CRIM7312

Unit 1 Theme 1: An explanation of theory

Trish Armstrong
LO1: Explain what theories are and their necessity in explaining crime.
LO2: Differentiate between ideographic and nomothetic theoretical explanations.
LO3: Discuss the building blocks of theory.
LO4: Apply the four building blocks to specific theories.
LO5: Evaluate the characteristics of a good theory.
LO6: Explain how theories are built.
LO1: Explain what theories are and their necessity in explaining crime

Theories are explanations of a natural or social behavior, event, or phenomenon.

More formally, a scientific theory is a system of constructs (concepts) and propositions

(relationships between those constructs) that collectively presents a logical, systematic,
and coherent explanation of a phenomenon of interest within some assumptions and
boundary conditions (Bacharach 1989)
Theories should explain why things happen, rather than just describe or predict.

It is possible to predict events or behaviors using a set of forecasters, without

necessarily explaining why such events are taking place.
Differentiate between ideographic and nomothetic theoretical explanations
The nomothetic approach involves trying to make generalizations about the world and understand large-
scale social patterns.

The idiographic approach involves trying to uncover a great deal of detailed information about a
narrower subject of study.
Explanations can be idiographic or nomothetic.

Idiographic explanations are those that explain a single situation or event in personal/individual detail. For example, you did
poorly on an exam because:
(1) you forgot that you had an exam on that day,
(2) you arrived late to the exam due to a traffic jam,
(3) you panicked midway through the exam,
(4) you had to work late the previous evening and could not study for the exam, or even
(5) your dog ate your text book.
The explanations may be detailed, accurate, and valid, but they may not apply to other similar situations, even
involving the same person, and are hence not “general”.

In contrast, nomothetic explanations seek to explain a class of situations or events rather than a specific situation or
event.

For example, students who do poorly in exams do so because they did not spend adequate time preparing for exams or
that they suffer from nervousness, attention-deficit, or some other medical disorder.
Because nomothetic explanations are designed to be general across situations, events, or people, they
tend to be less precise, less complete, and less detailed.

However, they explain economically, using only a few explanatory variables.

Because theories are also intended to serve as generalized explanations for patterns of events,
behaviors, or phenomena, theoretical explanations are generally nomothetic in nature.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqM1MRACQko

Nomothetic is based on a tendency to generalize, and is typical for the natural sciences. It describes the effort to
derive laws that explain types or categories of objective phenomena, in general.

Idiographic is based on a tendency to specify, and is typical for the humanities. It describes the effort to understand
the meaning of subject, unique, and often cultural or subjective phenomena.
Differentiate between ideographic and nomothetic theoretical explanations
Data, facts, and findings operate at the empirical or observational level, while theories
operate at a conceptual level and are based on logic rather than observations.

The goal of criminological theory is to help one gain an understating of crime

and criminal justice.

Theories cover the making and the breaking of the law, criminal and deviant
behavior, as well as patterns of criminal activity.
What is the importance of theory?

Theory allows us to explain what we see and to figure out how to bring about
change.

Theory is a tool that enables us to identify a problem and to plan a means for
altering the situation.
Discuss the building blocks of theory.
Building Blocks of a Theory

David Whetten (1989) suggests that there are four building blocks of a theory:
• constructs,
• propositions,
• logic, and
• assumptions.

• Constructs capture the “what” of theories (i.e., what concepts are important for explaining a
phenomenon),

• propositions capture the “how” (i.e., how are these concepts related to each other),

• logic represents the “why” (i.e., why are these concepts related), and

• assumptions examines the “who, when, and where” (i.e., under what circumstances will
these concepts and relationships work).
All theories are constrained by assumptions about values, time, and space, and boundary
conditions that govern where the theory can be applied and where it cannot be applied.

For example, many economic theories assume that human beings are rational based on cost and
benefit expectations as a way of understand human behavior.

In contrast, political science theories assume that people are more political than rational, and try
to position themselves in their professional or personal environment in a way that maximizes
their power and control over others.
In other words: Theories can only be used in the domain for which it was developed.

If a theory is to be properly used or tested, all of its implicit assumptions that form the
boundaries of that theory must be properly understood.

Unfortunately, theorists rarely state their implicit assumptions clearly, which leads to frequent
misuses of theories to problem situations in research.
Evaluate the characteristics of a good theory
Different criteria have been proposed by different researchers, the more important of which
are listed below:

Logical consistency: Are the theoretical constructs, proposals, boundary conditions and
assumptions logically dependable with each other?

If some of these “building blocks” of a theory are inconsistent with each other (e.g., a theory
assumes rationality, but some constructs represent non-rational concepts), then the theory is a
poor theory.
Explanatory power: How much does a given theory explain (or predict) reality? Good theories
obviously explain the target phenomenon better than rival theories
Falsifiability: British philosopher Karl Popper stated in the 1940’s that for theories to be valid, they must be
falsifiable.

Falsifiability ensures that the theory is potentially disprovable, if empirical data does not match with theoretical
propositions, which allows for their empirical testing by researchers.

In other words, theories cannot be theories unless they can be empirically testable.
Statements, such as “a day with high temperatures is a hot day” are not empirically testable because a hot day is
defined (and measured) as a day with high temperatures, and hence, such statements cannot be viewed as a
theoretical proposal.

Falsifiability requires presence of rival explanations it ensures that the problem is sufficiently measurable.

However, note that saying that a theory is falsifiable is not the same as saying that a theory should be falsified. If
a theory is indeed falsified based on empirical evidence, then it was probably a poor theory to begin with!
Parsimony: Parsimony examines how much of a phenomenon is explained with how few
variables.

The concept is attributed to 14 th century English logician Father William of Ockham (and
hence called “Ockham’s razor” or “Occam’s razor), which states that among competing
explanations that sufficiently explain the observed evidence, the simplest theory (i.e., one that
uses the smallest number of variables or makes the fewest assumptions) is the best.
Explanation of a complex social phenomenon can always be increased by adding more and more concepts.

However, such approach defeats the purpose of having a theory, which are intended to be “simplified” and
generalizable explanations of reality.

Parsimony relates to the degrees of freedom in a given theory.

Parsimonious theories have higher degrees of freedom, which allow them to be more easily generalized to
other contexts, settings, and populations.
What makes a good theory in criminology?
 To be used for maximum effectiveness,
 theories must make sense (logical consistency),
 explain as much crime as possible (scope),
 and be as concise as possible (parsimony).
 Most important, the theory must be true or correct (validity).
Akers and Sellers (2013) have established a set of criteria to judge criminological
theories:
• logical consistency,
• scope,
• parsimony,
• testability,
• empirical validity,
• and usefulness.
Logical consistency is the basic building block of any theory.

It refers to a theory’s ability to “make sense”. Is it logical? Is it internally consistent?

A theory’s scope refers to its range, or ranges, of explanations.

• Does it explain crimes committed by males AND females?
• Does it explain ALL crimes or just property crime?
• Does it explain the crime committed by ALL ages or just juveniles?

Better theories will have a wider scope or a larger range of explanation.

A parsimonious theory is concise, elegant, and simple. There are not too many constructs or
hypotheses.

Simply put, parsimony refers to a theory’s “simplicity”.

A good scientific theory needs to be testable too. It must be open to possible falsification.

“Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it or to refute it.

Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability: some theories are more testable, more exposed to
refutation than others; they take, as it were, greater risks…

One can sum up all this by saying that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or
refutability, or testability”
Why should we care? What do theories do?

– 1. Help us classify things: entities, processes, and causal relationships

– 2. Help us understand how and why already observed regularities occur
– 3 . Help us predict as yet unobserved relationships
– 4. Guide research in useful directions
– 5. Serve as a basis for action. "There is nothing so practical as a good theory."
To sum up: What makes a good theory?

1. Parsimony: the ability to explain in relatively few terms and statements

2. Span of phenomena explained
3. Accuracy of predictions of new phenomena
4. Ability to be disproved
Theme 2: Theoretical Classification

LO7: Explain the various theoretical classification models, such as micro and macro theories.
LO8: Discuss the policy implications of criminological theory
How do theories develop and change?
How do theories develop and change?

The process of theory development

– 1. Within some model, theories are developed

– 2. These are tested empirically, by the derivation of hypotheses and carrying out of research
– 3. Some hypotheses are confirmed, others are not
– 4. The theory is adjusted to take account of these findings, e.g. using moderator variables as
in Schutt example of deterrence theory
– 5. If there are multiple theories within a model or models - it is possible to pose “critical
experiments” that may adjudicate between them.
– 6. Example from Schutt: the deterrence experiment
Theme 2: Theoretical Classification
What are the advantages of classification?

The foremost advantage of classifying is that it makes the study of a wide variety of theories very easy
and convenient. It also shows the interrelationship between various groups.
Explain the various theoretical classification models, such as micro and macro theories.
Abstraction refers to the varying levels at which theoretical concepts can be
understood

The smallest level of analysis is the micro level of analysis, also referred to as Micro levels. It
concerns the nature of everyday human social interactions on a small scale: face to face.

Examples of micro levels of analysis include, but are not

limited to, the following individual analysis type approach:

• Alien, stateless person, asylum seeker, refugee

• Person
• Citizen
• Partnership, marriage
• Families
• Household
• Neighborhood
In general, a meso-level analysis indicates a population size that falls between the micro and macro levels,
such as a community or an organization. However, meso level may also refer to analyses that are specifically
designed to reveal connections between micro and macro levels. It is sometimes referred to as mid range,
especially in sociology. Examples of meso-level units of analysis include the following:

• Clan
• Tribe
• Community
• Village, town, city
• Formal organization
• State
Macro-criminology is a large-scale approach to criminology, emphasizing the analysis of social systems
and populations at the structural level, often at a necessarily high level of theoretical abstraction.

Though macro level doesnt concern itself with individuals, families, and other constituent aspects of a
society, it does so in relation to larger social system of which such elements are a part. The approach is
also able to analyze generalized collectivities (e.g. "the city", "the church") Examples of macro-level
units of analysis include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Nation
• Society
• Civilization
• International
• Global
LO8: Discuss the policy implications of criminological theory
Theme 3: Theoretical integration

LO9: Explain theory integration.

LO10: Evaluate the popularity of integrating theories to explain criminal behaviour.
LO11: Discuss which theories lend themselves to integration.
LO12: Discuss the policy implications of integrated theories
Explain theory integration
Theoretical integration is the process of joining ideas from two or more criminological
theories into a single theoretical statement, often to provide a more complete and
accurate explanation of crime or delinquent behavior.

There are number of ways in which theories may be combined, including

propositional integration, up-and-down integration, side-by-side integration, end-to-
end integration, and conceptual integration.
Historically, most criminological theories have focused on relatively specific factors or processes that are suggested
to explain either criminal behavior or the distribution of crime.

For example, anomie v Strain theorie (anomie – no other choice – eg. Steal bread to survive (Alladin)
Strain theory – American dream – all about wanting to live a dream life (catch me if you can movie)
On the surface, the answer to the question of what is theoretical integration would seem to be rather
straightforward. You have ideas from more than one theory that you combine with ideas from
another to form a new theory that offers a more complete explanation of the phenomenon.

E.G theory is an integrated theory because it borrows concepts from other e.g three reputable
theories (strain, social control, and social learning) and articulates how these concepts relate to one
another
What are the two basic types of integrated theory models?

Integrated theories are often classified into one of two types,

• propositional
• or
• conceptual.

Either type can be applied to theories within the same level of combination (micro-micro or macro-
macro integration) or across different levels (macro–micro integration).
Scholars have provided several reasons for either not integrating theories or being very cautious in the way
that we do so.

One argument against theoretical integration addresses the best way for the science of explaining criminal
behavior to advance.

Hirschi (1989) argues that science advances best when theories compete with one another.

We empirically assess different theoretical explanations and those that are better supported continue to be
entertained while those that prove not to be effective explanations are abandoned.
A second argument against theoretical integration concerns the conflicting assumptions that underlie different
theories.

A third concern with integrating theories is the almost inevitable increased complexity of the resulting product.
Conceptual integration involves an absorption strategy, arguing that concepts from one theory have
the same meaning as concepts from another theory and combining them into a common language
and set of concepts.

Propositional integration involves combining or linking propositions from one or more theories into a
single, unified and consistent set of propositions.

Conceptual integration is very common in theory development and a review of this type of integration
essentially would involve a general review of criminological theory.

Propositional integration, as a distinct development strategy is relatively rare and recent In some
instances propositional integration is based on theory commonalities and in others it involves
integrating competing theories
Structural arrangements typically take one of four forms: arranging theories (propositions) end-to-end, side-by-side,
up and down, and some combination of these forms.

The most common form of integration involves combining social control and social learning theories.

Proponents view theory integration as an alternative strategy for theory development and testing that addresses
some of the limitations of the more traditional competition strategy.

They also claim increased levels of explanatory power compared to that of the individual theories combined and
greater inclusiveness in types of criminal behavior explained.

There is a lively debate about the nature and efficacy of this strategy, the structure and coherence of specific
formulations, and the level of empirical support for specific integrated theories.
Discuss which theories lend themselves to integration
Rational Choice theory, also known as reasonable action theory or choice theory, is a
perspective of human behavior that is based on the assumption that individuals will naturally
make decisions of whether or not to act in a specific situation in order to maximize their
pleasure or benefits, while minimizing potential pain or punishment.

This perspective readily lends itself to integration with other theories of crime, given that it can
be applied to virtually every type of activity (including all conventional activities as well).

Others –Social learning, anomie

Much like traditional theories, each integrated theory has implications for the
development of policies designed to reduce delinquency and crime.

Because integrated theories are generally perceived to be more complex than traditional
theories, it stands to reason that their implications generally tend to be more complex.
Thank you!