Travis Hirschi’s research while affiliated with University of Arizona and other places

Research on self control from several disciplines demonstrates that relatively high levels of self control, emerging from childhood, create considerable personal advantages that accumulate throughout life. This chapter summarizes modern control theory and discusses directions for future development. It highlights the advantages of control theory, including disciplinary-free definitions of human nature and self control and the focus on childhood socialization. The potential for advances in measurement and application is described. Contributions of the theory to public policy are summarized. The role of higher levels of self control for lifelong advantages and the benefits of prevention are described as expectations of the theory worthy of considerable attention. The value of the theory for macro and comparative criminology is discussed.

With regard to crime, stability does not imply once a crook always a crook, that levels of crime or problem behaviors remain at the same rate over time and do not fluctuate, or that crime is caused only by variation in self control. It does mean that some characteristic or characteristics of the person cause crime rate differences over large periods of time. This chapter reviews and critiques developmental criminology and longitudinal studies of crime causation. It provides a critical evaluation of the use of the concept of stability in research about crime and on how prior record and early childhood effects have been misspecified in criminology. In addition, it critically evaluates the turning points, transition, and desistence research. Critiques of tests of the self-control concept in developmental and life-course research are presented. The role of individual differences in sociological theories of crime and delinquency and common problems with inferences from longitudinal data are discussed.

Modern control theory doubts the effectiveness of criminal sanctions to affect the crime rate substantially. This view is contrasted with the expectations of the criminal career perspective, a leading view on the nature of crime and the role of the criminal justice system in controlling crime by deterrence and incapacitation. The contrast is illustrated with differing expectations about how age is related to crime (including serious offending), the importance of the versatility effect for offending, and evidence about how changes in incarceration levels are expected to be related to crime rates. On all counts, the results of competent contemporary research support the expectations of the general theory of crime over the expectations of criminal career/career criminal traditions. The research on statistical modeling and offender typologies in the criminal careers tradition has not provided consistent or replicated results demonstrating that criminal sanctions effectively incapacitate or deter offending. Control theory is inconsistent with mass incarceration, with the belief that increasing severity of sanctions reduces crime rates either by incapacitation or by deterrence, and notes that crime tends overwhelmingly to decline with age for all offenders beginning in early adulthood.

Self control is a consistent, robust, and substantial cause of crime, and the foundational facts and other dimensions of the self-control theory of crime have found remarkable support in behavioral science. However, not all scholars view the evidence in the same way, and there have been several challenges to the expectations of the theory that merit consideration. Some of these challenges are important for what they say about the limits and contours of the theory; others are important for what they say about the process of theory testing in modern criminology. This chapter discusses methodological issues in testing general theories in criminology. This is followed by a discussion on how to conceptualize control variables and antecedent causes for research. Next, the scope and domain of a theory as relevant to its validity are discussed. In addition, the importance of the definitions of self control and crime is presented. The roles of prior record and of versatility in theory testing are then examined. Finally, a discussion of the tautology issue in self-control theory is presented.

This chapter provides an overview of the self-control theory of crime and delinquency, including a critical review of research literature bearing on the validity of the theory. It discusses research on the origins of self control in the family and the relationships between levels of self control and delinquency and crime, school performance and misconduct, and other problem behaviors. General reviews of the theory in the literature and meta-analyses for self control, parenting and crime, and prevention studies focused on childhood are also discussed. In addition, the chapter reviews research on age and crime, generality effects, and self control over the life course. There is substantial research support for self-control theory and for the predictions it makes for the criminal justice system and for prevention of crime. Implications for global criminology, micro/macro integration of crime theory, and measurement of self control are discussed.

Creating concrete operational indicators for narrative depictions of complex concepts, identifying and recruiting appropriate samples, and identifying designs permitting informed causal judgments in a largely nonexperimental field are among the most challenging intellectual achievements in the behavioral sciences. This chapter discusses misuses of self-control theory in research on crime and delinquency. It presents a critical evaluation of the “sole cause” and “spuriousness thesis” in depictions of self-control theory. Multiple factor and risk factor approaches as alternatives to general theories are discussed. In addition, the chapter examines how a choice theory integrates demographic factors and crime and the idea of family variables as a structural approach to crime theory. The integration of individual differences and sociological theory is also discussed.

In this chapter, the general theory of crime depicted in self-control theory is taken as valid, and the implications for criminal justice are explored. The historical connections between classical theory and criminal sanctions are described, and the relations between classical deterrence theories and control theory are examined. The classical theory assumption that deterrence places limits of effectiveness on state sanctions is used in conjunction with the modern notion of self control. The result is that modern control theory, supported by contemporary research on the effectiveness of criminal sanctions, explains why criminal sanctions have limited effectiveness for crime and sets limits on the appropriate use of criminal sanctions. Modern control theory, using classical school assumptions of human nature and choice, shows why public policy should focus on early socialization and prevention.

Control theory is consistent with the notion of situational crime prevention and many of the ideas that support it. This chapter discusses several contemporary issues in control theory, including the connection between self-control theory and social control theory, the connection between morality and crime, and the role and conception of the opportunity or situational factors in a choice theory of crime causation. It is concluded that self and social control are the same theory operating under common logic, assumptions, and terms. Efforts to show them as competing are misguided. How situational causes are integrated into control theory and the connections among belief, morality, and self control are explored.

Modern Control Theory and the Limits of Criminal Justice updates and extends the authors’ classic general theory of crime (sometimes referred to as “self-control theory”). In Part I, contemporary evidence about the theory is summarized. Research from criminology, psychology, economics, education, and public health substantially supports the lifelong influence of self control as a significant cause of problem behaviors, including delinquency and crime, substance abuse, school problems, many forms of accidents, employment instability, and many poor health outcomes. Contemporary evidence is supportive of the theory’s focus on early socialization for creation of higher levels of self control and other dimensions of the theory, including the roles of self control, age and the generality or versatility of problem behaviors, as well as the connections between self control and later teen and adult problem behaviors. The book provides methodological assessments of research on the theory, contrasting the control theory perspective with other developmental perspectives in criminology. The role of opportunity, the relationship between self and social control theory, and the role of motivation are addressed. In Part II, control theory is taken to be a valid theory and is used to explore the role of criminal sanctions, especially policing and prisons, and policies about immigration, as methods to impact crime. Modern control theory provides an explanation for the general lack of effectiveness of formal, state sanctions on crime and instead provides substantial justification for prevention of delinquency and crime by a focus on childhood. The theory effectively demonstrates the limits of criminal sanctions and the connection between higher levels of self control and positive life-course outcomes.

This chapter presents a review of the research and theorizing about age and crime as depicted in control theory. It critiques psychological and sociological studies of the meaning of the age–crime relationship. It also discusses testing general theory when age is a direct cause of crime, methods of accounting for the age–crime relationship in criminology, and the value of typologies and statistical treatments of age and crime. The accumulated evidence from the best research supports the conclusion that statistical and theoretical models meant to account for the age effect in criminology lack empirical and methodological support. As a result, the best stance for criminology, in both theory and policy, is to assume a direct effect for age. Implications for juvenile justice and the role of age in separate systems for adults and juveniles are discussed.