Texas State University-San Marcos
Department of Criminal Justice
CJ 7311: Advanced Criminological Theory
Spring 2012
Instructor: Jeffrey M. Cancino, Ph.D.
Office: Hines 126
Office Phone: 512-245-3331
Email: jc68@txstate.edu (best method of contact)
Texas State University’s TRACS Platform: Syllabi, class notes, and other material will be
placed on TXST’s TRACS home page.
Course Description & Objectives
Students will develop and apply knowledge surrounding a wide range of theoretical concepts,
assumptions, propositions, and variables aimed at explaining crime-related outcomes. In the
process, students will learn how social scientists empirically (i.e., quantitatively and
qualitatively) assess theory and how theory influences public policy.
Students will develop the ability to:
1. understand the philosophy of science, including theoretical development/limitations
2. distinguish between theoretical terms such as causation, association, and
correlation that are central toward supporting/not supporting (i.e., falsification) theory.
3. articulate many of the interdisciplinary (e.g., biological and sociological) and contemporary
criminological theories.
4. explain the nature and basis of crime causation, victimization, and citizen
perceptions of crime (e.g., fear of crime, perceived safety, physical and social disorder).
Required Texts
Chalmers A.F. (1999). What is this thing called science? Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Press.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1962 (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Davidson Reynolds, Paul. 1971. A primer in theory construction. New York, NY:
McMillan.
Recommended General Theory Reading Texts
Brown, S., Esbensen, F., & Geis, G. (latest edition). Criminology: Explaining crime and its
context. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co.
Bernard, T.G., Vold, G.B., and Snipes, J.B. (latest edition) Theoretical Criminology. Fifth
Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Williams, F.P. and McShane, M.D. (latest edition). Criminological Theory. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Class Format, Attendance and Participation
The class is designed as a seminar, meaning that the professor guides the discussion and does not
lecture. In essence, each student is responsible for the entire reading, NO EXCEPTIONS or
EXCUSES! By being prepared, students can serve as active participants in every class session.
Class attendance is strongly encouraged and the professor reserves the right to record attendance
at any time. At any point during the class discussion, the Socratic method of learning will be
applied. This is a doctoral-level class and expectations are high.
Academic-Scholastic Dishonesty
It is your responsibility to be well-informed of policies and procedures regarding cheating,
plagiarism, and collusion (SEE TXST POLICIES CATALOG).
Classroom Civility
Consistent with TXST student policy (SEE TXST STUDENT POLICY), students are required to
provide fellow classmates and the instructor with the utmost respect and vise-versa. The
classroom environment should be an enjoyable one with cordial relationships. Any behavior that
is offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive will NOT be tolerated.
Student Evaluations
Students will be evaluated on four requisites: regular class participation, class presentation,
discussion papers, and one seminar paper.
Regular Class Participation: As stated above, this course is designed as a seminar. The
professor will NOT lecture on the course material per se, but will assist in guiding the class
through the material. In a seminar, the each student is responsible for thoroughly dissecting the
material for each class period. Students are expected to come prepared to class and answer any
question put forth by the professor or fellow students. This includes being prepared to make
insightful and substantive comments (anecdotal comments should be limited) on the material
and/or ask questions that help clarify confusing points.
Class Presentation: Each student will be assigned to small groups (size will depend on the
number of students enrolled in the course) and will be responsible for making a presentation for
one particular class period. Presentations should be approximately 20 minutes in length. Student
presentations will not necessarily cover all of the material in full, but should draw on the major
themes/points. Students are encouraged to broaden and update the information with additional
material/articles/figures that are relevant to the topic. After the class presentation, the seminar
roundtable intellectual discussions will begin. Note that students will also be graded in terms of
how they respond to questions and how the material in presented.
Discussion Papers*: One discussion paper is required (100 points). It is important to note that
such paper should not exceed 5 pages of substantive text in length (strictly enforced). The five
page limitation should motivate students to write clearly and succinctly.
Seminar Paper*: Each student will be required to write one 10-15 page seminar paper. This
assignment will be discussed in class. Students are encouraged to be creative (i.e., show
diagrams or figures). All students should submit a paper that is consistent with current APA
citation standards, Times New Roman and 12 point font.
Final Exam: A final exam will be administered at the end of the semester. This exam, along with
expectations, will be discussed in class.
*NOTE THAT ALL LATE PAPERS WILL BE PENALIZED 25 POINTS PER DAY,
INCLUDING WEEKENDS
Grading
Class Presentation/Participation: 20%
Discussion Papers: 20%
Seminar Paper: 30%
Final: 30%
All assignments/activities are based on 0-100 scores
Grading Scale
Grades will be assigned according to the following percentages:
A
100%-90%
B
89%-80%
C
79%-70%
D
69%-60%
F
59%-0%
Week 1, January 23: Introduction to course and review syllabi
Week 2, January 30: The philosophy of science and knowledge acquisition
Chalmers A.F. (1999). What is this thing called science? Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Press.
Horowitz, Irving L. 2005. Cultural contradictions of contemporary sociology. Michigan
Quarterly Review 44:481-495.
MacKenzie, Donald, and Yuval Millo. 2003. Constructing a market, performing theory: the
historical sociology of a financial derivatives exchange. American Journal of Sociology
109:107-145.
Abelson, Elaine B. 1989. The invention of kleptomania. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society 15:123-143.
Recommended
Steinmetz, George. 2005. The cultural contradictions of Irving Louis Horowitz. Michigan
Quarterly Review 44:496-505.
Week 3, February 6: Theoretical development, limitations, and measurement
Development and Limitations
Kuhn, Thomas. 1962 (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press. 10-110 (Ch.1-9).
Davidson Reynolds, Paul. 1971. A primer in theory construction. New York, NY:
McMillan. (Ch. 3-6).
Heise, David. 1975. Causal analysis. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience. (Ch. 1).
Durkheim, Emile. 1985 (1982). The rules of the sociological method. New York, NY: Free
Press. (Ch. 1-2).
Karl Popper (PDFs)
Measurement (note that factor and time series analysis are introduced here and will be discussed
in future weeks below)
Liska, Allen E. 1990. The significance of aggregate dependent variables and contextual
independent variables for linking macro-micro theories. Social Psychology Quarterly
53:292-301.
Marvell, T. B. and Moody, C.E. 2008. Can and should criminology research influence policy?
Suggestions for Time-Series and Cross-Section Studies. Criminology and Public Policy
7:359-365.
Worrall, J. 2008. The effects of local law enforcement block grants on serious crime.
Criminology and Public Policy 7: 325-350.
Worrall, J. and Pratt, T. C. 2005. Estimation issues associated with time series-cross section
analysis in criminology. Western Criminology Review 5: 35-49.
Recommended
Lakatos, Imre, and Alan Musgrave (eds.). 1970. Criticism and the growth of knowledge.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Week 4, February 13: A critical examination of criminology
Akers, Ronald, and Christine Sellers. 2008. Criminological theories: Introduction,
evaluation, and application. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (Ch. 1).
Short, James F. 2001. “Crime: Sociological Aspects” in Neil J. Smelser, and Paul B. Baltes
(eds.) International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam:
Elsevier Science. 2934-2937.
Bernard, Thomas J. 1990. Twenty years of testing theories. What have we learned and
why? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 27:325-347.
Austin, James. 2003. Why Criminology is irrelevant. Criminology and Public Policy
2:557-564.
Young, Jock. 1981. “Thinking seriously about crime: some models in Criminology” in
Mike Fitzgerald, Gregor McLennan, and Jennie Pawson (eds.) Crime and society:
Readings in History and Theory. London: Routledge.
Available online at: http://www.malcolmread.co.uk/JockYoung/tsac_v_2003.pdf
Garland, David, and Richard Sparks. 2000. Criminology, social theory, and the challenge
of our times. British Journal of Criminology 41:189-204
Savelsberg, Joachim, Ryan King, and Lara Cleveland. 2002. Politicized scholarship?
Science on crime and the State. Social Problems 49:327-348.
Tittle, Charles. 1985. “The assumption that general theories are not possible” in Robert
Meier (ed.) Theoretical methods in Criminology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Sampson, Robert J. 2000. Whither the sociological study of crime? Annual Review of
Sociology 26: 711-714.
Week 5, February 20: Classical, biological, and deterrence theories of crime
Nagin, D., and Paternoster, R. 1991. The preventative effects of the perceived risk of arrest:
Testing an expanded conception of deterrence. Criminology, 29: 561-585.
Blackwell, B. S. 2000. Perceived Sanction Threats, Gender, and Crime: A Test and Elaboration
of Power-Control Theory. Criminology 38:439-488.
Simons, R. L., Wu, C., Lin K., Gordon, L., & Conger, R. 2000. A Cross-Cultural Examination
of the Link Between Corporal Punishment and Adolescent Antisocial Behavior.
Criminology 38:47-79.
Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. 2000. "The Imprisonment Penalty Paid by Young, Unemployed
Black and Hispanic Male Offenders. Criminology, 38:281-306.
Erickson, M., Gibbs, J.P., & Jensen, G.F. 1977. The deterrence doctrine and the perceived
certainty of legal punishments. American Sociological Review, 42: 305-317.
Paternoster, R. 1987. The deterrent effect of the perceived certainty and severity of
punishment. Justice Quarterly, 4: 173-217.
Simpson & Koper. 1992. Deterring corporate crime. Criminology, 30: 347-375.
Booth, A.D., and Osgood, W. 1993. The influence of testosterone on deviance in adulthood:
Assessing and explaining the relationship. Criminology, 31: 93-117.
Cullen, F.T., Gendreau, P., Jarjoura, G.R., and Wright, J.P. 1997. Crime and the bell curve:
Lessons from intelligent criminology. Crime and Delinquency, 43: 387-411.
Denno, D. 1988. Human biology and criminal responsibility: Free will or free ride. University
of Pennsylvania Law Review, 137: 615-671.
Mednick, S., Gabrielli, W.F., and Hutchings, B. 1984. Genetic influence in criminal convictions.
Science, 224: 891-894.
Walters, G.D., and White, T.W. 1989. Heredity and crime: Bad genes or bad research?
Criminology, 27: 455-486.
Recommended
Dunawayk, R. G., Cullen, F. T., Burton, V. S., & Evans, T. D. 2000. The Myth of Social Class
and Crime Revisited: An Examination of Class and Adult Criminality. Criminology
38:589-632.
Becarria, C. 1963. On Crimes and Punishment. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Bentham, J. 1948. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Edited with an
introduction by Laurence J. Lafleur. New York: Hafner Publishing.
Blumstein, A., Cohen,J., and Nagin, D. 1978. Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating the
Effects of Sanctions on the Crime Rate. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Burkett, S.R, and Ward, D.A. 1993. A note on perceptual deterrence, religiously based moral
condemnation, and social control. Criminology, 31: 119-134.
Chiricos, T.G., and Waldo, G.P. 1970. Punishment and crime: An examination of some
empirical evidence. Social Problems, 18: 200-217.
Gibbs, J.P. (1975) Crime, Punishment, and Deterrence. New York: Elsevier.
Nagin, D.S. (1998) Criminal deterrence: Research at the outset of the twenty-first century. Pp 142 in M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Volume 23. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Paternoster, R., Saltzman, L.E., Waldo, G.P., and Chiricos, T.G. 1983. Perceived risk and
social control. Law and Society Review, 17: 457-480.
Saltzman, L.E., Paternoster, R., Waldo, G.P., and Chiricos, T.G. 1982. Deterrent and experiential
effects. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 19: 172-189
Smith, D.A., and Gartin, P.R. 1989. Specifying specific deterrence. American Sociological
Review, 54: 94-106.
Stafford, M., and Warr, M. 1993. Reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30: 123-135.
Tittle, C. 1969. Crime rates and legal sanctions. Social Problems, 16: 409-422.
Week 6, February 27: Rational choice (free will/self control)
Grasmick, H., Tittle, C., Bursik, R., and Arneklev, B. 1993. Testing the core empirical
implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in
Crime and Delinquency, 30: 5-29.
Hirschi, T., and Gottfredson, M. 1993. Commentary: Testing the general theory of crime.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30: 47-54.
Pratt, T.C., and Cullen, F.T. 2000. The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general
theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38: 931-964.
Recommended
Pratt, T. C. 2008. Rational choice theory, crime control policy, and criminological relevance.
Criminology & Public Policy, 7 (1), 43-52.
Geis, G. 2000. On the absence of self-control as the basis for a general theory of
crime: a critique. Theoretical Criminology 4:55-69.
Wright, Bradley, Entner Wright, Avshalom Caspi, Terrie E. Moffitt, and Phil A. Silva.
1999. Low self control, social bonds and crime: social causation, social selection of
both? Criminology 37:479-514.
Akers, R.L. 1990. Rational choice, deterrence, and social learning theory in criminology: The
path not taken. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 81: 653-676.
Bachman, R., Paternoster, R., and Ward, S. 1992. The rationality of sexual offending: Testing a
deterrence/rational choice conception of sexual assault. Law and Society Review, 26: 343372.
Grasmick, H.G., and Bursik, R.J. 1990. Conscience, significant others, and rational choice:
Extending the deterrence model. Law and Society Review, 24: 837-862.
Piquero, A., and Pogarsky, G. 2002. Beyond Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of
deterrence: Personal and vicarious experiences, impulsivity, and offending behavior.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39: 153-186.
Pogarsky, G., and Piquero, A.R. 2003. Can punishment encourage offending? Investigating the
“resetting” effect. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40: 95-120.
Evans, T.D., Cullen, F.T., Burton, V.S., Dunaway, R.G., and Benson, M.L. 1997. The social
consequences of self-control: Testing the general theory of crime. Criminology, 35: 475501.
Reed, G.E., and Yeager, P.C. 1996. Organizational offending and neoclassical criminology:
Challenging the reach of a general theory of crime. Criminology, 34: 357-382.
Simpson, S.S., and Piquero, N.L. 2002. Low self-control, organizational theory, and corporate
crime. Law and Society Review, 36: 509-547.
Longshore, D., Turner, S., and Stein, J.A. 1996. Self-control in a criminal sample: An
examination of construct validity. Criminology, 34: 209-228.
Piquero, Alex, Randall MacIntosh, and Matthew Hickman. 2000. Does Self-Control Affect
Survey Response? Applying Exploratory, Confirmatory, and Item Response Theory
Analysis to Grasmick et al.’s Self-Control Scale. Criminology 38:897-929.
Benson, M., and Moore, E. 1992. Are white-collar and common offenders the same? An
empirical and theoretical critique of a recently proposed general theory of crime. Journal
of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29: 251-272.
Cochran, J. K., Wood, P.B., Sellers, C.S., Wilkerson, W., & Chamlin, M. B. 1998. Academic
dishonesty and low self control: An empirical test of a general theory of crime. Deviant
Behavior, 18, pp. 28-50.
Paternoster, R. 1989. Absolute and restrictive deterrence in a panel of youth. Social Problems,
36: 289-309.
Paternoster, R. 1989. Decisions to participate in and desist from four types of common
delinquency: Deterrence and rational choice perspective. Law and Society Review, 23: 740.
Paternoster, R., and Simpson, S. 1996. Sanction threats and appeals to morality: Testing a
rational choice model of corporate crime. Law and Society Review, 30: 549-583.
Piliavin, Thornton, Gartner, and Matsuda. 1986. Crime, deterrence, and rational choice.
American Sociological Review, 51:101-119.
De Haan, W., and Vos, J. 2003. A crying shame: The over-rationalized conception of man in
the rational choice perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 7: 29-54.
Piquero, A., and Tibbetts, S. 1996. Specifying the direct and indirect effects of low self-control
and situational factors in offenders’ decision making: Toward a more complete model of
rational offending. Justice Quarterly, 13: 481-510.
Pogarsky, G. 2002. Identifying “deterrable” offenders: Implications for research on deterrence.
Justice Quarterly, 19: 431-452.
Tibbetts, S. G., and Herz, D. C. 1996. Gender differences in factors of social control and
rational choice. Deviant Behavior, 17: 183-208.
Week 7, March 5: The social ecology and social disorganization
Bursik, R. 1988. Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquency: Problems and
prospects. Criminology, 26: 519-552.
Hagan, J. & Coleman, J. P. 2001. Returning captives of the American war on drugs: Issues of
community and family reentry. Crime and Delinquency 3:352-367.
Kubrin, Charis E., and Ronald Weitzer. 2003. New directions in social disorganization
theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 40:374-402.
Cancino, J., Martinez, R., & Stowell, J. 2009. The impact of neighborhood context on intra- and
inter-group robbery: The San Antonio Experience. The ANNALS of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science (AAPSS), May, 623.
Osgood, D. W., & Chambers, J. M. 2000. Social disorganization outside the metropolis: An
analysis of rural youth violence. Criminology 38:81-116.
Peterson, R. D., Krivo, L. J., & Harris, M. A. 2000. Disadvantage and neighborhood violent
crime: Do local institutions matter? The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency
37:32-63.
Roundtree, P.W., Land K.C., Miethe. T.D. 1994. Macro-micro integration in the study of
victimization: A hierarchial logistic model analysis across Seattle neighborhoods.
Criminology, 32: 387-414.
Sampson,R.J., and Groves, W.B. 1989. Community structure and crime: Testing socialdisorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94: 774-802.
Sampson, R.J.. Raudenbush, S.W., and Earls, F. 1997. Neighborhoods and violent crime: A
multi-level study of collective efficacy. Science, 277: 918-924.
Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Earls, F. 1999. Beyond social capital: Spatial dynamics of
collective efficacy for children. American Sociological Review 64:633-660.
Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. 1999. Systemic social observation of public spaces: A
new look as disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology 105:603651.
Snodgrass, J. 1976. Clifford R. Shaw and Henry D. McKay: Chicago Criminologists. The
British Journal of Criminology 16:1-19.
Recommended
Thomas, William I, and Florian Znaniecki (Eli Zaretsky, Ed.). 1918 (1984). The Polish
peasant in Europe and America. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. 85-122 (Parts
III-IV).
Park, Robert. 1925 (1967). “The city: suggestions for the investigation of human behavior
in the urban environment” in Robert Park, and Ernst Burgess. The city. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press. 1-46 (Ch.1).
Wilson, William J. 1987. The truly disadvantaged. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press. 3-62 (Ch. 1-2).
Bursik, Robert J., and Harold Grasmick. 1993. Neighborhoods and crime. Lexington, MD:
Lexington. 1-59. (Ch. 1-2)
Sampson, Robert J. 2006. “How does community context matter? Social mechanisms and
the explanation of crime rates” in Per-Olof H. Wikstrom, and Robert J. Sampson (eds.)
The explanation of crime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 31-60.
Taylor, Ralph B. 1997. Social order and disorder of street blocks and neighborhoods:
ecology, microecology and the systemic model of social disorganization. Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency 34:113-155.
Patillo, Mary E. 1999. Black picket fences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 1-90
(Ch. 1-4)
Venkatesh, Suddhir. 2000. American project. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
65-109, 191-237 (Ch. 2, 5).
Bursik, R.J., and Webb, J. 1982. Community change and patterns of delinquency. American
Journal of Sociology, 88: 24-42.
Elliot, D. S., Wilson, W. J., Huizinga, D., Sampson, R. J., Elliot, A., & Rankin, B. 1996. The
effects of neighborhood disadvantage on adolescent development. The Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency 33:389-405.
Heitgerd, J.L., and Bursik, R.J. 1987. Extra-community dynamics and the ecology of
delinquency. American Journal of Sociology, 92: 775-787.
Land, K. C., McCall, P. L., Cohen, L. E. 1990. Structural covariates of homicide rates: Are
there any invariances across time and social space. American Journal of Sociology
95:922-963.
Reiss, A., and Tonry, M. (1986) Communities and Crime (Crime and Justice: A Review of
Research, Volume 8). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sampson, R. J. 1991. Linking the micro- and macro-level dimensions of community social
organization. Social Forces, 70: 43-64.
Sampson, R. J., & Lauritsen, J. L. 1993. Violent victimization and offending: Individualsituational-,and community-level risk factors, pp.1-114 in Understanding and Preventing
Violence, Vol. 3, Reiss, A. J. Jr., & Roth, J. A. (eds.). Washington, D. C.: National
Academy Press.
Week 8, March 12: Spring Break – No Class
Week 9, March 19: Strain theory
Agnew, R. 1987. On testing structural strain theories. Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency, 24: 281-286.
Agnew, R. 1992. Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology,
30: 47-88.
Brezina, T. 1996. Adapting to strain: An examination of delinquent coping responses.
Criminology, 34: 39-60.
Burton, V. Cullen, F., Evans, D. and Dunaway, R.G. 1994. Reconsidering strain theory:
Operationalization, rival theories, and adult criminality. Journal of Quantitative
Criminology, 10: 213-239.
Merton, R.K. 1938 Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3: 672-682.
DeCoster, Stacy, and Lisa Kort-Butler. 2006. How general is general strain theory?
Assessing determinacy and indeterminacy across life domains. Journal of Research in
Crime and Delinquency 43:297-325.
Tittle, Charles R., Lisa M. Broidy, and Marc G. Getz. 2008. Strain, crime, and contingencies.
Justice Quarterly 25:283-312.
Recommended
Bernard, T.J. 1987. Reply to Agnew. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 24: 287290.
Agnew, R. 2001. Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of
strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency, 38: 319-361.
Agnew, R. and White, H.R. 1992. An empirical test of general strain theory. Criminology, 30:
475-500.
Agnew, R., Brezina, T., Wright, J.P., and Cullen, F.T. 2002. Strain, personality traits, and
delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology , 40: 43-72.
Bernard, T. 1984. Control criticisms of strain theories: An assessment of theoretical and
empirical adequacy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21: 353-372.
Bernard, T. 1987. Testing structural strain theories: An assessment of theoretical and empirical
adequacy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 24: 262-290.
Broidy, L. 2001. A test of general strain theory. Criminology, 39: 9-33.
Farnworth, M. and Lieber, M.J. 1989. Strain theory revisited: Economic goals, educational
means, and delinquency. American Sociological Review, 54: 263-274.
Hoffman, J.P., and Miller, A.S. 1998. A latent variable analysis of general strain theory. Journal
of Quantitative Criminology, 14: 83-110.
Mazerolle, P., Burton, V., Cullen, F., Evans, T. D., and Payne, G. 2000. Strain, anger, and
delinquent adaptations specifying general strain theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28:
89-101.
Paternoster, R., and Mazerolle, P. 1994. General strain theory and delinquency: A replication and
extension. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51: 564-577.
Piquero, A., and Piquero, N.L. 1998. On testing institutional anomie theory with varying
specifications. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 7(1): 61-84.
Piquero, N.L., and Sealock, M.D. 2000. Generalizing general strain theory: An examination of
an offending population. Justice Quarterly, 17(3): 449-484.
Week 10, March 26: Anomie and institutional anomie theory
Chamlin, M. and Cochran, J.K. 1995. Assessing Messner and Rosenfeld’s institutional anomie
theory: A partial test. Criminology, 33: 411-429.
Messner, Steven F. and Richard Rosenfeld. 1997. Political restraint of the market and levels of
criminal homicide: A cross national application of institutional anomie theory. Social Forces
75:1393-1416.
Maume, Michael O. and Matthew R. Lee. 2003. Social institutions and violence: A sub-national
test of institutional anomie theory. Criminology 4:137-1171.
Messner, Steve F., and Richard Rosenfeld. 2006. “The present and future of the
institutional anomie theory” in Francis T. Cullen, John P. Wright, and Kristie R.
Blevins (eds.) Taking stock: The status of criminological theory. New Brunswick, NJ:
Transaction. 127-149.
Baumer, Eric P., and Regan Gustafson. 2007. Social organization and instrumental crime:
Assessing the empirical validity of classic and contemporary Anomie theories.
Criminology 45:617-663.
http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v09n1/bjerregaard.pdf
http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v08n1/69.cancino/cancino.pdf
Recommended
Messner, Steven F., Eric P. Baumer, and Richard Rosenfeld. 2004. Dimensions of social capital
and rates of criminal homicide. American Sociological Review 69:882-903.
Messner, Steven F. and Reid M. Golden. 1992. Racial inequality and racially disaggregated
homicide rates: An assessment of alternative theoretical explanations. Criminology
30:421-447.
Messner, Steven F. and Richard Rosenfeld. 1994. Crime and the American Dream. Belmont,
California.: Wadsworth.
Week 11, April 2: Routine activities theory
Osgoode, Wayne D., Jane K. Wilson, Patrick M. O’Malley, and Jerald G. Bachman. 1996.
Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. American Sociological Review
61:635-655.
Sampson, R. J., & Wooldredge, J. D. 1987. Linking the micro-and macro-level dimensions of
lifestyle-routine activity and opportunity models of predatory victimization. Journal of
Quantitative Criminology 3:371-393.
Cohen, Lawrence E., and Marcus Felson. 1979. Social change and crime rate trends: A
routine activities approach. American Sociological Review 44:588-608.
Kennedy, L.W., and Forde, D. R. 1990. Routine activities and crime. Criminology, 28: 137-152.
Lynch, J. P., & Cantor, D. 1992. Ecological and behavioral influences on property victimization
at home: Implications for opportunity theory. Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency 29:355-362.
Miethe, T.D., and Meier, R.F. 1990. Opportunity, choice, and criminal victimization. Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency, 27: 243-266.
Sherman, L.W., Gartin, P.R., and Buerger, M.D. 1989. Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine
activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27: 27-56.
Spano, R. & Freilich, J. D. 2009. An assessment of the empirical validity and conceptualization
of individual level multivariate studies of lifestyle/routine activities theory published
from 1995 to 2005. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37 (3), 305-314.
Recommended
Clarke, R., and Cornish, D. 1993. Routine Activity and Rational Choice (Advances in
Criminological Theory, Volume 5). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.
Cornish, D., and Clarke, R. 1987. Understanding crime displacement. Criminology, 25: 933-947.
Felson, M. 1987. Routine activities and crime prevention in the developing metropolis.
Criminology, 25: 911-931.
Hough, M. 1987. Offenders choice of targets: Findings from the victims’ survey. Journal of
Quantitative Criminology 3:355-369.
Moffitt, T. E., Krueger, R. F., Caspi, A., & Fagan J. Partner Abuse and General Crime: How Are
They the Same? How Are They Different? Criminology 38:199-232.
Osgood, D.W., Wilson, J.K., O’Malley, P.M., Bachman, and Johnston. 1996. Routine activities
and deviant behavior. American Sociological Review, 61: 635-655.
Sampson, R.J., and Lauritsen, J.L. 1990. Deviant lifestyles, proximity of crime, and the offendervictim link in personal violence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 27: 110139.
Greenberg, David F. 1981. “Introduction” in David F. Greenberg (ed.) Crime and
Capitalism. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield. 1-35.
Brady, James. 1984. “The social economy of arson: vandals, gangsters, bankers, and
officials in the making of an urban problem” in Steven Spitzer, and Andrew Scull (eds.)
Research in Law, Deviance and Social Control. Greenwich, CT: JAI. 199-242.
Young, Jock. 1999. The exclusive society. London: Sage. 1-95 (Ch. 1-3)
Felson, Marcus. 2002. Crime and everyday life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 20-69 (Ch. 24).
Platt, Anthony. 1969. The Rise of the Child Saving Movement. A study in social policy and
correctional reform. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science 381:21-38.
Lynch, Michael J., and Paul B. Stretesky. 2006. “The new radical criminology and the
same old criticisms” in Stuart Henry, and Mark M. Lanier (eds.) The Essential
Criminology Reader. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press. 191-202.
Week 12, April 9: Subcultural, differential association/social learning/social bonding, and
labeling/shaming theories
Subculture
Sampson, Robert J., and Lydia Bean. 2006. “Cultural mechanisms and killing fields. A
revised theory of community-level racial inequality” in Ruth D. Peterson, Lauren J.
Krivo, and John Hagan (eds.) The many colors of crime. New York, NY: New York
University Press. 8-36.
Sampson Robert J., and Dawn Jeglum Bartusch. 1998. Legal cynicism and
(subcultural?) tolerance of deviance: the neighborhood context of racial differences.
Law and Society Review 32:777–804.
Steward, Eric, and Ronald Simmons. 2006. Structure and culture in African American
adolescent violence: A partial test of the code of the streets thesis. Justice Quarterly
23:1-33.
Subculture Recommended
Massey, Douglas, and Nancy Denton. 1993. American apartheid: Segregation and the
making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Ch. 2,5-6).
Kobrin, Solomon, Joseph Puntil, and Emil Peluso. 1967. Criteria of status among street
groups. Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency 4:98-118.
Felson, Richard. 1992. Kick ‘em when they’re down. The Sociological Quarterly 33:1-16.
Warner, Barbara. 2003. The role of attenuated culture in social disorganization theory.
Criminology 41:73-98.
Zatz, Marjorie S., and Edwardo L. Portillos. 2000. Voices from the Barrio: Chicano/a
gangs, families, and communities. Criminology 38:369-402.
Differential Association and Social Learning
Akers, R.L. 1996. Is differential association/social learning cultural deviance theory?
Criminology, 34: 229-247.
Bruinsma, G.J.N. 1992. Differential association theory reconsidered: An extension and its
empirical test. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 8: 29-49.
Krohn, M.D., Lanza Kaduce, L., and Akers, R.L. 1984. Community context and theories of
deviant behavior: An examination of social learning and social bonding theories.
Sociological Quarterly, 25: 353-371.
Differential Association and Social Learning Recommended
Akers, R.L. 1985. Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach. Third Edition. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Hirschi, T. 1996. Theory without ideas: Reply to Akers. Criminology, 34: 249-256.
Akers, R.L. 1998. Social Learning and Social Structure: A General Theory of Crime and
Deviant Behavior. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Akers, R.L., and Jensen, G.F. (Eds.). 2003. Social Learning Theory and the Explanation of
Crime: A Guide for the New Century. Advances in Criminological Theory, Volume 11.
New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Akers, R.L., Krohn, M.D., Lanza-Kaduce, L., and Radosevich, M. 1979. Social learning and
deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44:
638-655.
Bandura, A. 1977. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Burgess, R.L., and Akers, R.L. 1966. A differential association reinforcement theory of criminal
behavior. Social Problems,14: 128-47.
Haynie, D.L. 2002. Friendship networks and delinquency: The relative nature of peer
delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18: 99-134.
Hoffman, J. 2003. A contextual analysis of differential association, social control, and strain
theories of delinquency. Social Forces, 81: 753-785.
Matsueda, R.L. 1988. The current state of differential association theory. Crime and
Delinquency, 34: 277-306.
Matsueda, R.L., and Heimer, K. 1987. Race, family structure, and delinquency: A test of
differential association and social control theories. American Sociological Review, 52:
826-840.
Sutherland, E.H. 1947. Principles of Criminology. Fourth Edition. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.
Warr, M. 2002. Companions in Crime: The Social Aspects of Criminal Conduct. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Warr, M., and Stafford, M. 1991. The influence of delinquent peers: What they think or what
they do? Criminology, 29: 851-866.
Wood, P.B, Gove, W.R, Wilson, and Cochran, J.K. 1997. Nonsocial reinforcement and habitual
criminal conduct: An extension of learning theory. Criminology, 35: 335-366.
Social Bonding
Krohn, M.D., and Massey, J.L. 1980. Social control and delinquency behavior: An examination
of the elements of the social bond. Sociological Quarterly, 21: 529-543.
Social Bonding Recommended
Agnew, R. 1985. Social control theory and delinquency: A longitudinal test. Criminology, 23:
47-61.
Agnew, R. 1991. A longitudinal test of social control theory and delinquency. Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28: 126-156.
Cernkovich, S. and Giordano, P. 1987. Family relationships and delinquency. Criminology, 25:
295-321.
Hirschi, T. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Kempf, K. 1993. The empirical status of Hirschi’s control theory. Pp. 143-185 in F. Adler and
W. Laufer (Eds.), Advances in Criminological Theory, Volume 4. New Brunswick, NJ:
Transaction Press.
Matsueda, R.L., and Heimer, K. 1987. Race, family structure and delinquency: A test of
differential association and social control theories. American Sociological Review, 52:
826-840.
Reckless, W., Dinitz, S., and Kay, B. 1957. The self component in potential delinquency and
potential non-delinquency, American Sociological Review, 25: 566-570
Labeling and Shaming
Farrington, D. 1977. The effects of public labeling. British Journal of Criminology, 17:112-125.
Goode, Eric, and Nachman Ben-Yehuda. 1994. Moral panics: Culture, politics, and social
construction. Annual Review of Sociology 20:149-171.
Labeling and Shaming Recommended
Costello, Barbara, and Paul R. Vowell. 1999. Testing control theory and differential
association: a reanalysis of the Richmond Youth Project data. Criminology 37:815-842.
Becker, H.S. 1963. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.
Lemert, E. M. 1967. Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Link, B.G., Cullen, F.T., Frank, J., and Wozniak, J.F. 1987. The social reaction of former mental
patients. American Journal of Sociology, 92: 1461-1500.
Matsueda, R.L. 1992. Reflected appraisals, parental labeling, and delinquency: Specifying a
symbolic interactionist theory. American Journal of Sociology, 97: 1577-1611.
Miethe, T.D., and McCorkle, R.C. 1997. Gang membership and criminal processing: A test of
the “master status” concept. Justice Quarterly, 14: 407-427.
Paternoster, R., and Iovanni, L. 1989. The labeling perspective and delinquency: An elaboration
of the theory and an assessment of the evidence. Justice Quarterly, 6: 359-394.
Sampson, R. 1986. Effects of socioeconomic context on official reaction to juvenile delinquency.
American Sociological Review, 51: 876-885.
Schur, E.M. 1971. Labeling Deviant Behavior: Its Sociological Implications. New York: Harper
and Row.
Smith, D.A., and Paternoster, R. 1990. Formal processing and future delinquency: Deviance
amplification as selection artifact. Law and Society Review, 24: 1109-1131.
Wellford, C.F. 1975. Labeling theory and criminology: An assessment. Social Problems, 3: 332345.
Wellford, C.F., and Triplett, R.A. 1993. The future of labeling theory: Foundations and promises.
Pp. 1-22 in F. Adler and W.S. Laufer (Eds.), Advances in Criminological Theory,
Volume 4. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.
Week 13, April 16: Developmental/life course theory
Osgood, D. Wayne. 2005. Making sense of crime and the life course. The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science 602:196-211.
MacMillan, R. 2000. Adolescent Victimization and Income Deficits in Early Adulthood
Rethinking the Costs of Criminal Violence from a Life Course Perspective. Criminology
38:553-587.
Maxwell, S. R., & Maxwell, C. D. 2000. Examining the 'Criminal Careers' of Prostitutes
within the Nexus of Drug Use, Drug Selling, and Other Illicit Activities. Criminology
38:787-809.
Jeglum-Bartusch, D., Lynam, D.R., Moffitt, T.A., and Silva, P.A. 1997. Is age important?
Testing general versus developmental theories of antisocial behavior. Criminology, 35:
13-48.
Sampson, R.J., and Laub, J.H. 1990. Crime and deviance over the life course: The salience of
adult social bonds. American Sociological Review, 55: 609-627.
Simons, R.L., Stewart, E., Gordon, L.C., Conger, R.D., and Elder, G.H. 2002. A test of lifecourse explanations for stability and change in antisocial behavior from adolescence to
young adulthood. Criminology, 40: 401-434.
Simons, R.L., Wu, C., Conger, R.D., and Lorenz, F.O. 1994. Two routes to delinquency:
Differences between early and late starters in the impact of parenting and deviant peers.
Criminology, 32: 247-276.
Uggen, C. 2000. Work as a turning point in the life course of criminals: A duration model of
age, employment, and recidivism. American Sociological Review, 65: 529-546.
Sampson, Robert J., and John Laub. 2005. A life-course view of the development of crime.
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 602:12-45.
Recommended
Laub, J. H. & Sampson, R. J. 1993. Turning points in the life course: Why change matters to
the study of crime. Criminology 31:301-25.
Benson, M.L. 2002. Crime and the Life Course: An Introduction. Los Angeles: Roxbury
Publishing.
Glueck, S., and Glueck, E. 1950. Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency. New York: Commonwealth
Fund.
Moffitt, T. 1993. Adolescence-limited and life-course persistent antisocial behavior: A
developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100: 674-701.
Paternoster, R., and Brame, R. 1997. Multiple routes to delinquency? A test of developmental
and general theories of crime. Criminology, 35: 49-84.
Piquero, A. and Brezina, T. 2001. Testing Moffitt’s account of adolescence-limited delinquency.
Criminology, 39: 353-370.
Piquero, A.R., and Mazerolle, P. (Eds.) 2001. Life-Course Criminology. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Sampson, R.J., and Laub, J.H. 1992. Crime and deviance in the lifecourse. Annual Review of
Sociology, 18: 63-84.
Sampson, R.J., and Laub, J.H. 1993. Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points
Through Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sampson, R.J., and Laub, J.H. 1997. A life course theory of cumulative disadvantage and the
stability of delinquency. Pp. 133-161 in T. Thornberry (Ed.), Developmental Theories of
Crime and Delinquency (Advances in Criminological Theory, Volume 7).
Warr, M. 1998. Life-course transitions and desistance from crime. Criminology, 36: 183-216.
Bottoms, Anthony. 2006. “Desistance, social bonds, and human agency: a theoretical
exploration” in Per-Olof H. Wikstrom, and Robert J. Sampson. The explanation of
crime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 243-289.
Farrington, David P. 2006. “Building developmental and life-course theories of
offending” in Francis T. Cullen, John P. Wright, and Kristie R. Blevins (eds.) Taking
stock: The status of criminological theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. 335-367.
Laub, John H., and Robert J. Sampson. 2003. Shared beginnings, divergent lives.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pp. 1-60, 275-293 (Ch. 1-3, 10).
Moffitt, Terrie E. 1993. Adolescent-limited and life-course persistent antisocial behavior: a
developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review 100:674-701.
Thornberry, Terence. 1987. Toward an interactional theory of delinquency. Criminology
25: 863-892.
Blumstein, Alfred, and Jacqueline Cohen. 1987. Characterizing criminal careers. Science
238:985-991.
Laub, John H., and Robert J. Sampson. 1993. Turning points in the life course: Why
change matters to the study of crime. Criminology 31:301-326.
Hagan, John and Alberto Palloni. 1988. Crimes as social events in the life course:
Re-conceiving a criminological controversy. Criminology 26:87-100.
Agnew, Robert. 1997. “Stability and change in crime over the life course: a strain theory
explanation” in Thornberry, Terence P. (ed.) Developmental theories of crime and
delinquency. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Week 14, April 23: Application to policing and sentencing/corrections
Policing
Skogan, Wesley, and Tracey L. Meares. 2004. Lawful policing. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science 593:66–83.
Wilson, James O., and George Kelling. 1982. Broken windows: The Police and neighborhood
safety. Atlantic Monthly 127: 29 – 38.
Weisburd, David, and John Eck. 2004. What can police do to reduce crime, disorder, and
fear? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 593: 42–65.
Gau, J. M. and Pratt, T. C. 2008. Broken windows or window dressing? Citizens’ (in) ability to
tell the difference between disorder and crime. Criminology & Public Policy, 7 (2), 163194.
Policing Recommended
Kahan, Dan M. and Tracy L. Meares. 1998. Law and (norms of) order in the inner city.
Law and Society Review 32: 8-5-838.
Harcourt, Bernard. 2002. Illusions of order: the false promise of broken windows policing.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Ch.1-6).
Reiss, Albert J. 1975. The Police and the public. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
(Preface, Ch. 1-2).
Taylor, Ralph. 2001. Breaking away from broken windows: Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
(Ch. 1, 8).
Sentencing/Corrections
Liedka, Raymod, Anne Morrison Piehl, and Bert Useem. 2006. The crime-control effect of
incarceration. Does scale matter? Criminology and Public Policy 5:245-276.
Spellman, William. 2000. What recent studies do (and don’t) tell us about imprisonment
and crime. Crime and Justice 27: 419-494.
Wacquant, Loic. 2001. Deadly symbiosis. Punishment and Society 3:95-134
Feeley, Malcolm, and Jonathan Simon. 1992. The new penology: Notes on the emerging
strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology 30:449-474.
Lynch, Mona. 2000. Rehabilitation as rhetoric: The ideal of reformation in contemporary
parole discourse and practices. Punishment and Society 2:40-65.
Sentencing/Corrections Recommended
Garland, David. 1991. Punishment and culture: The symbolic dimension of criminal
justice. Studies in Law, Politics and Society 11:191-222.
Hirsch, Andrew von. 1999. “Penal theories” in Michael Tonry (ed.). The handbook of
crime and punishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 659-683.
Commission on safety and abuse in America’s prisons. 2006. Confronting confinement.
New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice. (Ch.1-3).
Available at: http://www,prisoncommission.org/pdfs/Confornting_Confinement.pdf
Garland, David. 2001. Culture of control: crime and social order in contemporary society.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Durkheim, Emile.1986. “On crime and punishment”, and “Two laws of penal
evolution” in Steve Lukes, and Andrew Scull. Durkheim and the Law. Blackwell. 5975, 102-132.
Tonry, Michael. 1996. Malign Neglect. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Week 15, April 30: Theoretical critiques—an argumentative exercise
Anderson, Elijah. 2002. The ideologically driven critique. American Journal of Sociology
107:1533-1550.
Durneir, Mitchell. 2002. What kind of combat sport is Sociology? American Journal of
Sociology 103:1551-1576.
http://sociology.nccu.edu.tw/Chinese/speech/ajs02Wacquant-DuneierReply-marked%20ups.pdf
Newman, Katherine S. 2002. No shame: the view from the left bank. American Journal of
Sociology 107:1577-1599.
Wacquant, Loïc. 2002. Scrutinizing the street: poverty, morality, and the pitfalls of urban
ethnography. American Journal of Sociology 107:1468-1532.
Week 16, May 7: Finals TBA
REMEMBER, YOUR PAPER SHOULD BE SUPPORTED WITH EXISTING
SCHOLARSHIP.
Discussion and Final Paper Guidelines:
Students are given a wide range of discretion to decide on a topic for the seminar papers.
All papers must be relevant to the material covered in class and should emphasize some policy
(e.g., the use of mandatory arrest policies, aggressive enforcement of zero tolerance policies, the
use of alternatives to incarceration such as boot camps, the abandonment of the juvenile justice
system, etc.).
General Guidelines: All papers must be written in Times New Roman (12 point font).
Students are encouraged to follow APA style guidelines yet may use others. The following
general guidelines are offered: (a) Do not write in first person (e.g., I, me, we, etc.); (b) do not
use contractions unless part of a quote; (c) parenthetical reference should be in the following
format (Author, Year) unless specified differently by another formatting guide (you may be
required to provide evidence of this); (c) absolutely no sources may come from the internet –
period; and (d) be sure to integrate research into your arguments. Do not make statements of fact
that are not supported with solid research.
Use of Research: Seminar papers should be, above all else, research based. That is,
students are expected to go beyond offering opinions and beliefs. As in all scholarly writing,
students are expected to make clear arguments that are empirically grounded. Students are
expected to draw heavily on empirically based journal articles, research reports, and books. You
should avoid certain secondary sources (e.g., textbooks) but instead draw on the original research
material. Students should also not use internet sources in any way. The internet is an
appropriate medium to acquire empirically grounded reports (e.g., Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Bureau of Justice Assistance, and the National Institute of Justice). Contrary to popular belief,
websites such as www.hightimes.com is generally not considered an objective, research-based
source of research.