NCJ Number
178480
Journal
Criminology Volume: 37 Issue: 2 Dated: May 1999 Pages: 375-404
Date Published
May 1999
Length
30 pages
Annotation
This study tested four models of self-control theory for their ability to explain one form of intimate violence: courtship aggression.
Abstract
The study focused on the problem raised by Miller and Burack (1993) in their criticism of Gottfredson's and Hirschi's general theory of crime. In 1990 Gottfredson and Hirschi advanced a "general theory of crime," a theory that posits that crime and other analogous behaviors can be explained as a lack of self- control that stems from ineffective parenting in early childhood. Ambiguities in this theory have generated doubts about its explanatory scope as well as consistency in the specification of models that have tested it. In particular, the theory has been criticized for its inability to explain violence between intimates; however, an empirical test of this criticism cannot be appropriately conducted unless the theoretical model has been adequately specified. Thus, this study tests four models of self- control theory for their ability to explain dating violence. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the ability of measures of low self-control, opportunity, and perceptions of reward to predict the probability of courtship violence in a sample of 985 students currently involved in a dating relationship. The results show that although the main effects of low self-control, opportunity, and perception of immediate gratification were significant predictors of the probability of using violence in a dating relationship, it was less clear whether the functional form of the theoretical model accommodated the interaction between low self-control and either opportunity or perceived rewards. The analysis thus shows that the explanatory scope of self-control theory can, at least to some extent, accommodate the use of violence in intimate relationships. As an act of force undertaken in the pursuit of self-interest, courtship violence may be more likely among those low in self-control. 3 tables and 85 references