Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

Agent-Based Assessments of Criminological Theory

  • Daniel BirksEmail author
  • Henk Elffers
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_687

Synonyms

Overview

This entry discusses the application of computational agent-based models (ABM) in exploring the ramifications of crime event mechanisms proposed by criminological theory. In particular, it describes how simulation experiments can be used to systematically assess the plausibility of crime event theories in explaining commonly observed patterns of crime and how the use and development of ABM may offer a viable method of theoretical prototyping free from traditional empirical constraints which in turn encourages theorists to explicitly specify the mechanisms by which they propose observed crime phenomena come about.

Introduction

A wide range of criminological theories provide individual-level depictions of the crime event. Such theories outline hypothesized mechanisms of cognition and action for both potential victims and offenders and, in turn, the influences that the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading and References

  1. Axelrod R (1997) The complexity of cooperation: agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Axelrod R (2005) Advancing the art of simulation in the social sciences. Idea Group, HerseyGoogle Scholar
  3. Axtell R, Epstein J (1994) Agent-based modeling: understanding our creations, vol. 9. Bulletin of the Santa Fe InstituteGoogle Scholar
  4. Birks D, Donkin S, Wellsmith M (2008). Synthesis over Analysis: Towards an Ontology for Volume Crime Simulation. In: Liu L, Eck J (eds) Artificial crime analysis systems: using computer simulations and geographical systems. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp 160–191Google Scholar
  5. Birks D, Townsley M, Stewart A (2012) Generative models of crime: using simulation to test criminological theory. Criminology 50(1):221–254Google Scholar
  6. Bonabeau E (2002) Agent-based modeling: methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A (PNAS) 99(3):7280–7287Google Scholar
  7. Bosse T, Elffers H, Gerritsen C (2010) Simulating the dynamical interaction of offenders, targets and guardians. Crime Patterns Anal 3(1):51–66Google Scholar
  8. Brantingham P, Brantingham P (2004) Computer simulation as a tool for environmental criminologists. Secur J 17(1):21–30Google Scholar
  9. Brantingham P, Tita G (2008) Offender mobility and crime pattern formation from first principles. Idea Group. In: Liu L, Eck J (eds) Artificial crime analysis systems: using computer simulations and geographical systems. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp 193–208Google Scholar
  10. Brantingham P, Glasser U, Jackson P, Kinney B, Vajihollahi M (2008) Mastermind: computational modelling and spatiotemporal aspects of crime in urban environments. In: Liu L, Eck J (eds) Artificial crime analysis systems: using computer simulations and geographical systems. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp 252–280Google Scholar
  11. Cornish D (1994) The procedural analysis of offending and its relevance for situational prevention, vol 3, Crime prevention studies. Criminal Justice Press, MonseyGoogle Scholar
  12. Eck J, Liu L (2008) Contrasting simulated and empirical experiments in crime prevention. J Exp Criminol 4:195–213Google Scholar
  13. Elffers H, Van Baal P (2008) Realistic spatial backcloth is not that important in agent based simulation research. An illustration from simulating perceptual deterrence. In: Liu L, Eck J (eds) Artificial crime analysis systems: using computer simulations and geographic information systems. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp 19–34Google Scholar
  14. Epstein J (1999) Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity 4(5):41–60Google Scholar
  15. Epstein J (2006) Generative social science: studies in agent-based computational modeling. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  16. Epstein J, Axtell R (1996) Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Fung K, Vemuri S (2003) The significance of initial conditions in simulations. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 6(3)Google Scholar
  18. Gilbert N (2004) Agent-based social simulation: dealing with complexity. http://cress.soc.surrey.ac.uk/resources/ABSS
  19. Gilbert N, Troitzsch K (2005) Simulation for the social scientist, 2nd edn. Open University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Groff E (2007) Simulation for theory testing and experimentation: an example using routine activity theory and street robbery. J Quant Criminol 23(2):75–103Google Scholar
  21. Hedström P (2005) Dissecting the social: on principles of analytical sociology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson S (2008) Repeat burglary victimisation: a tale of two theories. J Exp Criminol 4:215–240Google Scholar
  23. Liu L, Wang X, Eck J, Liang J (2005) Simulating crime events and crime patterns in a RA/CA model. Idea Publishing, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  24. Malleson N, Evans A, Jenkins T (2009) An agent-based model of burglary. Environ Plan B Plan Des 36:1103–1123Google Scholar
  25. Schelling T (1978) Micromotives and macrobehaviour. W.W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Schlesinger S (1980) Terminology for model credibility. Simulation 34:101–105Google Scholar
  27. Townsley M, Birks D (2008) Building better crime simulations: systematic replication and the introduction of incremental complexity. J Exp Criminol 4(3):309–333Google Scholar
  28. Townsley M, Johnson S (2008) The need for systematic replication and tests of validity in simulation. In: Liu L, Eck J (eds) Artificial crime analysis systems: using computer simulations and geographical systems. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  29. Van Baal P (2004) Computer simulations of criminal deterrence: from public policy to local interaction to individual behaviour. Boom Juridische uitgevers, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang X, Liu L, Eck J (2008) Crime simulation using GIS and artificial intelligent agents. In Liu L, Eck J (eds) Artificial crime analysis systems: using computer simulations and geographical gystems. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp 209–225Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ARC Center of Excellence in Policing and Security, CEPS, Griffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR)AmsterdamThe Netherlands