THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF CRIME: SELF-CONTROL, ALCOHOL USE, AND DISPUTE-RELATED VIOLENCE

Open Access
- Author:
- Palmore, Christopher C
- Graduate Program:
- Criminology
- Degree:
- Doctor of Philosophy
- Document Type:
- Dissertation
- Date of Defense:
- November 01, 2017
- Committee Members:
- Richard Felson, Dissertation Advisor/Co-Advisor
Richard Felson, Committee Chair/Co-Chair
Jeffery T. Ulmer, Committee Member
Corina Graif, Committee Member
H. Harrington Cleveland, Outside Member - Keywords:
- crime
opportunity
violence
routine activities
alcohol - Abstract:
- This dissertation examines the social context of criminal behavior. Despite the need for research that examines when criminal behavior is more or less likely, theoretical perspectives accounting for the social context of crime remain underdeveloped. I approached this issue using three separate papers to examine distinct issues in the literature. I wrote each chapter as a stand-alone study using the language from each body of literature. Chapter 1 examines whether opportunity influences the relationship between low self-control and crime. Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) general theory of crime argues that low self-control is the primary individual-level cause of crime and research has consistently shown that low self-control is one of the strongest predictors of individual participation in crime. Most scholars have interpreted the theory as predicting that the supply of criminal opportunities and an offender’s low self-control interact to produce crime. From this perspective, the effects of low self-control are contingent on the amount of available opportunities for crime. However, Gottfredson and Hirschi have since argued against this view and contend that opportunity for crime should have little effect on individuals with low self-control. I contribute to this debate by using a design that controls for selection into criminal opportunities, as well as all time-stable individual differences that could affect both opportunity and crime. Using routine activities as a measure of opportunity, I find that increases in opportunity were significantly related to violent and property crime. This relationship did not vary across levels of self-control for property crime but did vary across self-control for violent crime. The effect of opportunity was strongest for individuals with higher levels of self-control. Chapter 2 examines an area that has received an enormous amount of attention: alcohol use and crime. Research consistently finds a strong association between alcohol use and offending. However, alcohol use does not lead to crime every time it is consumed, or for every person who consumes it. Chapter 2 examines the role of routine activities in the relationship between alcohol use and crime. I examine the mediating and moderating effects of routine activities in the alcohol-crime relationship. The results suggest that alcohol use plays a strong role in both violent and nonviolent offending, and this effect is especially prominent when opportunity for crime is highest. The evidence suggests that the social context of alcohol use provides opportunity for crime and amplifies the effects of alcohol use for violent and property crime. Chapter 3 makes use of incident-level data in order to determine which situational factors contribute to the escalation of violence. This study is based in impression management theory and examines whether disputes are more likely to be violent if one of the participants is intoxicated, whether the relationship between the participants plays a role in the outcome of a dispute, and whether weapons contribute to the escalation of violence. The findings suggest that alcohol use, by either actor in a dispute, significantly contributes to a violent outcome. Disputes are especially likely to turn violent when both disputants have been drinking. Relationship status also played a role in disputes becoming violent as disputes that involve acquaintances and intimate partners were somewhat more likely to become violent than those with strangers. The presence of firearms played a significant role in the escalation of violence. When both parties had a firearm, disputes were least likely to escalate.