The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
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
Abstract
This paper builds on work by Nagin and Paternoster in which they contend that two recent developments in criminological theory, self-control and rational choice, have been explored separately rather than in conjunction with one another. In their analysis, Nagin and Paternoster found direct effects for variables from each of these theories and called for more research into simultaneous examination of the two. We build on their work by delineating a more highly specified model of rational offending, in which we observe that the research thus far has not examined the indirect effects of low self-control. We believe that this area is grossly underdeveloped and that such an examination is necessary for a more complete understanding of criminal offending. We advance three hypotheses concerning the integration of low self-control into a rational choice framework: (1) that low self-control will have both direct and indirect effects via situational characteristics on intentions to shoplift and drive drunk; (2) that situational characteristics will have direct effects on intentions to deviate, as well as effects on other situational factors; and (3) that a model uniting the effects of low self-control and situational characteristics will provide a good fit to the data. We find support for all these hypotheses and suggest that future theoretical developments will be improved by the integration of low self-control with situational characteristics in a more general model of offending.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621794 · Cited by 10,127
Crime, Shame and Reintegration
Braithwaite, J. (1989) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804618 · Cited by 4,153
The Analysis of Covariance Structures: Goodness-of-Fit Indices
HOELTER, J. W. (1983) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124183011003003 · Cited by 1,624
Sanction, fear, and the maintenance of social order
Tittle, C. R. (1977) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2577457 · Cited by 161
Cited by
VAZSONYI, A. T., PICKERING, L. E., JUNGER, M., & HESSING, D. (2001) · Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency · doi:10.1177/0022427801038002001 · Cited by 464
LOW SELF‐CONTROL, ROUTINE ACTIVITIES, AND FRAUD VICTIMIZATION*
HOLTFRETER, K., REISIG, M. D., & PRATT, T. C. (2008) · Criminology · doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00101.x · Cited by 375
Pratt, T. C., Turner, M. G., & Piquero, A. R. (2004) · Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency · doi:10.1177/0022427803260270 · Cited by 327
Self-citationElaborating the Individual Difference Component in Deterrence Theory
Piquero, A. R., Paternoster, R., Pogarsky, G., & Loughran, T. (2011) · Annual Review of Law and Social Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102510-105404 · Cited by 297
Self-citationSelf-control, perceived opportunity, and attitudes as predictors of academic dishonesty
Bolin, A. U. (2004) · The Journal of Psychology · doi:10.3200/jrlp.138.2.101-114 · Cited by 167
Metadata
- Authors
- Piquero, A., & Tibbetts, S.
- Venue
- Justice Quarterly
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1996-09
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 481-510
- ISSN
- 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9109
- OpenAlex
- W1978689929
- Cited by
- 504
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 29.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: 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. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/07418829600093061
- The paper
- Piquero, A., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829600093061
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.