Rational Choice and Social Bonding Theory

Rational Choice Theory and Social Bonding Theory

Name: Prateeksha Ravi

Student ID: 20416391

Case 1: When Need Turns to Greed – Chapter 1

Case 2: Compulsive Gambler – Chapter 5

Case 3:  The Honest Crime – Chapter 6

Clarke and Cornish’s rational choice theory draws light on the fact that crime is a purposive behavior designed to meet the individual’s need for pleasure and happiness. It is a utilitarian belief that humans are rational actors who weigh the costs and benefits to make rational decisions to maximize individual pleasure. However, the concept of bounded rationality suggests that individuals lack the ability and resources to arrive at an optimal decision. This theory considers the offender’s subjective perspective to understand their reasoning and thought process behind committing the crime.

Travis Hirschi’s social bonding theory emphasizes four elements namely, attachment, commitment, involvement and belief, that act as social controls to promote conformity and prevent deviance (SOC 229 course notes). This theory also argues that social bonds can lead to crime if attachments are made with other criminals rather than those who would constrain such behavior. Most crimes take little skill to commit and since the rational perspective overemphasizes the intellectual sophistication of the offender, the social learning theory provides a good counterbalance through its image of offenders as “losers” (SOC 229 course notes).

         In the case When Need turns to Greed, the offender was driven by the initial motivation of obtaining money quickly to support his family. He did not take any precautions and only chose banks that were unoccupied by customers and cameras. As per the choice theory, this option seemed to be the most rational to the offender at that time as he took simple shortcuts and did not have to go through much planning. However, to critique this theory, with only 48 hours to pay his rent, he weighed the costs and benefits within the context of the situation he was in, thus limiting his rationality. Furthermore, he had merely just read about robberies and did not have the relevant information to make a sophisticated decision.  

        The idea to rob a bank originated from the media as it was depicted as just a simple passing of a hold-up note. Knowing that bank employees are trained to comply with the offender’s demands, he saw these crimes as being a fast, easy and low risk way of getting money. As the theory suggests, his initial success increased and strengthened his confidence for further holdups. (SOC 226 course notes). He characterized the image of greed as he was driven by his desire to the point where “[he] didn’t even need the money” (Desroches, 1996:9).