among sex offenders receiving therapeutic treatment (Wakeling, 2007).…”