Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of temporary residences on burglary: A test of criminal opportunity theory

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous work testing the criminal opportunity/routine activities theory of burglary has been marked by three recurrent problems: (1) a neglect of testing the theory in rural areas (2) the use of indicators which confound opportunity with disorganization effects (3) failure to control for alternative theories of burglary. The present paper contributes to the literature by correcting these shortcomings. The results of a multiple regression analysis of county level data from Michigan indicate that the greater the criminal opportunity, the greater the rate of burglary. These results are independent of indicators taken from economic strain and social disorganization theories. The model explains 69% of the variance in burglary rates overall and 84% of the variance in rural counties. While there may be higher levels of social cohesion and lower anonymity in rural areas, these factors are not sufficient to offset the influence of criminal opportunity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Belsley, D.A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R.E. (1980).Regression diagnostics. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, T., & Wright, R. (1984).Burglars on burglary. Aldershot: Grover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., & Rosenfeld, R. (1991). Trend and deviation in crime rates: A comparison of UCR and NCS data for burglary and robbery.Criminology, 29, 237–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bursik, R.J. (1988). Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquency.Criminology, 26, 519–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, L., & Jackson, P.I. (1983). Inequality, opportunity, and crime rates in central cities.Criminology, 21, 178–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach.American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Felson, M., & Land, K. (1980). Property crime rates in the US: A macrodynamic analysis, 1947–1977.American Journal of Sociology, 86, 90–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., & Cantor, D. (1981). Residential burglary in the US: Lifestyle and demographic factors associated with the problem of victimization.Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency, 17, 113–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Kluegel, J. R., & Land, K. (1981). Social inequality and predatory victimization.American Sociological Review, 46, 504–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cromwell, P.F., Olson, J.N., & Avary, D.W. (1991).Breaking and entering: An ethnographic analysis of burglary. Newburry Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker, S., Wright, R., & Logie, R. (1993). Perceptual deterrence among active residential burglars.Criminology, 31, 135–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decker, S., Wright, R., Redfern, A., & Smith, D. (1993). A woman’s place is in the home: Females and residential burglary.Justice Quarterly, 10, 143–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ensminger, M.E., Kellam, S.G., & Rubin, B. (1983). School and family origins of delinquency. In K.T. Van Dusen & S.A. Mednick (Eds.),Antecedents of aggression and antisocial behavior (pp. 99–128). Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, C. (1982).To dwell among friends: Personal networks in town and city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindelang, M., Gottfredson, M., & Garofalo, J. (1978).Victims of personal crime. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holzman, H.R. (1983). The serious habitual property offender as moonlighter.Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73, 174–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hope, T. (1984). Building design and burglary. In R. Clarke & T. Hope (Eds.),Coping with burglary (pp. 45–59). Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hough, M. (1987). Offenders’ choice of target: Findings from victim surveys.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 355–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hough, M., & Mayhew, P. (1985).Taking account of crime: Key findings from the 1984 british crime survey. Home Office Research Study no. 85. London: H.M. Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P. (1984). Opportunity and crime: A function of city size.Sociology and Social Research, 68, 172–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornhauser, R. (1978).Social sources of delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski, G.S., Faupel, C., & Starr, P.D. (1987). Urbanism and suicide: A study of American counties.Social Forces, 66, 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis-Beck, M. (1980).Applied regression analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loeber, R., & Stouthammer-Loeber, M. (1986). Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems and delinquency. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.),Crime and justice: Volume 7 (pp. 28–149). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, M. (1982).Burglary in a dwelling. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxfield, M. (1987a). Household composition, routine activity, and victimization: A comparative analysis.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 301–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxfield, M. (1987b). Lifestyle and routine activity theories of crime.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 275–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayhew, P. (1984). Target hardening: How much of An answer? In R. Clarke & T. Hope (Eds.),Coping with burglary (pp. 29–44). Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messner, S. (1983). Regional differences in the economic correlates of homicide.Criminology, 21, 477–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messner, S., & Blau, J. (1987). Routine leisure activities and rates of crime.Social Forces, 65, 1035–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miethe, T., & Meier, R. (1990). Opportunity, choice, and criminal victimization: A test of a theoretical model.Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency, 27, 243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miethe, T., Stafford, M., & Long, J.S. (1987). Social differentiation in criminal victimization: A test of routine activities/life styles theories.American Sociological Review, 52, 184–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miethe, T., Hughes, M., & McDowall, D. (1991). Social change and crime rates: an evaluation of alternative perspectives.Social Forces, 70, 165–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molumby, T. (1976). Patterns of crime in a university housing project.American Behavioral Scientist, 20, 247–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rengert, G., & Wasilchick, J. (1985).Suburban burglary. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reppetto, T.A. (1974).Residential crime. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. (1987). Urban Black violence: The effect of male joblessness and family disruption.American Journal of Sociology, 93, 348–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., & Wooldredge, J. D. (1987). Linking the micro and macro-level dimensions of life-style-routine activity and opportunity models of predatory victimization.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 371–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social disorganization theory.American Journal of Sociology, 94, 774–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C., & McKay, H. D. (1969).Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shover, N. (1991). Burglary. In M. Tonry (Ed.),Crime and Justice: Volume 14 (pp. 73–113). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spotts, D. (Ed.) (1986).Travel and tourism in Michigan: A statistical profile (Research Monograph #1). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Travel, Tourism, and Recreational Resource Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stack, S. (1982). Social structure and Swedish crime rates: A time series analysis, 1950–1979.Criminology, 20, 499–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahura, J.M., & Sloan, J. J. (1988). Urban stratification of places, routine activities and suburban crime rates.Social Forces, 66, 1103–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunnell, K.D. (1992).Choosing crime: The criminal calculus of property offenders. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Census. (1989).County Statistics File 3 (COSTAT 3) Technical Documentation. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Census. (1992).County Statistics File 4 (COSTAT 4) Technical Documentation. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller, I., & Okihiro, N. (1978).Burglary: The victim and the public. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, D. (1986).Heavy business: Commercial burglary and robbery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, S. (1980).Applied linear regression. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. (1984). Economic sources of homicide: Reestimating the effects of poverty and inequality.American Sociological Review, 49, 283–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life.American Journal of Sociology, 44, 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wayne State University, USA

    Steven Stack

Authors
  1. Steven Stack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stack, S. The effect of temporary residences on burglary: A test of criminal opportunity theory. AJCJ 19, 197–214 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02885915

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02885915

Keywords

Search

Navigation