Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Dept. of Economics, June 2000. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2000. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 150-168).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Pardee Rand Graduate School, Santa Monica, California, 2009. / "This document was submitted as a dissertation in March 2009." Title taken form title screen (viewed October 14, 2009)

No description available.

This study tests the validity of two theories of crime: economic choice (as manifest in the criminal career paradigm) and social control. The test of these two theories is primarily methodological, in that four types of crime data (official and longitudinal (Uniform Crime Reports), official and cross-sectional (Bail Decisionmaking Study), self-report and longitudinal (National Youth Survey), and self-report and cross-sectional (Seattle Youth Study)) and a variety of graphical and statistical techniques are used to compare findings on (1) the stability of the age distribution of crime, (2) the prevalence of offense specialization, and (3) the differences in the causes of participating in crime compared to the causes of frequency of criminal activity among those individuals committing crimes. The findings on the relation between age and crime show the general shape of the age-crime curve is stable across year of the data or curve, type of data, cohort, and age group. The tests for offense specialization reveal that offenders are versatile. An individual's current offense type is not predictable, with much accuracy, on the basis of prior offending. Again, the lack of offense specialization held across type of data, but age, race, and gender distinctions also failed to alter significantly the observed pattern of versatility. Findings on the causes of participation in crime and frequency of criminal activity among active offenders showed only trivial differences in the set of statistically significant predictors for each operationalization of crime and delinquency. Two distinct operationalizations of frequency also showed no substantial difference in the set of statistically significant predictors. Similar to the findings on age and crime, and offense specialization, the pattern of results for the participation and frequency analyses held across type of data. In sum, the results tended to support the predictions of social control theory over those of the economic choice-criminal career view of crime.

This study operationalized and empirically tested the general propositions of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime (1990). Specifically, the core concept of the theory, self-control, is operationalized using two data sets--Richmond Youth Project and Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development--and tested using criteria of reliability and validity. In this part of the study, a methodological question focuses on the pattern of validity change across types of data, namely, cross-sectional and longitudinal data. In the following tests, causes and consequences of low self-control are tested using Richmond Youth Project data. Child rearing as early socialization and individual traits are tested as sources of self-control. Then the measure of self-control is related to crime, delinquency, and analogous behaviors that are, according to the theory, manifestations of low self-control. A research question here focuses on the generality of self-control theory. Overall, the test results support the claims of the general theory of crime. Findings from the validity tests of the self-control index show theoretically expected relations with important individual variables such as gender, race, and delinquent status. In particular, findings from two differently designed data sets are very similar. Test results also show that boys low on self-control are more likely than others to have committed crime, delinquency, and various analogous behaviors. One possible research problem based on the theoretical assumption was also tested and empirically supported. Theory implies that respondents low on self-control are more likely than others to fail to answer questions in self-report survey. Empirical tests support this theoretical implication, revealing that respondents dropped from the index due to missing data are more likely than others to be delinquents. Further research implications are also discussed.

This study has two primary objectives: first, to examine the characteristics of 75 offenders incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Talladega, Alabama, using the Pre-sentence Investigation (PSI) Report data, and second, to delve into the phenomenology of the offenders through a lengthy interview process. To achieve these objectives, three offenders types were constructed based on criminal history analysis: First-time Offenders, Repeat Drug Offenders, and Mixed Multiple Offenders. The study found that First-time Offenders were less deviant in all respects than the other two subtypes. First-time Offenders, hailing from lower-middle class environments, were relatively better educated, more skilled, employed for longer periods, and possessed more self-control than members of the other subtypes. First-time Offenders were frequently reared in intact homes with both parents present (or involved in their lives). Repeat Offenders had mostly drug convictions with or without traffic violations and misdemeanors charges. Mixed Multiple Offenders had lengthier arrest histories than other subtypes with a variety of convictions ranging from a simple battery to homicide, rape or armed robbery-indicating a more threatening, violent, and pervasive deviant and/or criminal lifestyle than First-time or Repeat Offenders. Unlike the First time Offenders, both the Repeat Drug Offenders and Mixed Multiple Offenders were relatively less educated, less skilled, employed for less periods of time or sporadically or irregularly employed, and were reared in lower class, broken homes environments with a larger number of family members present. Findings from this study provide a more in-depth understanding of what criminal behavior means to those who commit criminal acts and their life circumstances under which it occurs. These findings will enable social workers to design and implement more effective intervention strategies to assist offenders with their behavioral problems

This dissertation seeks to understand how democratic elections can coexist with a significant number of politicians implicated in criminal wrongdoing. Specifically, it seeks answers to three questions. Why do parties nominate candidates with criminal backgrounds? Why do voters vote for them? And what does their proliferation mean for democratic accountability? To address these questions, I draw on a wide body of quantitative and qualitative evidence from India, the world's largest democracy. I argue that parties are attracted to criminal politicians because they have access to financial resources that allow them to function as self-financing candidates. Whereas the prevailing consensus in political economy suggests that voters support "bad politicians" because they lack adequate information on candidate quality, I develop an alternate theory that suggests well-informed voters can display rational behavior by voting for such candidates. Specifically, in contexts where social divisions are highly salient, voters often desire a representative who they perceive can protect group-based interests most credibly. In such settings, criminality can serve as a useful signal of a candidate's credibility. As a result, parties selectively field criminal candidates in those areas where social divisions are most pronounced. The implications of this study are far reaching because they suggest that information about a candidate's criminality is not only available, but actually is central to understanding the viability of his candidacy. Thus, there are circumstances in which "bad politicians" can in fact be compatible with democratic accountability. Empirically, this dissertation makes use of a unique, author-constructed database of affidavits submitted by more than 60,000 candidates contesting state and national elections between 2003 and 2009. This dataset contains detailed information on candidates' financial and criminal records from 37 elections, which I analyze using state-of-the-art quantitative methods. I complement these quantitative analyses with qualitative fieldwork conducted in three states, including an in-depth exploration of the case of Bihar, a state in north India.

The problem of jail overcrowding has forced corrections officials and jail administrators to examine ways in which to better manage available jail space. Pretrial release and detention policies have been a target of this examination as pretrial defendants typically account for 50% of a jail's population. Standards for pretrial release exist, but their administration varies by jurisdiction. The impact of jail overcrowding on pretrial release policies has been to decrease the time available to render a decision. Recent efforts to standardize pretrial release standards in Oregon have not addressed the issue of expediency. The current study examines pretrial misconduct (failure to appear in court and rearrest) with regard to information that is available to jail personnel and release office personnel at the time of arrest, with the specific intent to develop a predictive model of pretrial misconduct that will function as an initial risk assessment. Six hundred defendants arrested in Washington County, Oregon during 1991 served as subjects. The results indicated that 90.9% of all defendants arrested are released pending trial/ and that 22.7% of those released engaged in pretrial misconduct. The results of the loglinear model-building indicated that the variables prior failure-to-appears/ employment, and age were the best predictors of pretrial misconduct. The construction sample (n = 395) accurately predicted 94.5% of the observed pretrial misconduct compared to 90.7% for the validation sample (n = 150). The loglinear analysis yielded 16 typologies (based on the variables included in the model) by which defendants could be ranked as to their risk of pretrial misconduct. Spearman Rank Order coefficents for the construction and validation samples were .847 and .626 respectively. Data were also collected on detained subjects. A Chi-Square test using detained with released ?Ubjects by typology indicated that the categories are not independent (p < .01). Further examination indicated that the detained subjects did represent higher risks of pretrial misconduct as estimated by the typologies. The results also indicated that defendants currently on probation or parole were more likely to detained than other defendants. The results do not reject the assumptions by Sturz {1962), whose Manhattan Bail Project is the basis for pretrial release, that persons with strong ties to the community may pose the least risk of pretrial misconduct. The results also found sex and ethnic differences with regard to pretrial misconduct. The sex differences may have been confounded by age and crime type; however, the ethnic differences may reflect a systemic inability to communicate with Hispanic offenders.

University of Macau / Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities / Department of Sociology