# data[].attributes.body
Rational choice theory purports that a potential offender must make four primary choices: (1) whether or not to commit a crime, (2) whether or not to select a particular target, (3) how frequently to offend, and (4) whether or not to desist from crime.

1986  by Ronald Clarke and Derek Cornish.

An example could be an officer seeing £10 in a hallway at a station, they weigh up that there is no CCTV, no one around to see this theft, the likelihood of being caught is very low, however the risk is that they are caught, and this is a breach of professional standards and would lead to their dismissal.

This can be linked strain theory in the example of a substance user deciding to shoplift. Is the rational choice to committing theft and shoplifting solely for the theft of food to eat and survive, or is it being driven in part by the need to steal for financial gain to feed an addiction.

In our assessment, this can be linked through the idea of how young people are congregating in an unused area, potential committing damage, potentially have weapons, stealing items from these buildings, littering etc. The reward to do these “fun activities in their eyes, is likely outweighing the risk of being caught, friends rare they and they likely won’t say anything, there is no CCTV, no one works or lives there anymore, there aren’t any police there currently.

Pros of rational choice theory in criminology are:

·        Rational choice theory gives a reasonable explanation for a wide selection of criminal activity on the individual, group, and societal levels.

·        Rational choice theory helps with understanding why people make decisions that outwardly appear to be less than ideal.

Cons of rational choice theory in criminology are:

·        Not all individuals are rational thinkers. Many people have experiences that hinder rational thinking, such as certain mental disabilities and traumatic experiences. This is where the link to strain theory comes.

·        Even when people do think rationally, they may not be able to consistently make the best decisions due to limited knowledge, as there will always be unknown variables in any possible course of action.

·        People's decisions are proven to be influenced by factors outside of their own original thought processes, such as persuasion by others or the culture of their environment.

# data[].attributes.body
(Wilson and Kelling, 1982)

Definition –

The image of ‘broken windows’ is used to explain how neighbourhoods descend into incivility, disorder, and criminality if attention is not paid to their maintenance. An unrepaired broken window signals to law-abiding and criminals alike that no one cares. if the matter is not addressed it will gradually signify that disorder is tolerated.

Strengths –

Improving the quality of the neighbourhood reduces low level crim , ASB and low-level disorder. More serious crime is then less likely to occur.

Drop in crime rates (Noble, 2015).

Weaknesses –

Although the research does not have a crime focus, comment is made on the issues of the broken window theory in relation to ASB. Sampson and Raudenbush develop the argument that the broken window theory might not play as big a part as initially thought. The efforts made to clean up or renovate an area that have large, concentrated neighbourhoods of poor people or a large ethnic minority may have no or limited success in the controlling of ASB within open public spaces. This was a consideration of St. Jean’s research (2007). The thought therefore for further research is that the perceptions that individuals and communities formulate in relation to ASB may well extend into arenas outside of Wilson and Kelling’s broken windows theory.

Links into scenario -

ASB around disused buildings that are under maintained, because if this it attracts ASB and unless these buildings are maintained crime will continue.

McLaughlin, E. (2019). The SAGE dictionary of criminology (4th edition.). SAGE Publications.

Noble, B. (June, 2015) Pros and cons of ‘Broken Windows’ Crime Prevention strategy. NewsMax.com

# data[].attributes.body
Created by Cohen and Felson,

The routine activity theory by Cohen and Felson posits that changes in the structure of the patterns of daily activity could explain the rise in crime that occurred following World War II. This approach assumes that, for a crime to occur, three necessary elements must converge in time and space: likely offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of capable guardians. This theory remains one of the leading theoretical approaches in criminology and has garnered significant scientific support.

These elements are motivated offender, suitable target, absence of a capable guardian

Nuisance youths causing issues - Absence of capable guardian could link into why the youths are causing issues there out without there parents

Motivated by other youths also causing issues, the contagion theory can link in here. Peer pressure

Suitable target - disused factory area and are surrounded by small shops meaning lots of targets for these youths.

Strengths: its helps assemble diverse and previously unconnected criminal theorys into one frame work, it links legal and illegal. Can explain why the offences take place

Weaknesses: doesnt tell how criminals get motivated, the guardian could be involved.

If someone is guarding the targets a crime can still occur. It is weak for road traffic

Miller, J. M. (n.d.). Routine Activity Theory. In The Encyclopedia of Theoretical Criminology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118517390

# data[].attributes.body
What is situational crime prevention? (n.d.). College of Policing. https://www.college.police.uk/guidance/neighbourhood-crime/what-situational-crime-prevention

# data[].attributes.body
Social learning theory, introduced by psychologist Albert Bandura, proposed that learning occurs through observation, imitation, and modelling and is influenced by factors such as attention, motivation, attitudes, and emotions.

The theory suggests that learning occurs because people observe the consequences of other people's behaviours.

Rewards and punishments will be studied by the observer. If the observer perceives the rewards to be greater than the costs (punishment) then they will most likely imitate the behaviour. If, however, the punishment is too high, they will not model the behaviour.

Bandura suggested that there were three sources of modelled behaviour: family members, members of one’s peer group and symbolic models, as seen for example in the popular media. Explore this.

Family members

·        Their family and their background could influence their behaviour

·        How their family punishes bad behaviour

·        Are there any other criminals in the family?

Peer group

·        Friends are spurring them on

·        More children are coming into the area as they will be seeing other children there and wanting to do what they do

·        Same friendship groups enjoy the same things

Symbolic models

·        Someone that the children could look up to and influence them such as a local boxer or local celeb.

·        If they are younger, then local NPT could influence them.

·        Older members of the public that they look up to – religious members, older children etc#

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall