Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Moral Rules, Self-Control, and School Context: Additional Evidence on Situational Action Theory from 28 Countries

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The goal of the study is to address several voids in the literature investigating Situational Action Theory (SAT) by: (1) testing the role of parenting as a precursor to individual moral rules and self-control; (2) investigating the interplay between personal moral rules, self-control, and rules of school settings; and (3) exploring the generalizability of these theoretical links across western and nonwestern country clusters.

Methods

Using unique data from the third iteration of the International Self-Reported Delinquency Survey (ISRD-3) of 28 different countries, this investigation puts SAT to the test in school settings by estimating a series of two-level mixed effect negative binomial linear regression models to assess the effects of SAT-relevant individual and school-level predictors on offending.

Results

The results suggest a moderately strong performance of SAT in western and nonwestern countries. Specifically, parenting acts as a partial precursor to individual moral rules and self-control. Furthermore, some SAT-relevant predictors are equally potent as crime predictors across western and nonwestern countries. However, the effects of moral rules significantly differ across western and nonwestern country clusters. Moral rules also appear to interact significantly with self-control and a number of contextual factors in their effects on delinquency.

Conclusions

The results of the study point to the cultural generalizability of SAT but warrant further investigation as some differences in the findings across clusters exist.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. SAT defines crime propensity as a tendency to perceive crime as acceptable and to “choose to break a rule of conduct.” (Wikström et al. 2012:132).

  2. It is important to note that, according to SAT, moral rules may overlap with the law but extend far beyond it. Therefore, crime is only different from other breaches of moral rules because it breaches moral rule(s) codified as laws (Wikström et al. 2012:11).

  3. The study contains 28 countries because all respondents from Denmark were found to not have school identifiers at the time.

  4. The response rate varies across different countries; the lowest response rate was recorded in Croatia (59%) and the highest—in Indonesia (close to 100%). Country samples vary in size from 647 respondents in Serbia to 6,492 in Austria, whereas the average sample size across all countries is 1,899. The data collection took place within classrooms where survey was disseminated by research assistants in the form of paper and pencil (63%) survey or in an online format (37%) (Enzmann et al. 2018) in the absence of teachers to avoid response bias. Most students took 45 min or less to complete the survey (Enzmann et al. 2018). Finally, there were missing data across several of our variables of interest varying from 1% (most common) to 6%.

  5. There was not much overlap in the missing across variables, therefore multiple imputation was used. We compared the results of models with listwise deletion and multiple imputation and found that there were no significant differences in what variables and interactions were significant across models. Therefore, for simplicity purposes we ultimately used listwise deletion. As a result, our final samples size across both country clusters is 55,419.

References

  • Akers RL (1998) Social learning and social structure: a general theory of crime and deviance. Northeastern University Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Antonaccio O, Tittle CR (2008) Morality, self-control, and crime. Criminology 46(2):479–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonaccio O, Botchkovar EV, Hughes LA (2017) Ecological determinants of situated choice in situational action theory: does neighborhood matter? J Res Crime Delinq 54(2):208–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumrind D (1993) The average expectable environment is not good enough: a response to scarr. Child Dev 64:1299–1317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botchkovar E, Marshall IH, Rocque M, Posick C (2015) The importance of parenting in the development of self-control in boys and girls: results from a multinational study of youth. J Crim Justice 43:133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite J (1989) Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clinard MB, Abbott DJ (1973) Crime in developing nations: a comparative perspective. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen FT (1994) Social support as an organizing concept for criminology: presidential address to the academy of criminal justice sciences. Justice Q 11:527–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enzmann D, Kivivuori J, Marshall IH, Steketee M, Hough M, Killias M (2018) A global perspective on young people as offenders and victims. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gallupe O, Baron S (2014) Morality, self-control, deterrence and drug use: Street youths and situational action theory. Crime Delinq 60:284–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick HG, Tittle CR, Bursik RJ, Arneklev BJ (1993) Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. J Res Crime Delinq 30:5–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 Behav 42(3):329–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris JR (2000) The outcome of parenting: what do we really know? J Pers 68(3):625–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay C, Forrest W (2006) The development of self-control: examining self-control theory’s stability thesis. Criminology 44:739–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirtenlehner H, Hardie B (2016) On the conditional relevance of controls: an application of situational action theory to shoplifting. Deviant Behav 37(3):315–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton R (2000) Globalization’s cultural consequences. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 570(1):140–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishoy GA, Blackwell BS (2018) Situational action theory’s self-control/morality interaction effects and the moderating influence of being female: a comparison of property and violent offending using a sample of juvenile delinquents. Feminist Criminology, OnlineFirst

    Google Scholar 

  • Junger-Tas J, Marshall IH, Enzmann D, Killias M, Steketee M, Gruszczynska B (eds) (2009) Juvenile delinquency in Europe and beyond: Results of the second international self-report delinquency study. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Junger-Tas J, Marshall IH, Enzmann D, Killias M, Steketee M, Gruszczynska B (2012) The many faces of youth crime: contrasting theoretical perspectives on juvenile delinquency across countries and cultures. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler U, Karlson KB, Holm A (2011) Comparing coefficients of nested nonlinear probability models. Stata J 11:420–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroneberg C, Schulz S (2018) Revisiting the role of self-control in situational action theory. Eur J Criminol 15(1):56–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitter R, Major P (2004) Across the blocs: cold war cultural and social history. Frank Cass and Co, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Na C, Paternoster R (2012) Can self-control change substantially over time? Rethinking the relationship between self- and social control. Criminology 50:427–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nofziger S (2008) The “cause” of low self-control: the influence of maternal self-control. J Res Crime Delinq 45:191–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paternoster R, Brame R, Mazerolle P, Piquero A (1998) Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology 36:859–866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels L (2011) Adolescent offending and the segregation of poverty in urban neighbourhoods and schools: An assessment of contextual effects from the standpoint of situational action theory. Urban Studies Research, vol. 2011.

  • Pauwels LJR, Weerman FM, Bruinsma GJN et al (2015) How much variance in offending, self-control and morality can be explained by neighbourhoods and schools? An exploratory cross-classified multi-level analysis. Eur J Crim Policy Res 21:523–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels LJR, Svensson R, Hirtenlehner H (2018) Testing situational action theory: a narrative review of studies published between 2006 and 2015. Eur J Criminol 15:32–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plomin R, Daniels D (1987) Why are children in the same family so different from one another? Behav Brain Sci 10(1):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plomin R, Kagan J, Emde RN, Reznick JS, Braungart JM, Robinson J, DeFries JC (1993) Genetic change and continuity from fourteen to twenty months: the MacArthur longitudinal twin study. Child Dev 64(5):1354–1376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schepers D (2017) Causes of the causes of juvenile delinquency: social disadvantages in the context of Situational Action Theory. Eur J Criminol 14:143–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schepers D, Reinecke J (2018) Conditional relevance of controls: a simultaneous test of the influences of self-control and deterrence on criminal behaviour in the context of Situational Action Theory. Eur J Criminol 15:77–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serrano-Maíllo A (2018) Crime contemplation and self-control: a test of Situational Action Theory’s hypothesis about their interaction in crime causation. Eur J Criminol 15:93–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song H, Lee S-S (2019) Motivations, propensities, and their interplays on online bullying perpetration: a partial test of situational action theory. Crime Delinq 66:1787–1808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson R, Pauwels L (2010) Is a risky lifestyle always “risky”? The interaction between individual propensity and lifestyle risk in adolescent offending: a test in two urban samples. Crime Delinq 56:608–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson R, Pauwels L, Weerman FM (2010) Does the effect of self-control on adolescent offending vary by level of morality? A test in three countries. Criminal Justice Behav 37:732–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weerman FM, Bernasco W, Bruinsma GJN, Pauwels LJR (2016) Gender differences in delinquency and situational action theory: a partial test. Justice Q 33:1182–1209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström P-OH (2005) The social origins of pathways in crime: towards a developmental ecological action theory of crime involvement and its changes. Integr Develop life-course Theor Offend 14:211–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH (2006) Individuals, settings, and acts of crime: Situational mechanisms and the explanation of crime. The explanation of crime: context, mechanisms and development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 61–107

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH (2010) Situational action theory. In: Cullen F, Wilcox P (eds) Encyclopedia of criminological theory. SAGE Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikström P-OH (2019) Explaining crime and criminal careers: The DEA model of situational action theory. J Develop Life-Course Criminol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-019-00116-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström P-OH, Butterworth DA (2006) Adolescent crime: Individuals differences and lifestyles. Willan Publishing, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH, Svensson R (2010) When does self-control matter? The interaction between morality and self-control in crime causation. Eur J Criminol 7:395–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström P-OH, Treiber K (2007) The role of self-control in crime causation. Eur J Criminol 4:237–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH, Treiber K (2016) Social disadvantage and crime: a criminological puzzle. Am Behav Sci 60(10):1232–1259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH, Treiber K (2019) The dynamics of change: criminogenic interactions and life course patterns in crime. The Oxford handbook of developmental and life-course criminology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 272–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH, Oberwittler D, Treiber K, Hardie B (2012) Breaking rules: the social and situational dynamics of young people’s urban crime. OUP, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikström POH, Mann RP, Hardie B (2018) Young people’s differential vulnerability to criminogenic exposure: bridging the gap between people-and place-oriented approaches in the study of crime causation. Eur J Criminol 15(1):10–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman GM, Botchkovar EV, Antonaccio O, Hughes LA (2015) Low self-control in “bad” neighborhoods: assessing the role of context on the relationship between self-control and crime. Justice Q 32(1):56–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Northeastern University, 425 Churchill Hall, 360 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Matthew Kafafian & Ekaterina V. Botchkovar

  2. Department of Sociology, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Northeastern University, Boston, USA

    Ineke Haen Marshall

Authors
  1. Matthew Kafafian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ekaterina V. Botchkovar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ineke Haen Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ekaterina V. Botchkovar.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Pairwise correlation matrix

  1. Bold cells correspond to correlations for non-western countries. Cells that are not unbold correspond to correlations for western countries.
  2. *p < 0.05 **p < 0.01 ***p < 0.001

Appendix 2

The independent and interactive effects of individual- and school-level variables associated with situational action theory on offending behavior without control variables negative binomial mixed effects regression model

  1. Boldface indicates statistically significant differences found comparing the equality of coefficients across country clusters using the test by Paternoster et al. (1998)
  2. *p < 0.05 **p < 0.01 ***p < 0.001

Appendix 3

The independent and interactive effects of individual- and school-level variables associated with situational action theory on offending behavior including extra control variables negative binomial mixed effects regression model

  1. Boldface indicates statistically significant differences found comparing the equality of coefficients across country clusters using the test by Paternoster et al. (1998)
  2. *p < 0.05 **p < 0.01 ***p < 0.001

Appendix 4

Country clusters

Western Cluster:

1. United States

2. U. Kingdom

3. Germany

4. France

5. Belgium

6. Netherlands

7. Austria

8. Switzerland

9. Finland

10. Italy

11. Portugal

Non-Western Country Cluster:

12. Czech

13. Estonia

14. Lithuania

15. Armenia

16. Ukraine

17. Rep. Serbia

18. Kosovo

19. Croatia

20. Bosnia

21. Macedonia

22. Slovakia

23. Venezuela

24. Indonesia

25. India

26. Cape Verde

27. Turkey

28. Poland

Juvenile delinquency:

1. “Vandalized someone’s property”

2. “Shoplifted something from a store”

3. “Broke into a store and stole something”

4. “Stole a motorbike or car”

5. “Stole bicycle”

6. “Stole something with force or a threat”

7. “Stole something from someone without force or threat”

8. “Beat someone or hurt them badly they were injured”

Self-control scale:

1. “I act on the spur the moment without stopping to think”

2. “I do whatever brings me pleasure here and now, even at the cost of some future goal”

3. “I’m more concerned with what happens to me in the short run than in the long run”

4. “I like to test myself every now and then by doing something a little risk”

5. “Sometimes I will take a risk just for the fun of it”

6. “Excitement and adventure are more important to me than security”

7. “I try to look out for myself first, even if it means making things difficult for other people”

8. “If things I do upset people, it’s their problem not mine”

9. “I will try to get the things I want even when I know it’s causing problems for other people”

Moral rules scale:

1. “Knowingly insult someone because of his/her religion, skin color, or ethnic background”

2. “Purposely damage or destroy property that does not belong to you”

3. “Illegally download films or music from the internet”

4. “steal something small like a chocolate bar from a shop”

5. “Break into a building to steal something”

6. “Hit someone with the idea of hurting that person”

7. “Using a weapon or force to get money or things from other people”

Parental attachment:

1. “My parents know where I am when I go out”

2. “My parents know what I am doing when I go out”

3. “My parents know what friends I am with when I go out”

4. “If I have been out, my parents ask me what I did, where I went, and who I spent time with”

5. “If I go out in the evening my parents tell me when I have to be back home by”

6. “If I am out and it gets late I have to call my parents and let them know”

7. “My parents check if I have done my homework”

8. “My Parents check that I only watch films/DVDs allowed for my age-group”

9. “I tell my parents who I spend time with”

10. “I tell my parents how I spend my money”

11. “I tell my parents where I am most afternoons after school”

12. “I tell my parents what I do with my free time”

School moral context discouraging delinquency (attachment):

1. “If I had to move I would miss my school”

2. “Most mornings I like to go to school”

3. “I like my school”

4, “Our classes are interesting”

School moral context encouraging delinquency:

1. “There is a lot of stealing in my school”

2, “There is a lot of fighting in my school”

3. “Many things are broken or vandalized in my school”

4. “There is a lot of drug use in my school”

Peer delinquency:

1. “I have friends who used soft or hard drugs like week, hash, ecstasy, speed, heroine, coke.”

2, “I have friends who have stolen things from a shop or department store.”

3. “I have friends who have entered a building without permission to steal something.”

4. “I Have friends who have threatened somebody with a weapon or beaten someone up, just to get their money or other things”

5. “I have friends who have beaten someone up or hurt someone badly with something like a stick or a knife”

Truancy:

“Have you ever stayed away from school for at least a whole day without a proper reason in the last 12 months”

Personal deprivation:

“If you compare yourself with other people of your age: do you have more, the same, or less money (pocket money + presents + own earnings”

Family deprivation:

“How well-off is your family, compared to others?”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kafafian, M., Botchkovar, E.V. & Marshall, I.H. Moral Rules, Self-Control, and School Context: Additional Evidence on Situational Action Theory from 28 Countries. J Quant Criminol 38, 861–889 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-021-09503-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-021-09503-y

Search

Navigation