Crim Exam 2- Deterrence Theory

MICRO LEVEL THEORIES

3 components

1) certainty

2) severity

3) celerity (swiftness)

Deterrence Theory

Based in the classical school assumption of rationality (people use their free will to make choices, including calculating the risk involved in committing crime)

The main idea here is that punishment for crime should discourage future crime commitance

proportionality

if a punishment is too severe or too lenient it will not effectively deter crime-

too harsh a punishment will be considered unjust // a loose punishment will not effectively deter (make people think the pain will outweigh the pleasure of committing crime)

2 types of deterrence:

specific deterrence - prevent offenders from becoming repeat offenders

general deterrence- scare the general public into not committing crimes (making an example of someone)

certainty

probability of apprehension and punishment for committing a crime (more effective deterrent than severity)

celerity

immediate punishment is more useful - people will more closely link the punishment to the crime (so the punishment will be a more effective deterrent)

3 Factors of deterrence research in the 1960s

1) technological

2) social

3) intellectual (economic)

What does research say about the death penalty as a deterrent?

In studies comparing crime rates in death penalty vs. non-death penalty states, there was little general deterrence effect found in death penalty states

2 measures in deterrence research

1) objective indicators from crime statistics

2) perceptual —> measure individuals’ perceptions of legal penalties (there is a cognitive dimension to the theory —> do people perceive the punishment in a way that will make them want to avoid receiving it?)

Does the actual or perceived threat of formally applied punishment by the state provide a significant marginal deterrent effect beyond that assured by the informal control system?

research finds … YES - thought not by much

Empirical validity of deterrence theory is …

LIMITED

not everyone can be deterred…

some people “incorrigible offenders” will not be deterred from committing crime // some people wouldn’t have committed crime anyway just due to morals

thus these people do not need to be deterred or simply will not be

informal deterrence

people do not want to disappoint family/friends

***despite research supporting this, this does NOT increase the empirical validity of deterrence theory

Rational Choice Theory

Adds to deterrence theory the expected utility principle from economic theory: people will make rational choices to maximize profit and minimize cost

proposed as a general, all-inclusive explanation of both the decision to commit a specific crime and the development of a criminal career

Research on Rational Choice Theory

pure rationality —> virtually no empirical validity

(most models based on) partial rationality —> Can incorporate psych/soc elements