CHAPTER I

CLASSICAL AND POSITIVIST THEORY

The Concept of Theory
Introduction

What is the origin of criminal behavior? Why others are serving

their sentence inside the prison institution while others remain a
conforming individual. Are people outcomes of their environment, or is
the probability of their becoming a criminal determined at birth? In
order to explain the grounds of criminal behavior, theories are being
made. Many social scientist have observed facts about criminal
behavior and organized them into complex theoretical models. What is
theory then?
Concepts

According to Freda Adler, theory is a statement that explains the relationship

between abstract concepts in a meaningful way. For example, if scientists observe
that criminality rates are usua ly lhigh in neighborhoods with high employment
rates, they might theorize that environmental conditions influence criminal
behavior (Siegel, 2007).
Social Theory- defined as the systematic set of interrelated statements or principles
that explain aspects of social life. Theory serves as models or framework for
understanding
social factshuman
or readily
behavior
observed
and the
phenomena
forces thatthat
formcan
it. be
It isconstantly
based on ver
calculated
fied
(
measured. Siegel, 2007)
i
especially andone
Theory
based-A on
supposition or a system
general principles of ideas of
independent intended to explain
the thing to be
something,
explained. It derived from the Greek word “theoria” which means “contemplation
or specula tion”(Oxfo rd Dictionary)

principl s offered to ex lain phenom na (Meriam Webste s Diction y).

Theory -a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body
e p e - r’ ar
of
Why Theory is Important?

Introduction
When somebody is putting his effort ,time, money and energy to a certain
project, no doubt how significant and valuable that project is; the same with
the theories being created by theorists. How important it is? Coming up with
theories is at the heart of the scientific process. In simplest
observat on
i osa p enomenon
f h le d to an educated
a ue s about what g is s
causing it or how it works. Experiments or other forms of research then test
terms, this guess or hypothesis. If these guesses are confirmed, a theory
it’s powerful one, it will both explain, telling you why something, is
happen ng in such –and – such a way, and predict, telling you what should
i
emerges.
the sakeIf happen
of knowledgenext. Explaining how something
itself. Explanations canworks
leadis important, and
to solutions
not only
crime forhappening
from (https://iancommunity.org).
in that area if they For example,
didn’t police
know how andofficers cannot
why a crime
prevent the is occurring in that area in the first place.
Concepts

Moore, 1991 as cited in (http: // faculty. Jou.ufl.edu /theory.html) enumerated the

importance o ftheory:
1. Theory provides concepts to name what we observe and to expla nrelationships
i
between concepts. Theory allow us to explain what see and to figure out how to bring
change. Theory is a toll that enables us to identify a problem and to plan a
about for altering situation.
means
2. Theory is to justify reimbursement to get funding and support—need to explain
is being done and demonstrate tha it works. t
Theory
what 3. is to enhance the growth of the professional area to identify a body knowledge
with theories from both within and without the area of distance learning. That
knowledge grows with theory and research. Theory guides research; and,
Theory also helps us underst nd what we don’t know and, the efore, is the only body
guideof

4. c a r
to research. It increases its ability to solve other problems in different times and
pla es.
different
Theories are used by researchers as causal mechanisms to give historical explanation of
cases (George,2004).
PRE-CHRISTIANITY ERA
A. Demonological Theory
During the middle Ages (1200-1600), superstition and fear of satanic
possession dominated thinking. People who violated social norms or
religious practices were believed to be witches or possessed by
demons. The prescribed method for dealing with the possessed was
burning at the stake, a practice that survived into the seventeenth
century. For example, 1575 and 1590, Nicholas Remy, head of the
Inquisition in the French province of Lorraine, ordered 900 sorcerers
and witches burned to death; likewise, a contemporary, Peter Binsfield,
the bishop of the German city of Trier, ordered the death of 6,500
people.
An estimated 100,000 people were prosecuted throughout Europe for
witchcraft during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It was also
commonly believed that some families produced offspring who were
unsound or unstable and that social misfits were inherently damaged
by reason of their “inferior blood.” It was common practice to use cruel
tortures to extract confessions, and those convicted of violent or theft
crimes suffered extremely harsh including whipping, branding,
maiming, and execution.
CHRISTIANITY ERA
1. Classical Criminology
By the mid-eighteenth century, social philosophers began to rethink the
prevailing concepts of law and justice. They argued for a more rational
approach to punishment, stressing that the relationship between
crimes and their punishment should be balanced and fair. This view
was based on which emphasized that behavior occurs when the actor
considers it useful, purposeful, and reasonable. It stands to reason that
criminal behaviors can be eliminated or controlled if people begin to
view them as troublesome and disappointing and not easily rewarding.
Reformers called for a more moderate and just approach to penal
sanctions, which could substitute for the cruel public executions
designed to frighten people into obedience. The most famous of these
was Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794), whose writings described both a
motive for committing crime and methods for its control.
CESARE BECCARIA
He is best known for his treatise, “On Crimes and Punishment”, this
book presented a coherent and comprehensive design for an
enlightened criminal justice system that was to serve the people. It
contains almost all modern penal reforms but its greatest contribution
was the foundation it laid for subsequent changes in criminal
legislation. His treatise was son influential that is became basis of the
reforms in criminal justice and penology not only in Italy but in other
parts of Europe as well, such as in France and Russia. Also, it influenced
the first ten amendments to the U.S Constitution.
Becarria believed people want to achieve pleasure and avoid pain.
Therefore, be concluded, crimes must provide some pleasure to the
criminal. To deter crime, he believed one must administer pain in an
appropriate amount to counterbalance the pleasure obtained from
crime. Beccaria state his famous theorem like this:
In order for punishment not to be in every instance, an act of violence
of one or many against a private citizen, it must be essentially public,
prompt, necessary, the least possible in the given circumstances,
propositions to the crimes, and directed by the laws.
The writings of Beccaria and his followers of what today is referred to
as Classical Criminology. As originally conceived in the eighteenth
century, classical criminology theory had several basic elements:
• In every society people have free will to choose criminal or lawful
solutions to meet their needs or settle their problems.
• Criminal solutions maybe attractive than lawful ones because they
usually require less work for a greater payoff; if left unsanctioned,
crime has greater utility than conformity.
• A person’s choice of criminal solutions maybe controlled by his or her
fear of punishment.
• The more severe, certain, and swift the punishment, the better able it
is to control criminal behavior.
This classical perspective influenced judicial philosophy during much of
the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Prisons began to be used
as a form of punishment, and sentences were greater proportionately
to the seriousness of the crime. Executions were still widely used but
slowly began to be employed for only the most serious crimes. To catch
phrase was “let the punishment fit the crime.”
During the nineteenth century, a new vision of the world challenged
the validity of classical theory and presented an innovative way of
looking at the causes of crime.
RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY
The development of rational choice theory has its roots in the classical
school of criminology developed by the Italian social thinker Cesare
Beccaria. In keeping with the utilitarian views, Beccaria called for fair
and certain punishment to deter crime. He believed people are
egotistical and self-centered, and therefore they must be motivated by
the fear of punishment, which provides a tangible motive for them to
obey the law and suppress the “despotic spirit” that resides in every
person.
1. The Classical Theory of Crime
Beccaria’s ideas and writings inspired social thinkers to believe that
criminals choose to commit crime and that crime can be controlled by
judicious punishment. His vision was widely accepted throughout
Europe and the United States.
In Britain, philosopher Jeremy Bentham, helped popularize Beccaria’s
views in his writings on Utilitarianism. Bentham believed that people
choose actions on the basis of whether they produce pleasure and
happiness and help them avoid pain or unhappiness.
The purpose of law is to produce and support the total happiness of the
community it serves. Because punishment is in itself harmful, its existence
is justified only if it promises to prevent greater evil than it creates.
Punishment, therefore, has four main objectives:
• To prevent all criminal offenses
• When it cannot prevent a crime, to convince the offender to commit a
less serious crime
• To ensure that a criminal uses no more force than is necessary
• To prevent crime as cheaply as possible
•
• Beccaria’s writing has been credited as the basis of the elimination of
torture and severe punishment in the nineteenth century. The practice of
incarcerating criminals and structuring prison sentences to fit the severity
of crime was a reflection of his classical criminology.
GEREMY BENTHAM
His contribution to Classical School of criminology is the concept
of Utilitarianism and the Felicific Calculus.
Utilitarianism is a philosophy which argues that what is right is
the one that would cause the greatest good for the greatest number of
people. Others refers to it as the greatest happiness principle, or the
principle of utility. Bentham based his ideas for social and legal reforms
to this philosophy. According to him, legislators should enact laws that
people and punishments which measure the pleasures and pains.
From the philosophy of utilitarianism, Bentham “formulated the
felicific calculus” or the pleasure-and-pain principle. This is a theory that
proposes that individuals by weighing the gain or “pleasure” and the
suffering or “pain” he would derive from doing the action. If the pleasure
outweighs the pain, then he would most probably proceed to doing
the act. But id
pleasure, he would choose not to do it.
Applying the principle to criminality, it explains that an individual will
commit the crime if the pleasure or benefit he would derive from it is
greater than the punishment he would suffer when caught. Another way of
saying it is an individual will not commit the crime if the degree of
punishment he would incur is greater than the benefit he would get from
committing the crime. In both cases, the individuals are choosing his action
based on his own free will.
2. Neo-Classical Theory of Criminology
One of the flaws of the Classical school of Criminology is that it does
not make any distinction between adult and child, nor does it consider
the position of a mentally-handicapped person. It does not take into
account the mental ability of a child to differentiate between what is
right and wrong. In like manner, it does not take into consideration that
an insane person could not appreciate the consequence of his actions
by reason of his mental illness.
The Neo-Classical theory is modification of the free will doctrine by a
stating that certain factors affect the free will of men and they may
either reduce or totally remove accountability on the part of the person
who committed the crime. Some of these factors are incompetence
due to disorders and abnormalities, physical illnesses and immaturity
due to tender age or minority. All these factors make it impossible for
the individual to exercise free will completely.
Another flaw of the classical school is that it punishes offenders alike,
without regard to whether or not the offender is a first time offender or
a repeat offender, whether the offender is an accidental offender or a
professional offender. This aspect was also modified by the neo-
classical school of criminology.
The principles of classical school intact but the system of defined and
variable punishment between the maximum and minimum fixed by law.
This approached of penology assessed at the time of French Revolution.
It maintained that while the classical School Doctrine in general is
connect. It should be modified in certain details. It argues that since
children and lunatic cannot calculate pleasure and pain they should not
be prepared as criminals and as such that they should not be punished.
Significant Contributions of Neo-Classical School
1. Exempting circumstances
2. Reduction of punishment for partial freedom of the will only partial
punishment.
3. Punishment mitigating for lack of full responsibility
4. It represents the reaction against the severity of the classical theory
of equal punishment irrespective of circumstances.
Positivist School of Criminology
For almost one hundred years, the classical school of criminology
served as the basis of law and justice. However, in the late 1800s, the
use of scientific methods in studying human behavior started to
become widespread. It was on longer enough to rely on pure thought
and reason. Use of observation and analysis of the observable were
beginning of positivism. Positivism refers to a perspective that
measured and observed.
Significant advances in knowledge of both the physical and social world
influenced thinking about crime. These advances in knowledge
changed the study of Crimes and Criminals into a scientific approach.
The earlier “scientific” studies examining human behavior were
biologically oriented Physiognomists, such as J. K. Lavater (1741-1801),
studied the facial features of criminals to determine whether the shape
of ears, nose, and eyes and the distance between them were
associated with antisocial behavior. Phrenologists, such as Franz Joeph
Gall (1758-1828) and Johann K. Spurzheim (1776-1832), studied the
shape of the skull and bumps on the head to determine whether these
physical attributes were linked to criminal behavior. Phrenologists
believed that external cranial characteristics dictate which areas of the
brain control physical activity. Though their primitive techniques and
quasi-scientific methods have been thoroughly discredited, these
efforts were an early attempt to use a “scientific” method to study
crime.
By the early nineteenth century, abnormality in the human mind was
being linked to criminal behavior patterns. Philippe Pinel, one of the
founders of French psychiatry, claimed that some people behave
abnormally even without being mentally ill. He coined the phrase
“manie sans delire” to denote what eventually was referred to as
psychopathic personality. In 1812, an American, Benjamin Rush,
described patterns with an “innate preternatural moral depravity.”
Another early criminological pioneer, English physician Henry Maudsley
(1835-1918), believed that insanity and criminal behavior were strongly
linked. He stated: “Crime is a sort of outlet in which their unsound
tendencies are discharged; they would go mad it they were not
criminals.” These early research efforts shifted attention to brain
functioning and personality as the keys to criminal behavior.
Nineteenth-Century Positivism
The classical position served as a guide to crime, law, and justice for
almost 100 years, but during the late nineteenth century a change in
the way knowledge was being gathered created a challenge to its
dominance. The scientific method was beginning to take hold in
Europe. Rather than rely on pure thought and reason, careful
observation and analysis of natural phenomena was being undertaken
to understand the way the world worked. This movement inspired new
discoveries in biology, astronomy, and chemistry. If the scientific
method could be applied to the study of nature, then why not use it to
study human behavior?
FOUNDER OF POSITIVISM AND SOCIOLOGY
A. August Comte (1798-1857), considered the founder of Sociology,
applied scientific methods to the study of society. Believed to be the
one who reinvented the French term sociologie. According to Comte,
societies pass through stages that can be grouped on the basis of how
people try to understand the world in which they live. People in
primitive societies consider inanimate objects as having life (for
example, the sun is a god); in later social stages, people embrace a
rational, scientific view of the world. Comte called this final stage the
positive stage, and those who followed his writings became known as
positivist. He is recognized as the father of sociology and positivism.
As we understand it today, positivism has two main elements. The first is
the belief that human behavior is a function of internal and external forces.
Some of these forces are social, such as the effect of wealth and class, and
others are political and historical, such as war and famine. Other forces are
more personal and psychological, such as an individual’s brain structure and
his or her biological makeup or mental ability. Each of these forces
influences human behavior.
The second aspect of positivism is embracing the scientific method to solve
problems. Positivists rely on the strict use of empirical methods to test
hypothesis. That is, they believe in the factual, firsthand observation and
measurement of conditions and events. Positivists would agree that an
abstract concept such as “intelligence” exists because it can be measured
by an IQ test. They would challenge a concept such as the “soul” because it
is a condition that tradition was popularized by Charles Darwin (1809-
1882), whose work on the evolution of man encouraged a nineteenth-
century “cult of science” that mandated that all human activity could be
verified by scientific principles.
B. CESARE LOMBROSO
Was a medical doctor, an Italian criminologist and is one of the
proponents of the positivist school of criminology. Due to his
application of modern scientific methods to trace criminal behavior, he
is recognized as the Father of Modern Criminology.
However, with the advent of more advanced methods and
criminological researches, most of his ideas are now discredited.
Nevertheless, his early studies revealed new knowledge that was
useful in the study of criminality during his time. He is known for the
concept of Atavistic Stigmata, the physical features of creatures at an
earlier stage or development. He claimed that criminals are
distinguishable from non-criminals due to the presence of atavistic
stigmata and crimes are committed by those who are born with certain
recognizable hereditary traits (Siegel, 2004)
According to his theory, criminals are usually in possession of huge jaws and strong
canine teeth, the arm span of criminals is often greater than their height, just like
that of apes who use their forearms to push themselves along the ground. Other
physical stigmata include deviation in head size and shape, asymmetry of the face,
excessive dimensions of the jaw and cheekbones, eye defects and peculiarities,
ears of unusual size, nose twisted, upturned of flattened in thieves or aqua ine
l or
beaklike
like thoseinofmurderer, fleshy
animal’s toes lips, swollen
(Siegel, 2004) and protruding, and pouches in the cheek

Lombroso also devised his own classification of criminals and these are:
1. Born
stigmata criminals
is a bor criminal.- A person who is in possession of at least five (5)
Insane criminals
atavistic 2. n who became criminals because of some brain
– are those
defect which affected their ability to understand and differentiate
from what is wrong.
what is right

3. Criminaloids – refer to criminals who do not possess five (5) atavistic stigmata
and who are not suffering from any brain defects. They are habitual criminals,
 criminals by passion and others.
In essence, what Lombroso concluded is that criminals are biologically
physically in ferior to conventi onal normal ,law-abi ing
d citize s.n
and
C. ENRICO FERRI
He focused his study on psychological factors and social factors, such
as economics, on crimes. He devised his own classification of five (5) types or
classes. These are:
1. Born criminals - a born criminal has a congenital predisposition for crime.
2. Insane criminals – suffering from some clinical form of mental alienation.
3. criminals – is one who has acquired the habit of crime mainly
through the ineffective measures employed by society for the prevention
Habitual
and repression of crime.

4. led
Occasional
astray bycriminals - iveryof
his conditions significant criminal the
life than because actsaggressive
more because
ene gyhe
of is
5. aPassionate
degenerate personal– ty
criminals is impels
one whohimcommits
(Ferri, 1901).
crime because of passionr or
revenge.
D. RAFFAELE GAROFALO
Is an Italian juris and criminologist credited for having coined the
word criminology from Italian word, Criminologia. He used it as title if
his book which was published in 1885. Like Ferri, he was also a follower
of Lombroso in the sense that he also rejected the doctrine of the
Classical School of Criminology. He also9 believed that crimes should be
studied using scientific methods.
 CHAPTER 3
BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM
Determinism assigns the causes of crimes to predetermined individual
or environmental factors (Del Carmen and Trulson, 2006). Some of
these theories have already been given new names of although
substantially they remain the same. While some have already
developed into another set of theories. Some have been the bases of
more recent theories, and others may have already been discredited
due to discovery of new facts that proved such theories to be false.
Because criminology is dynamic, new theories continue to be
formulated as new facts continue to be discovered and introduced as
the world continues to evolve. Still, it is important to study the
evolution of the theories of crime causation in order to better
understand how the modern explanations of the causes of crime came
about.
Several important positivists and their contributions to the
understanding and determination of the different causes of crimes
need to be discussed to see how their work shaped the theories of
today.
In Italy, Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909) was studying the cadavers
of executed criminals in an effort to scientifically determine whether
law violators were physically different from people of conventional
values and behavior. Lombroso, known as the “Father of Criminology,”
was a physician who served much of his opportunity to study the
physical characteristics of soldiers convicted and executed for criminal
offenses. Later, he studied inmates at institutes for the criminally
insane at Pavia, Pesaro, and Reggio Emilia.
Lombroso theory can be outlined in a few simple statements. First,
Lombroso believed that serious offenders – those who engaged in repeated
assault or theft-related activities-inherited criminal traits. These “born
criminals” inherited physical problems that impelled them into a life of
crime. This view helped stimulate interest in a criminal anthropology.
Lombroso held that born criminals suffer from atavistic anomalies –
physically, they are throwbacks to more primitive times when people were
savages. For example, criminals were believed to have the enormous jaws
and strong canine teeth common to carnivores and savages who devour
raw flesh.
Lombroso compared the behavior of criminals to that of the mentally
ill and those suffering some forms of epilepsy. According to Lombroso
theory, criminogenic traits can be acquired through indirect heredity, from
a degenerate family whose members suffered from such ills as insanity,
syphilis, and alcoholism. He believed that direct heredity – being related to
a family of criminals – is the second primary cause of crime.
Lombroso’s version of criminal anthropology was brought to the United
States via articles and textbooks that adopted his ideas. He attracted a
circle of followers who expanded on his wisdom of biological
determinism. His work was actually more popular in the United states
than it was in Europe. By the turn of century, American authors were
discussing “the science of penology” and “the science of criminology.”
Lombroso’s version of strict biological determinism is no longer
taken seriously. Later in his career even in recognized that not all
criminals were biological throwbacks. Today, those criminologists who
suggest that crime has some biological basis also believe that
environment conditions influence human behavior. Hence, the term
biological theory has been coined to reflect the assumed link between
physical and mental traits, the social environment, and behavior.
BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM
This refers to the set of theories that point to physical,
physiological and other natural factors as the causes for the
commission of crimes of certain individuals. Some of the fields of study
developed under biological determinism, the important positivists and
their contributions to the development of the said fields are discussed
here briefly.
1. PHYSIOGNOMY – is the study of facial features and their relation to
human behavior.
a. GIAMBATISTA DELA PORTA
was an Italian Physician who founded the school of human
physiognomy. According to this study, tendencies toward criminal
behavior may be predicted based on the facial features of the person.
b. JOHANN KASPAR LAVATER
He is a Swiss theologian who supported the belief of Dela Porta
regarding facial features. He believed that a person’s character is
revealed through his facial characteristics.
2. PHRENOLOGY, CRANIOLOGY OR CRANIOSCOPY
a. FRANZ JOSEPH GALL
Gall is a German neuroanatomist and physiologist who
developed cranioscopy. Cranioscopy is the study of the external shape
of the skull in relation to the person’s personality and tendencies
toward criminal behavior. It has certain similarities to another field of
study called Phrenology, the study that deals with the relationship
between the skull and human behavior. The terms cranioscopy,
phrenology and craniology are used interchangeably to refer to the
study of the skull in relation to human behavior.
b. JOHANN KASPAR SPURZHEIM
He was a German Phrenologist who worked as assistant to Franz
Joseph Gall. Like Gall, he also studied phrenology and believed in its
findings.
3. PHYSIOLOGY OR SOMATOTYPE
Physiology or Somatotype school of criminology refers to the study of the body
build of a person in relation to his temperament and personality and the type of
offense he is most prone to commit. This posits that criminals manifest distin ct
physiques that make them susceptible to particular types of delinquent behavior
(Siegel, 2004). Some books also refer to this as Somatology and body-type
theories.

a. ERNST KRETSCHMER
He was a German psychiatrist who researched the human constitution and
established a typology or somatotype based on three types:
1. Asthenic – body type is characterized as thin, small and weak.
2. Athletic – is muscular and strong
3. Pyknic – round and fat
Each of these body types is associated with certain personality traits.
b. WILLIAM HERBERT SHELDON
He was an American psychologist who was another follower of
the somatotype school of criminology. Based on his studies, he
formulated his own body types:
1. Mesomorph – have well-developed muscles and an athletic
appearance. They are active, aggressive, sometimes violent, and the
most likely to become criminals.
2. Endomorph – have heavy builds and are slow moving. They are
known for lethargic behavior rendering them for unlikely to commit
violent crimes and more willing to engage in less strength criminal
activities such as fencing stolen property.
3. Ectomorph – are tall, thin and less social and more intellectual than
the other types (Siegel, 2004).
HEREDITY
Heredity is the transmission of traits from parents to offspring.
Studies have been conducted, and are still being conducted, as to the
relationship of genetics to criminality. The findings of certain studies
conducted, such as twin studies and adoption studies, support the
theory that criminal tendencies can be theory that since criminal
characteristics can be inherited, children of criminal parents have a
greater chance of becoming criminals themselves.
1. RICHARD LOUIS DUGDALE
He was an American sociologist who in 1877 conducted study of the
Juke Family by researching their family tree as far as far back as 200
years. He discovered that most of the ascendants of the Jukes were
themselves criminals. He became interested in the Jukes family when it
came to his knowledge that six convicted criminals and were serving
their sentences all at the same time. His research confirmed that
criminality was common among the Jukes family. However, the Jukes
family is only fictitious (Barkan, 2006). His study was called The Jukes: A
Study in Crime, Pauperism, Disease and Heredity.
2. HENRY HERBERT GODDARD
Another classic study on heredity and criminality is that of Henry
Goddard, which he published in 1912. He was an American
psychologist and eugenicist whose classical work was called The
Kallikak Family: A Study in Heredity of Feeble-Mindedness. He traced
the descendants of Martin Kallikak from each of his two wives and
found distinct differences in terms of the quality of lives of his
descendants. The Martin Kallikak’s first wife was a woman from a good
Quaker family but he later had an affair with a feeble-minded woman.
Most of the descendants from the feeble-minded woman turned out to
be feeble-minded also epileptics, unhealthy and criminals, while most
of those from his first wife were normal and no one became a criminal.
3. CHARLES BUCKMAN GORING
Charles Goring was an English physician and psychiatrist who published
a book entitled, The English Convict. He was employed as a medical
officer in various English prisons where he conducted his studies on the
physical traits of the convicted offenders. From the findings of his
studies, he was a firm believer that criminal traits can be passed from
parents to offspring through the genes. Because of his belief, he
proposed that individuals who possess criminal characteristics should
be prohibited from having children.
 CHAPTER 4
PSYCHOLOGICAL DETERMINISM

This refers to the theories that attribute criminal behavior of individuals

to psychological factors, such as emotional and mental problems.
1. SIGMUND FREUD
From among the many theories regarding the relationship of
psychology and crime, the psychoanalytic theory by Sigmund Freud is the
most notable. At the mere mention of his name, the theory that
immediately comes to mind in his psychoanalytic theory.
The psychoanalytic or psychodynamic theory holds that the human
personality contains a three-part structure:
Id – is the primitive part of an individual’s mental make-up present at birth.
It represents unconscious biological drives for sex, food, and other life-
sustaining necessities. The id follows the Pleasure Principle: it required
instant gratification without concern for the rights of others.
Ego – is that part of the personality that compensates for the demands
of the id by helping the individual guide his or her actions to remain
within the boundaries of social convention. The ego is guided by the
Reality Principle: it takes into account what is practical and
conventional by societal standards.
Superego – develops as a result of incorporating within the personality
the moral standards and values of parents, communities and significant
others. It is personality; it passes judgments on behavior (Siegel, 2004).
 CHAPTER 5
SOCIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM

Sociological factors refer to things, places and people with whom

we come in contact with and which play a part in determining our
actions and conduct. These causes may bring about the development
of criminal behavior. Some of the proponents of sociological
determinism are presented, as well as brief explanations of their
theories.
1. EMILE DURKHEIM
Durkheim was a French sociologist who published his dissertation,
called The Division of Labor in Society which had been influential in the
study of the organization of societies. It was Durkheim who stated that
crime is a normal part of society, just like birth and death and that for as
long as humans continue to exist and live with each other, crimes will
continue to occur.

Another important contribution of Durkheim is the concept of

Anomie, the absence of social norms. Anomie is common values shared by
individuals, lack appreciation for what is acceptable and not acceptable in
society.
2. GABRIEL TARDE
Tarde was a French sociologist and psychologist who introduced
the theory of imitation which proposes the process by which people
become criminals. According to this theory, individuals imitate the
behavior of other individuals based on the degree of their association
with these other individuals and it is the inferior or the weak who tend
to imitate the superior or the strong. So if a person associates himself
with those is very likely to be influenced by these people and become a
criminal as well.
3. ADOLPHE QUETELET AND ANDRE MICHAEL GUERRY
Quetelet and Guerry, both statisticians, are credited for founding
what is known as the Cartographic School of Criminology. In other
books, they are also cited as the founder of Moral Statistics. The
Cartographic School of Criminology made use of social statistical data
such as population, age, gender, occupation, religious affiliations and
social economic status and studies their influences and relationship to
criminality. This study also found connection between climate, weather
and geographical location to the tendencies to commit crimes of
certain individuals.
MODERN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME CAUSATION
Environmental factors, such as the kind of rearing or family
upbringing, quality of teaching in the school, influences of peers and
friends, conditions of the neighborhood and economic and other
societal factors are believed to be contributory to crime and criminal
behavior. These are some of the explanations proposed by sociological
determinism. These theories have been grouped together and labeled
based on the commonality of the factors believed to have caused the
commission of the crime. These groups of theories are social structure
theories, social process theories, social reaction theories and social
control theories. Under each groups are sub-theories that give further
explanations.
1. SOCIAL STRUCTURE THEORIES
The term, social structure refers not only to the physical features of
communities but also to the way society is organized: the distribution
of social and economic power and the nature of relationships among
individuals and groups. Sometimes, it is also called social environment.
Specific aspects of the social structure are sometimes called
structural conditions and include such things as the level of
poverty and unemployment and the amount of crowded housing
(Barkan, 2006). These factors in society are believed to affect behavior
and attitudes of individuals which in turn contribute to their
commission of crimes.
Three sub-theories under this set of theories are the following:

a. Social Disorganization theory – this theory was popularized by

Clifford Shaw and Henry Mckay, who conducted criminological research
in Chicago in the early 1900s. according to this theory, crimes in the
urban areas are more prevalent because residents have impersonal
relationship with each other. They have different backgrounds and sets
of values and have less in common with each other in general. Also,
there is higher level of turn-over of residents, which makes it even
more difficult to establish close ties. Thus, there is less care and
concern among the members of the community.
Increase in the number of broken families and single parenthood are
also very common in disorganized communities. As a result, there is a
breakdown of traditional family values. These also make it difficult for
parents to exert influence on their children to stay in school, which
accounts for the high drop-out rate and increased number of out-of-
school youths. The importance of schools and what they can do to help
them improve communities. And because many youths are not able to
finish school, these same youths even add to the problem of
unemployment.
 Another feature of a disorganized community is poverty as
evidenced by poor living conditions, such as rundown houses,
unsanitary and unsightly streets and high unemployment rate.

All these factors contribute to the behavior and attitude of an

individual and when combined with each other, may push him into
becoming involved in criminal activities.
b. Strain Theory – as used in this context, refers to the individual’s
frustrations, anger and resentment (Siegel, 2004). These negative
feelings are brought about by their inability to have, possess and
achieve their desires in life, whether material or non-material things.
This inability is usually the result of poverty. Some people, such as the
rich, the middle-class, the educated, and the employed have the means
to get or realize what they want because they have the money to do so.
On the contrary, the poor, by even the most basic needs and wants in
life. This deprivation is the source of the strain. Because of this, they
are pushed into doing illegal activities, such as the crime of robbery,
theft, drug pushing and other similar crimes for the purpose of learning
money. They feel that this is the only way to survive.
c. Cultural Deviance Theory - this theory gives emphasis on the
concept of culture and sub-culture. Culture refers to the system of
values and meanings shared by a group of individuals including the
embodiment of those values and meanings in a material object. Sub-
culture is the subgroup within an existing culture that maintains a
unique set of values and beliefs that are in conflict with conventional
social norms (Siegel, 2004).

According to this theory, because people in the lower class feel

isolated due to the extreme deprivation or poverty, they tend to create
a sub-culture with its own set of rules and values. This sub-culture is
characterized by deviant behavior which results in criminal behavior
among its members.
2. SOCIAL PROCESS THEORIES
Social process theories refer to a group of theories which point
to the individual’s socialization process as the cause for the commission
of crimes. These theories cited interaction with people and experiences
and exposure to different elements in the environment as the primary
factors in criminality. Under this group of theory is the Social Learning
Theory, which in turn has three (3) sub-theories:
a. Differential Association Theory
The differential Association theory, was formulated by Edwin
Sutherland. This theory states that criminality, just like any other
behavior, can be learned through socialization. It further proposes that
criminal behavior is influenced by the people with whom the individual
has regular and frequent contact with, such as family and members and
close friends. This tends to explain why members of the same family
are engaged in the same illegal activities, such as robbery and drug
pushing. This is also the reason given as to why an individual, who used
to be law-abiding, becomes an offender when he develops a strong
friendship with criminals.
b. Differential Reinforcement Theory
According to this theory, individual’s behavior depends on how people
around him react towards his behavior. Thus, the word “reinforcement”
is in the name. a behavior is reinforced when the individual gains
something from it. Conversely, a behavior will be extinguished if the
individual was punished for the doing of such action. Simply stated, an
act, when rewarded, will be repeated. On the other hand, an act, when
punished, will be avoided.
c. Neutralization Theory
This was introduced by David Matza and Gresham Sykes, both modern
criminologists based in Chicago. According to the findings of the studies
they conducted, people are always aware of their moral obligation to
abide by the law and that they have the same moral obligation within
themselves to avoid illegitimate acts. In simple words, people know
when they are doing something wrong, however, they rationalizing is
what is called “Neutralization”. A person is aware that he is about to do
is wrong, but he neutralizes this by convincing himself that is not wrong
and enumerating his justifications. This theory is sometimes also
referred to as Drift Theory. The word drift is used to refer to the
condition wherein a person, who is usually good, sometimes “drift” to
doing something bad.
 3. SOCIAL REACTION THEORIES
Social reaction theory states that people become criminals when
significant members of society label them as such and they accept those labels as
a personal identity (Siegel, 2004). This theory more commonly called Labeling
Theory.
This simply means that when important and influential people in a
person’s life, such as parents, siblings and peers, used negative words to describe
him, use unflattering monickers to refer to him, the tendency is for that person to
internalized or believe that those negative monickers and descriptions of him are
true. He then starts regarding himself as such and this would be reflected through
his actions.
This is usually more applicable children, thus, children who are caught
committing crimes are not called criminals to avoid “labeling”. In the Philippines,
the law is called children in conflict with the law, replacing the old term, minor or
youth offender.
4. SOCIAL CONTROL THEORIES
Social control theories maintain that everyone has the potential
to become a criminal but most people are controlled by their bonds to
society (Siegel, 2004). The social control being referred to are the
agencies of social control, such as family, school, religion or church,
government and laws and other identified authorities in society. Thus,
when the agencies of social control are strong, then people can be
expected not to resort to criminal behavior. In contrast, when these are
weak and ineffective, then criminal behavior will be difficult to control
or contain. Under this group, there are two (2) sub-theories:
a. Containment Theory
this was proposed by Walter Reckless when he conducted
studies pertaining to juvenile delinquency. In his findings, he stated
that inner and outer containments help prevent juvenile offending.
Inner containments include a positive self-concept, tolerance for
frustration and an ability to set realistic goals. Outer containments
include institutions such as the family (Barkan, 2006). Containments, as
used in this context, means the forces within and outside the individual
that has the power to influence his actions, such as whether to commit
or not to commit a crime. Both the inner and outer containments are
important factors in a person’s decision.
Self-concept or self-image refers to how a person sees or regards
himself or his self-esteem. It has been said that a high self-esteem is
not likely to be influenced into doing immoral and illegal things.
Conversely, a person with a negative self-image can be easily seduced
into a life of deviancy and crime.
Tolerance for frustration refers to the person’s ability to cope
with personal problems and find solutions. A person who has a high
level of tolerance for frustrations and disappointments are emotionally
balanced, while those that are emotionally weak. For example, they are
the ones who resort to alcoholism and drugs, which in turn can result
to aggressive behavior. A person’s ability to handle and address
problems that come their way also deviant and criminal behavior.
b. Social Bond Theory
Travis Hirschi is the one credited for the propagation of this
theory. This theory views crime as a result of individuals with weakened
bonds to social institutions (Barkan, 2006). According to this theory,
there are four (4) elements of social bonds, and these are: attachment,
commitment, involvement and belief.
Attachment refers to the degree to which individuals care about
the opinions of others (Barkan, 2006). This means that people’s actions
depend on how the important people in his life would think. For
example, a person who does not want to hurt or disappoint his parents
would not do something that would bring pain, embarrassment and
disappointment to his family. He would strive to be a good person
because he wants his family to be proud of him.
Commitment refers to an individual’s investment of energy and emotion in
conventional pursuits, such as getting a good education (Barkan, 2006). For
example, a person who wants to succeed in life would endeavor to get good
grades in school, finish his college education preferably in a prestigious
university and would aspire to get reputable employment is commonly to his
ambition, he would be less likely to get involved in illegal activities because this
might derail his plans for his life.
Involvement refers to the amount of time an individual spends on a
conventional pursuit (Barkan, 2006). A person who is committed to his ambition
in life is more likely to be deeply-involved with the activities that would lead to
the achievement of his plans. Because he is so focused on this, there is very little
chance that he would allow himself to be distracted by engaging in activities that
can possibly ruin his efforts, such as vices and criminal activities. The same
reasoning is applied for out-of-school youths. It is believed that because they are
not studying, they have a lot of time to spend on non-productive activities. To
counter this, programs are being sponsored by the local government unit, such
as sports tournaments, to divert drugs and gambling.
Finally, belief refers to acceptance of the norms of conventional society
(Barkan,2006). A person who accepts the social norms is more likely to
conform to them. One such norm is obedience to laws.
 CHAPTER 6
VICTIMOLOGY
Traditionally, criminology is focused on the individual who
perpetrated the crime, the criminal. However, starting in the 1940s, a
new approach was introduced which gave an added dimension to this
field of study. This approach involves the study of the victims of crimes,
it is not only the criminals that should be discussed because there is
another important player that completes the picture, and that is the
victim.
BRIEF HISTORY OF VICTIMOLOGY
It was Benjamin Mendelsohn who coined the term “victimology”
in the 1940’s. Mendelsohn was a lawyer from Bucharest, Romania who
developed a scientific method for the study of the criminal act that
utilized biopsychosocial data on the criminal, the victim and the
witnesses. He distributed the manuscript among medico-legal experts
in 1946 when he delivered one of the first formal speeches on the
subject of victimology in Romania (Burgess, 2010).

Mendelsohn developed victim typologies that identified victim

characteristics that might increase a person’s risk of victimization, or
even contribute to, or precipitate the victimization (Tobolowsky, 2000).
He devised his typology according the degree or responsibility of the
victim for his victimization.
Another pioneer in the field of victimology is Hans Von Hentig. Others refer
him as the father of victimology. However, other textbooks credited
Mendelsohn. Von Hentig was a German scholar who taught at a university
in the Unites States. He wrote an article called “The Criminal and
His Victim”, focusing on the interaction between criminals and his victims,
and published it in 1941. He also developed his own victim typology
consisting of three (3) categories, based on psychological, social and
biological factors in contrast to Mendelsohn’s categories based on guilt
and responsibility (Burgess, 2010).
The first textbook written above victims was published in 1968 and
was authored by Stephen Schafer. Schafer was a lawyer born in Budapest,
Hungary who criminology at Polytechnic of Central London (now called
University of Westminster). He later also taught at the Florida State
University and Northeastern University, both in the United States of
America, where he became a professor in criminal justice. The book he
wrote, entitled “Restitution to Victims of Crime”. Was the first book ever
written about “The Victim and His Criminal”.
VICTIMOLOGY
According to Carmen (2010), victimology is the study of victimization,
including the relationship between victim and offenders, the interactions
between and the criminal justice system that is the: police, the prosecutor,
courts, corrections, and other societal groups and institutions, such as
media, businesses and social movements.
It is also defined as the scientific study of the physical, emotional and
financial harm people suffer because of illegal activities (Karmen, 2010).
This definition focuses on the effects of crime to the victim.
In simple terms, victimology tries to answer the following questions:
a. What are the reasons a person becomes a victim?
b. Why are certain people victimized more than the rest?
c. What makes a person a target of offenders?
d. And how does a person contribute to becoming a victim.
VICTIM TYPOLOGY
Typology is a classification scheme that aids in the understanding
of what a group of people has in common and how it differs from
others (Karmen, 2010). Victim typology, then, refers to the
classification of victims based on the types of crimes usually committed
or are likely to be committed against them based on their demographic
profile, such as gender, age, occupation, location of residence or place
of work and the like.
TRADITIONAL CONCEPTS IN VICTIMOLOGY
A few of the traditional concepts in studying victimology are
victim-offender relationship. Victim-facilitation, victim-precipitation
and culpability (also called victim precipitation and provocation), victim
-resistance, victim-vulnerability and victim-blaming.

a. Victim-Offender Relationship
This refers to the relationship of the victim with the offender, and
vice versa. It could be that the victim personally knows the offender,
may be actually related to him by blood, or they may be co-workers,
neighbor or classmates, or even in a relationship with each other. This
relationship be a factor as to why he was victimized by the offender.
 For example, in the cases where a man becomes a victim of
violent crimes, the offender is usually s stranger. On the other hand,
females are more likely to be victims of sexual offenses, and they are
more likely victimized by people they know, like relatives, friends and
even boyfriends (Siegel, 2004).
b. Victim Facilitation
This happens in situations wherein victims unknowingly,
carelessly, negligently and inadvertently make it easier for the criminal
to commit a crime (karmen, 2010). Because of carelessness or
negligence on the part of the victim, the offender is given the
opportunity to actually commit the crime, such as in cases of theft and
robbery. It is called victim facilitation because in effect, it was the victim
who facilitated the commission of the crime, meaning, it was the victim
who made it possible for the offender to commit the crime against him.
c. Victim Precipitation Theory
According to the victim precipitation view, some people may
actually initiate the confrontation that eventually leads to their injury
or death. Victim precipitation can be either active or passive.
1. Active Precipitation
Occurs when victims act provocatively, use threats or fighting words, or
even attack first. In 1971, Menachem Amir suggested female victims
often contribute to their attacks by dressing provocatively or pursuing a
relationship with the rapist. Although Amir’s findings are controversial,
courts have continued to return not guilty verdicts in rape cases if a
victim’s actions can in anyway be construed as consenting to sexual
intimacy.
2. Passive Precipitation
Occurs when the victim exhibits some personal characteristics
that unknowingly either threatens or encourages the attacker. The
crime can occur because of personal conflict. For example, when two
people compete over a job, promotion, love interest, or some other
scarce and coveted commodity. For example, a woman may become
the target of intimate violence when she increases her job status and
her success results in a backlash from a jealous spouse or partner.
Although the woman may never have met the attacker feels menaced
and acts accordingly.
Passive precipitation may also occur when the victim belongs to a
group whose mere presence threatens the attacker’s reputation, status,
or economic well—being. For example, hate crime violence may be
precipitated by immigrant group members arriving in the community to
compete for jobs and housing. Research indicates that passive
precipitation is related to power. If the target group can establish
themselves economically, their vulnerability will diminish. They are still
a potential threat, but they become too formidable a target to attack;
they are no longer passive precipitators. By implication, economic
power reduces victimization risk.
In victim precipitation, the victim significantly contributed to his
victimization, while in culpability or provocation, the victim is
considered to be even more responsible for the crime than the
offender himself (Karmen, 2010).
 A good example of victim precipitation is in case of robbery, when a
person boasts of having money, or shows off his valuable, such as jewelry,
expensive gadgets and other similar items, then he puts himself in danger of
becoming robbed. Thus, precipitated, or caused, his own victimization.

In case wherein the victim suffered physical injuries because he was

the one who actually provoked the anger of the offender, which caused the
offender to retaliate in a violent manner, such as when it resulted to a
physical fight, then it can be said that the victim is actually the one
responsible. Such is an example of victim culpability or provocation.

In both situations, it is implicit that the victim did something to cause

him to become victimized.
4. Victim Resistance
Resistance is defined as action by a potential victim during a
confrontation that is designed to interfere in any way with the
completion of the criminal act or escape. Resistance may conduct
active fight, like physical retaliation or calling to meet the demands of
an offender (Burgess, 2010).

Victim resistance, then, refers to the efforts of the victim to fight-

off or repel the offender. Some victims are strong enough to fight back,
such as males with a good body build or who possess some knowledge
and skills in self-defense. In like manner, females are generally
considered physically weaker which makes them easy target of
offenders. Some people are also emotionally weaker of the offenders,
while some people have a stronger willpower to resist.
5. Victim Vulnerability
Victim vulnerability refers to the tendency of a person to become victimized
without any fault on his part. Such person can easily become a victim because of
his personal circumstances. Such as age and state of mental health. Children are
the best examples of vulnerable persons. Because of their young age, they can be
taken advantage of by older people, sometimes even by their own family. They
become victims of such crimes as child pornography, sexual abuse, human
trafficking, child labor, drug-related offenses, and other crimes that exploit
children. Offenders are able to commit these crimes against children because of
their age and innocence. Obviously, it is not the fault of the children that they are
young and innocent. This is why there are laws that protect the welfare of children
because they cannot protect themselves.
In terms of age, studies show that young people are more at risk of
becoming victims than older persons. This could be attributed to their lifestyles.
Most young people have very active social lives, they go out regularly and
therefore targets of criminals, young people have the highest victim risk (Siegel,
2004).
6. Victim Blame
It is very common to hear people blame the victims for the crime
committed against him. Sometimes, even the victim himself blames
himself. In some ways, this is good because it shows that people aware
that crimes can be prevented if we protect ourselves from them and
that there are means to protect ourselves from criminals. However, this
can also be a negative thing because when we start blaming the victim,
then it is like we are removing the blame from the offender. This can
make offender feel like it is your fault that they victimized you.
VICTIM PATTERNS
The age, gender, marital status educational background, level of
intellect, income, occupation, lifestyle or habits victim-offender
relationship and ecology, are some of the factors that affect
victimization risks.
Results of various studies reveal that in terms of gender, females
are more likely to become victims of robbery and physical injuries. In
terms of income or economic status, the poor are most likely to
become victims of crimes because they live in areas that are crime-
prone.
It was also found out that unmarried or never been married
individuals are victimized more often than married people. This could
be because married people tend to have more stable routines and less
active social lives.
Ecology refers to the location or place of commission of the crime.
According to statistics, victimization occurs more in large, urban areas
while victim rates are lower in rural and sub-urban areas. Most crimes
are committed at night, and the most likely site is an open, public area
such as street, park, parking area and other similar places (Siegel,
2004).
LIFESTYLE THEORY
Some criminologist believe people may become crime victims
because their lifestyles increases their exposure to criminal offenders.
Victimization risk is increased by such behaviors as associating with
young men, going out in public places late at night, and living in an
urban area. Conversely, one’s chances of victimization can be reduced
by staying home at night, moving to a rural area, staying out of public
places, earning more money, and getting married. The basis of this
theory is that crime is not a random occurrence but rather a function of
the victim’s lifestyles.
a. High-Risk
people who have high-risk life-styles—drinking, taking drugs,
getting involved in crime – maintain a much greater chance of
victimization. For example, young runaways are at high risk for
victimization; the more time they are exposed to street life, the greater
their risk of becoming crime victims. Teenage males have an extremely
high victimization risk because their lifestyle places them at risk both at
school and once they leave the school grounds. They spend a great deal
of the hanging out with friends and pursuing recreational fun. Their
friends may give them a false ID so they can go drinking in the
neighborhood bar; or they may hang out in taverns at night, which
places them at risk because many fights and assaults occur in places
that serve liquor. Those who have histories of engaging in serious
delinquency, getting involved in the gangs, carrying shot and killed
themselves.
 Lifestyles risks continue into young adulthood. College students
who spend several nights each week partying and who take
recreational drugs are much more likely to suffer violent crime than
those who avoid such risky academic lifestyles. As adults, those who
commit crimes increase their chances of becoming the victims of
homicide.
b. Victims and Criminals
one elements of lifestyle that may place people at risk for victimization is
ongoing involvement in a criminal career. analysis of data from the Rochester and
Pittsburgh Youth Studies, two ongoing longitudinal surveys tracking thousands of
risk youth, indicates that kids who became victims of serious crime were more likely
than non-victims to have precipitated in such criminal activities as gang/group
fights, serious assaults, and drug dealing. They are also more likely to carry a
weapon and associate with delinquent peers. An adolescent characterized by any
one of these risk factors was generally 2 to 4 times more likely to become a crime
victim than a non-criminal youth. For example, 24 and 40 percent of males involved
in gang/group fights and been seriously injured. Carrying a weapon was another
surefire way to become a crime victim. Males who carried weapons were
approximately 3 times more likely to be victimized than those who did not carry
weapons – between 27 and 33 percent of the weapon carriers became victims, as
opposed to only 10 percent who did not carry weapons. These data indicate that
criminals and victims may not be two separate and distinct groups. Rather, the risk
of victimization is directly linked to the high-risk lifestyle of young, weapon-toting
gang boys.
c. Deviant Place Theory
according to deviant place theory, victims do not encourage
crime but are victim prone because they reside in socially discouraged
high-crime areas where they have the greatest risk of coming into
contact with criminal offenders. Irrespective of their own behavior or
lifestyle. Consequently, there may be little reason for residents in lower
class areas to alter their lifestyle or take safety precautions because
personal behavior choices do not influence the likelihood of
victimization. Neighborhood crime levels, then, may be more important
for determining the chances of victimization than individual
characteristics.
 Deviant places are poor, densely populated, highly transient
neighborhoods in which commercial and residential property exist side
by side. The commercial property provides criminals with easy targets
for theft crimes, such as shoplifting and larceny. Successful people stay
out of these stigmatized areas; they are homes for demoralized kinds of
people who are easily targets for crime: the homeless, the addicted,
the retarded, and the elderly poor. People who live in more affluent
areas and take safety precautions significantly lower their chances of
becoming crime victims; the effect of safety precautions is less
pronounced in poor areas. Residents of poor areas have a much greater
risk of becoming victims because they live in areas with many
motivated offenders; to protect themselves, they have to try harder to
be safe than the more affluent.
Sociologist William Julius Wilson has described how people who can
afford to leave dangerous areas do so. He suggests that affluent people
realize that criminal victimization can be avoided by moving to an area
with greater law enforcement and lower crime rates. Because there are
significant interracial income differences.
d. Routine Activities Theory
Routine activities theory was first articulated in a series of papers
by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson. They concluded that the
volume and distribution of predatory crime are closely related to the
interaction of three variables that reflect the routine activities of the
typical American lifestyle:
• The availability of suitable targets, such as homes containing easily
salable goods.
• The absence of capable guardians, such as police, homeowners,
neighbors, friends, and relatives.
• The presence of motivated offenders, such as a large number of
unemployed teenagers.
The presence of each of these components increases the likelihood
that a predatory crime will take place. Targets are more likely to be
victimized if they engage in risky behavior, are poorly guarded and are
exposed to a large group of motivated offenders such as substance
abusing young men. For example, young women who drink to excess in
bars and frat houses may elevate their risk of date rape because:
They are perceived as easy targets and,
Their attackers can rationalize the attack because they view intoxication
as a sign of immorality.
e. Hot Spots
Motivated people – such as teenage males, drug users, and
unemployed adults – are the ones most likely to commit crime. If they
congregate in a particular neighborhood, it becomes a “hot spot” for
crime and violence. People who live in these hot spots elevate their
chances of victimization. For example, people who live in public
housing projects may have high victimization rates because their fellow
residents, mostly indigent, are extremely motivated to commit crime.
Yet motivated criminals must have the opportunity to find suitable
undefended targets before they commit crime. Even the most
desperate criminal might hesitate to attack’s a well-defended target,
whereas a group of teens rip off unoccupied home on the spur of the
moment. In hot spot for crime, therefore, an undefended yet attractive
target becomes an irresistible objective for motivated criminals. Given
these principles, it is not surprising the:
• People who live in high-crime areas
• Go out late at night
• Carrying valuables such as expensive watch
• Engage in risky behavior such a drinking alcohol
• Without friends or family to watch or help them, have a significant
chance of becoming crime victims.
f. Moral Guardianship
Some criminologists believe moral beliefs and socialization may
influence the routine activities that produce crime. Even in the
presence of criminal opportunities, people may refrain from crime if
they are bonded and or attached to conventional peers and have been
socialized to hold conventional attitudes. The strength of social bonds
may serve as a buffer, a form of moral guardianship, sufficient to
counteract the lure of criminal opportunities.
When Martin Schwartz and his associates studied date rape on
college campuses, they found that men whose peer group supported
emotional and physical violence against women were the ones most
likely to engage in date rape. Those who believed their peers would
reject and disapprove of their behavior were deterred from victimizing
women. Peer rejection and disapproval may be a form of moral
guardianship that can motivated offenders from engaging in law-
violating behavior.
G. Lifestyle, Opportunity, and Routine Activities
Routine activi ies theory is bound up : in oppo tunity and lifestyle. A person’s
living arrangements
motivated offenders.can affect victims
tLifestyle affects risk
the people in unguarded
opportunity areas
rfor crime are the
because it mercy of a
controls
person’s;
• Proximity to criminals
• Time of exposure to criminals
• Attractiveness as a target
• Ability to be protected

Ronald Clarke shows the relationship among opportunity routine activities, and
environment factors. Criminal opportunities (like suitable victims and targets) abound
un urban environments where facilitators (such as guns and drugs) are also readily
found. Environmental factors, such as physical layout and cultural style, may ei her t
facilitate or restrictlearn
spots continually criminal
aboutopportunity. Motivated offenders
criminal opportunities livingthe
from peers, in media
these urban hot
and their
own
warn perceptions; such information may either escalate their criminal motivation or
them of its danger.
Crime and Everyday Life
A core premise of routine activities theory is that all things being
equal, the greater the opportunity to commit crime, the greater the
crime and victimization rate. This thesis is cogently presented by
Marcos Felson in Crime and Everyday Life.
According to Felson, there are always impulsive, motivated
offenders who are willing to take the chance, if conditions are right, of
committing crime for profit. Therefore, crime rates are a function of
changing social conditions.
 CHAPTER 7
THE DEVELOPMNENT OF RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY
Rational choice theory has its roots in the Classical School of
Criminology developed by the Italian social thinkers Cesare Beccaria. In
keeping with the utilitarian views, Beccaria called for fair and certain
punishment to deter crime. He believed people are egoistical and self-
centered, and therefore they must be motivated by the fear of
punishment, which provides a tangible motive for them to obey the law
and suppress the “despotic spirit” that resides in every person.

To deter people from committing more serious offenses Beccaria

believed crime and punishment must be proportional, if not, people
would be encouraged to commit more serious offense. For example, if
robbery, rape, would have little reason to refrain from killing their
victims to eliminate them as witnesses to the crime.
The Classical Theory of Crime
Beccaria’s ideas and writings inspired social thinkers to believe that
criminals choose to commit crime and that crime can be controlled by
judicious punishment. His vision was widely accepted throughout Europe
and the United States.

In Britain, philosopher Jeremy Bentham, helped popularize Beccaria’s

views in his writings on Utilitarianism. Bentham believed that people
choose actions on the basis of whether they produce pleasure and
happiness and help them avoid pain or unhappiness. The purpose of law is
to produce and support the total happiness of the community it serves.
Because punishment is in itself harmful, its existence is justified only if it
promises to prevent greater evil than it creates. Punishments, therefore,
has four main objectives:
1. To prevent all criminal offenses.
2. When it cannot prevent a crime, to convince the offender to
commit a less serious crime.
3. To ensure that a criminal uses no more force than is necessary.
4. To prevent crime as cheaply as possible.
This vision was embraced by France’s post-revolutionary Constituent
Assembly (1789) in its Declaration of the Rights of Man:

“The law has the right to prohibit only actions harmful to society…The
law shall inflict only such punishments as are strictly and clearly
necessary… no person shall be punished except by virtue of a law
enacted and promulgated previous to the crime and applicable to its
terms.”
 Similarly, a prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment
was incorporated in the Eight Amendment to the U.S Constitution.

Beccaria’s writings have been credited as the basis of the

elimination of torture and severe punishment in the nineteenth
century. The practice of incarcerating criminals and structuring prison
sentences to fit the severity of crime was a reflection of his classical
criminology.

By the end of the nineteenth century, the popularity of the

classical approach began to decline, and by the middle of the twentieth
century, this perspective was neglected by mainstream criminologists.
During this period positivist criminologist focused on internal and
external factors – poverty, IQ, education, home life—which were
believed to be the true causes of criminality.
 Because these conditions could not be easily manipulated the
concept of punishing people for behaviors beyond their control seemed
both foolish and cruel. Although the classical principles still controlled
the way police, courts, and correctional agencies operate, most
criminologists rejected classical criminology as an explanation of
criminal behavior.
Choice Theory Emerges
Beginning in the mid-1970s, the classical approach began to
enjoy resurging popularity. First, the rehabilitation of known criminals –
considered a cornerstone of positive policy – came under attack.
According to positivist criminology, if crime was caused by some social
or psychological problem, such as poverty, then crime rates could be
reduced by providing good jobs and economic opportunities. Despite
some notable efforts to provide such opportunities, a number of
national surveys (the most well-known being Robert Martinson’s “What
Works?” failed to find examples of rehabilitation programs that
prevented future criminal activity. A well-publicized book, Beyond
Probation, by Charles Murray and Louis Cox, went as far as suggesting
that punishment-oriented programs could suppress future criminality
much more effectively than those that relied on rehabilitation and
treatment efforts.
 A significant increase in the reported crime rate, as well as
serious disturbances in the nation’s prisons, frightened the general
public. The media depicted criminals as callous and dangerous rather
than as needy people to suggest that it made more sense to frighten
these cold calculators with severe punishments than to waste public
funds by futilely trying to improve entrenched social conditions linked
to crime such as poverty.
Thinking About Crime
Beginning in the late 1970s, a number of criminologists began
producing books and monographs expounding the theme that criminals are
rational actors who plan their crimes, fear punishments, and deserve to be
penalized for their misdeeds. In a 1975 book that came to symbolized
renewed interest to classical views, Thinking About Crime, political scientist
James Q. Wilson debunked the positivists view that crime was a function of
external forces, such as poverty, that could be altered by government
programs. Instead, he argued, efforts should be made to reduce criminal
opportunity by deterring would, be offenders and incarcerating known
criminals. Persons who are likely to commit crime, he maintained, lack
inhibition against misconduct, value the excitement and thrills of breaking
the law, have a low stake in conformity and are willing to take greater
chances than the average person. If they could be convinced that their
actions will bring severe punishment, only the totally irrational would be
willing to engage in crime.
The Concept of Rational Choice
According to the rational choice approach, law violating behavior
occurs when an offender decides to risk breaking the law after
considering both personal factors (such as the need for money,
revenge, thrills, and entertainment) and situational factors (how well a
target is protected and the efficiency of the local police force). Before
choosing to commit a crime, the reasoning criminal evaluates the risk
of apprehension, the seriousness of expected punishments, the
potential value of the criminal enterprise, and his or her immediate
need for criminal gain. Conversely, the decision to forgo crime may be
based on the criminal’s perception that the economic benefits are no
longer there or that the risk of apprehension is too great.
 Rational choice theorists view crime as both offense and offender-
specific. When they say that crime is offense-specific, they mean that
offenders will react selectively to the characteristics of particular offenses.
The decision of whether to commit burglary, for example, might involve
evaluating the target’s likely cash yield, the availability of resources such as
a gateway car, and the probability of capture by police.

When they say that crime is offender-specific, they mean that

criminals are not simply automatons who, for one reason or another,
engage in random acts of antisocial behavior. Before deciding to commit
crime, individuals must decide whether they have the prerequisites to
commit a successful criminal act, including the proper skills, motives,
needs, and fears. Criminal acts might be ruled out if potential offenders
perceive that they can reach a desired personal goal legitimate means or if
they are too afraid of getting caught.