Self-Control and Offending

Pratt, Travis C.; Lloyd, Kristin M.

doi:10.1017/9781108759458.033

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different approaches have resulted in different theories of what shapes compliance. There are five main strands of theories: (1) rational choice theories, where people comply because the utility of compliance outweighs violation (Becker, 1968;Gul, 2009), (2) social theories, where people comply because they are influenced by opinions, values, and behaviors of others (Nolan & Wallen, 2021;Schultz et al, 2007), (3) legitimacy theories, where people comply out of a sense of duty that originates in the legitimacy of the legal system (Tyler, 2006), (4) capacity theories, where people comply because they are able to do so (Pratt & Lloyd, 2021;Van Rooij & Fine, 2021), and (5) opportunity theories, where people comply because they do not have the opportunity to violate the rules (Benson et al, 2009;Clarke, 2005;Felson, 1987).…”

Section: Compliance Theories and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, people may lack the knowledge, resources, or the discretion that is necessary in order for them to comply (Gray & Silbey, 2011;Winter & May, 2001;Yan et al, 2016). This idea is also reflected in criminological research that suggests that people's compliance with rules may depend on their ability to exert self-control (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990;Hirschi & Gottfredson, 1993;Pratt & Cullen, 2000;Pratt & Lloyd, 2021), or on strenuous, negative emotional states that people may cope with through rule breaking (Agnew, 2007;Piquero & Sealock, 2004). As such, people should comply more the greater their practical capacity to do so is, the greater their self-control, and the less that they experience negative emotions.…”

Section: Compliance Theories and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This field aims to understand the interaction between rules and human conduct (van Rooij & Sokol, 2021), and specifically, the way that compliance with rules, laws, and policies develops and is sustained. Compliance research has traditionally looked at these questions through particular theoretical perspectives, such as rational choice theories (Becker, 1968; Gul, 2009), social theories (Nolan & Wallen, 2021; Schultz et al, 2007), legitimacy theories (Tyler, 2006), capac- ity theories (Pratt & Lloyd, 2021; Van Rooij & Fine, 2021), and opportunity theories (Benson et al, 2009; Clarke, 2005; Felson, 1987). While these per- spectives have not been fully isolated, the focus in different strands of com- pliance literature has most often been to show how a particular theory can best explain compliance within a particular setting, or how one, two, or three theories interact (e.g., see Gneezy & Rustichini, 2000; Murphy, 2003; Thornton et al, 2005; Wenzel, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel

Bruijn

Feldman

Folmer

et al. 2022

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To understand the question why people obey or break rules, different approaches have focused on different theories and subsets of variables. The present research develops a cross-theoretical approach that integrates these perspectives. We apply this in a survey of compliance with COVID-19 pandemic mitigation rules in Israel. The data reveal that compliance in this setting was shaped by a combination of variables originating from legitimacy-, capacity-, and opportunity theories (but not rational choice or social theories). This demonstrates the importance of moving beyond narrow theoretical perspectives of compliance, to a cross-theoretical understanding—in which different theoretical approaches are systematically integrated.

show abstract

Section: Compliance Theories and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Compliance Theories and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel

Bruijn

Feldman

Folmer

et al. 2022

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A related aspect of people’s capacity to follow rules is whether they are able to exert self-control, and are able to restrain themselves from breaking rules. Previous criminological findings have shown that high levels of impulsivity predict deviant behavior (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990 ; Pratt & Cullen, 2000 , 2005 ; Pratt & Lloyd, 2021 ; Vazsonyi et al, 2017 ). Related to this, some people’s capacity to follow the rules may be undermined by negative emotions they experience or develop.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…In this literature, we can distinguish five key theoretical approaches, which have developed in relative isolation from each other—in different disciplines, focusing on different settings and behaviors. Broadly they comprise rational choice theories (Becker, 1976 ; Shover & Hochstetler, 2005 ), social theories (Nolan & Wallen, 2021 ; Schultz et al, 2007 ), legitimacy theories (Murphy & Tyler, 2008 ; Tyler, 1997 , 2006 ; Tyler & Blader, 2005 ), capacity theories (Langton & Piquero, 2007 ; Pratt & Lloyd, 2021 ; Van Rooij, 2021 ), and opportunity theories (Benson & Madensen, 2007 ; Benson et al, 2009 ; Clarke, 2003 ). Each of these literatures has focused on its own concepts and variables to understand how these predict individual compliance within specific settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Network Approach to Compliance: A Complexity Science Understanding of How Rules Shape Behavior

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To understand how compliance develops both in everyday and corporate environments, it is crucial to understand how different mechanisms work together to shape individuals’ (non)compliant behavior. Existing compliance studies typically focus on a subset of theories (i.e., rational choice theories, social theories, legitimacy theories, capacity theories, and opportunity theories) to understand how key variables from one or several of these theories shape individual compliance. The present study provides a first integrated understanding of compliance, rooted in complexity science, in which key elements from these theories are considered simultaneously, and their relations to compliance and each other are explored using network analysis. This approach is developed by analyzing online survey data (N = 562) about compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures. Traditional regression analysis shows that elements from nearly all major compliance theories (except for social theories) are associated with compliance. The network analysis revealed groupings and interconnections of variables that did not track the existing compliance theories and point to a complexity overlooked in existing compliance research. These findings demonstrate a fundamentally different perspective on compliance, which moves away from traditional narrow, non-network approaches. Instead, they showcase a complexity science understanding of compliance, in which compliance is understood as a network of interacting variables derived from different theories that interact with compliance. This points to a new research agenda that is oriented on mapping compliance networks, and testing and modelling how regulatory and management interventions interact with each other and compliance within such networks.

show abstract

Explaining compliance with voluntary sustainability standards: A case study from Colombia's coffee belt

Batistic,

Dietz,

Börner

et al. 2024

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to explain producer compliance with Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS), instruments of private governance regarded as key to solving sustainability issues in global value chains. We employ a dataset of 194 Colombian coffee producers who are certified by one or more VSS to break down the factors leading to farmer compliance with environmental criteria linked to VSS. In total, we analyse 19 environmental criteria, derived from 10 obligations from five different sustainability standards. We expect compliance to be explained by different theoretical approaches, being either rational choice, capacity, legitimacy, or opportunity, operationalised by grouping related variables. Rational choice and legitimacy‐related drivers, as well as opportunity, show mostly positive, mild to strong effects on compliance, while capacity variables show no significant effect. We propose that a hybrid approach among theories explains coffee farmers' compliance with environmental VSS requirements, empowering policy‐makers and standard setters to adjust practices and policies accordingly.

show abstract

Self-Control and Offending

Cited by 7 publications

References 61 publications

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel

A Network Approach to Compliance: A Complexity Science Understanding of How Rules Shape Behavior

Explaining compliance with voluntary sustainability standards: A case study from Colombia's coffee belt

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About