Theory of Convenience: Determinants of White-Collar Crime Intention

ABSTRACT

Crime intentions are an important area of research in criminology. Yet substitutes for real intentions have to be applied since respondents will be reluctant to tell truthfully of their tendency to commit a crime. In this article, we present determinants of white-collar crime based on the theory of convenience. Convenience theory suggests that the extent of individual convenience orientation determines to what extent a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his or her occupation will make a decision to violate the law whenever alternative decisions are less convenient. A more stressful and greedy financial motive, an improved organizational opportunity to commit and conceal crime, and a stronger personal willingness for deviant behavior are assumed to influence the extent of white-collar crime intention. Based on a survey of business school students, we find support for suggested causal relationships in the theory of convenience. Business school students are relevant for this research, as they will occupy positions in the future where they can commit financial crime, prevent crime, or become victims of such crime.     

Low Self-Control Versus the Desire-For-Control: An Empirical Test of White-Collar Crime and Conventional Crime

Gottfredson and Hirschi's (1990) general theory of crime has been used to explain a wide variety of criminal and analogous behaviors, yet the few studies that have tested its ability to account for white-collar and corporate offending have yielded mixed results. One response to these mixed findings has been to explore the possibility that unique attributes may predict white-collar and corporate offending. In this vein, limited research examining the relationship between desire-for-control, a similar yet competing construct as low self-control, and corporate crime has revealed desire-for-control to be a stronger predictor of corporate crime than low self-control. The current study expands on existing research by examining the relationship between desire-for-control and low self-control in predicting conventional offending, white-collar or occupational offending, and corporate offending. Results indicate that desire-for-control is a stronger predictor of white-collar and corporate offending than low self-control, but that, as expected, this relationship does not hold true for conventional crime. Theoretical implications and future research directions are also discussed.     

Are NFL Arrestees Violent Specialists or High Frequency Offenders or Both?

Although recent research showed that NFL players have a higher violent crime arrest rate, it remains unclear whether, at the individual-level, NFL players who are arrested are specializing in violent crimes or whether their involvement in violence is driven largely by their high frequency of offending. Using two publically available databases on NFL player arrests, our results show that high frequency offending is rare among the arrested NFL players, that non-white players are more chronic than white players, and that the likelihood of violence is largely driven by high frequency offending—especially among non-white players. Importantly, there appears to be no specialization-in-violence among this sample of arrested NFL players.     

"I knew we would win": hindsight bias for favorable and unfavorable team decision outcomes

This study examined hindsight bias for team decisions in a competitive setting in which groups attempted to outperform each other. It was anticipated that, because of self-serving mechanisms, individuals would show hindsight bias only when decision outcomes allowed them to take credit for their own team's success or to downgrade another team for being unsuccessful. MBA students playing a market simulation game made hindsight estimates regarding the likelihood that either their own or another team would perform well. Consistent with a self-serving interpretation, when decision outcomes were favorable individuals evaluating their own team, but not those evaluating another, showed hindsight bias. When outcomes were unfavorable individuals evaluating their own team did not show hindsight bias, but those evaluating another team did. Discussion focuses on implications of hindsight bias in team decision-making settings.     

Empirical Study of Convenience Theory: A Student Elicitation on White-Collar Crime

Convenience theory suggests that members of the elite in society commit financial crime in their professional roles when alternative actions require too much effort. Convenience is a relative concept where white-collar crime is chosen over legitimate actions when there is a strong economical motive, ample organizational opportunities, and acceptance of deviant behavior. To study convenience theory, a group of students were asked to express their opinions using a questionnaire. The students participated in an elective class on white-collar crime in a business school in Norway.     

Framing decisions: Hypothetical and real

This paper addresses the general issue of whether the practice of investigating human decision making in hypothetical choice situations is at all warranted, or under what conditions. A particularly relevant factor that affects the match between real decisions and hypothetical decisions is the importance of a decision’s consequences. In the literature experimental gambles tend to confound the reality of the decision situation with the size of the payoffs: hypothetical decisions tend to offer large payoffs, and real decisions tend to offer only small payoffs. Using the well-known framing effect (a tendency of risk-aversion for gains and of risk-seeking for losses) we find that the framing effect depends on payoff size but hypothetical choices match real choices for small as well as large payoffs. These results appear paradoxical unless size of incentive is clearly distinguished from the reality status of decision (real versus hypothetical). Since the field lacks a general theory of when hypothetical decisions match real decisions, the discussion presents an outline for developing such a theory.     

Offending Patterns,Control Balance,and Affective Rewards among Convicted Sex Offenders

We present results from a survey of 125 incarcerated sex offenders enrolled in a residential sex offender treatment program that reveal their offending behaviors, reasons for offending, and the affective states they say they experienced while committing their crimes. We supplement this survey information with qualitative data from audio-taped focus groups with these same offenders. Results provide a unique glimpse of the self-reported offending patterns of these offenders, as well as characteristics of their victims and the relationship of the offenders to their victims. Employing concepts from locus of control and control balance perspectives, we argue that many sex offenders, particularly high-volume and high-frequency offenders, are motivated to commit crimes due to an externalized locus of control (a control deficit), which reflects a perceived lack of control over events in their own lives. Their crimes can be viewed as a strategy or device that allows them to experience positive affect and sensations of power and control—even if only temporarily. Findings with regard to offending patterns, motivations, and affective rewards common to these offenders lend qualified support to control balance theory and the locus of control concept and help us understand what drives people to commit sex offenses.     

Approaches to the Empirical Study of Convenience Theory for White-Collar Crime

Convenience theory suggests that members of the elite in society commit financial crime in their professional roles when alternative actions require too much effort. Convenience is a relative concept where white-collar crime is chosen over legitimate actions when there is a strong economical motive, ample organizational opportunities, and acceptance of deviant behavior. To study convenience theory, four investigations are presented in this article: statistical sample of white-collar criminals, autobiographies by white-collar criminals, internal investigations of white-collar crime, and student elicitation on white-collar crime. The strongest relationship within convenience theory seems to be the effect from willingness to commit crime based on deviant behavior on organizational opportunity to commit white-collar crime.     

认知闭合需要、框架效应与决策偏好

在带有模糊性的决策情境中,决策者个人的认知特征会对其判断决策产生重要影响。通过实验的方法,考察了认知闭合需要和特征框架效应对个体决策偏好的影响。93名工商管理硕士（MBA）参与了实验,研究的结果支持了本研究的3个假设,即认知闭合需要与特征框架效应不仅对被试的决策偏好存在显著的影响,而且二者还存在显著的交互作用。具体来说,研究发现,在模糊情境中：高认知闭合需要的被试偏好于立刻做出决策,而低认知闭合需要的被试偏好于暂缓做出决策;接收到正向框架信息的被试偏好于立刻做出决策,而接收到负向框架信息的被试偏好于暂缓做出决策;认知闭合需要与特征框架对被试的决策偏好还存在显著的交互作用。研究结论为根据个体认知闭合需要的水平来选拔决策者、利用框架效应来影响个体的信息加工方式进而提高决策质量提供了理论依据     

A longitudinal examination of the relation between co‐offending with violent accomplices and violent crime

Although the idea that youthful offenders are affected by the company they keep is widely accepted, evidence in support of this idea is based primarily on reports provided by offenders and their peers. As an alternative to relying on reports of criminal behavior, a method that may overestimate the role that peers play in criminal behavior, the current research on co‐offending uses court records to identify and track over time individuals who are known to commit crimes together. The present investigation is the first co‐offending study to track patterns of violent criminal behavior (over an 18‐year period) among a sample of urban offenders and their accomplices. The study tests whether violence “spreads” from violent offenders to those inexperienced in violence. Results indicate that nonviolent offenders who commit their first co‐offense with violent accomplices are at increased risk for subsequent serious violent crime. Findings suggest that lessons of violence can be learned “on the street,” where knowledge is passed along through impromptu social contexts, including those in which offenders commit crimes together. Aggr. Behav. 28:97–108, 2002. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Better to Decide Together: Shared Consumer Decision Making,Perceived Power,and Relationship Satisfaction

Shared consumer decisions, particularly those made with a relationship partner, can be very different from decisions that are made alone. Across multiple studies, we investigate how shared consumer decision making affects perceptions of power and relationship satisfaction. We integrate two streams of research to create a novel theory about consumer decision making and perceived power. Specifically, we suggest that shared consumer decision making combines two necessary components of power—an individual's influence over and a partner's engagement in the decision—and that these combined components drive power perceptions. In other words, individuals who relinquish some control and make a decision with their partner, ironically, perceive having greater power than if they had made the decision alone. We further find that shared decision making and greater perceived power lead to greater satisfaction with the relationship in which the decisions are made. By focusing on consumer decision making within relationships, the current research contributes to the literatures on decision making, social influences in consumer behavior, close relationships, consumer well-being, and power.     

Students' Views of Business Ethics: An Analysis

This study investigates the difference in perceptions between undergraduate business and MBA students regarding selected ethical issues facing employees and managers of today's businesses. Furthermore, the study investigates the intergroup (i.e., at each educational level) and intragroup (i.e., between undergraduates and MBAs) differences in terms of the "situation"; that is, their position as an employee or a manager of the company. A sample of 104 undergraduate and MBA students was used. The results indicate that undergraduate students tend to act more ethically than do MBA students, and both groups tend to be more ethically oriented the higher their professional corporate position is. The findings have direct implications for business practitioners and for educators.     

Ethical? Toward whom?

Comments on the original article, "Nonrational processes in ethical decision making" by M. D. Rogerson et al (see record 2011-19198-001). Among the many insightful points made by Rogerson, Gottlieb, Handelsman, Knapp, and Younggren (October 2011) regarding nonrational processes in ethical decision making, one deserves further explication: Many of psychologists' ethical decisions lead to actions done to someone. Unfortunately, frameworks and models of ethical decision making frequently neglect this fact by implying that the decisions happen in the abstract, but in truth, these decisions often affect a specific recipient. Importantly, the characteristics of that specific recipient, especially as perceived by the psychologist, can have a powerful impact on the process of ethical decision making (Caughron et al., 2011). It would be wise to add such a hypothetical to the list of specific questions that Rogerson et al recommended psychologists ask themselves: Would I make the same ethical decision if the person(s) toward whom the decision is directed had different characteristics?     

The Effect of Inference Order and Experience-Related Knowledge on Diagnostic Conjunction Probabilities

Ideally, a decision maker′s diagnostic probability judgments should not be affected by making predictive judgments before making diagnostic inferences. The purpose of this study is to investigate how experience-related knowledge and the inference presentation order affect a decision maker′s diagnostic conjunction probability judgments. Specifically, when decision makers are asked to make diagnoses in different judgment domains with which they have different levels of experience, we examine how making predictions first affects their subsequent diagnostic judgments in a standard conjunction paradigm. Professional auditors with experience in the auditing domain and MBA students with little or no auditing experience participated in the experiment. The results indicate that when the task involves a domain with which people have experience, making predictions prior to diagnoses has a significant influence on their subsequent diagnostic conjunction probabilities. When auditors made diagnoses in a familiar audit task situation, they were strongly influenced by whether or not they were asked to make predictions in advance. However, there was no influence of inference order on auditors′ diagnoses in a medical task, with which they do not have experience-related knowledge. Similarly, MBA students, having no experience-related knowledge in either audit or medical domains, were not affected by the inference order in making diagnoses. In the discussion of these exploratory results, we suggest that this inference order effect may be due to subjects′ anchoring on the predictive probability and insufficiently adjusting it to yield the diagnostic probability judgment.     

An examination of graduate students' statistical judgments: statistical and fuzzy set approaches

The present study examined how statistical significance levels are treated and interpreted by graduate students who use hypothesis-testing in their scientific investigation. To test underlying psychological aspects of hypothesis-testing, the idea of fuzzy set theory was employed to identify the uncertain points in judgments. 34 graduate students in a psychology department made judgments about hypothetical statistical decisions. The results indicated that (1) the majority of these students treated significance levels on a continuum and rated them according to the magnitude of statistical significance; (2) the subjects shifted their decisions based on the types of hypothetical scenarios but not by the sample sizes; instead, they interpreted a smaller sample size as being less reliable. (3) The subjects frequently chose formally used statistical terms, e.g., Significant and Not Significant, more than graduated verbal expressions, e.g., Marginally Significant and Borderline Significant; and (4) the Fuzziness (degree of confidence in decision-making) was dependent on individuals and existed more in the critical points of transition where judgments are most difficult. The Fuzziness Index illustrated the subtle shifts of human decision-making patterns in statistical judgments. Underlying decision uncertainties and difficulties can be illustrated by functions generated from fuzzy set theory, which may more closely resemble human psychological mechanism. This integrative study of fuzzy set theory and behavioral measurements appears to provide a technique that is more natural for examining and understanding imprecise boundaries of human decisions.     

Neutralizations in Retail Banking: A Qualitative Analysis

This study seeks to examine neutralization theory’s generalizability to other white collar crime contexts and also seeks to address the question of whether certain techniques of neutralization are more likely with certain kinds of white collar crime or offenders. These objectives are achieved through a case study of active members of the retail banking industry. Results indicate that neutralization theory does generalize to the retail banking context. Results also show that neutralization techniques identified in this sample relate more to corporate rather than occupational crime. Findings have implications for theoretical development and also for methods to combat white collar deviance.     

Attitude Change Toward Animal Experimentation in an Academic Setting

Social values theory was used to examine how parents make decisions for their adolescent children. Social values theory states that decision making for others is based on the social value of an action, leading to a norm for how to decide for others, whereas self decisions are influenced by a number of additional factors. Consistent with a risk-aversion norm, in hypothetical health and safety scenarios parents made more risk-averse decisions for their adolescent children than for themselves. Further, the level of risk and inconvenience affected self decisions more than decisions for one's child. A second study showed that the norm was stronger for decisions for one's child than for oneself and more related to parents’ decisions for their child than for themselves. In sum, parents’ decisions for their children seem to be largely determined by a norm stating how they are supposed to decide, at least in the domain of health and safety. Implications for both the judgment and decision making and parenting literatures are discussed.     

Convenience in Criminal Entrepreneurship: The Case of a Norwegian Hashish Baron

The intent of this article is to study a case of criminal entrepreneurship, which reflects the key attributes of convenience theory in order to test that theory. The intent is also to show that the theory of convenience can be extended beyond white-collar crime to include criminal entrepreneurship. The theory of convenience is introduced in this article to explain why criminal entrepreneurship can be an attractive avenue for some people. Convenience theory suggests that a strong desire for financial gain to satisfy greed and solve problems, an attractive organizational opportunity to commit and conceal crime, as well as a personal willingness for deviant behavior can make criminal entrepreneurship attractive. The case of a Norwegian hashish baron illustrates convenience theory by the person’s ability to stay in the illegal drug business for two decades as a white-collar criminal.     

Extending Situational Action Theory to White-Collar Crime

A theory that has started to receive increased empirical attention is Situational Action Theory. This theory argues that an individual’s morality is the central individual-level variable in predicting offending. It also hypothesizes that low self-control will only predict offending among those with low morals. Although this theory has been applied to street crime, the current study represents the first time it has been applied to white-collar crime. With the use of a scenario-based methodology, the results support the theory. Along with the implications of these findings, limitations and directions for future research are also presented.     

Accepting or Rejecting Medical Treatment: A Comparison of Decisions Made for Self Versus Those Made for a Significant Other1

College students (N= 52) made sets of hypothetical decisions concerning whether to accept or withhold medical treatment for oneself as well as for a significant other. Two sets of decisions were made for the significant other: a set representing what the significant other would want for himself or herself, and a set representing what the potential surrogate would want for the significant other. Results revealed consistent sets of decisions within each decision frame, considerable individual differences in mean judgments, an emphasis on the levels of mental and physical functioning, self‐reported decision weights that differed across the decision frames, and considerable self‐insight into the decision policy used when deciding for oneself.