Self-Control, Conscience, and Criminal Violence: Some Preliminary Considerations

Chapter

Abstract

Many criminologists have followed Gottfredson and Hirschi’s verdict on the uselessness of conscience as an explanatory concept within criminological theory. The present chapter challenges this assessment and explores the analytical potential of “conscience” not only for the explanation of (violent) crime but also for shedding light on other aspects of social practice and exchange. It proposes the expansion of self-control into a multi-dimensional concept that comprises different functions of human agency related to the requirement of (a) expressing personal identity, (b) securing long-range personal interests, and (c) maintaining cooperative relationships with others (solidarities). The chapter also examines facets and forms of positive and negative self-appraisal, in particular shame and guilt, and considers the protective or aggravating impact they may have on aggressive or violent conduct. Some additional—and occasionally ambiguous—features of both the conceptual meaning and the social praxis of “conscience” are also discussed, taking the cognitive–developmental approach to the analysis of moral conscience as a major point of reference.

Keywords

Manifold Coherence Explosive Assure Expense 

References

  1. Antonaccio, O. and Tittle, C. R. (2008). Morality, self-control, and crime. Criminology, 46, 801–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronfreed, J. (1968). Conduct and Conscience. The Socialization of Internalized Control Over Behavior. New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
  3. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., and Pastorelle, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 364–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumeister, R. R. and Bushman, B. J. (2003). Emotions and aggressiveness. In W. Heitmeyer and J. Hagan (Eds.), International Handbook of Violence Research (pp. 479–493). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A. M., and Heatherton, T. F. (1994). Guilt: an interpersonal approach. American Psychological Association, 115, 243–267.Google Scholar
  6. Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., and Boden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: the dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage (German edition 1986).Google Scholar
  8. Blasi, A. (1993a). The development of identity: some implications for moral functioning. In G. Noam and T. E. Wren (Eds.), The Moral Self (pp. 99–122). London: MIT.Google Scholar
  9. Blasi, A. (1993b). Die Entwicklung der Identität und ihre Folgen für moralisches Handeln. In W. Edelstein, G. Nunner-Winkler, and G. Noam (Eds.), Moral und Person (pp. 119–147). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  10. Bornewasser, M., Eifler, S., and Reichel, K. (2007). Wie allgemein ist die “General Theory of Crime”? Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform, 90(6), 443–465.Google Scholar
  11. Edelstein, W. and Nunner-Winkler, G. (1993). Einleitung. In W. Edelstein, G. Nunner-Winkler, and G. Noam (Eds.), Moral und Person (pp. 7–30). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  12. Eisner, M. (1997). Das Ende der zivilisierten Stadt? Die Auswirkungen von Modernisierung und urbaner Krise auf Gewaltdelinquenz. Frankfurt/New York, NY: Campus.Google Scholar
  13. Frank, R. H. and Cook, P. J. (1995). The Winner-Take-All Society. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gibbard, A. (1992). Wise Choices, Apt Feelings: A Theory of Normative Judgment. Oxford: Clarendorn (in 1990, first published by Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  15. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gilligan, J. (2003). Shame, guilt, and violence. Social Research, 70(49), 1149–1180.Google Scholar
  17. Gottfredson, M. R. and Hirschi, T. (1990). A General Theory of Crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Grasmick, H. G. and Bursik, R. J. Jr. (1990). Conscience, significant others, and rational choice: extending the deterrence model. Law and Society Review, 24, 837–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., Bursik, R. J., and Arneklev, B. J. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(1), 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hauser, S. (2007). Gewissensentwicklung in neueren psychoanalytischen Beiträgen. In C. Hopf and G. Nunner-Winkler (Eds.), Frühe Bindungen und moralische Entwicklung. Aktuelle Befunde zu psychischen und sozialen Bedingungen moralischer Eigenständigkeit (pp. 43–68). Weinheim, München: Juventa.Google Scholar
  21. Hirsch, F. (1976). Social Limits to Growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hirschi, T. and Gottfredson, M. R. (1994). The generality of deviance. In T. Hirschi and M. R. Gottfredson (Eds.), The Generality of Deviance (pp. 1–22). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Hoffman, M. L. (1976). Empathy, role taking, guilt, and development of altruistic motives. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral Development and Behaviour: Theory, Research and Social Issues (pp. 124–143). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  24. Joas, H. (2004). Braucht der Mensch Religion? Über Erfahrungen der Selbsttranszendenz. München: Herder.Google Scholar
  25. Kittsteiner, H. D. (1991). Die Entstehung des modernen Gewissens. Frankfurt, Leipzig: Insel Verlag.Google Scholar
  26. Leist, A. (2003). Selbstbindung mit oder gegen Universalität. Erwägen – Wissen – Ethik (previously: Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften), 14, 623–625.Google Scholar
  27. Lewis, H. B. (1971). Shame and Guilt in Neurosis. New York, NY: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
  28. Luhmann, N. (1973). Das Phänomen des Gewissens und die normative Selbstbestimmung der Persönlichkeit. In F. Böckle and E.-W. Böckenförde (Eds.), Naturrecht in der Kritik (pp. 223–243). Mainz: Matthias-Gründewald-Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Luhmann, N. (1998). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  30. Marcus, B. (2003). An empirical examination of the construct validity of two alternative self-control measures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 674–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marcus, B. (2004). Self-control in the general theory of crime. Theoretical Criminology, 8, 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maruna, S. and Copes, H. (2005). What have we learned from five decades of neutralization research. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 32 (pp. 221–320), Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Merton, R. K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  34. Messner, S. F. and Rosenfeld, R. (1997). Crime and the American Dream, 2nd Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  35. Messner, S. F. and Rosenfeld, R. (2007). Crime and the American Dream, 4th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  36. Morselli, C. and Tremblay, P. (2004). Criminal achievement, offender networks and the benefits of low self-control. Criminology, 42, 773–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Neckel, S. (1991). Status und Scham. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  38. Nunner-Winkler, G. (1985). Identität und Individualität. Soziale Welt, 36, 466–482.Google Scholar
  39. Nunner-Winkler, G. (1999). Empathie, Scham und Schuld. Zur moralischen Bedeutung von Emotionen. In M. Grundmann (Ed.), Konstruktivistische Sozialisationsforschung. Lebensweltliche Erfahrungskontexte, individuelle Handlungskompetenzen und die Konstruktion sozialer Strukturen (pp. 149–179). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  40. Nunner-Winkler, G. (2000). Von Selbstzwängen zur Selbstbindung. In M. Endreß and N. Roughly (Eds.), Anthropologie und Moral. Philosophische und soziologische Perspektiven (pp. 211–243). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
  41. Nunner-Winkler, G. (2003). Ethik der freiwilligen Selbstbindung. Erwägen – Wissen – Ethik (priviously Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften), 14, 579–589.Google Scholar
  42. Nunner-Winkler, G. (2004). Sociohistoric changes in the structure of moral motivation. In D. K. Lapsley and D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral Development, Self, and Identity (pp. 299–334). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. [Here quoted from a manuscript version]Google Scholar
  43. Piers, G. and Singer, M. B. (1971). Shame and Guilt. A Psychoanalytic and a Cultural Study. New York, NY: Norton (first published 1953, Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas).Google Scholar
  44. Piquero, A. and Tibbetts, S. (1996). Specifying the direct and indirect effects of low self-control and situational factors in offenders’ decision making: toward a more complete model of rational offending. Justice Quarterly, 13, 481–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pratt, T. C. and Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: a meta-analysis. Criminology, 38, 931–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Richards, P. (2008). The emotions at war. A musicological approach to understanding atrocity in Sierra Leone. Paper presented at the conference on “Explanatory patterns and controllability of terrorist violence”, University of Bielefeld, Center for Interdisciplinary Research, April 10–12, 2008; this paper also served as a draft chapter for “The emotions and public life”, Eds. A. Treacher, S. Radstone, C. Squire, and Perri 6.Google Scholar
  47. Ricoeur, P. (1996). Theonomie und/oder Autonomie. In C. Krieg, T. Kucharz, and M. Volf (Eds.), Die Theologie auf dem Weg ins dritte Jahrtausend. Festschrift für Jürgen Moltmann zum 70. Geburtstag (pp. 324–345). Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verl.-Haus.Google Scholar
  48. Sanders, B. (1995). Der Verlust der Sprachkultur. Die Pistole ist das Schreibgerät des Analphabeten. Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer [English edition: A is for Ox. The collapse of literacy and the rise of violence in an electronic age. Vintage Books 1995].Google Scholar
  49. Safranski, R. (1997). Das Böse und das Drama der Freiheit. München: Hanser.Google Scholar
  50. Scheff, T. (1995). Shame and related emotions: an overview. American Behavioral Scientist, 38, 1053–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schoepfer, A. and Piquero, A. R. (2006). Self-control, moral beliefs, and criminal activity. Deviant Behavior, 27, 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tangney, J. P. (1995). Recent advances in the empirical study of shame and guilt. American Behavioral Scientist, 38, 1132–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tangney, J. P. (1996). Conceptual and methodological issues in the assessment of shame and guilt. Behavioral Research and Theory, 34, 741–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tangney, J. P., Burggraf, S. A., and Wagner, P. E. (1995). Shame-proneness, guilt-proneness, and psychological symptoms. In J. P. Tangney and K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Self-Conscious Emotions. The Psychology of Shame, Guilt, Embarrassment, and Pride (pp. 343–367). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  55. Tangney, J. P., Wagner, P. E., Hill-Barlow, D., Marschall, D. E., and Gramzow, R. (1996). Relation of shame and guilt to constructive versus destructive responses to anger across the lifespan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(4), 797–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thome, H. (2001). Explaining long term trends in violent crime. Crime, History and Societies, 5, 69–86.Google Scholar
  57. Thome, H. (2004). Theoretische Ansätze zur Erklärung langfristiger Gewaltkriminalität seit Beginn der Neuzeit. In W. Heitmeyer and H.-G. Soeffner (Eds.), Gewalt. Entwicklungen, Strukturen, Analyseprobleme (pp. 315–345). Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  58. Thome, H. (2007a). Luhmanns Reflexionen über das Gewissen. Anregungen für ein empirisches Projekt. In J. Aderhold and O. Kranz (Eds.), Intention und Funktion. Probleme der Vermittlung psychischer und sozialer Systeme (pp. 252–269). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  59. Thome, H. (2007b). Explaining the long-term trend in violent crime: a heuristic scheme and some methodological considerations. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 1(2), 185–202.Google Scholar
  60. Thome, H. and Birkel, C. (2007). Sozialer Wandel und Gewaltkriminalität. Deutschland, England und Schweden im Vergleich, 1950 bis 2000. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  61. Tibbetts, S. G. and Gibson, C. L. (2002). Individual propensities and rational decision-making: recent findings and promising approaches. In A. R. Piquero and S. G. Tibbetts (Eds.), Rational choice and criminal behavior (pp. 3–24). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Trasler, G. (1993). Conscience, opportunity, rational choice, and crime. In R. V. Clarke and D. B. Cornish (Eds.), Routine Activity and Rational Choice (pp. 305–322). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  63. Turner, R. (1976). The real self: from institution to impulse. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 989–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Weber, M. (1973). Der Sinn der “Wertfreiheit” der soziologischen und ökonomischen Wissenschaften. In M. Weber (Ed.), Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre, 4th Edition, (pp. 489–540). Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck).Google Scholar
  65. Wikström, P.-O. and Treiber, K. (2007). The role of self-control in crime causation. European Journal of Criminology, 4, 237–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wilkinson, R. G., Kawachi, I., and Kennedy, B. P. (1998). Mortality, the social environment, crime and violence. Sociology of Health and Illness, 20, 578–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Sociology, Martin Luther UniversityHalle-WittenbergGermany

Personalised recommendations