Peers and offender decision‐making

Hoeben, Evelien M.; Thomas, Karen A.

doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12462

Cited by 36 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 175 publications

(322 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Individuals are presumed to internalize their norms and values toward crime over time based on their accumulative experience with exposure to peers. In other words, one’s norms and values toward crime develop gradually from responses to interpersonal relations with deviant peers (Hoeben & Thomas, 2019). Thus, the impact of normative peer influence requires examining developmental pattern of individuals’ own values and norms toward crime in relation to norms and values of their peers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Differential Relationship between Self-Control and Peer Influences over Time: Toward an Integrative Model of Offending Using a Dual-Systems Approach

Yim

2020

Crime & Delinquency

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to explore an alternative approach to unravel how both self-control and peer influence relate to offending. Deriving from a dual-systems framework, this study hypothesizes that individuals with varying levels of self-control will be differentially susceptible to the effects of both exposure to deviant peers and informal socializing with peers. Analyses are based on a sample of serious youthful offenders from the Pathways to Desistance Study. The results indicate that exposure to deviant peers has a stronger impact on offending for individuals with higher self-control, consistent with the hypothesis. However, individuals with higher self-control are more vulnerable to unstructured and unsupervised socializing with peers than those lower in self-control, which counters the hypothesis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Differential Relationship between Self-Control and Peer Influences over Time: Toward an Integrative Model of Offending Using a Dual-Systems Approach

Yim

2020

Crime & Delinquency

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peer influence has been found to be one of the best predictors of crime (Agnew, ; Warr, ). As developed in considerably more detail by others in this issue (Hoeben & Thomas, ), models of peer influence, however, can undoubtedly benefit from more consideration of a decision‐making perspective. One way to model a decision to offend is as a function of traditional criminological/psychological constructs like social rewards and costs that capture the role of peer influence.…”

Section: Developing a Theory Of Offender Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral criminology and public policy

Loughran

2019

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary Public policy, including crime policy, is heavily shaped by economic theory. Recently, refinements based on the application of behavioral insights into the study of public policy applications have become en vogue. Although criminologists have made some inroads into incorporating behavioral principals into the study of crime and offender decision‐making, these contributions have mainly been limited to the area of risk. In this article, I offer a more widespread description of how behavioral economics (BE) can be applied to the study of offender decision‐making and crime policy. Specifically, I focus on several main areas that move beyond the traditional foci on perceptions of risk: intertemporal choice, criminal labor supply, mental accounting and consumption, and social preferences. For each topical area, I first identify a presumable, normative model that could reasonably be drawn from traditional rational choice theory. I then describe ways, based on existing contributions from BE, that scholars have sought to make the assumptions (and anomalies) of this model more realistic. Policy Implications The primary aim of this article is to highlight implications to theory and policy that increase the utilization of BE by criminologists.

show abstract

“…Thus, criminologists continue to investigate social influence and coordination (Hoeben & Thomas, , pp. 759–784; Loughran, , pp.…”

Section: Further Dimensions Of Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nudging and the choice architecture of offending decisions

Pogarsky

Herman

2019

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Peers and offender decision‐making

Cited by 36 publications

References 175 publications

The Differential Relationship between Self-Control and Peer Influences over Time: Toward an Integrative Model of Offending Using a Dual-Systems Approach

The Differential Relationship between Self-Control and Peer Influences over Time: Toward an Integrative Model of Offending Using a Dual-Systems Approach

Behavioral criminology and public policy

Nudging and the choice architecture of offending decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About