Criminal Justice

school needed

Chapter2Powerpoint.pdf

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Criminal Justice

Criminological Theory: A Brief Introduction Fourth Edition

Chapter 2

Classical and Neoclassical Criminology

The Classical School

• Classical Theory is one of the oldest explanations of crime

• Derived from the ideas and writing of early Greek philosophy

• Formally originated in the 18th century

Classical Theory of Criminology

• Began in 1764 with ‘Of Crime and Punishments’ by Cesare Beccaria

• This book drew from the concepts of the enlightenment movement in Europe

• Theory focused on social harm prevention as opposed to moral retribution of law

Deterrence

• Beccaria looked at deterrence as the central purpose of criminal justice

• The prevalence of crime in society was thought to reflect irrational and ineffective law

• Legal reform implementing a more fair and rational justice system, which would deter people from crime, was thought to be the answer to the crime problem

Fundamental Assumptions

• Beccaria’s perspective is rooted in several fundamental assumptions 1. People are generally good but need negative

motivation 2. Behavior is calculated 3. Crime control is an attainable goal

Bentham

• Another well known figure in the development of the classical perspective

• Developed the principle of utility based on the assumption that people pursue pleasure and avoid pain

• Individuals calculate pleasure or pain according to intensity, duration, certainty and extent

Classical Criminology Assumptions

• Several assumptions underlie classical criminology 1. People have free will 2. People exhibit hedonism 3. People have rationality

Deterrence Theory

• Martinson (1974) questioned the viability of positivist explanations of criminality

• He also suggested that the idea behind deterrence should be reconsidered

• This questioning included a postmodern rejection of causal determinism

How Deterrence Works

• To understand deterrence one must accept basic classical ideas about human nature

• Much of the problem with crime is that it “feels good”

• Crime must be controlled by negative means

Deterrence Effectiveness (1 of 2)

• Beccaria argues that the effectiveness of deterrence will depend on three characteristics related to punishment administration 1. Certainty 2. Celerity (speed of punishment) 3. Severity (painfulness of outcome)

Deterrence Effectiveness (2 of 2)

• Of the three characteristics, maximizing swiftness and certainness is more important for deterrence than severity

• If severity is disproportionate, irrationality brutality may occur and the effect on crime will be counterproductive

Relativity

• A less extreme problem with severity has to do with relativity

• Deterrence functions through criminal law, which makes assumptions about which crimes are to be punished more severely

• Sentencing is based on severity and not on characteristics of the crime

Limitations of Deterrence (1 of 2)

• Cost-benefit conceptualization of deterrence theory is known as the economic model or objective deterrence

• Cost/benefit calculations are based on a number of factors

• At times some offenders do not engage in rational decision making

Limitations of Deterrence (2 of 2)

• Deterrence theory assumptions are often faulty in practice

• The diverse stratified and pluralistic nature of our society make deterrence less than straightforward

• Different socioeconomic groups might opt out of different crimes due to cost/benefits

Variability of Severity

• Variability of true severity has an intangible element

• EG: Approval of peer groups and concepts such as direct and indirect punishments affect deterrence

Boundedness of Decision Making (1 of 2)

• Scholars recrafted deterrence to include the role of variability and perception in individual decision making

• This is known as bounded choice/perceptual deterrence theory

• Decisions to engage in criminal behavior are influenced by an individual’s perception of punishment

Boundedness of Decision Making (2 of 2)

• Deterrence occurs when perceptions of likely punishment cause would be offenders to refrain from committing criminal acts (despite motivation and willingness)

• Modern analysis of deterrence has divided deterrence into two specific types (specific and general)

Specific Deterrence

• Offender is inhibited from repeating criminal behavior by unpleasant experiences

• Involves the direct experience of punishment

General Deterrence

• Punishing other offenders has an effect on would be offenders

• Involves the indirect or vicarious experience of punishment through seeing others receive unpleasant outcomes for their actions

Research on Deterrence Theories

• As a theory, the validity of deterrence as a scientific explanation depends on the ability to conduct empirical research and testing hypotheses

• Research to study deterrence is typically very difficult to accomplish

Difficulties (1 of 2)

• Part of the difficulty with deterrence theory is determining fully measurable concepts and fully specified/testable hypotheses

• Fundamental difficulty is that deterrence is not observable, it can only be inferred from observable events

Difficulties (2 of 2)

• As deterrence cannot be “seen” the majority of research has been conducted on the failures of deterrence

• Observing people committing crime is a failure of deterrence

• We do not really observe people not committing crime

Methods to Determine Validity of Deterrence Theory

1. Anecdotal Studies

2. Crime Rate Analysis

3. Natural/Field Experiments

4. Self-Report Surveys

Appeal of Deterrence (1 of 2)

• Overall, the appeal of the theory is not entirely based on scientific progress

• Theory is more ideological than utilitarian

• Agrees with the values we hold about human nature, law and morality

Appeal of Deterrence (2 of 2)

• Classical theory works, “well enough,” re: empirical research and policy evaluations

• Does not work better than most positivist theoretical competitors

• The variability of criminal punishments will always limit this theory