Individual Differences and Rational Choice: Are Some more Rational than Others?

• In Event: Integrative Approaches to Criminological Theory

Abstract

Most prior tests of rational choice theory (RCT) within criminology have supported the notion that individuals are responsive to (dis)incentives when offending. That is, perceptions about the rewards, risks, and costs of crime are associated with one’s tendency to engage in criminal behavior. Nevertheless, criminologists continue to express skepticism about the extent to which offending decisions are “rational,” due in part to the growing recognition that some offenders are highly impulsive, and thus tend to act without considering the long-term consequences of their actions. While choice-based criminological research has included variables capturing various individual differences as controls in regression models (Nagin & Paternoster, 1993), far less attention has been devoted to assessing how these characteristics affect one’s rational calculus directly (see Thomas et al., 2013). Using panel data from the Pathways to Desistance study, this paper will examine the extent to which certain individual characteristics – e.g., impulsivity – moderate the weight placed on various rational choice “inputs” on self-reported criminal offending.

Authors

• Benjamin Hamilton, University of Missouri - St. Louis

• Kyle Thomas, University of Missouri - St. Louis