Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zlgnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T23:41:53.282Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conscience, Significant Others, and Rational Choice: Extending the Deterrence Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Harold G. Grasmick  and
Robert J. Bursik JR.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We propose that significant others and conscience function as agents of social control in a manner similar to the State. All three pose possible threats or costs that are more or less certain and severe which actors take into account in considering whether or not to violate the law. State-imposed costs, which have been addressed in the literature on deterrence, are material deprivations in the form of fines and incarceration. Socially imposed costs are the embarrassment or loss of respect actors might experience when they violate norms which significant others support. Self-imposed costs are shame or guilt feelings which actors might impose upon themselves when they offend their own conscience by engaging in behaviors they consider morally wrong. The threats of shame and embarrassment, like the threat of legal sanctions, affect the expected utility of crime and, thus, the likelihood that crime will occur. In the research reported here, parallel measures are developed of the perceived threats of each of these three kinds of punishment for three illegal behaviors (tax cheating, petty theft, drunk driving). The effects of these perceived threats on people's intentions to violate the law are then examined in a random sample of adults. Threats of shame and of legal sanctions inhibit the inclination to commit each of the three offenses, but the findings for embarrassment appear less compatible with the expected utility model.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , 1990 , pp. 837 - 861
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 The Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Funding for this research was provided by the College of Arts and Sciences, University of Oklahoma, as part of the annual Oklahoma City Survey.

References

ANDERSON, Andy, HARRIS, A., and J. L., MILLER (1983) “Models of Deterrence Theory,” 12 Sociology and Social Research 236.Google Scholar
BALDWIN, John (1985) “Thrill and Adventure Seeking and the Age Distribution of Crime: Comment on Hirschi and Gottfredson,” 90 American Journal of Sociology 1326.Google Scholar
BECKER, Gary (1968) “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach,” 76 Journal of Political Economy 169.Google Scholar
BERGER, Dale E., and John, SNORTUM (1986) “A Structural Model of Drinking and Driving: Alcohol Consumption, Social Norms, and Moral Commitments,” 24 Criminology 139.Google Scholar
BISHOP, Donna M. (1984) “Legal and Extralegal Barriers to Delinquency: A Panel Analysis,” 22 Criminology 403.Google Scholar
BLAKE, Judith, and Kingsley, DAVIS (1964) “Norms, Values and Sanctions,” in Faris, Robert (ed.), Handbook of Modern Sociology. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
BRIAR, Scott, and Irving, PILIAVIN (1965) “Delinquency, Situational Inducements, and Commitment to Conformity,” 13 Social Problems 35.Google Scholar
BURKETT, Steven R., and Eric L., JENSEN (1975) “Conventional Ties, Peer Influence, and the Fear of Apprehension: A Study of Adolescent Marijuana Use,” 16 Sociological Quarterly 522.Google Scholar
BURSIK, Robert, and Yoko, BABA (1986) “Individual Variations in Crime-related Decisions,” 15 Social Science Research 71.Google Scholar
BYNUM, Tim (1982) “Release on Recognizance: Substantive or Superficial Reform?” 20 Criminology 67.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John (1987) “Compliance with the Law: A Decision-making Approach to Taxpaying,” 11 Law and Human Behavior 319.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John (1986) “A Cognitive-Process Analysis of Taxpayer Compliance.” Presented at the National Research Council's Symposium on Taxpayer Compliance Research, South Padre Island, Texas.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John (1982) “Committing a Crime: The Offender's Decision,” in Konecni, V. and Ebbesen, E. (eds.), The Criminal Justice System: A Social Psychological Analysis. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John (1978) “A Psychological Approach to Deterrence: The Evaluation of Crime Opportunities,” 36 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1512.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John, and Frances, WEAVER (1986) “Shoplifters' Perceptions of Crime Opportunities: A Process-tracing Study,” in Cornish, Derek and Clarke, Ronald (eds.), The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
CORNISH, Derek, and Ronald, CLARKE (1986) “Preface,” in Cornish, Derek and Clarke, Ronald (eds.), The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EHRLICH, Isaac (1973) “Participation in Illegitimate Activities: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation,” 81 Journal of Political Economy 521.Google Scholar
ECKLAND-OLSEN, Sheldon, John, LIEB, and Louis, ZURCHER (1984) “The Paradoxical Impact of Criminal Sanctions: Some Microstructural Findings,” 18 Law & Society Review 159.Google Scholar
FISHBEIN, Martin, and Icek, AJZEN (1975) Belief Attitudes, Intention and Behavior. New York: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
GIBBS, Jack (1968) “Crime, Punishment, and Deterrence,” 48 Southwestern Social Science Quarterly 515.Google Scholar
GOVE, Walter (1985) “The Effect of Age and Gender on Deviant Behavior: A Biopsychosocial Perspective,” in Rossi, Alice (ed.), Gender and the Life Course. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
GRASMICK, Harold (1985) “The Application of a Generalized Theory of Deterrence to Income Tax Evasion.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Law & Society Association, San Diego.Google Scholar
GRASMICK, Harold, and George, BRYJAK (1980) “The Deterrent Effect of Perceived Severity of Punishment,” 59 Social Forces 471.Google Scholar
GRASMICK, Harold, and Donald, GREEN (1981) “Deterrence and the Morally Committed,” 22 Sociological Quarterly 1.Google Scholar
GRASMICK, Harold, Nancy, FINLEY, and Deborah, GLASER (1984) “Labor Force Participation, Sex Role Attitudes, and Female Crime,” 65 Social Science Quarterly 703.Google Scholar
GREEN, Gary (1985) “General Deterrence and Television Cable Crime: A Field Experiment in Social Control,” 23 Criminology 629.Google Scholar
GREENBERG, David, and Ronald, KESSLER (1982) “The Effect of Arrests on Crime: A Multivariate Panel Analysis,” 60 Social Forces 771.Google Scholar
HIRSCHI, Travis (1986) “On the Compatibility of Rational Choice and Social Control Theories of Crime,” in Cornish, Derek and Clarke, Ronald (eds.), The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
HIRSCHI, Travis (1969) Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
HORTON, Paul, and Gerald, LESLIE (1960) The Sociology of Social Problems. 2d ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
JENSEN, Gary (1969) “Crime Doesn't Pay: Correlates of a Shared Misunderstanding,” 17 Social Problems 189.Google Scholar
JENSEN, Gary, and Maynard, ERICKSON (1978) “The Social Meaning of Sanctions,” in M. Krohn and R. Akers (eds) Crime, Law, and Sanctions. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
JENSEN, Gary, Maynard, ERICKSON, and J., GIBBS (1978) “Perceived Risk of Punishment and Self-reported Delinquency,” 57 Social Forces 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
JOHNSON, Eric, and John, PAYNE (1986) “The Decision to Commit a Crime: An Information-processing Analysis,” in Cornish, Derek and Clarke, Ronald (eds.), The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
KAHNEMAN, Daniel, Paul, SLAVIC, and Amos, TVERSKY (eds.) (1982) Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KAHNEMAN, Daniel, and Amos, TVERSKY (1979) “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,” 47 Econometrica 263.Google Scholar
KATZ, Jack (1988) Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions in Doing Evil. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
KLEPPER, Steven, and Daniel, NAGIN (1989a) “Tax Compliance and Perceptions of the Risks of Detection and Criminal Prosecution,” 23 Law & Society Review 209.Google Scholar
KLEPPER, Steven, and Daniel, NAGIN (1989b) “The Deterrent Effect of Perceived Certainty and Severity of Punishment Revisited,” 27 Criminology 721.Google Scholar
LANZA-KADUCE, Lonn (1988) “Perceptual Deterrence and Drinking and Driving Among College Students,” 26 Criminology 321.Google Scholar
LATTIMORE, Pamela, and Ann, WITTE (1986) “Models of Decision Making Under Uncertainty,” in Cornish, Derek and Clarke, Ronald (eds.), The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
LEMPERT, Richard (1981–82) “Organizing for Deterrence: Lessons from a Study of Child Support,” 16 Law & Society Review 513.Google Scholar
LOGAN, Charles (1975) “Arrest Rates and Deterrence,” 56 Social Science Quarterly 376.Google Scholar
LUNDMAN, Richard (1986) “One-Wave Perceptual Deterrence Research: Some Grounds for the Renewed Examination of Cross-sectional Methods,” 23 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 370.Google Scholar
MEIER, Robert, and Weldon, JOHNSON (1977) “Deterrence as Social Control: The Legal and Extralegal Production of Conformity,” 42 American Sociological Review 292.Google Scholar
MEIER, Robert, BURKETT, Steven R., and Carol A., HICKMAN (1984) “Sanctions, Peers, and Deviance: Preliminary Models of a Social Control Process,” 25 Sociological Quarterly 67.Google Scholar
MILLER, J. L., and Andy, ANDERSON (1986) “Updating the Deterrence Doctrine,” 77 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 418.Google Scholar
MURRAY, Glenn, and Patricia, ERICKSON (1987) “Cross-sectional Versus Longitudinal Research: An Empirical Comparison of Projected and Subsequent Criminality,” 16 Social Science Research 107.Google Scholar
PATERNOSTER, Raymond (1989) “Decisions to Participate in and Desist from Four Types of Common Delinquency: Deterrence and the Rational Choice Perspective,” 23 Law & Society Review 7.Google Scholar
PATERNOSTER, Raymond (1988) “Examining Three-Wave Deterrence Models: A Question of Temporal Order and Specification,” 79 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 135.Google Scholar
PATERNOSTER, Raymond, SALTZMAN, Linda E., WALDO, Gordon P., and Theodore, CHIRICOS (1983) “Perceived Risk and Social Control: Do Sanctions Really Deter?” 17 Law & Society Review 457.Google Scholar
PILIAVIN, Irving, GARTNER, Rosemary, THORNTON, Craig, and Ross, MATSUEDA (1986) “Crime, Deterrence, and Rational Choice,” 51 American Sociological Review 101.Google Scholar
RECKLESS, Walter (1967) The Crime Problem. 4th ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1982) Deterring the Drinking Driver: Legal Policy and Social Control. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
SALTZMAN, Linda, PATERNOSTER, Raymond, WALDO, Gordon, and Theodore, CHIRICOS (1982) “Deterrent and Experiential Effects: The Problem of Causal Order in Perceptual Deterrence Research,” 19 Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency 172.Google Scholar
SHERMAN, Lawrence, and Richard, BERK (1984) “The Specific Deterrent Effects of Arrest for Domestic Assault,” 49 American Sociological Review 261.Google Scholar
SILBERMAN, Matthew (1976) “Toward a Theory of Criminal Deterrence,” 41 American Sociological Review 442.Google Scholar
SUTHERLAND, Edwin, and Donald, CRESSEY (1966) Principles of Criminology. 7th ed. New York: J. B. Lippincott.Google Scholar
TITTLE, Charles (1980) Sanctions and Social Deviance: The Question of Deterrence. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
TITTLE, Charles (1977) “Sanction Fear and the Maintenance of Social Order,” 55 Social Forces 579.Google Scholar
TITTLE, Charles (1969) “Crime Rates and Legal Sanctions,” 16 Social Problems 409.Google Scholar
TITTLE, Charles, and A. R., ROWE (1973) “Moral Appeal, Sanction Threat, and Deviance: An Experimental Test,” 20 Social Problems 488.Google Scholar
TUCK, Mary, and David, RILEY (1986) “The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Decision Theory of Crime,” in Cornish, Derek and Clarke, Ronald (eds.), The Reasoing Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
WARD, David, MENKE, Ben, GRAY, Louis, and Mark, STAFFORD (1986) “Sanctions, Modeling, and Deviant Behavior,” 14 Journal of Criminal Justice 501.Google Scholar
WEAVER, Frances, and John, CARROLL (1985) “Crime Perceptions in a Natural Setting by Expert and Novice Shoplifters,” 48 Social Psychology Quarterly 349.Google Scholar
WILLIAMS, Kirk, and Richard, HAWKINS (1989) “The Meaning of Arrest for Wife Assault,” 27 Criminology 163.Google Scholar
WILLIAMS, Kirk, and Richard, HAWKINS (1986) “Perceptual Research on General Deterrence: A Critical Review,” 20 Law & Society Review 545.Google Scholar