Individual differences in the deterrence process: Which individuals Learn (most) from their offending experiences?

Schulz, Sonja

Additional URL:
Document Type: Article
Year of publication: 2014
The title of a journal, publication series: Journal of Quantitative Criminology
Volume: 30
Issue number: 2
Page range: 215-236
Place of publication: Dordrecht
Publishing house: Springer
ISSN: 0748-4518 , 1573-7799
Publication language: English
Institution: Außerfakultäre Einrichtungen > Graduate School of Economic and Social Sciences- CDSS (Social Sciences)
Außerfakultäre Einrichtungen > Mannheim Centre for European Social Research - Research Department A
Subject: 300 Social sciences, sociology, anthropology
Abstract: Objectives to test whether individuals differ in deterrability by studying whether the effect of criminal experiences on perceived detection risk varies by criminal propensity. Methods Data from the British ‘‘Offending, Crime and Justice Survey’’, a four-wave panel study on criminal behavior and victimization, are analyzed. Two subsamples for analyses are constructed: one of non-offenders at first measurement, to analyze the effect of gaining first offending experiences during the time of study (n = 1,279) and one sample of individuals who have committed offenses within the past year (n = 567), to analyze the effect of police contact among active offenders. Fixed-effects regressions of perceived detection risk on criminal experiences and interactions between criminal experiences and measures of criminal propensity (risk-affinity, impulsivity) are estimated. Results Analyses support learning models for the formation and change of risk perceptions, but individual differences by criminal propensity are present in the deterrence process: After gaining first offending experiences, impulsive individuals as well as riskaverse individuals are more likely to lower their perceptions about the probability of detection than less impulsive or risk-affine individuals are. A positive effect of police contact on expected detection risk is restricted to risk-averse individuals. Conclusions Findings support claims that deterrence works differently for crime-prone individuals. The differential effects of impulsivity and risk-affinity underline the importance of not combining constituent characteristics of criminal propensity in composite indices, because they might have differential effects on deterrence.

Dieser Eintrag ist Teil der Universitätsbibliographie.

Metadata export


+ Search Authors in

BASE: Schulz, Sonja

Google Scholar: Schulz, Sonja

+ Page Views

Hits per month over past year

Detailed information

You have found an error? Please let us know about your desired correction here: E-Mail

Actions (login required)

Show item Show item