Deterrence and Rational Choice Theories

Deterrence and Rational Choice Theories
Name:
Institution
Abstract
Different approaches and theories have been implemented towards the study of human behavior, especially in the fields of criminal law. The increased rate of criminal activities has seen the need to employ different theories towards addressing the issue. Theories such as deterrence and rational choice theories are among the most debated by different authors. Reflecting on research carried out by different authors, it is proven that rational choice theory is more superior in the field of criminology as compared to the deterrence theory. This is an article that explicitly examines deterrence and rational choice theories from broad perspective.
Introduction
Different theories have been developed to assist comprehend human nature and explain the reasoning with which criminals partake when committing offenses. The development of these theories has been aimed towards mitigating such vices. This cognitive process of offenders is attempted to be unraveled in criminology studies. As conjured up by Gul (2009), deterrence and rational choices theories in criminology are based on the utilitarian notion that humans are capable of weighing options. This is thorugh evaluating their merits, repercussions/costs, end and means. They then rationally select their perceived best choice between the alternatives. This paper aims at addressing deterrence and rational choice theories.
Deterrence and Rational Choice Theories
As applied in criminology, it is believed that offenders deliberately commit their crime for some form of benefit. Some of the well known benefits take account of material gains- money, sex and status - or for non-pecuniary benefits- excitement, revenge, and psychological gain (Ward, Stafford & Gray, 2006). However, these options could come at an expense. For example, material costs such as money, psychic such as the feeling of guilt, opportunistic such as alternate time spent or punishment costs as focused on by the deterrence theory models. The making of these decisions can either be expedited or constrained by past experience, information gathering ability or other limits. Just like the neo-Marxist perspectives thrived in the 1970s, so is the rational choice and action theories today, which is being incorporated in most social realms and disciplines.
Most of the literature that explicates on the rational theory derives from econometric models to attempt to explain criminal behavior and test models that can be utilized in criminal justice system. There are numerous assumptions that the theory proposes and have been relied or used to find the truth. For example, the theory presumes that the choices that are regarded by persons are those that reap maximum benefits with the lowest cost or repercussions incurred (McCarthy, 2002). This is strikingly similar to what occurs when making economically sound decisions-maximizing profits with the minimum capital input. According to the theory, the cognition of pain or punishment for crimes committed acts as a deterrence for criminal action while pleasure offers motivation for particular actions. In this section, the article discusses the concept and applications of the theory and display the connection between rational choices and behavioral models. Based on differential reinforcement, models are developed to determine the balance between dissuasive and rewarding stimuli.
In deterrence theory of criminology, the aversive factors to reprehensible behavior are formed from consequences recorded from different institutions such as apprehension by law enforcers and jail sentences (Moyer, 2001). While these are formal consequences attributed to breaking of law, there are informal factors such as parental reprimand or social judgment. However, it is also recognized that deterrence is subsumed in social learning in a differential reinforcement context. There is no general rule or variables to determine deterrence in the models. This is true since it is acknowledged that the mere fear of formal punishment is a flimsy variable to relate to criminal acts.
Other measures must be considered such as perceived backlash from prospective victim and society and numerous others, which cut across social learning theory. The society is structured to reward conforming behavior and censure non-conformity through socialization acts. This routine acts as a contingency for reinforcement of deterrence and rational choice theories which ensures that the larger population tows the line through self-control. Humans have also been wired to contend with punishment as a consequence for their misdeeds. Deterrence form of negative punishment is interpreted that the direct threat of punishment in legal systems is more convincing than the anticipated loss of a payoff for partaking a certain choice. The traditional deterrence theory as it stood did not incorporate the implications of positive punishment and is considered frivolous (Moyer, 2001).
Currently, the theory attempts to integrate variables such as discriminative stimuli, association’s normative definitions which include rationalizations, attitudes and others. When the other numerous variables are considered, the deterrence theory becomes the rational choice theory. However, the argument of rational choices behavior being modeled in criminology is debatable. This is evident since deterrence is not necessarily as a result of causation, but can be from free will and this is not considered by the models (Gul, 2009). This is viewed to be fallacious to ignore and that currently defining rationality still appears to be vague and arbitrary. This is even addressed by different authors who admit that even criminals display some degree of rationality in the planning of an offense. However, trying to rationalize that through extensive gathering of evidence could blur the rational-irrational demarcation. They, thus, assume that the most minimal form of rationality should be applied limitedly rather than purely in criminology.
Empirical support for models has shown to be deficient in corroborating purely rational criminology models. In rational choice theory, offenders are viewed as individualistic and their behavior is attributed to be of self-interest. Secondly, their actions are inclined to reap maximum profit with minimum costs. The theory constitutes the following perspectives;
humans are rational beings
based on their calculation humans choose between deviance or conforming behavior
calculations involve balancing between pain versus pleasure
choice taken is based on utmost pleasure gain
choice is also attributed from discernment or perception of prospective social reprimand or appraisal
laws by state are intended to maintain ‘social good’
Severity, clarity and celerity of punishment of crime are a measure of capability of laws to curb human violations of these laws (Ward et al., 2006).
There is a classical origin to the modern theory of deterrence. As conceived by Cesare Beccaria, (1738-1794) and perpetuated by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1833), they asserted that the weight of punishment must outweigh the merits of an illegality (Gul, 2009). Punishment was used to incapacitate offenders to safeguard society, as retribution...