Prelim THEORIES 1st Sem A.Y. 2021-2022

Preliminary Period
Burauen Community College Modular Home Instruction

LGU Compound, Burauen, Leyte Second Year Professional Criminology and Related Courses
First Semester, A.Y. 2021- 2022
Outcomes- Based Learning Modules in

Theories of Crime Causation
(for internal use only of Burauen Community College)
Prepared by:
Florens M. Lacambra, RCrim, MSCJ, CCS
___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

1
Preliminary Period
Theories of Crime Causation

(A.Y.2021-2022 Preliminary Period)
STUDY PLAN
Module 1: Early and Classical Criminological Theories
Week 1 - Unit 1: Classical School of Criminology

• Classical Theory
• Principle of Utilitarianism
• Neo – Classical Theory
• Positivist Theory
✓ Learning Activity 1
a. Concept Map
b. Knowledge Assessment
Week2 - Unit 2: Concepts of Rational Choice Theory

• Rational Choice Theory
• Structuring Criminality
✓ Learning Activity 2: Case Study
✓ Periodic Quiz (Unit 1 and Unit 2)
Week 3 - Unit 3: Theories of Victimization

• Victim of Precipitation
• Lifestyle Theory
• Deviant Place Theory
✓ Learning Activity 3: Personal Reflection
Week 4
✓ Summative Assessment

2
Preliminary Period
Introduction
Theories of crime causation undertake the theoretical perspective of crime causation committed by
individuals and institutions. It is considered as the foundation of criminology and criminal justice, as it refers to
efforts to explain or understand crime causation. The dimensions and aspects of a person are characterized by the
society and the institutions (political, economic, environmental, social, psychological and biological) and life course. It
is also defined as the system of ideas arranged in rational order that produces general principles that increase our
understanding and explanations. It is an abstract statement that explains why certain phenomena or things do or do
not do. A theory can only be valid if it predicts or foresees future occurrences of certain events and circumstances that
are in question and verified through several experiments or some factual observations. A theory is often viewed as an
attempt to justify and excuse crime or as being wholly inadequate in guiding practical, existing social policy. It simply
explains that theory is the basis of all human acts, may it be good or bad. Theories were developed for us to
understand why certain phenomena are happening; theory has been developed. They were formulated by theorists in
order to explain the causes and effects of crime, criminal behavior and or delinquencies
All throughout, this course module will introduce students the nature and extent of crime, its causes and
society’s reaction. Students have the opportunity to become familiar with the various explanations of criminal
behavior based on the choice of theories developed in the 20 th century. The course also covers various types of crimes
from a legal and sociological perspective. The course has an interdisciplinary component and it is of interest to
students in history, psychology, business among others. It surveys the major schools of thought related to crime
causation and particular theories in crime and delinquency, places these theories in its historical context and reviews
the primary assumptions of the theories and conclusions reached from criminology research. Additionally, the course
focuses on the nature and causes of crime as well as on patterns and trends in criminal activity. Biological,
psychological, and sociological theories are also discussed as explanations of crime and delinquency.
At the end of the course module, the student’s knowledge and understanding of the theories of crime
causation and their ability to use this data to their own professional context will be measured by analyzing situations
through case studies and research analysis.

3
Preliminary Period
Module 1: Early and Classical Criminological Theories
Learning Outcome based on the Course Syllabus:

LO1: Describe by illustrating the development of neo-classical and positivism theory from classical theories in
connection to the free will and rationality of the victim through case study.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this term, with the use of various activities, the learning objective will be attained by the BCC 2 nd year
students taking up Theories in Crime Causation with 75% success.
1. The student will be able to outline the development of the theories of classical school of criminology.
2. The student will be able to discuss the aspects of free will and the rationality of the offender.
3. The student will be able to examine the role of the victim in criminality.
Course Direct Instruction

“The law has the right to give the highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the
right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural
inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good” (Philippine Constitution).
The mainstream of this study is on the different fundamental causes of crime that have been pointed out in
criminological theory. The earliest theories generally attributed the crime to different aspects. While the present
theoretical efforts are more dynamic, that includes multiple personal and social factors into a complex web to explain
the onset, continuation, and eventual resistance of an individual from a criminal career (Siegel, 2018).
As an outline, the general principles, in theory were taken from representatives of particular facts and are not
dependent upon the particular thing to be explained, theories were based from actual phenomena or occurrences, and
that theories have its own life in the increasing generalization it provide. It points out the root cause of every man’s
actions, may it be good deed or a criminal act.
As universally characterized, criminal act or a crime is an act in violation of the law or against the standard
norms of the society. A crime is a product of individual tendencies and the situation of the moment interacting with
his mental resistance, conveyed Abrahamsen. It consists of four dimensions, the law, the offender, the target and the
place.
The theoretical theme argues that criminal events can be understood in the context of people’s movement in
the course of everyday life (Sharma, 2019). Emile Durkheim also suggests that criminality is a normal factor and that
crime is found in all societies.
To further understand, a theory explains why an individual violates the law. It also covers how law is created
and how the law is being violated by criminals and how criminal activity is performed.
That is the reason why the fundamentals school of thought in causes of crime has presented theories to look
into the primary motivations of every individual’s deed. One of which is the Classical Theory.
But before the formulation and acceptance of the classical theory, it has been known and from previous
literatures and stories that the administration of criminal justice in some countries was cruel, uncertain, and
unpredictable. The system of law, its mechanisms of enforcement and the forms of punishment used in the 18th
century were primitive and inconsistent. Decisions were unsatisfactorily being the product of incompetence,
capriciousness, corruption, and political manipulation. The use of torture is to extract confessions and a wide range of
cruel punishments that were publicly executed. Some punishments are whipping/flogging, beheading, pillory.
The need for legal rationality and fairness was identified and found an audience among the emerging middle-
classes whose economic interests lay in providing better systems for supporting national and international trade.
UNIT I: CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT
Concept of Classical Theory

The classical theory originated from the age of Enlightenment, in the 18th century in an attempt to reform the
legal system and to protect the accused against harsh and arbitrary action on the part of the state. It was founded by
Cesare Beccaria an Italian criminologist and economist along with Jeremy Bentham. The main concept of this theory
“it is better to prevent crimes than to punish them”. He believed in the social contract theory of the government that
sovereignty resided in the people and the law applied equally to all members of the society (Allen, 2018).

4
Preliminary Period
It has been pointed out that the relevance of classical theory is human free will. Beccaria’s treatise “On Crimes
and Punishment” was famous in which he called for fair and certain punishment to deter crime. He believed that
people are egoistical and self-centered, and therefore they must be controlled by the fear of punishment. It will
provide them a definite motive to obey the law and suppress the despotic spirit that resides in every person. He also
suggested that people choose all behavior, including criminal behavior, and that choices are designed to please them
and reduce pain, and criminal choices can be controlled by fear punishment (Siegel, 2018).
While estimating the likelihood of any individual to engage in a particular action through moral calculus,
Jeremy Bentham believed that the purpose of the law was to produce and support the happiness of the community it
served. Accordingly, punishment must be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime, if not people would be
encouraged to commit more serious crimes. Granted that, robbery, rape, and murder were all punished by death,
robbers or rapists would have the very least reason to or refrain themselves from killing or raping their victims.
Whereas, if petty crimes like theft or pickpocketing are punished the same with a serious crime rather than a fine or
minimum penalty, the offender would prefer to commit a more serious crime because the resulting punishment is still
the same.
It has been the concern of this theory that punishment should be suited to the offense, not to the social or even
the physical characteristics of the criminal, and so argued, with eventual success, that extreme measures are
unnecessary and indeed may be counter-productive (Tiwari, 2019). Supposing that Juan committed a heinous crime,
he should be punished then with a maximum penalty. If Johnny committed theft, he should be punished with a
minimum penalty. Otherwise, Johnny would commit the same as Juan if the penalty to both crimes is the same.
Principle of Utilitarianism
Bentham said in his principle of utilitarianism “mankind was governed by two sovereign motives, pain and
pleasure and the principle of utility recognized this state affair (Duignan, 2018).
He believed that free will allowed people to make calculated and deliberate decisions related to the pursuit of
their happiness. The object of all legislation must be the greatest happiness of the greatest number. He was very much
a contemporary and admirer of Beccaria's work and believed that freewill allowed people to make calculated and
deliberate decisions related to the pursuit of their happiness.
Accordingly, his principle of morals and legislation was is a philosophical piece on the social control of
individuals based on the principle of utility. For example, the happiness or satisfaction felt by a person when he/she
is at a party.
Based on an individual's actions and the effects on the community it is necessary to consider the act itself,
situations, the motive, the consciousness, and the possible result of the act.
Similar to a situation where a person commits a crime, by doing so, he gains pleasure. He obtained the satisfaction
he was aiming by acting delinquently. So when one is satisfied, he already avoided pain. Thus, to prevent someone
from committing the crime, pain must be applied in a form of punishment. The purpose is to counterbalance the
pleasure obtained from the crime. Consequently, fair judgment to someone's actions still must necessarily be applied.
Every action of a person always has a corresponding consequence depending on the gravity of their acts. Hence,
its existence will only be justified if it promised to prevent greater evil than it created (Frailing, & Harper, 2016).
Utilitarian principle may be illustrated by considering the difference between stop signs and yield signs. Stop
signs forbid drivers to go through an intersection without stopping, even if the driver sees that there are no cars
approaching and thus no danger in not stopping. A yield sign permits drivers to go through without stopping unless
they judge that approaching cars make it dangerous to drive through the intersection. The key difference between
these signs is the amount of discretion that they give to the driver.
Basic Principle of Utilitarianism

1. Psychological Hedonism – it is explained as pleasure and happiness is the only thing that has intrinsic value.
When we say intrinsic value it simply means good in itself. It means that the only motivation for human
choice and behavior is the desire for pleasure and avoid pain. The only thing a person desires is their own
happiness.
2. Ethical hedonism - everyone’s happiness count equally. This is rather more obvious as a moral principle. For
example, the lives of enslavers were more important than enslaved people; the well-being of a king was more
important than that of a peasant.

5
Preliminary Period
The term “hedonism,” is one of the major ideas built from Utilitarianism. It is construed as the search for pleasure,
and it refers to several related theories about what is good for us, how we should behave, and what motivates us to
behave in the way that we do. All hedonistic theories identify pleasure and pain as the only important elements of
whatever phenomena they are designed to describe. It claims that pleasure and pain are the only things of ultimate
importance is what makes hedonism distinctive and philosophically interesting (Weijers, nd).
Bentham further believed, in his hedonistic calculus the doctrine of “nullum crimen sine lege”, or the principle of
there will be “no crime without a law” and the law assumes the responsibility of an individual for his voluntary
conduct (Elzeiny, 2016).
“It is better to prevent crimes than to punish them” is one of the main concept of Beccaria’s Classical School of
thought. Thus, it arises a common understanding of deterrence and the idea that it is better to let a guilty man go free
than to punish an innocent man.
Why is it important to prevent crime rather than punishing one?
Practically, especially in our country, it is sensible to prevent crime. One specific reason, it would help minimize
the link of the long cost in criminal justice system and the cost of crime. If crime would be avoided, the budget will be
significant if it is saved for justice, health care and other aspect related thereto. Another thing, it would also lighten the
tons of loads in our criminal justice system, not to mention the court with that hundreds of pending cases, and the
congested correctional institution.
This is a very contrary position to the "old" Pre-Classical ways whereby the innocent were often tortured and even
killed in the pursuit of justice to extract a confession. Beccaria did not question the need for punishment, but he
believed that laws should be designed to preserve public safety and order, not to avenge the crime. To ensure a
rational and fair penal structure, punishments for specific crimes must be decreed by written criminal codes, and the
discretionary powers of judges severely curtailed (Classical Criminology).
Three concepts associated with the classical theory; deterrence, incapacitation, and retribution (Criminal
Justice,nd).
1. Deterrence employs the threat of punishment to influence behavior. It assumes that people are rational,
people's behavior is a product of free will, and people are hedonistic. Deterrence prevents future crime by
frightening the defendant or the public (see fig. 5).
There are three principles of punishment in Beccaria’s deterrence doctrine:
a. Swift - punishment must be swift to be effective. You can't have the punishment linger or the punishment
and the crime lose their association.
b. Certain - people must know they will be punished for their illegal behavior - can't have people evade the
law for any reason.
c. Severe - must be severe enough to outweigh the rewards of the illegal action - severity and
proportionality are sometimes at odds especially since each person is different in terms of what
constitutes a "severe" punishment.
Two types of Deterrence
a. Specific deterrence - applies to an individual defendant or the offender. The main idea of specific
deterrence it is to prevent the offender itself or defendant from committing the same crime in the future.
The punishments associated with specific deterrence include fines, imprisonment, or both.
It is frightening an individual defendant with punishment
b. General deterrence applies to the public at large. When the public learns of an individual defendant’s
punishment, the public theoretically less likely to commit a crime because of fear of the punishment the
defendant experienced (Legal Dictionary).
It aims at making possible criminals, fear the consequences of crime. The threat of punishment is
meant to convince rational thinkers that crime does not pay.
2. Incapacitation is defined as a state of being disabled, or unable to move or function. This often takes the form
of removing the offender from the community through imprisonment or home detention. These strategy
attempts to reduce crime rates by denying motivated offenders there opportunity to commit crime. If people
still find crime attractive then the only way to control their behavior is to incarcerate them for extended period
of time. An example, having your license revoked for driving while intoxicated offense. Without the license
you’ll not be allowed to drive again.

6
Preliminary Period
3. Retribution - is another concept of punishment imposed for purposes of repayment or revenge for the wrong
committed. For example, for a crime of murder someone gets death penalty. But since there is no death
penalty in our country, life imprisonment is his repayment. Retribution is somewhat similar to revenge, since
both require repayment to his act, the thing is, and revenge desires to see the offender suffer while retribution
only seeks justice.
A person has freedom in choosing own behavior, and those who violates the standard norm are inspired or
triggered by personal needs that includes, survival, selfishness, revenge, and pleasure. Even though, he is aware that
his action is wrong and still committed it, then he must be sanctioned accordingly.
The following concepts illustrate how an offender can be prevented from being delinquent. In deterrence, while
an individual is being punished, at the same time it is giving hint to the society or the public not to commit future
crimes. Incapacitation is preventing someone to commit a crime or another crime by separating or removing the
offender from the society. He may be put in a correctional institution, in order that the person who commits
lawlessness will not be wandering around the community and endangering the safety of the society. Thus, retribution
prevents crime by giving victims or society a feeling of avengement.
Neo-Classical Theory
Long after the practice of the classical theory, it was later on modified, an extended version of the classical
theory was created it was called the as neo-classical theory. It arose during French revolution with the modification
that children, lunatics, and others were not legally responsible for their actions. Since classical theory generalized that
people have freewill, neo-classical school questioned that there are people who have the absence of freewill hence they
must be exempted from punishment because they did not know what they were doing; they did not know what they
did was the product of insanity (Panugaling & Cano, 2019).
The neo-classical school of thought was first incorporated into the French Code of 1791 and remained the
cornerstone of criminal justice policy but did not receive much attention until 1980 and 1990s. Neoclassical theory can
be thought of as a ‘just desserts’ model or sometimes referred to as retribution. Neo-classical entails two major
exceptions: the rejection of the rigidity of the classical system of punishment and the degree of subjectivity, or
discretion, when assessing criminal responsibility.
It basically admits environmental, psychological, and other mitigating circumstances as modifying conditions
to classic doctrine. It is focused on the importance of character (a kind of middle ground between total free will and
hard determinism) and the dynamics of character development, as well as the rational choices that people make when
faced with opportunities for crime.
Positivist Theory
The classical school of criminology became very popular and prevailed for almost 100 years until the end of
1800s. Its social movement has deeply strike and changed the thought and application of laws, and practices were
passed through many of the current criminal justice system. After the prevailing paradigm of the classical school, a
new school of thought emerged, the Positivist School in its Positivist theory founded by Cesare Lombroso known as
the Father of Criminology, together with his two students Rafaelle Garofalo and Enrico Ferri. They are known as the
holy three of criminology ( Panugaling, & Cano, 2019).
By the end of the 1800s, classical criminology, with its emphasis on free will and individual choice as the root
causes of crime, had given way to another approach known as positivism. It made use of the scientific method in
studying criminality and was based on an acceptance of hard determinism, the belief that crime results from forces
beyond the control of the individual. The original positivists completely rejected the notion of free will and turned
their attention to the impact of socialization, genetics, economic conditions, peer group influences, and other factors
that might determine criminality (Schmalleger, 2014).
An example of positivism is a Christian being absolutely certain there is a God. It is a perception that that true
knowledge come from studying observable traits and actions rather than through reasoning or speculating.
The primary idea behind positivist criminology is that criminals are born as such and not made into criminals;
in other words, it is the nature of the person, not nurture that results in criminal propensities. Moreover, the positive
criminologist does not usually examine the role of free will in criminal activity. One famous positive criminologist was
Cesare Lombroso. In the mid-1800s, he studied cadavers and looked for physiological reasons for criminal behavior.
Lombroso distinguished between different types of criminals, including the born criminal and the criminaloid.
7
Preliminary Period
Who are born criminals?

Lombroso stated that the born criminal could be anatomically identified by such items as a sloping forehead,
ears of unusual size, asymmetry of the face, excessive length of arms, asymmetry of the cranium, dark skin and other
“physical stigmata”. Just an example, immigrants, ethnic minorities, foreign workers, refugees and generally groups
determined as strangers for the community are considered as potential criminals. Example, a thief could be identified
by his expressive face.
Although, theory had remained in the past, it is considered as ridiculous idea because unfortunately, judgments
still exist. Ethnicity, gender, and physical properties leads to discrimination. Through the theory presented by
Lombroso, I could suggest that it would have been the start of discrimination. Born criminals tend to commits felonies
such as arson and homicide.
Criminaloid – is another type of criminal defined by Lombroso is the “criminaloid”, it is a person with an
inclination towards crime, an occasional rather than habitual criminal. Being a criminaloid is having the capability to
commit crime. They are motivated by passion and will commit criminal acts under the proper circumstances. So,
when there is great chances of committing a crime, criminaloid will eventually commit such acts. Example of crimes
that might be committed by criminaloid is petty crimes such as theft.
While positivism remains an important component of present-day criminology, many of its assumptions were
undermined in the 1970s by studies that seemed to show that offenders could not be rehabilitated no matter what was
tried, a growing and widespread public fear of crime that led to “get tough on crime” policies, and a cultural
reaffirmation of the belief that human beings had a rational nature. And it has resulted to the resurgence of classical
ideals, called neoclassical criminology, focused on the importance of character (a kind of middle ground between total
free will and hard determinism) and the dynamics of character development, as well as the rational choices that
people make when faced with opportunities for crime (Schmalleger, 2014).
The core ideas of some people have biological and metal traits that make them crime prone. These traits are
inherited and present at birth. Mental and physical degeneracies are the cause of crime (Siegel, 2018).
UNIT II: RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY
Rational Choice Theory

Rational choice is one of the modern variations of classical theory. It was developed during the middle ages
(12001400), superstition and fear of satanic possession dominated thinking. People who violated the social norms or
religious were to believe to be witches or possessed by demons and not rational decision makers. St. Thomas Aquinas
(1225-1274) argued that there was a God-given natural law that was based on people’s natural tendency to do well.
People who were evil were manifesting original sin and fall from the grace, similar to that experienced by Adam and
Eve when they were expelled from the Garden of Eden (Siegel, 2018).
Why Crime?
The core premise of rational choice theory is that people will choose crime if the circumstances are right: great
reward with little risk. Though the consequences can be painful, costly, and embarrassing, for some people choosing
crime is actually an easy decision to make. Take adolescents, who regularly violate the law. The criminal lifestyle fits
well with this group, whose members routinely organize their lives around risk taking and partying. Crimes can
provide money for drugs and alcohol and serve as an ideal method for displaying courage and fearlessness to one’s
running mates.
Rational choice theory views that crime is a function of a decision-making process in which the potential
offender weighs the potential costs and benefits of an illegal act.
The rational choice approach assumes that offenders are rational beings who make decisions about crime, no
matter how limited their mental ability, information, or time. However, rational choice theory adds to basic classical
concepts the view is both offense and offender specific.
Offense specific gives an idea that offenders react selectively to the characteristics of particular crimes (Siegel,
2018). It refers to the fact that offenders react to a particular offense. The offender will take time consider as to whether
he will continue the offense or not. His choices depend after considering, the weight or the risk of the crime. Like for
instance, the decision to commit burglary. The offender will first evaluate the target place, if there are security devices,

8
Preliminary Period
police presence, and the necessary mode of escape, the point of entry and exits, and the presence of neighbor. In
offense specific, it is evaluated as to the type of crime is something that would fit the type of area it will be performed.
Offender specific is the idea that the offenders evaluate their skills, motives, needs and fears before deciding to
commit crime (Siegel, 2018). It refers to the fact that criminals are not simply driven people who for one reason or
another engage in random acts of anti-social behavior. Before deciding to commit crime, the offender decides first
whether they have the capability of committing a successful criminal act or they have the necessary skills to do so.
The interaction between the offender and offense provide a basis for selecting among alternative actions and
that would build the structure of the offender’s choice of behavior.
The rational choice approach is most closely associated with the work of criminologists Ronald Clarke, Derek
Cornish, Philip Cook and others, conceived that people make calculations before performing such activity. An
important element of the theory is that before engaging in a specific criminal action, potential offenders must decide
that they are going to become involved in crime (Frailing & Harper, 2016).
For example, in rational choice theory, choices are designed to maximize their benefits and minimize their
costs. Once they have chosen to become involved in crime, offenders decide which crime to commit by determining
the costs and benefits of a particular criminal action.
The theory also distinguishes between criminal involvement and criminal events. If a criminal action is high
in benefits and low in costs, people will engage in this action to meet their needs. Conversely, if a criminal action is
high in costs and low in benefits, people will refrain from taking this action. Of course, one of the potential costs of
engaging in any criminal action is punishment and this is where deterrence and rational choice theories are connected.
They argue that law-abiding behavior takes place when an offender decides to take the chance of violating the law
after considering his or her personal situation and situational factors (Frailing & Harper, 2016).
Structuring Criminality
The decision to commit crime is shapes by both personal factors and situational conditions. Time, place,
audience, guardianship, and other factors all play a role in criminal decision making. The factors that draw people
into criminal acts are the following: peers and guardianship, thrills and excitement, economic opportunity, learning
and experience and knowledge of criminal techniques.
Peers and guardianship - plays an important role in criminal decision making. Example, monitoring by
parents reduces the likelihood of a child to commit crime; hanging out with adolescent friends increases the risk. Kids
are more likely to choose crime when they are drinking with their buddies, in a public space without adult
supervision. In the absence of peer support and the presence of adult supervision, the choice is likely to occur.
Excitement and thrills - some criminal offenders may engage in illegal behavior because they love the
excitement and thrills that crime can provide.
Economic opportunity - influence the decision to commit crime. Some people may engage in crime because they
need the money to support their lifestyle and perceive few other potential income sources.
Learning and experience - may be important elements in structuring the choice of crime.
Knowledge of criminal techniques helps criminal offenders in avoiding detection, a sure sign of rational
thinking and planning. Remember that the classical school focused almost exclusively on formal punishment as the
cost of crime; rational choice theory recognizes that the potential costs of crime go beyond formal sanctions to include
is the disapproval from family and friends, loss of job and feelings of shame. They may also include features of the
criminal action itself. A high level of effort, skill and time needed to commit a specific crime may all be perceived as
costs to the offender. The potential benefits of crime are not limited to monetary or material gain. They may also
include increased status among peers and thrills and features of the criminal action may also function as benefits for
the offender. A low level of effort, skill and time needed to commit a specific crime may all be perceived as benefits to
the offender (Frailing & Harper, 2016).
As alluded to above, the potential costs of crime are not limited to formal sanctions meted out by the criminal
justice system, but also include costs such as high levels of effort, skill and time needed to commit the crime, high risk
of physical injury, confrontation with victim, 273 feelings of guilt or shame, and loss of economic security or status
among peers and/or relatives. Similarly, the potential benefits of crime go beyond monetary or material gain to
include low levels of effort, skill and time needed to commit the crime, low risk of physical injury, little or no
confrontation with victim, thrills and status among peers and/or relatives (Frailing & Harper, 2016).
9
Preliminary Period
The possible value of an offense or criminal conduct is not only limited to formal sanctions like those imposed
by our law. Sometimes an offense may be in a form of physical injuries caused by confrontation or revenge,
sometimes the feeling of guilt, shame and ridicule from family members and friends.
The rational choice perspective urges us to take seriously how offenders think so as to predict when criminal
events will occur. Therefore, central issues include the decision to commit a particular type of crime, how to commit a
crime, where to commit the crime and how targets or victim are selected, the offenders decide to take steps to avoid
detection ,and how offender decide to recidivate. Rational choice theory is that decisions are that offenders make are
purposive (Lilly, Cullen &, Ball, 2019).
The standpoint of rational choice theory, the offender knows how to predict the criminal event that will occur
after the commission of the crime. In deciding as to whether, he will continue to do such lawlessness only if he would
have an assurance that he would be able to perform the illegal act without obstacles. Like the presence of the police
officers, the location of the area where he would commit crime, and even use of instrumentality.
The rational choice perspective urges us to take seriously how offenders think so as to predict when criminal
events will occur. Therefore, central issues include the decision to commit a particular type of crime, how to commit a
crime, where to commit the crime and how targets or victim are selected, the offenders decide to take steps to avoid
detection ,and how offender decide to recidivate. The decision of the offender is purposive. Offenders make choices
and to the degree pay attention to consequences.
Example, no offender will commit a crime when there is a police officer watching and virtually will flee from
the scene to avoid being captured. Offenders are not rational, rather their rationality is bounded. Meaning, offenders
make choices that might be based on limited information, made under pressure, insufficiently planned and or
attentive only to immediate risk of apprehension rather than long-term consequences of their actions.
On reflection, such choices might be judged as ill advised, if not foolish. Offenders are not acting irrationally
but rather endeavoring to satisfy needs like money, status, and revenge. And to avoid negative consequences like
arrest or being shot by intended victim. This applies the pain and pleasure principle, where the offender only wants to
satisfy their urge of something. A criminal offender will rob a grocery store to his satisfy his needs, like lack of money
and food. Then afterwards, after he fulfilled his plan, he would eventually flee from the area in order to escape and
avoid being captured.
The person will literally engage in criminal behavior after weighing the consequences and benefits of his or
her actions. I must say criminal behavior is a rational choice made by a motivated offender who perceives that the
chances of gain to outweigh any possible punishment or loss.
Rational choice theory is a branch term for a variety of models explaining social phenomena as outcomes of
individual action that can—in some way—be construed as rational. Rationality is a behavior that is suitable for the
realization of specific goals, given the limitations imposed by the situation.
The key elements of all rational choice explanations are individual preferences, beliefs, and constraints.
Preferences - denote the positive or negative evaluations individuals attach to possible outcomes of their
actions. Preferences can have many roots, ranging from culturally transmitted tastes for food or other items, to
personal habits and commitments.
Beliefs - refer to perceived cause-effect relations, including the perceived likelihood with which an
individual’s actions will result in different possible outcomes. For example, a village head may believe that raiding a
neighboring village A has a higher probability of success than raiding neighboring village B.
Constraints - define the limits to the set of feasible actions, for example, the amount of credit one can get
imposes a budget constraint for those who consider buying a house.
According to the contemporary version of rational choice approach, law violating behavior occurs when an
offender decides to risk breaking the law after considering both personal factors. Personal factors include need for
money, revenge, thrills, and entertainment and situational factors, this suggests the ability to protect and the efficiency
of the local police force. People who believe that the risks of crime outweigh the rewards may decide to go straight. It
they think they are likely to be arrested and punished, they are more likely to seek treatment and turn their lives
around than risk criminality (Siegel, 2018).
It is relatively easy to show that some crimes are the product of rational, objective thought, especially when
they involve an ongoing criminal conspiracy centered on economic gain.

10
Preliminary Period
Though an individual enters a criminal way of life, not all the times they commit crime. Some goes to church,
school or even go to work. They also even spend time with their family, they engage in romances, even play sports,
and watch movies. They also live a normal life when they are not into criminal acts.
UNIT III: THEORIES OF VICTIMIZATION
Victimization is defined as causing someone to be treated unfairly or made to feel as if he is in a bad position. It
is the process of being victimized or becoming a victim. Victims are persons who individually or collectively, have
suffered harm, which include physical or mental injury, emotional suffering or economic loss or substantial
impairment of fundamental rights through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal laws operative within
member states, including those laws proscribing criminal abuse of power (Hussin, & Zawawi, 2012).
Treating someone poorly and make him feel unfortunate is an example of victimization. Bullying someone is
one best example of victimization.
Along with the theories underlying victimization are; Victim Precipitation Theory, Lifestyle Theory, Deviant
Place Theory and the Routine Activity Theory.
Victim Precipitation Theory

It explains that some people eventually initiate the confrontation that eventually leads to their injury or death. It
analyzes how a victim's interaction with an offender may contribute to the crime being committed (Siegel, 2018). It
also contends that victims contribute to the criminal events that harm them, either though victim facilitation or
through victim provocation. (Lasky, 2019).
Substantially, this type of theory is most commonly associated with crimes like homicide, rape, assault, and
robbery, were provocation and facilitation may occur.
There are two classifications of victim precipitation; first, the active precipitation and second, passive
precipitation.
Active Precipitation (Victim provocation) - occurs when victims act provocatively, use threats of fighting
words, or even attack first. Menachem Amir suggested that female rape victims often contribute to their attacks by
dressing provocatively or pursuing a relationship with a rapist. Example in a drinking spree, Jose were teasing Pedro
being uncircumcised. Pedro got irritated, degraded and insulted in front of their group, so he punched Jose and beat
him with the bottle of beer. This explains active precipitation.
Passive precipitation (victim facilitation) - occurs when a victim exhibits same personal characteristics that
unknowingly either threatens or encourages the attacker. Victim facilitation implies that victims, regardless of
intention, create the circumstances that lead to victimization although the victim may have never met the attacker or
even know of his or her existence, the attacker feels menaced and acts accordingly. In this type of precipitation, the
victim belongs to a group whose mere presence threatens the attacker’s reputation, status or economic well-being. An
example to this is hate crime violence may facilitated by group of persons, especially in competition for house or jobs
(Siegel, 2018).
• Victim personality - one of the reasons some people invite or precipitate victimization is because there is an
element in their personality that incites attacks. Depression and anxiety have been linked to victimization.
Perhaps criminals single out people who lack confidence and seem anxious and depressed may be considered as
easy targets unlikely to fight back.
• Victim Disability - not only do criminals seek out people with personality deficits, but with those physical
disabilities are at risk. The rate of person with disability is more than twice the rate of the persons without
disability.
Lifestyle Theory
In lifestyle theory, people may become crime victims because of their risky lifestyle increases their exposure to
criminal offenders. Victimization increased by such behaviors as associating with young men, going out in public
places late at night, and living in the urban area. Conversely, one’s chances of victimization can be reduced by staying
home at night, moving to a rural, staying out in public places, earning more money and getting married. The basis of
lifestyle theory is that victimization is not a random occurrence but rather a function of the victim’s lifestyle.

11
Preliminary Period
People who belong to groups that have an extremely risky life – homeless, runaways, drug users – are at high
risk for victimization; the more time they are exposed to street life, the greater their risk of becoming crime victims.
Those who ran away at an earlier age, slept on the street, panhandled, and hung out with deviant peers rather than
protective family members were ones most likely to suffer physical victimization.
Criminal Lifestyle is not surprisingly, getting involved in criminality also increases the chance of victimization.
There is evidence that the association between offending and personal victimization begins early in life and can be
both direct and indirect.
• Direct influence – Kids who are delinquent risk being victimized from angry targets seeking retaliation or from
bystanders acting as good Samaritans.
• Indirect influence – People who engage in criminal activities also associate with risk-taking peers and engage in
risky behaviors. They consume alcohol, congregate with peers in the absence of authority figures, and hang out at
night in public places. These unsafe behaviors all increase victimization risk.
Gang Lifestyle views gang boys are a group with an extremely high risk for victimization. The gang lifestyle is
engaging in serious crime and delinquency, carrying guns, selling drugs, retaliating against perceived slights or
disrespect typifies behaviors that significantly increase the chances of becoming a victim of violent crimes. Protecting
the gang turfs and engaging in retaliatory vendettas to maintain the gang’s reputation also increase the risk of
personal victimization. Gang boys are much more likely to own guns and associate with violent peers than non-
members.
Gang membership’s impact on victimization risk is reinforced by a research conducted by Andrew
Papachristos and his associates. Gun violence clustered in groups that have gang members in the network, ganging
significantly elevated the likelihood of being the target of gun violence.
Deviant Place Theory

According to deviant place theory, the greater their exposure to dangerous places, the more likely people will
become victim of crime and violence. Victims do not encourage crime but are victim prone because they reside in
socially disorganized high crime areas where they have the greatest risk of coming into contact with criminal
offenders, irrespective of their own behavior or lifestyle. The more often victims visit high crime areas, the more likely
they may be victimized. Neighborhood crime levels, then, may be more important for determining chances of
victimization than individual characteristics. Consequently, there may be little reason for residents in lower-class
areas to alter their lifestyle or take safety precautions because personal behavior choices do not influence the
likelihood of victimization.
Deviant places are poor, densely populated, highly transient neighborhoods in which commercial and
residential property exist side by side. The commercial property provides criminals with easy targets for theft crimes,
such as shoplifting and larceny. Successful people stay out of these stigmatized areas; they are homes for
“demoralized kinds of people” who are easy target for theft crimes: the homeless, the addicted, and the intellectually
disabled and elderly poor.
People who live in more upscale areas can take precautionary measures to avoid criminality; they had lesser
chances of becoming a victim. While those, residing in poor areas have much greater risk of becoming a victim
because they live near a motivated offender. According to Sociologist William Julius Wilson has described how people
who can afford to leave dangerous areas do so. He suggests that affluent people realize that criminal victimization can
be avoided by moving to an area with greater law enforcement and lower crime rates.
Routine Activities Theory

The routine activities theory was first articulated in a series of papers by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felon.
They concluded that volume and distribution of predatory crime Siegel, 2018).
According to this view, both the motivation to commit crime and supply of willing offenders are constant. That
is, a certain percentage of the population will always have reason to violate the law for reasons of greed, need, gain,
and so on. Consequently, the volume and distribution of predatory crimes are closely related not only to the behavior
of criminals but to routine daily activities of potential victims.
Cohen and Felson clarify this view by linking crime rates to the interaction of the three variables which reflect
the routine activities fond in everyday American life:

12
Preliminary Period
• The availability of suitable targets, such as home containing easily saleable goods, easily transportable and
not capably guarded.
• The absence of capable guardians, such as police officers, homeowners and watchful neighbors, friends and
relatives.
• The presence of motivated offenders, such as unemployed, and teenagers.
The presence of these components increases the likelihood that predatory crime will take place. Targets are more
likely to be victimized if they are poorly guarded and exposed to a large group of motivated offenders, such as
teenage boys. As targets increase in value and availability, so too should crime rates.
For example, a CCTV camera is not a capable guardian if it is set up incorrectly or in the wrong place or is not
monitored. Staff might be present in a shop but may not have sufficient training or awareness to be an effective
deterrent. It describes and explains how crime rates vary over time and space. The approach applies to variations and
changes in both large and small areas, over both short and long stretches of time.
Another example, young women who drink excessively in bars and frat houses may elevate their risk of rape
because; a) they are perceived as easy targets and b) their attackers can rationalize their attack because they view
intoxication as sign of immorality.
Conversely, people can reduce their chances of victimization if they adopt a lifestyle that limits their exposure
to danger by getting married, having children and moving to small town.
Guardianship – even the most motivated offenders may ignore valuable target if they are well guarded. Despite
containing valuable commodities, private homes and/or public businesses may be considered off-limits by seasoned
criminals if they are well protected by capable guardians and efficient security systems.
Hot Spots – motivated people such as teenage males, drug users, and unemployed adults are the ones most
likely to commit crime. If they congregate in a particular neighborhood it becomes a “hot spot” for crime and violence.
People who live in these hot spots elevate their chances of victimization. For example, people who live in public
housing projects may have high victimization rates because their fellow residents, mostly indigent, are extremely
motivated to commit crime.
Experiential Learning
Activity 1:
A. Concept Map (15 pts)
Instruction: Supply the diagram with the CORE CONCEPTS of the following schools of thought identified below.
Use the following format.
Classical School of
Thought
CLASSICAL THEORY UTILITARIANISM POSITIVIST THEORY

13
Preliminary Period
B. Knowledge Assessment
Read the questions carefully. Identify the answer for each of the following statements below. Note: Try to answer
the assessment exercise without referring or looking back at the discussion in the preceding pages.
1. He is an Italian criminologist known as the founder of Classical theory.
2. It refers to the belief that perceived punishment will serve as a warning and inhibit individuals and groups
from involvement in criminal activity.
3. He claims that criminals suffer from atavistic anomalies and is known as the Father of Criminology.
4. This term is defined as shelter for demoralized kinds of people, homeless, addicted, and the intellectually
disabled and elderly poor.
5. It is concept of punishment imposed known as the societal counterpart of individual revenge.
6. It is the concept of victim facilitation that occurs when a victim unintentionally makes it easier for an offender
to commit a crime.
7. It is causing someone to be treated unfairly or made to feel as if he is in a bad position.
8. Children, lunatics, and other related thereto were not legally responsible for their actions.
9. Through his moral calculus, he believed that the purpose of the law was to produce and support the
happiness of the community it served.
10. It is a type where a person has an inclination towards crime or may be considered as an occasional criminal.
Activity 2. Case Study (10 pts. each)

Give your insight about the case given below. Illustrate the rationality of the characters mentioned in the case.
Thomas was married 4 years ago to Helen. They met after leaving school and have been in a continuous
relationship since that time. Thomas describes his relationship with Helen as a strong friendship, but also explains
that they have experienced recurring problems in their relationship. Thomas feels that the main problem is the
interference of Helen’s family in their partnership. Helen has had a close relationship with her mother and father and
had been living with them up until 5 years ago. Neither Helen’s mother nor father approved of her relationship with
Thomas, since their first meeting. Thomas is at a loss to explain their disapproval of him, and it appears that he has
tried in many ways, to gain their respect.
Initially Helen was hesitant to continue a relationship with Thomas, due to her parent’s strong reaction to him. At
times they even carried on their relationship in secret to avoid her parent’s reaction. It became more apparent to them
that they would eventually have to overlook Helen’s parents’ opinions of their relationship and follow their own
wishes.
Finally, Helen and Thomas moved into their own apartment and became engaged to be married. Since becoming
married and having their first child, Thomas has continued to extend himself to great personal lengths to maintain
any of his parents-in-law’s support. It is his belief that if he extends himself enough, that they will come to love him as
much as they love their daughter.
He finds this position very demanding. Of particular difficulty is that Helen’s parents expect to be visited on a
weekly basis, by their daughter and new grandchild. These weekly meetings are very draining for Thomas as his
parents-in-law are still openly critical of him. At best, he says, they ignore him.
a. Describe the behavior Thomas.
b. Can you consider him a rational decision maker? Why?
Activity 3: Personal Reflection (5 pts. each)

Answer the following questions.
1. What is your insight on the role of the victim in criminality?
2. Can you consider victim precipitation theory as victim blaming? Why?
3. Describe how deviant place is associated to criminality.

14

Prelim THEORIES 1st Sem A.Y. 2021-2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Prelim THEORIES 1st Sem A.Y. 2021-2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prelim THEORIES 1st Sem A.Y. 2021-2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preliminary Period

Burauen Community College Modular Home Instruction

Outcomes- Based Learning Modules in

Florens M. Lacambra, RCrim, MSCJ, CCS

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

Theories of Crime Causation

Module 1: Early and Classical Criminological Theories

Week 1 - Unit 1: Classical School of Criminology

Week2 - Unit 2: Concepts of Rational Choice Theory

Week 3 - Unit 3: Theories of Victimization

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

Module 1: Early and Classical Criminological Theories

Learning Outcome based on the Course Syllabus:

Course Direct Instruction

UNIT I: CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT

Concept of Classical Theory

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

Basic Principle of Utilitarianism

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

Who are born criminals?

UNIT II: RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

Rational Choice Theory

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

UNIT III: THEORIES OF VICTIMIZATION

Victim Precipitation Theory

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

Deviant Place Theory

Routine Activities Theory

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

CLASSICAL THEORY UTILITARIANISM POSITIVIST THEORY

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

Activity 2. Case Study (10 pts. each)

Activity 3: Personal Reflection (5 pts. each)

___________________________________Modular Home Instruction__________________________________

You might also like

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction

_Modular Home Instruction