Governments have a crucial role in protecting their citizens from criminal activities. In controlling crime, governments must utilize criminology theories to understand how it originates. Through criminal justice theories, governments can enhance their crime prevention and control strategies to provide safer societies. The crime structure is organized into five categories: the victim, location of a crime, the form of crime, level of crime, and the offender. Governments and scholars use the interconnections between the five categories to establish the best criminology theories to use in the provision of safe societies. Crime control and prevention mechanisms are based on various criminology theories ( Bhattacherjee & Shrivastava, 2018) . The most common deterrence and psychological theories can be compared to understand their similarities and differences. Additionally, the two theories can be used in understanding their conceptualization of police procedures and crime control strategies.
The deterrence theory is a criminology theory that focuses on how governments can ensure safe societies by introducing punitive systems. Essentially, this theory assumes that individuals are more likely to avoid crime if severe punishment is imposed based on their actions ( Johnson, 2019 ) . According to this theory, governments control the criminal behaviors of their citizens by invoking fear. The theory also holds that punishing individuals results in both short-term and long-term benefits to society. For instance, punishing criminals prevents them from offending society through more severe mechanisms under short-term goals. In this case, a criminal who engages in public shooting can be killed on the spot to prevent further damage. However, for long-term benefits, deterrence aims at preventing crime that could originate from the existing social behavior. For example, punishing a criminal makes other potential criminals fear the consequences, thus resulting in safer societies. The development of the deterrence theory was considerate of both short-term and long-term deterrence benefits within society.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The deterrence theory was developed in early societies like the Roman Empire, where heavy punishments like hanging were served as an example for other members within a society. However, in the modern era, the deterrence theory gained momentum in 1968, with Garry Becker publishing a book, Crime, and Punishment ( Johnson, 2019 ) . In his book, Becker argued that crime could not be understood from the previously conceptualized theories, including psychological, sociological, or biological theories. Instead, he affirmed that criminal theory could only be understood from an economic perspective. In this case, he stated that people are more likely to commit criminal activities because of economic reasons. For Becker, most people are more likely to adopt criminal behaviors because they desire to satisfy their economic needs, including food and shelter.
According to the deterrence theory, increasing the severity of punishment results in a more reformed society. Under the paradigm of fear, people are more likely to avoid criminal activities if they know that the government has extreme punitive guidelines. The deterrence theory has three critical components: celerity, severity, and certainty. In this case, celerity is applied to understanding the available consequence's speed in solving criminal activity. Pro-deterrence theorists argue that instant or more immediate punishments provide effective results than delayed punishments ( Johnson, 2019 ) . The certainty component is based on the approach that criminals use in fear of being caught. According to this component, individuals are more likely to indulge in crime, despite severe punishments. Essentially, the only determining factor for the crime levels in a society under the severity component is the policing efforts to catch any offenders. Finally, the severity component is based on the assumption that the best way to control crime is to formulate and implement tougher punishments.
Understanding the three deterrence theory components can be fundamental in crime prevention and control. Under the severity component, for decades, scholars had always assumed that severe punishments reduce crime levels in countries by making people fear the consequences of their actions. Through this assumption, lawmakers across the globe used severe sanctions and laws to ensure crime prevention. In the late 1960s, a series of studies were conducted to ascertain the provisions of the existing crime control theories ( Johnson, 2019 ) . Under the new studies, researchers examined homicide rates in the US, establishing that the nature of the crime determined the level of deterrence. For instance, severe punishments for crimes like assault, robbery, auto theft, and rape did not affect the percentage of people convicted for crimes. Essentially, the study established that underlying conditions like social needs could be critical contributing factors that determine the functionality of the deterrence theory.
The first explanation for the ineffectiveness of the severity component under the deterrence theory is that some crimes do not involve rational decisions. Essentially, researchers established that some criminal activities could be promoted by multiple factors rather than rational decisions; hence individuals do not have time to reflect on the existing deterrence policies. For instance, most criminals in the US occur due to alcohol and drug influence. Strong emotions and passion were also established as reasons why people indulge in criminal activities. Another reason for the ineffectiveness of the severity component is that most offenders are more likely to be involved in subsequent criminal activities ( Johnson, 2019 ) . For instance, after releasing from jails, most people are more likely to be rearrested, indicating the ineffectiveness of the severity component. Essentially, prison sentencing, as a mechanism of deterrence, does not induce enough fear to make individuals avoid criminal behaviors. Thirdly, the severity of a punishment is ineffective is individuals have higher chances of not being caught. Essentially, the effectiveness of the deterrence theory depends on the ability of the existing law enforcement agencies to catch criminals. If people know that they cannot be caught, they are more likely to commit any crime without considering the severity of the punishments they could face.
Under the certainty component, the subjective aspect is more reliable, like objectivity. Essentially, people's beliefs on the likelihood of punishments are more important than that punishment exists. Under this component, criminal prevention can only be enhanced if people strongly believe that they will be punished if they indulge in criminal behavior. In this case, if people believe that they might not be punished for their activities, they are more likely to indulge in crime. For instance, if a child believes that their parents will forgive them, they are unlikely to obey them (Paternoster, 2020). Similarly, under the deterrence theory, if people are not exposed to the reality of punishment, they can never avoid crime because punishment is theoretical. The subjective beliefs used in this component are derived from anecdotal information gained through other people or personal experiences. The component also explains people who avoid arrest for first-time offenses are more likely to re-offend. Essentially, the belief that they were not punished on their first ordeal gives them the courage to indulge in subsequent criminal activities. Therefore, the certainty component is based on the risk of punishment derived from peers, personal experiences, or observable situations influencing people's emotional responses.
The final component, celerity, explains that the speed of action against an offender is fundamental in dictating their criminal behavior. Under this component, the police must ensure that offenders are arrested and prosecuted in courts within shorter periods. Getting quick punishment enables psychological reflection, resulting in possible changes in criminal perceptions (Trang & Brendel, 2019). For instance, during a shoot-out between officers and harmed gangs, urgency by the police can prevent future criminal activities from a similar gang. However, delays in response could lead to the emergence of other gangs, believing that they can easily survive due to poor punishment systems.
The deterrence theory has been used in the formulation of various police patrol procedures and crime prevention strategies. In this case, the theory is more applicable in creating crime prevention strategies within police departments. First, the severity component is used in preventing potential criminals from offending. State and federal legislative organs have formulated severe punishments over the years, matching the type of offense committed. For instance, crimes like rape and murder attract severe punishments at both state and federal levels. The laws were developed under the assumption that the severity of the punishment increases fears, thus making societal members more sensitive to such criminal activities (Trang & Brendel, 2019). Under this paradigm, the legislative organs aim at reducing crime by making American citizens aware of the possible implications of their actions within the criminal justice system.
The certainty component is also fundamental in the formulation of policing strategies in the US. The component has influenced both policing procedures and crime control and prevention strategies. Under this component, individuals can only comply with the existing regulations if there are higher chances of punishment. In applying this deterrence component, police departments have increased patrol activities. For instance, diversion from active patrols to randomized patrols has proven effective in crime control and prevention (Bhattacherjee & Shrivastava, 2018). More patrols imply that criminals can easily be caught while planning or executing criminal plans. In essence, when individuals see more police presence in their neighborhoods, they are less likely to indulge in crime. According to the certainty component, people indulge in crime if they believe that they will not be punished. However, with increased police patrols, the chances of arrest and punishment are higher. Consequently, this results in a reduction in crime levels as police presence increases the certainty of punishment.
The certainty component can also explain the strategic decision by police departments to increase the number of police officers. Globally, governments have been working to increase the ratio of police to citizens. The move can only be attributed to the deterrence criminology theory. Essentially, increasing the number of police officers in departments implies heavy police presence within a state or a city. Consequently, potential criminals perceive higher chances of punishment, thus desisting from involvement in a crime. One such situation was experienced in Denmark during World War II. In this case, the German Army arrested Danish police, and after two years, crime levels had increased by more than 25% (Bhattacherjee & Shrivastava, 2018). The Danish offenders were more aware that their chances of punishment were minimal due to the absence of police. The deterrence theory is also applicable in heavy budgetary allocations for police departments from state and federal governments. Increased levels of investment in surveillance and intelligence systems can also be attributed to the certainty component of the deterrence theory. Through intelligence systems, criminal groups can easily be identified, thus increasing the chances of punishment.
The increased rate of incarceration across the US can also be attributed to the deterrence theory. Through increasing incarceration policies, state and federal governments have reduced crime levels in the US. For instance, Minnesota changed its incarceration policy, with more people going to jails from the 1980s to 2015 (Bhattacherjee & Shrivastava, 2018). Consequently, this led to a reduction in crime rates over the same period. The crime deterrence theory is applicable in this case because the crime levels reduced due to changes in people's beliefs on punishment. With the changed policies, Minnesota residents believed in higher chances of punishment. Essentially, seeing more people going to jails made the residents avoid criminal activities, thus resulting in lower crime rates.
Finally, the celerity component was also fundamental in establishing policing procedures and strategic approaches to crime prevention and control. Police departments across the US have been reducing crime response time (Bhattacherjee & Shrivastava, 2018). Essentially, the departments invest in faster cars and bikes to ensure efficiency in patrols and emergency response. Under the celerity component, immediate punishment plays a significant role in crime prevention and control. Therefore, random patrols were adopted to increase the chances of faster response and punishment for crimes. With rapid response, the police can easily find offenders in their crime scenes.
Unlike the deterrence theory that focuses on fear for crime prevention and control, psychological theories focus on the underlying personal influences that can be altered for crime control. Under the psychological theory, there are three approaches to crime: psychodynamic approach, cognitive approach, and behavioral approach (Agnew, 2020). The psychodynamic approach explains how early childhood exposure and experiences could have influenced an individual's criminal perceptions or behaviors. On the contrary, the behavioral approach shows how global crime perceptions influence criminal behavior. The cognitive approach emphasizes the role of perceptions in the achievement of criminal behavior.
The psychodynamic approach focuses on the unconscious mind influences that were gained during childhood. Developed by Sigmund Freud, who believed that most unconscious behavioral displays are driven by gratification or the desire for instant gratification (Agnew, 2020). Freud used the psychodynamic theory to develop the pleasure principle, whereby offenders forget the need to ensure other people's wellness rather than push for their gains. In this case, an offender is unlikely to consider the possible impacts their actions could have on victims. Instead, they are more focused on gaining what satisfies their temporary desires. For instance, a thief shoots a storekeeper to get money without considering their actions on their victim's children, business, or other aspects of life. Children's behavior can also understand the theory to express frustration if their demands are not met. Essentially, children usually fail to understand the possible implications of their demands on their parents' financial situations. For them, getting what they what is instant gratification, which is inconsiderate of future gains or losses.
The psychodynamic theory holds that people with traumatizing childhood are more likely to indulge in criminal activities. Essentially, the theory assumes that offenders are more likely to be aggravated. Memories of past events result in ego-centric behavior, with less focus on other people and the desire for personal gratification (Wertz et al., 2018). Due to their miserable childhood, criminals have not concerned for other people. Immaturity and poor social etiquette are also critical characteristics of people who experienced troubled childhoods. The theory also suggests that such individuals have low self-esteem; hence the best way to self-motivation is through harming others or indulging in drugs.
In his conceptualization of the psychodynamic model, Freud stated that everyone possesses different instinctual drives. With such drives, individuals have to provide gratification for all the decisions they take or for all their experiences in life. The first set of codes, "superego," involve ethical and moral livelihoods (Wertz et al., 2018). For this theory, the main cause of crime is the conflict between the three drives, superego, id, and ego. People develop delinquency or poor behavioral approaches based on the magnitude of the psychodynamic conflicts.
The behavioral approach is also fundamental in the understanding of how people become criminals. Specifically, the model conceptualizes the idea that people nurture and develop the behavior that the people in their environment widely accept. According to the model, experiences contribute to behavioral changes based on the environment of exposure. Essentially, behavioral changes are influenced by the reactions of other people to conscious and subconscious practices (Wertz et al., 2018). The theory also argues that behavior is developed from societal norms. In this case, behavior is reinforced through the concept of rewards for good deeds and punishment for unacceptable practices.
According to this approach, individuals who constantly interact with criminals are more likely to develop behavioral practices. Similarly, if individuals interact with people who reward their criminality, they are more likely to adopt criminal behavior. The theory also emphasizes people in power, whereby they are more likely to influence behavior among their followers (Comunale et al., 2020). In this case, criminal behavior could originate from parents or other influential people in a society. For example, a child whose criminal behavior is not punished or cautioned by a parent is more likely to become a severe threat to society. Essentially, the child will always see their parent's refusal to condemn the criminal behavior as a reward, resulting in a higher desire to exercise the learned practice. As a grown-up, the individual is also more likely to continue the childhood crime while indulging in more criminal acts.
The cognitive approach is a psychological theory, which focuses on people's perceptions. The theory states that perceptions govern an individual's thoughts, emotions, and actions. In its conceptualization, the theory is divided into three parts: post-conventional, pre-conventional, and conventional levels. The pre-conventional stage states that children learn the impacts of their actions through their feedback from the people around them, especially their guardians. The convention stage explains how young adults adapt to societal behavioral expectations and perceptions (Comunale et al., 2020). Finally, the post-conventional level is whereby independent thinking is invoked, with individuals wanting to establish how certain societal rules or values are related to human rights or other global clauses. At this stage, individuals over 20 years start judging how their social values either conform or do not conform to their expectations of human welfare of social liberty.
For cognitive psychological theory, criminal behavior is only developed at the pre-conventional level of acquisition. In this case, only children can learn criminal behavior from other observable traits. Therefore, parenting plays a critical role in influencing the behavioral outcomes of a child about crime (Comunale et al., 2020). Children raised in strict parenting are more likely to shun criminal behavior as their guardians did not observe it. However, children from crime-prone neighborhoods are more likely to develop criminal behavior. Essentially, the difference between the two categories of children is acquiring behavioral patterns from the immediate environment.
The psychological theory has also been used widely in conceptualizing policing procedures and strategies for crime control and prevention. In its application, the theory must be broken into the three fundamental stages: cognitive, psychodynamic, and behavioral approaches. The psychodynamic approach is fundamental in helping the police establish investigation networks into the origin of crime (Comunale et al., 2020). Essentially, this theory helps police departments understand how conflicting drives could promote criminal behavior in a region. For instance, police use the psychodynamic approach to understand criminal behavior, especially among immigrants. After moving into the US from another country, most immigrants find it difficult to adapt to the American culture. Consequently, this leads to conflicting drives, as stated under the psychodynamic approach. Eventually, this could lead to increased levels of crime. With the psychodynamic areas, police departments can understand areas that demand more policing operations.
The behavioral approach has also been fundamental in the formulation of policing strategies. In this case, police departments focus on increasing the number of police in crime-prevalent localities or neighborhoods. Essentially, the term "profiling" could have been generated from applying the behavioral approach (Comunale et al., 2020). By identifying areas with large numbers of crimes, the police can easily start concrete patrol activities to reduce the chances of crime. For instance, if a police department identifies a neighborhood to be more prevalent to violent gangs, they are more likely to deploy more patrol vehicles in the region, thus controlling the criminal state in the region. The police can establish the societal factors that could be breeding crime in a neighborhood through the behavioral approach.
Similarly, the cognitive approach was also fundamental in formulating crucial policing practices and crime control and prevention strategies. Through this approach, police can understand why some areas report larger numbers of criminal records. For instance, if a locality had high crime rates in the 1990s, the police can expect the same challenge among children born during this period (Comunale et al., 2020). Consequently, community engagement emerged from this approach, whereby the police started using the statistical projections obtained through the cognitive psychological theory to educate youths on crime prevention. Through community engagement, police can reduce young adults' pre-conventional exposure to crime.
Conclusively, criminology theories focus on understanding the origin of crime and how it can be prevented or controlled. The deterrence theory focuses on crime control by making people afraid. According to this theory, the imposition of heavy punishments makes individuals unlikely to indulge in criminal behavior. The theory is divided into certainty, severity, and celerity that explains why individuals participate or escape crime. On the contrary, the criminal psychological theory focuses on understanding society's psychodynamic, cognitive, and behavioral patterns breeding crime. The two theories are applicable in policing procedures and crime prevention strategies. For instance, the deterrence theory explains the reason for random police patrols. It also helps departments in increasing the ratios of police officers to citizens. On the contrary, psychological theories enable police engagements with community members to eliminate any existing stereotypes promoting crime. Criminology theories are therefore, critical in the design and implementation of policing procedures and crime control strategies
References
Agnew, R. (2020). The contribution of social-psychological strain theory to the explanation of crime and delinquency. In The legacy of anomie theory (pp. 113-137).
Bhattacherjee, A., & Shrivastava, U. (2018). The effects of ICT use and ICT Laws on corruption: A general deterrence theory perspective. Government Information Quarterly , 35 (4), 703-712.
Comunale, T., Calderoni, F., Marchesi, M., Superchi, E., & Campedelli, G. M. (2020). Systematic review of the social, psychological and economic factors relating to involvement and recruitment into organized crime. Understanding Recruitment to Organized Crime and Terrorism , 175-204.
Johnson, B. (2019). Do criminal laws deter crime? Deterrence theory in criminal justice policy: A primer. MN House Research.
Paternoster, R. (2020). How much do we really know about criminal deterrence? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 100(3), 1-61.
Trang, S., & Brendel, B. (2019). A meta-analysis of deterrence theory in information security policy compliance research. Information Systems Frontiers , 21 (6), 1265-1284.
Wertz, J., Caspi, A., Belsky, D. W., Beckley, A. L., Arseneault, L., Barnes, J. C., ... & Moffitt, T. E. (2018). Genetics and crime: Integrating new genomic discoveries into psychological research about antisocial behavior. Psychological science , 29 (5), 791-803.
