American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 131–148 | Cite as

Designed to fail: Self-control and involvement in the criminal justice system



This study investigates self-control theory using official and selfreported criminal records of 500 adult offenders. Four items derived from rapsheets (aliases, date of birth, place of birth, and social security number) are used as indicators of the self-control construct. Negative binomial regression models indicate a significant inverse relationship between self-control and escape arrests, failure to appear violations, probation and parole violations, felony convictions, and prison sentences. Since system involvement entails discipline, tenacity, and responsibility, offenders with low self-control are more likely to experience a criminal justice system failure.


Criminal Justice Item Response Theory Criminal Justice System Criminal History Prison Sentence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akers, R. L. (1991). Self-control as a general theory of crime.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 7, 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arneklev, B., Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., & Bursik, R. J. (1993). Low self-control and imprudent behavior.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 9, 225–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arneklev, B., Cochran, J. K., & Gainey, R. (1998). Testing Gottfredson and Hirschi’s “low self-control” stability hypothesis: An exploratory study.American Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartusch, D., Lynam, D., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. (1997). Is age important? Testing a general versus a developmental theory of antisocial behavior.Criminology, 35, 13–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benson, M. L., & Moore E. (1992). Are white collar and common offenders the same? An empirical and theoretical critique of a recently proposed general theory of crime.Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 29, 251–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biderman, A. D., & Reiss, A. (1967). On exploring the “dark figure” of crime.The Annals, 374, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blomberg, T., & Lucken, K. (1994). Stacking the deck by piling up sanctions: Is intermediate punishment destined to fail?Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Britt, C. (2000). Comment on Paternoster and Brame.Criminology, 38, 965–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Britt, C., Gottfredson, M. R., & Goldkamp, J. S. (1992). Drug testing and pretrial misconduct: An experiment on the specific deterrent effects of drug monitoring defendants on pretrial release.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29, 62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brownfield, D., & Sorenson, A. (1993). Self-control and juvenile delinquency: Theoretical issues and an empirical assessment of selected elements of a general theory of crime.Deviant Behavior, 14, 243–264.Google Scholar
  11. Burton, V., Cullen, F., Evans, T., Fiftal-Alarid, L., & Dunaway, R. G. (1998). Gender, self-control, and crime.Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 35, 123–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burton, V., Evans, T. D., Cullen, F. T., Olivares, K., & Dunaway, R. G. (1999). Age, self-control, and adults’ offending behaviors: A research note assessing a general theory of crime.Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cernkovich, S. A., Giordano, P. C., & Pugh, M. D. (1985). Chronic offenders: The missing cases in self-report delinquency research.Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 76, 705–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cochran, J., Wood, P., Sellers, C., Wilkerson, W., & Chamlin, M. (1998). Academic dishonesty and low self-control: An empirical test of a general theory of crime.Deviant Behavior, 19, 227–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DeLisi, M. (in press). It’s all in the record: Assessing self-control theory with an offender sample.Criminal Justice Review.Google Scholar
  16. Evans, T. D., Cullen, F. T., Burton, V. S., Dunaway, R. G., & Benson, M. L. (1997). The social consequences of self-control: Testing the general theory of crime.Criminology, 35, 475–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forde, D., & Kennedy, L. (1997). Risk lifestyles, routine activities, and the general theory of crime.Justice Quarterly, 14, 265–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gardner, W., Mulvey, E. P., & Shaw, E. C. (1995). Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed Poisson, and negative binomial models.Psychological Bulletin, 118, 392–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Geerken, M. R. (1994). Rap sheets in criminological research: Considerations and caveats.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 10, 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Geis, G. (2000). On the absence of self-control as the basis for a general theory of crime: A critique.Theoretical Criminology, 4, 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibbs, J., & Giever, D. (1995). Self-control and its manifestations among university students: An empirical test of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory.Justice Quarterly, 12, 231–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gibbs, J., Giever, D., & Martin, J. (1998). Parental management and self-control: An empirical test of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory.Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 35, 40–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gibson, C. L., Wright, J. P., & Tibbetts, S. G. (2000). Empirical assessment of the generality of the general theory of crime: The effects of low self-control on social development.Journal of Crime & Justice, 23, 109–134.Google Scholar
  24. Goldkamp, J. S. (1993). Judicial responsibility for pretrial release decisionmaking and the information role of pretrial services.Federal Probation, 57, 28–35.Google Scholar
  25. Goldkamp, J. S., Gottfredson, M. R., & Weiland, D. (1990). Pretrial drug testing and defendant risk.Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 81, 585–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990).A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gove, W. R., Hughes, M., & Geerken, M. (1985). Are uniform crime reports a valid indicator of index crimes? An affirmative answer with minor qualifications.Criminology, 23, 451–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., Bursik, R. J., & Arneklev, B. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime.Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 30, 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hay, C. (2001). Parenting, self-control, and delinquency: A test of self-control theory.Criminology, 39, 707–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Herbert, C., Green, G., & Larragoite, V. (1998). Clarifying the reach of a general theory of crime for organizational offending: A comment on Reed and Yeager.Criminology, 36, 867–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hindelang, M., Hirschi, T., & Weis, J. G. (1981).Measuring delinquency. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Hirschi, T., & Gottfredson, M. (1993). Commentary: Testing the general theory of crime.Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 30, 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hirschi, T., & Gottfredson, M. (Eds.) (1994).The generality of deviance. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Hirschi, T., & Gottfredson, M. R. (2000). In defense of self-control.Theoretical Criminology, 4, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jones, P. R., & Goldkamp, J. S. (1991). Judicial guidelines for pretrial release: Research and policy developments in the United States.Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 140–160.Google Scholar
  36. Junger, M., & Tremblay, R. (1999). Self control, accidents, and crime.Criminal Justice & Behavior, 26, 485–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keane, C., Maxim, P., & Teevan, J. (1993). Drinking and driving, self control, and gender: Testing a general theory of crime.Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 30, 30–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. LaGrange, T., & Silverman, R. (1999). Low self-control and opportunity: Testing the general theory of crime as an explanation for gender differences in delinquency.Criminology, 37, 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Longshore, D. (1998). Self-control and criminal opportunity: A prospective test of the general theory of crime.Social Problems, 45, 102–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Longshore, D., & Turner, S. (1998). Self-control and criminal opportunity: A cross-sectional test of the general theory of crime.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lucken, K. (1997). Dynamics of penal reform.Crime, Law, and Social Change, 26, 367–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maxfield, M. G., Weiler, B., & Widom, C. S. (2000). Comparing self-reports and official records of arrests.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16, 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maxwell, S. R. (1999). Examining the congruence between predictors of ROR and failures to appear.Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 127–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller, S., & Burack, C. (1993). A critique of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: Selective (in)attention to gender and power positions.Women & Criminal Justice, 4, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moffitt, T. E., Krueger, R., Caspi, A., & Fagan, J. (2000). Partner abuse and general crime: How are they the same? How are they different?Criminology, 38, 199–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Paternoster, R., & Brame, R. (1998). The structural similarity of processes generating criminal and analogous behaviors.Criminology, 36, 633–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Paternoster, R., & Brame, R. (2000). On the association among self-control, crime, and analogous behaviors.Criminology, 38, 971–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Petersilia, J., & Deschenes, E. P. (1994). Perceptions of punishment: Inmates and staff rank the severity of prison versus intermediate sanctions.Prison Journal, 74, 306–328.Google Scholar
  49. Piquero, A., & Tibbetts, S. (1996). Specifying the direct and indirect effects of low self-control and situational factors in offenders’ decision making: Toward a more complete model of rational offending.Justice Quarterly, 13, 481–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Piquero, A., Macintosh, R., & Hickman, M. (2000). Does self-control affect survey response? Applying exploratory, confirmatory, and item response theory analysis to Grasmick et al.’s self-control scale.Criminology, 38, 897–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Polakowski, M. (1994). Linking self- and social control with deviance: Illuminating the structure underlying a general theory of crime and its relation to deviant activity.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 10, 41–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reed, G., & Yeager, P. (1996). Organizational offending and neoclassical criminology: Challenging the reach of a general theory of crime.Criminology, 34, 357–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schreck, C. (1999). Criminal victimization and low self-control: An extension and test of a general theory of crime.Justice Quarterly, 16, 633–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sellers, C. (1999). Self-control and intimate violence: An examination of the scope and specification of the general theory of crime.Criminology, 37, 375–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sorenson, A., & Brownfield, D. (1995). Adolescent drug use and a general theory of crime: An analysis of a theoretical integration.Canadian Journal of Criminology, 37, 19–37.Google Scholar
  56. Steffensmeier, D. (1989). On the causes of “white collar” crime: An assessment of Hirschi and Gottfredson’s claims.Criminology, 27, 345–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Taylor, C. (2001). The relationship between social and self-control: Tracing Hirschi’s criminological career.Theoretical Criminology, 5, 369–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tittle, C. R. (1991). Review.American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1609–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Wyk, J. A., Benson, M. L., & Harris, D. K. (2000). Test of strain and self-control theories: Occupational crime in nursing homes.Journal of Crime & Justice, 23, 27–44.Google Scholar
  60. Wiebe, R. (2000). Is self-control sufficient? Toward a more general theory of crime. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
  61. Wood, P. B., & Grasmick, H. G. (1999). Toward the development of punishment equivalencies: Male and female inmates rate the severity of alternative sanctions compared to prison.Justice Quarterly, 16, 19–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wright, B., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. (1999). Low self-control, social bonds, and crime: Social causation, social selection, or both?Criminology, 37, 479–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Yeager, P., & Reed, C. (1998). Of corporate persons and straw men: A reply to Herbert, Green, and Larragoite.Criminology, 36, 885–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyIowa State UniversityAmes

Personalised recommendations