Abstract
This chapter describes the problems and solutions that justify the need for appropriate analysis of the convergence of people in environments to explain action. Thus, it justifies the research approach and methods that are described and explained in this volume.
Criminology is plagued by the fragmentation of environmental and psychological approaches. Limited attempts at integration display fundamentally different, incompatible approaches to the question of how to integrate individuals and environments in behavioural research. Furthermore, criminology has traditionally studied the factors related to concentrations of crime in either people or places, but not the factors implicated in an explanation of acts of crime (behaviour). Welcomed event-focused approaches are hindered by not identifying an action process that specifies the precise mechanism by which (how) both individual and environmental factors are relevant to acts of crime.
This chapter justifies the need to consider features of both individuals and environments in the study of the causes of acts of crime, as opposed to studying factors related to aggregates of crime in either individuals or environments. It details why an interactive, rather than additive, worldview is essential to research that is best able to inform effective crime prevention policy and practice. The two key questions addressed are therefore why and how criminology should integrate individuals and environments to explain crime. Understanding the answers to these questions is crucial to appreciation of appropriate analysis of situational interaction. If researchers do not see the issues raised in this chapter as problematic and fundamental, they will fail to see the value of the solution. Since the solution is the research approach and methods that are the main topic of this volume, this chapter justifies the volume.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Wikström defines a place as a ‘geographic location and its immediate environment, which includes other people present, the activities going on and its physical layout’ (Wikström, 2019 p.266) (i.e. the social and physical environment of a particular geographical location). Environmental effects (both physical and social) are often termed ‘situational’ (Bottoms & Wiles, 2002; Wilcox & Cullen, 2018); however, the terms ‘environment’ and ‘situation’ are crucially different and are delineated in Chap. 2.
- 2.
The Brantinghams argue that environmental criminology requires an understanding of the coming together of offenders, criminal targets, and time- and place-relevant laws (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1991). This definition of ‘environmental criminology’ is often understandably interpreted as integrating person and environment. However, the Brantinghams do not go on to specify a model of action that details how person-environment interaction results in acts of crime; instead they posit factors that predict spatial concentrations of crime (Brantingham & Brantingham, 1984; Brantingham & Brantingham, 1993).
- 3.
Some newer and innovative research studies that might appear to integrate people into environmental criminology arguably still fall short. For example, there is increasing research interest in the role of ambient (as opposed to resident) populations in spatial distributions of crime (e.g. Felson & Boivin, 2015; Hanaoka, 2018; Malleson & Andresen, 2016); however, with the exception of analysis by Wikström et al. (2012, pp. 311–319), there is little consideration of the nature of the varying features of those people who are present, in part due to the limitations of the kinds of ‘big data’ most often used (Hardie & Wikström, in press; see further Chap. 4). Another example is Summers and Guerette’s attempt to consider individuals’ perception of, interactions with, and exposure to environments (Summers & Guerette, 2018). However, they fail to address the content of individual variation (i.e. relevant features of people); therefore, neglecting that differing perceptions of and interactions with environments mean that when it comes to explaining an act of crime, individuals differ in their susceptibility to environmental effects.
- 4.
The major exception is the Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study (PADS+) which was specifically designed to empirically study Situational Action Theory (Treiber, 2017) and is able to empirically study both the developmental effects of exposure to contexts (Wikström et al., forthcoming) and also the effect of features of contexts on action (Beier, 2018; Hardie, 2019; Wikström et al., 2012; Wikström, Ceccato, Hardie, & Treiber, 2010; Wikström, Mann, & Hardie, 2018).
- 5.
Within the framework that is fundamental to this volume (SAT), a few studies have explained crime concentrations in people (criminality, e.g. Wikström et al., forthcoming) and places (hotspots, e.g. Wikström et al., 2012, pp. 311–319) by first explaining acts of crime, which then allows analysis of how and why they become aggregated.
- 6.
- 7.
Efforts have been made to integrate control and opportunity theories of crime (e.g. Felson, 1986; P. Wilcox, Land, & Hunt, 2003). Such a project is conceivable because of a shared assumption of self-interested human behaviour, which implies that actors aim to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. This rational choice perspective determines that the decision to commit an act of crime results from a cognitive calculation which determines that the benefits of an act of crime outweigh the costs. Opportunity and controls are therefore fundamental to this choice, which is rational in the sense that it is self-interested. This assumption of the nature of human action is problematic because it ignores that human nature is not compelled by self-interest alone (Barton-Crosby, forthcoming; Wikström, 2005, 2006). Thus, opportunity and control perspectives, and attempts to integrate them, fall foul of this problematic assumption of the nature of human action. For a discussion, see Hardie (2017, pp. 134–138).
- 8.
Society, crime prevention, and criminological research are discussed from a Western perspective in this volume.
- 9.
An explosion in applications of new ‘big data’ sources to the study of crime will contribute to a continuation of this situation; many such studies are conducted by computational scientists who are mostly data-driven non-criminologists who identify correlates (particularly of spatial concentrations) rather than study causes of crime (see Snaphaan & Hardyns, 2019).
- 10.
This corresponds to a realist position (Wikström, 2007b), which states that ‘capable successful intervention into the social realm likely necessitates, and always stands to benefit from, explicit social ontological reasoning’ (Lawson, 2019, p. 4), where ontology means ‘investigation into the nature, basic constitution and modes of being of stuff, of all phenomena’ (Lawson, 2019, p. 21).
- 11.
There follows an illustration of the difference between the additive and interactive approaches to the integration of individual and environmental insights. Reckless (1940) rightly argued that consideration of individual differences in response to exposure was lacking from the prominent theories of crime of the time, which focused on environmental factors. However, he asks ‘what is the difference between those who are and those who are not affected? What sorts of individuals are they who succumb and what sorts are they who remain immune?’ (Reckless, 1940, p. 444). By asking what the individual differences are, as opposed to how (by what specific mechanisms) those differences mean that the individual responds to the environment differently, Reckless demonstrates an additive approach to the integration of person- and environment- oriented understandings of the causes of crime.
- 12.
Not all parts of SAT’s situational model have received equal empirical attention. For example, the role of motivation in the situational process is particularly under-researched (for discussion, see Barton-Crosby, 2018; Barton-Crosby & Hirtenlehner, 2020).
References
Anastasi, A. (1958). Heredity, environment, and the question “how?”. Psychological Review, 65(4), 197–208.
Andresen, M. A. (2019). Environmental criminology (2nd ed.). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Barton-Crosby, J. (2018). Situational Action Theory and intimate partner violence: An exploration of morality as the underlying mechanism in the explanation of violent crime (Doctoral thesis; University of Cambridge). https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.25206.
Barton-Crosby, J. (forthcoming). The nature and role of morality in Situational Action Theory. [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge.
Barton-Crosby, J., & Hirtenlehner, H. (2020). The role of morality and self-control in conditioning the criminogenic effect of provocation: A partial test of Situational Action Theory. Deviant Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2020.1738645
Beier, H. (2018). Situational peer effects on adolescents’ alcohol consumption: The moderating role of supervision, activity structure, and personal moral rules. Deviant Behavior, 39(3), 363–379.
Belsky, J., & Pluess, M. (2009). Beyond diathesis stress: Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Psychological Bulletin, 135(6), 885.
Bernasco, W., Ruiter, S., Bruinsma, G. J. N., Pauwels, L. J. R., & Weerman, F. M. (2013). Situational causes of offending: A fixed-effects analysis of space–time budget data. Criminology, 51(4), 895–926.
Blomberg, T. G., Mestre, J., & Mann, K. (2013). Seeking causality in a world of contingency. Criminology & Public Policy, 12(4), 571–584.
Bottoms, A. E., & Wiles, P. (2002). Environmental criminology. In M. Maguire, R. Morgan, & R. Reiner (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of criminology (3rd ed., pp. 620–656). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bouhana, N. (2013). The reasoning criminal vs. Homer Simpson: Conceptual challenges for crime science. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7(682).
Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1991). Introduction: The dimensions of crime. In P. J. Brantingham & P. L. Brantingham (Eds.), Environmental criminology (2nd ed., pp. 7–26). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Brantingham, P. L., & Brantingham, P. J. (1993). Environment, routine, and situation: Toward a pattern theory of crime. In R. V. Clarke & M. Felson (Eds.), Routine activity and rational choice: Advances in criminological theory, volume 5 (pp. 259–294). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Brantingham, P. L. J., & Brantingham, P. L. J. (1984). Patterns in crime. New York: Macmillan.
Briar, S., & Piliavin, I. (1965). Delinquency, situational inducements, and commitment to conformity. Social Problems, 13(1), 35–45.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (Vol. 1, 5th ed., pp. 993–1028). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Bruinsma, G. J. N., & Johnson, S. D. (2018a). Environmental criminology: Scope, history, and state of the art. In G. J. N. Bruinsma & S. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of environmental criminology (pp. 1–31). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bruinsma, G. J. N., & Johnson, S. D. (2018b). The Oxford handbook of environmental criminology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bunge, M. (1963). Causality the place of the causal principle in modern science. New York: World Publishing.
Bunge, M. (2001). Scientific realism. In M. Mahner (Ed.), Selected essays by Mario Bunge. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
Bunge, M. (2004). How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(2), 182–210.
Bunge, M. (2006). A systemic perspective on crime. In P.-O. H. Wikström & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms, and development (pp. 8–30). Cambridge University Press.
Bursik, R. J., & Grasmick, H. (1993). Neighborhoods and crime: The dimensions of effective community control. New York: Lexington.
Burt, C. H. (2019). Self-control and crime: Beyond Gottfredson and Hirschi’s theory. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011419.
Carmichael, L. (1925). Heredity and environment: Are they antithetical? The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 20(3), 245.
Chrysoulakis, A. P. (2020). Morality, delinquent peer association, and criminogenic exposure: (How) does change predict change? European Journal of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370819896216
Clarke, R. V. (1980). Situational crime prevention: Theory and practice. The British Journal of Criminology, 20, 136.
Clarke, R. V. (1983). Situational crime prevention: Its theoretical basis and practical scope. Crime and Justice, 4, 225–256.
Clarke, R. V. (1997). Situational crime prevention (2nd ed.). Guilderlands, NY: Harrow and Heston.
Cohen, & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.
Coleman, J. S. (1986). Social theory, social research, and a theory of action. American Journal of Sociology, 91(6), 1309–1335.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12(11), 671.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured race in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.
Dawid, P., Faigman, D. L., & Fienberg, S. E. (2013). Fitting science into legal contexts: assessing effects of causes or causes of effects? Sociological Methods & Research.
de Jong, E., Bernasco, W., & Lammers, M. (2019). Situational correlates of adolescent substance use: An improved test of the routine activity theory of Deviant Behavior. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-019-09433-w
Dodge, K. A., & Rutter, M. (2011). Gene-environment interactions in developmental psychopathology. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Ekehammar, B. (1974). Interactionism in personality from a historical perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 81(12), 1026.
Elder, G. H. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06128.x
Elder, G. H., Shanahan, M. J., Damon, W., & Lerner, R. M. (2006). The life course and human development. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (Vol. 1, 6th ed., pp. 665–715). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114
Ellis, L., Farrington, D. P., & Hoskin, A. W. (2019). Handbook of crime correlates (2nd ed.). London: Academic Press, Elsevier.
Elster, J. (2007). Explaining social behavior: More nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Esser, H., & Kroneberg, C. (2015). An integrative theory of action: The model of frame selection. In E. J. Lawler, S. Thye, & J. Yoon (Eds.), Order on the edge of chaos: Social psychology and the problem of social order (p. 63). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Farrington, D. P. (1988). Social, psychological and biological influences on juvenile delinquency and adult crime. In W. Buikhuisen & S. A. Mednick (Eds.), Explaining criminal behaviour (pp. 68–89). Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill.
Farrington, D. P. (1992). Explaining the beginning, progress, and ending of antisocial behavior from birth to adulthood. In J. McCord (Ed.), Facts, frameworks, and forecasts: Advances in criminology theory, volume 3 (pp. 253–286). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Farrington, D. P. (2000). Explaining and preventing crime: The globalization of knowledge-the American Society of Criminology 1999 Presidential Address. Criminology, 38(1), 1–24.
Farrington, D. P. (2003). Developmental and life-course criminology: Key theoretical and empirical issues - the 2002 Sutherland award address. Criminology, 41(2), 221–256.
Farrington, D. P., Sampson, R. J., & Wikström, P.-O. H. (1993). Integrating individual and ecological aspects of crime. National Council for Crime Prevention.
Felson, M. (1986). Linking criminal choices, routine activities, informal control, and criminal outcomes. In D. B. Cornish & R. V. Clarke (Eds.), The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending (pp. 119–128). New York: Springer.
Felson, M., & Boba, R. L. (2010). Crime and everyday life (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Felson, M., & Boivin, R. (2015). Daily crime flows within a city. Crime Science, 4(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-015-0039-0
Fuentes, A. (2016). The extended evolutionary synthesis, ethnography, and the human niche: Toward an integrated anthropology. Current Anthropology, 57(S13), S13–S26.
Gerring, J. (2008). The mechanismic worldview: Thinking inside the box. British Journal of Political Science, 38(01), 161–179.
Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. T. (1950). (1959 imprint) Unraveling juvenile delinquency. Commonwealth Fund (Harvard University Press).
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (2003). Self-control and opportunity. In C. Britt & M. Gottfredson (Eds.), Control theories of crime and delinquency (Advances in criminological theory) (Vol. 12, pp. 5–19). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (2019). Modern control theory and the limits of criminal justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Guerette, R. T., & Clarke, R. V. (2009). The pull, push, and expansion of situational crime prevention evaluation: An appraisal of thirty-seven years of research. In J. Knutsson & N. Tilley (Eds.), Evaluation of crime reduction initiatives (pp. 29–58). Devon, UK: Criminal Justice Press.
Guerette, R. T., Johnson, S. D., & Bowers, K. J. (2016). Situational crime prevention. In T. G. Blomberg, J. Brancale, K. Beaver, & W. Bales (Eds.), Advancing criminology and criminal justice policy (pp. 104–114). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Hanaoka, K. (2018). New insights on relationships between street crimes and ambient population: Use of hourly population data estimated from mobile phone users’ locations. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 45(2), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813516672454
Hardie, B. (forthcoming). The dangers of ‘making do’: Using a medical analogy to advocate analytic criminology and a cause-oriented crime prevention strategy. [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge.
Hardie, B. (2017). Why monitoring doesn’t always matter: The situational role of parental monitoring in adolescent crime (Doctoral Thesis; University of Cambridge). https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.15484.
Hardie, B. (2019). Why monitoring doesn’t always matter: The interaction of personal propensity with physical and psychological parental presence in a situational explanation of adolescent offending. Deviant Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2019.1673924
Hardie, B., & Wikström, P.-O. H. (in press). Space-time budget methodology: Facilitating social ecology of crime. In J. C. Barnes & D. Forde (Eds.), Encyclopedia of research methods and statistical techniques in Criminology and Criminal Justice. Wiley.
Hay, C., & Forrest, W. (2008). Self-control theory and the concept of opportunity: The case for a more systematic union. Criminology, 46(4), 1039–1072. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00135.x
Hedström, P., & Ylikoski, P. (2010). Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 49–67.
Hirtenlehner, H., & Reinecke, J. (2018). Introduction to the Special Issue with some reflections on the role of self-control in Situational Action Theory. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370817732182
Holland, P. W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81(396), 945–960.
Jensen, G. F., & Akers, R. L. (2003). Taking social learning global: Micro-macro transitions in criminological theory. In R. L. Akers & G. F. Jensen (Eds.), Social learning theory and the explanation of crime (Vol. 11, pp. 9–37). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Jolliffe, D., Farrington, D. P., Piquero, A. R., Loeber, R., & Hill, K. G. (2017). Systematic review of early risk factors for life-course-persistent, adolescence-limited, and late-onset offenders in prospective longitudinal studies. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 33, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.01.009
Kantor, J. R. (1924). Principles of psychology Vol. 1 (Vol. 1). Bloomington: Principia Press.
Katz, J. (1988). Seductions of crime. New York: Basic Books.
Keuschnigg, M., Lovsjö, N., & Hedström, P. (2017). Analytical sociology and computational social science. Journal of Computational Social Science., 1, 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-017-0006-5
Kornhauser, R. (1978). Social sources of delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D. R., Kessler, R. C., Jensen, P. S., & Kupfer, D. J. (1997). Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54(4), 337.
Kraemer, H. C., Lowe, K. K., & Kupfer, D. J. (2005). To your health: How to understand what research tells us about risk. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Lawson, T. (2019). The nature of social reality: Issues in social ontology. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Le Blanc, M. (1997). A generic control theory of the criminal phenomenon: The structural and dynamic statements of an integrative multilayered control theory. In T. P. Thornberry (Ed.), Developmental theories of crime and delinquency (Vol. 7, pp. 215–285). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Liska, A. E., Krohn, M. D., & Messner, S. F. (1989). Strategies and requisites for theoretical integration in the study of crime and deviance. In S. F. Messner, M. D. Krohn, & A. E. Liska (Eds.), Theoretical integration in the study of deviance and crime: Problems and prospects (pp. 1–19). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Mahoney, J. (2001). Review essay: Beyond correlational analysis: Recent innovations in theory and method. Sociological forum, 16, 575–593.
Malleson, N., & Andresen, M. A. (2016). Exploring the impact of ambient population measures on London crime hotspots. Journal of Criminal Justice, 46, 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.03.002
Manski, C. F. (1978). Prospects for inference on deterrence through empirical analysis of individual criminal behaviour. In J. M. Heineke (Ed.), Economic models of criminal behavior. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland Publishing Company.
Manski, C. F. (2013). Public policy in an uncertain world: Analysis and decisions. Harvard University Press.
Mayntz, R. (2004). Mechanisms in the analysis of social macro-phenomena. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(2), 237–259.
Mill, J. S. (1843). (1974 edition). A system of logic ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of scientific investigation. Toronto Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.
Morgan, R., & Hough, M. (2007). The politics of criminological research. In R. D. King & E. Wincup (Eds.), Doing research on crime and justice (2nd ed., pp. 45–72). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Murray, J., Farrington, D. P., & Eisner, M. P. (2009). Drawing conclusions about causes from systematic reviews of risk factors: The Cambridge Quality Checklists. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 5(1), 1–23.
Oberwittler, D., & Wikström, P.-O. H. (2009). Why small is better: Advancing the study of the role of behavioral contexts in crime causation. In D. Weisburd, W. Bernasco, & G. J. N. Bruinsma (Eds.), Putting crime in its place: Units of analysis in spatial crime research (pp. 35–59). New York: Springer.
Ohlin, L. E. (1970). A situational approach to delinquency prevention. Washington, D.C.: Youth Development and Delinquency Prevention Administration, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Social and Rehabilitation Service.
Osgood, D. W., Wilson, J. K., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Johnston, L. (1996). Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. American Sociological Review, 61, 635–655.
Overton, W. F. (1973). On the assumptive base of the nature-nurture controversy: Additive versus interactive conceptions. Human Development, 16(1–2), 74–89.
Overton, W. F., & Reese, H. W. (1973). Models of development: Methodological implications. In J. R. Nesselroade & H. W. Reese (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology. Methodological issues (pp. 66–86). New York: Academic Press.
Pauwels, L. J. R., Ponsaers, P., & Svensson, R. (2009). Analytical criminology: A style of theorizing and analysing the micro-macro context of acts of crime. Contemporary Issues in the Empirical Study of Crime, 1, 129–140.
Pauwels, L. J. R., Svensson, R., & Hirtenlehner, H. (2018). Testing Situational Action Theory: A narrative review of studies published between 2006 and 2015. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 32.
Piaget, J. (1971). Biology and knowledge: An essay on the relations between organic regulations and cognitive processes. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press.
Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38(3), 931–964. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb00911.x
Proctor, K. R., & Niemeyer, R. E. (2019). Mechanistic criminology. New York: Routledge.
Psillos, S. (2002). Causation and explanation. Chesham, UK: Acumen.
Reckless, W. C. (1940). Criminal behavior. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Rein, M., & Winship, C. (1999). The dangers of “strong” causal reasoning in social policy. Society, 36(5), 38–46.
Reiss, A. J. (1986). Why are communities important in understanding crime? In A. J. Reiss Jr. & M. Tonry (Eds.), Crime and justice, volume 8: Communities and crime (Vol. 8, pp. 1–33). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Reiss, A. J. (1991). Research as the core technology in crime prevention. The 1st International Conference of the Korean Institute of Criminology: Crime and Crime Control. Past, Present and Future. Seoul, Korea.
Rodman, H., & Grams, P. (1967). Juvenile delinquency and the family: A review and discussion. In US President’s commission task force report: Juvenile delinquency and youth crime. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Rutter, M. (2003). Crucial paths from risk indicator to causal mechanism. In B. B. Lahey, T. E. Moffitt, & A. Caspi (Eds.), Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency. New York: Guilford Press.
Rutter, M. (1989). Pathways from childhood to adult life. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30(1), 23–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1989.tb00768.x
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1997). A life-course theory of cumulative disadvantage and the stability of delinquency. In Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 313–333).
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924.
Sampson, R. J., Winship, C., & Knight, C. (2013). Translating causal claims. Criminology & Public Policy, 12(4), 587–616.
Shaw, C., & McKay, H. (1969). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D. P., Welsh, B. C., & MacKenzie, D. L. (2002). Preventing crime. In L. W. Sherman, D. P. Farrington, B. Welsh, & D. L. MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention. London: Routledge.
Snaphaan, T., & Hardyns, W. (2019). Environmental criminology in the big data era. European Journal of Criminology, 147737081987775. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370819877753
Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: W. W. Norton and Company Inc.
Summers, L., & Guerette, R. T. (2018). The individual perspective. In G. J. N. Bruinsma & S. D. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of environmental criminology (pp. 84–104). Oxford University Press.
Sutherland, E. H., & Cressey, D. R. (1970). Criminology (8th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
Tittle, C. R. (1995). Control balance: Toward a general theory of deviance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Tittle, C. R. (2004). The arrogance of public sociology. Social Forces, 82(4), 1639–1643.
Tittle, C. R., & Botchkovar, E. V. (2005). Self-control, criminal motivation and deterrence: An investigation using Russian respondents. Criminology, 43(2), 307–354. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00010.x
Tonry, M., Ohlin, L. E., & Farrington, D. P. (1991). Human development and criminal behavior: New ways of advancing knowledge. Springer Science & Business Media.
Treiber, K. (2013). Life course theories of crime. In E. McLaughlin & J. Muncie (Eds.), The Sage dictionary of criminology (3rd ed.) (pp.254–257). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Treiber, K. (2017). Situational Action Theory and PADS+: Theoretical and methodological advances in the study of life course criminology. In A. Blokland & V. Van der Geest (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook on life-course criminology (pp. 50–73). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
VanderWeele, T. J. (2009). Mediation and mechanism. European Journal of Epidemiology, 24(5), 217–224.
Vazsonyi, A. T., Mikuška, J., & Kelley, E. L. (2017). It’s time: A meta-analysis on the self-control-deviance link. Journal of Criminal Justice, 48, 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCRIMJUS.2016.10.001
Walters, G. (2019). Closing the integration gap in criminology: The case for criminal thinking. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429328879
Weisburd, D., Eck, J. E., Braga, A. A., Telep, C. W., Cave, B., Bowers, K., et al. (2016). Place matters: Criminology for the twenty-first century. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
West, D. J., & Farrington, D. P. (1973). Who becomes delinquent? Cambridge studies in criminology; second report of the Cambridge study in delinquent development. London: Heineman.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2004). Crime as alternative: Towards a cross-level situational action theory of crime causation. In J. McCord (Ed.), Beyond empiricism: institutions and intentions in the study of crime (Advances in Criminological Theory) (Vol. 13, pp. 1–37). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2005). The social origins of pathways in crime: Towards a developmental ecological action theory of crime involvement and its changes. In D. P. Farrington (Ed.), Integrated developmental and life course theories of offending (Advances in criminological theory) (Vol. 14, pp. 211–246). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2006). Individuals, settings, and acts of crime: Situational mechanisms and the explanation of crime. In P.-O. H. Wikström & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms and development (pp. 61–107). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2007a). Doing without knowing. Common pitfalls in crime prevention. In G. Farrell, K. Bowers, S. Johnson, & M. Townsley (Eds.), Imagination for crime prevention: Essays in honour of Ken Pease. Criminal Justice Press.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2007b). In search of causes and explanations of crime. In R. D. King & E. Wincup (Eds.), Doing research on crime and justice (pp. 117–139). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2007c). The social ecology of crime: The role of the environment in crime causation. In H. J. Schneider & H. Joachim (Eds.), Internationales handbuch der kriminologie (pp. 333–358). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2010). Explaining crime as moral action. In S. Hitlin & S. Vaysey (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of morality. New York: Springer.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2011). Does everything matter? Addressing the problem of causation and explanation in the study of crime. In J. M. McGloin, C. J. Sullivan, & L. W. Kennedy (Eds.), When crime appears: The role of emergence (pp. 53–72). New York: Routledge.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2014). Why crime happens: A situational action theory. In G. Manzo (Ed.), Analytical sociology: actions and networks (pp. 74–94). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2017). Character, circumstances, and the causes of crime: Towards an analytical criminology. In A. Liebling, S. Maruna, & L. McAra (Eds.), Oxford handbook of criminology (6th ed., pp. 502–521). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wikström, P.-O. H. (2019). Situational Action Theory: A general, dynamic and mechanism-based theory of crime and its causes. In M. D. Krohn, A. J. Lizotte, & G. P. Hall (Eds.), Handbook on crime and deviance (2nd ed.) (pp. 259-282). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Wikström, P.-O. H., Ceccato, V., Hardie, B., & Treiber, K. (2010). Activity fields and the dynamics of crime: Advancing knowledge about the role of the environment in crime causation. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 55–87.
Wikström, P.-O. H., Clarke, R. V., & McCord, J. (1995). Integrating crime prevention strategies: Propensity and opportunity. Stockholm, Sweden: National Council for Crime Prevention, Sweden.
Wikström, P.-O. H., Mann, R., & Hardie, B. (2018). Young people’s differential vulnerability to criminogenic exposure. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 10–31.
Wikström, P.-O. H., Oberwittler, D., Treiber, K., & Hardie, B. (2012). Breaking rules: The social and situational dynamics of young people’s urban crime. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2006). Introduction: Toward a unified approach to crime and its explanation. In P.-O. H. Wikström & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms and development (pp. 1–7). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Torstensson, M. (1999). Local crime prevention and its national support: Organisation and direction. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 7(4), 459–482.
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Treiber, K. (2007). The role of self-control in crime causation: Beyond Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime. European Journal of Criminology, 4(2), 237–264.
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Treiber, K. (2013). Towards an analytical criminology. In K. Boers, T. Feltes, J. Kinzig, L. W. Sherman, F. Streng, & G. Trüg (Eds.), Kriminologie - Kriminalpolitik - Strafrecht: Festschrift für Hans-Jürgen Kerner zum 70. Geburtstag. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck.
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Treiber, K. (2016). Situational theory: The importance of interactions and action mechanisms in the explanation of crime. In A. R. Piquero (Ed.), The handbook of criminological theory. Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons.
Wikström, P.-O. H., & Treiber, K. (2017). Beyond risk factors: An analytical approach to crime prevention. In B. Teasdale & M. S. Bradley (Eds.), Preventing crime and violence (pp. 73–87). New York: Springer.
Wikström, P.-O. H., Treiber, K., & Roman, G. (forthcoming). Character, criminogenic circumstances and criminal careers. Towards a dynamic and developmental life course criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilcox, A., & Hirschfield, A. (2007). Pathways into policy: A study of the relationship between research, policy and government. Project Report. Huddersfield, UK: Applied Criminology Centre, University of Huddersfield. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/5842/
Wilcox, P., & Cullen, F. T. (2018). Situational opportunity theories of crime. Annual Review of Criminology, 1(1), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092421
Wilcox, P., Land, K. C., & Hunt, S. A. (2003). Criminal circumstance: A dynamic multi-contextual criminal opportunity theory. New York, NY: de Gruyter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hardie, B. (2020). Why and How Criminology Must Integrate Individuals and Environments. In: Studying Situational Interaction. SpringerBriefs in Criminology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46194-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46194-2_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-46193-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-46194-2
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)