Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

THE PRESUMPTION THAT virtually everyone in society is capable of illegal or criminal and other deviant behavior because people are clever enough to see their advantages, is the basis of self-control theory. People have no trouble inventing wrongful behaviors and then discovering the easiest ways to commit them, with no special motivation or learning required for their completion. Why, then, is not everyone a criminal? Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi's self-control theory, found in their A General Theory of Crime, stresses the importance of studying the factors that cause most individuals generally to obey the law, factors that center on a fear of the consequences for bad behavior.

Virtually all crimes promise to net the perpetrator some expression of immediate self-gratification, be it money without work, sex without courtship, revenge without court delays, or simply excitement itself. It follows that persons likeliest to commit crime are those who are most unable to self-control pursuit of these outcomes. An individual's general level of self-control varies from very high (or little tendency for short-term gratification) to very low (great tendency for short-term gratification), and all of us fall somewhere within those extremes.

Crime Similarity

Self-control theory's approach represents three major departures from other criminological postulations. Most fundamentally, because virtually all criminal acts promise the same thing—relatively immediate gratification—self-control theorists believe that distinctions such as white-collar and corporate crime or even violent and property crime have little utility, and, in fact obscure the similarity among criminal acts and among criminals. To illustrate this similarity, all of the following are looking for money (or its equivalent) based on the least amount of honest work: robbers, corporate polluters, shoplifters, bank embezzlers, doctors who perform unnecessary surgery, lawyers who over-bill, burglars, and price-fixers. Self-control theory therefore supposes that all of these offenders should be viewed as essentially the same.

A second important divergence of self-control theory is that it considers the division between criminal and noncriminal behavior to be a false distinction for theoretical purpose, because both crime and noncriminal deviant acts reveal manifestations of the same trait. Tobacco and alcohol use, lying, low academic performance and cheating, adultery, high debt, checkered work histories, unsafe sex, car accidents from risky driving, gambling, and a host of other noncriminal behaviors will occur at rates based on how low one's self-control is, as will larceny, assault, embezzlement, rape, fraud, and murder. By transcending legalistic designations of which behaviors and individuals are criminal, self-control theory avoids many of the entanglements associated with figuring out such designations, and is able instead to concentrate on overall behavior patterns. Many of these noncriminal acts of self-gratification can contribute to financial and other stresses for an individual, increasing further the motivations and frustrations that lead a person to commit property crime, violent crime, and to use drugs. Indeed, extremely low self-control ravages a person's life far beyond the pains associated with official punishments, and official punishments are often the least of such persons' daily worries. However, self-control theory does not believe that involvement in one form of deviance leads to involvement in other forms. Rather, high involvement in both criminal and noncriminal deviant behaviors are caused by the same thing—lower self-control.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading