NCJ Number
225365
Journal
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology Volume: 52 Issue: 6 Dated: December 2008 Pages: 698-721
Date Published
December 2008
Length
24 pages
Annotation
Comparing a sample of university students to a group of incarcerated young offenders, the study sought to explore the criticism that knowledge about the operation of rational choice theory gained from student sample might not generalize to other groups, especially, groups of actual offenders.
Abstract
The results demonstrate a number of significant differences in the probability that each group would report various types of costs and benefits as being relevant to their offending decisions. The results provide at least some evidence to suggest that the content of the decisionmaking process, as it is understood from research on university students, may not generalize to other samples, such as in this case, a group of younger known offenders. Most criminological research from the rational choice perspective has utilized hypothetical scenarios presented to university students. Although this research generally supports rational choice theory, a common criticism is that conclusions from these studies might not generalize to samples of actual offenders. This study examined these issues in two steps. First, a sample of university students was examined to determine how various costs and benefits related to their hypothetical likelihood of offending. Second, a sample of younger, adjudicated, and institutionalized offenders was examined to determine whether the conclusions drawn from the sample generalized to this offender sample. Tables, appendix, and references