Meaningfully and Artfully Reinterpreting Crime for Useful Science: An Essay on the Value of Building with Simple Theory

  • John E. Eck
  • Tamara D. Madensen
Chapter

Abstract

Theories are toys. Both toys and theories are abstractions of a far more complex reality. Just as toy manipulation helps infants, children, and adults learn about the world, theory manipulation serves the same purpose for researchers and practitioners. So, it is no coincidence that we use similar criteria for judging the adequacy of toys and theories.

Keywords

Crime Prevention Routine Activity Legal Authority Place Management Routine Activity Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Braga, A. A., & Weisburd, D. L. (2012). The effects of “pulling levers” focused deterrence strategies on crime. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2012, 6. DOI: 10.4073/csr.2012.6.Google Scholar
  2. Clarke, R. V. G. (1999). Hot products: Understanding, anticipating and reducing demand for stolen goods. London: Home Office, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit. Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cullen, F. T. (2011). Beyond adolescence-limited criminology: Choosing our future — The American society of criminology 2010 Sutherland address. Criminology, 49, 287–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eck, J. E. (1994). Drug markets and drug places: A case-control study of the spatial structure of illicit drug dealing. Doctoral dissertation. College Park, MD: Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  6. Eck, J. E., & Liu, L. (2008). Contrasting simulated and empirical experiments in crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 4, 195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Engel, R. S., Tillyer, M. S., & Corsaro, N. (2013). Reducing gang violence using focused deterrence: Evaluating the Cincinnati initiative to reduce violence (CIRV). Justice Quarterly, 30, 403–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farrell, G., & Pease, K. (2008). Repeat victimisation. In R. Wortley, & L. Mazerolle (Eds.), Environmental criminology and crime analysis. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing. pp. 117–135.Google Scholar
  9. 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. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. pp. 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Felson, M. (1987). Routine activities and crime prevention in the developing metropolis. Criminology, 25, 911–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Felson, M. (2008). Routine activity approach. In R. Wortley, & L. Mazerolle (Eds.), Environmental criminology and crime analysis. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing. pp. 70–77.Google Scholar
  12. Fisher, B. A., Daigle, L. E., & Cullen, F. T. (2009). Unsafe in the ivory tower: The sexual victimization of college women. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hollis-Peel, M. E., Reynald, D. M., Bavel, M., Elffers, H., & Welsh, B. C. (2012). Guardianship For crime prevention: A critical review of the literature. Crime, Law and Social Change, 56, 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kennedy, D. (2006). Old wine in new bottles: Policing and the lessons of pulling levers. In D. Weisburd, & A. A. Braga (Eds.), Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 155–170.Google Scholar
  16. Leclerc, B., Wortley, R., & Smallbone, S. (2011). Getting into the script of adult child sex offenders and mapping out situational prevention measures. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48, 209–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lemieux, A. M. (2013). Situational prevention of poaching. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Madensen, T. D. (2007). Bar management and crime: Toward a dynamic theory of place management and crime hotspots. PhD dissertation. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati.Google Scholar
  19. Madensen, T. D., & Eck, J. E. (2012). Crime places and place management. In F. T. Cullen, & P. Wilcox (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of criminological theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 554–578.Google Scholar
  20. Mazerolle, L. G., & Ransley, J. (2005). Third party policing. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (1998). Predicting risks of larceny theft victimization: A routine activity analysis using refined lifestyle measures. Criminology, 36, 829–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reynald, D. M. (2010). Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47, 358–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reynald, D. M. (2011). Factors associated with the guardianship of places: Assessing the relative importance of the spatio-physical and socio demographic contexts in generating opportunities for capable guardianship. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48, 110–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sampson, R., Eck, J. E., & Dunham, J. (2010). Super controllers and crime prevention: A routine activity explanation of crime prevention success and failure. Security Journal, 23, 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sherman, L. W., Gartin, P.R., & Buerger, M.F. (1989). Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 17, 27–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sparrow, M. (2008). The character of harms: Operational challenges in control. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tillyer, M. S., & Eck. J. E. (2011). Getting a handle on crime: A further extension of routine activity theory. Security Journal, 24, 179–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Weisburd, D., & Piquero, A. (2008). How well do criminologists explain crime? Statistical modeling in published studies. Crime and Justice, 17, 453–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Weisburd, D., Groff, E., & Yang, S. (2012). The criminology of place: Street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© John E. Eck and Tamara D. Madensen 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • John E. Eck
  • Tamara D. Madensen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations