EARNEST A. HOOTON AND THE BIOLOGICAL TRADITION IN AMERICAN CRIMINOLOGY*

Biological explanations shaped criminology at its inception, and today they are reemerging with fresh vigor and increased potential. But many criminologists do not understand how biological theories developed, what they contributed to criminology generally and where they went astray. This paper focuses on the work of Earnest A. Hooton, whose criminological studies, published in 1939, met with decidedly mixed reviews but were nonetheless discussed for decades in criminological textbooks. Information about a now half‐forgotten and misunderstood figure like Hooton, in addition to being useful in and of itself, contributes to the history of criminology as a discipline—a project essential to the field's ultimate maturity. It helps build a history of criminological knowledge.     

GENE-BASED EVOLUTIONARY THEORIES IN CRIMINOLOGY *

In the past 20 years, several theories of criminal (and antisocial) behavior have been proposed from an evolutionary perspective, some of which specifically stipulate that people vary in their genetic dispositions toward criminality. It is these theories, herein called gene-based evolutionary theories, that are the focus of this article. Two categories of gene-based evolutionary theories are described. One category is crime specific, pertaining to the offenses of rape, spousal assault/murder, and child abuse neglect. The second category consists of two general theories of criminal and antisocial behavior: the cheater (or cad vs. dad) theory, and the r/K theory. In addition to assuming that genes contribute to variation in criminal (and antisocial) behavior, all five of these theories assume that natural selection has acted on human populations to open up reproductive niches for individuals and groups who victimize others. While the theories are still far too new to have been fully tested, we derive some of the most obvious hypotheses from each theory and explore the relevant empirical evidence. We show that while gene-based evolutionary theories open make predictions similar to strictly environmental theories, they also lead to unique hypotheses, several of which have at least some support.     

THE LIFE COURSE OF CRIMINOLOGY IN THE UNITED STATES: THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY 2003 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS*

The field of criminology lacks a sense of its own history. To rectify this situation, I apply the concepts and framework of the life‐course perspective to the development of criminology as a discipline. Examining criminology in the United States over the last 100 years, I discuss three eras (or life‐course phases), intellectual continuities and turning points in the field. My thesis is that if we knew our history, we would realize that ideas about crime matter. I offer a revised version on how to view criminology and in doing so address the theme of the 2003 annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, “The Challenge of Practice, the Benefits of Theory.”     

OVERCOMING THE CRISIS IN CRITICAL CRIMINOLOGY: TOWARD A GROUNDED LABELING THEORY*

It has been said that critical criminology is in a state of crisis The author contends that the theoretical roots of this crisis lie in the failure of critical criminology to come to terms with the interactionist tradition from within which it developed. He shows how the traditional critical-Marxist critiques of interactionism have failed to comprehend the substance of this approach. Such substance is rooted in the social philosophy of pragmatism, especially in the thought of Mead, and in the reality of 20th-century social relationships The author proposes that the renewed critical criminology should be based in a grounded labeling theory which is able to foster consideration of both practical and discursive forms of interaction.     

PREDICTION AND INFERENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

The calculus of probability constitutes an elegant formal model for the various questions of prediction in criminology. However, the use of this model has been criticized for its failure to deal with individual instances vis-à-vis group phenomena. It has been argued that since probability is a function of classes or sequence of events, no meaning can be attached to the probability of a single event. This paper presents a logical analysis of this aspect of probability and prediction. The proposal of logical probability is suggested as a meaningful explication of the prediction and the probability of a single event.     

CONSTRUCTING CROSS-CULTURAL THEORIES IN CRIMINOLOGY

Over the past twenty years, researchers have, once again, discovered the benefits of studying a phenomenon cross-culturally, and a revival of the method is currently underway. However, criminologists currently use the method to determine the scope and generalizability of their theories, which were orginally developed for use in one particular culture. Due to problems in this approach, their activities have been met with varied success. The purpose of this article is to examine the use of the cross-cultural research method in constructing and testing criminological theories. The article will distinguish between the use of a method to determine a theory's scope and generalizability (Evaluative Approach) and the use of the method to construct explanatory models designed to transcend cultural boundaries (Generative Approach). The article will conclude with a detailed discussion of the latter.     

CRIMINAL CAREER RESEARCH: ITS VALUE FOR CRIMINOLOGY*

In a recent paper published in this journal, Gottfredson and Hirschi (1986)¹ argue that the concepts of criminal careers, career criminals, selective incapacitation, prevalence, and incidence, and longitudinal studies all have little value for criminology. In our view their paper misrepresents these concepts and our research on these topics. We are pleased to have the opportunity in this paper to develop these concepts more clearly and to show their relevance for criminology.     

CONSTITUTIVE CRIMINOLOGY: THE MATURATION OF CRITICAL THEORY*

This paper synthesizes recent trends in the development of critical criminology into a new theoretical direction in thinking about crime. It rejects approaches to criminological theory that reduce crime to an outcome of micro causes or macro contexts. It suggests instead that thinking about crime should be reconsidered as the coterminous discursive production by human agents of an ideology of crime that sustains it as a concrete reality. It argues that this coproduction occurs when agents act out criminal patterns, when others seek to control criminal behavior, and when yet others attempt to research, philosophize about, and explain crime. The paper argues that reducing crime will only come about with a reduction of investment by human agents in the ideology of crime production. Such a reflexive re-conceptualization requires the development of a replacement discourse, rather than an oppositional one, a peacemaking discourse rather than a conflicting one. We call this new theoretical direction constitutive criminology.     

THEORY AND IDEOLOGY IN MARXIST CRIMINOLOGY

Marxist criminology can be analyzed both as a theory of what is and as an ideology of what ought to be. theory must be examined by logic and empirical evidence. An ideology and its vision of the good society must be examined by comparison with other ideologies and real societies based on competing ideologies. Such comparisons would reveal that societies based on Marxist ideology have been unjust and repressive and do not represent a future for which criminologists should strive as Quinney urges them to do.     

A TEST OF THE ORTEGA HYPOTHESIS IN CRIMINOLOGY

Following J. Cole and S. Cole (1973), we attempt to ascertain whether important scientific work is dependent upon works of lesser quality for fruition. The “Ortega hypothesis” posits such a dependence, and we test this assertion in criminology. Using some 2700 works published in criminology between 1945 and 1972, we demonstrate that less important works (those with few citations) are rarely utilized by much more important papers (those with the highest citation counts). The Ortega hypothesis is refuted, and most criminological literature contributes nothing or little that is useful to the field. This corroborates the conditions found by the Coles to exist in physics after their test of Ortega. The data we use are from Wolfgang et al. (1978).     

PRESTIGE OF JOURNALS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE

The prestige of professional journals is an important element in the academic world because of the relationship of journal prestige to the careers of individuals and to the reputations of academic institutions. This study investigates the system of journal prestige in the field of criminology and criminal justice, using the ratings of professional journals obtained from a sample of respondents who are members of professional associations in criminology and criminal justice. The results show that there is a relatively high degree of agreement about the relative prestige of journals in the field, despite the fact that criminology and criminal justice is a multidisciplinary field involving professionals from a wide variety of occupational settings.     

THE LAW OF CRIME CONCENTRATION AND THE CRIMINOLOGY OF PLACE*

According to Laub (2004), criminology has a developmental life course with specific turning points that allow for innovations in how we understand and respond to crime. I argue that criminology should take another turn in direction, focusing on microgeographic hot spots. By examining articles published in Criminology, I show that only marginal attention has been paid to this area of study to date—often termed the criminology of place. I illustrate the potential utility of a turning point by examining the law of crime concentration at place, which states that for a defined measure of crime at a specific microgeographic unit, the concentration of crime will fall within a narrow bandwidth of percentages for a defined cumulative proportion of crime. By providing the first cross‐city comparison of crime concentration using a common geographic unit, the same crime type, and examining a general crime measure, I find strong support for a law of crime concentration. I also show that crime concentration stays within a narrow bandwidth across time, despite strong volatility in crime incidents. By drawing from these findings, I identify several key research questions for future study. In conclusion, I argue that a focus on the criminology of place provides significant opportunity for young scholars and has great promise for advancing criminology as a science.     

BEYOND ADOLESCENCE‐LIMITED CRIMINOLOGY: CHOOSING OUR FUTURE—THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY 2010 SUTHERLAND ADDRESS*

For over a half century, criminology has been dominated by a paradigm—adolescence‐limited criminology (ALC)—that has privileged the use of self‐report surveys of adolescents to test sociological theories of criminal behavior and has embraced the view that “nothing works” to control crime. Although ALC has created knowledge, opposed injustice, and advanced scholars’ careers, it has outlived its utility. The time has come for criminologists to choose a different future. Thus, a new paradigm is needed that is rooted in life‐course criminology, brings criminologists closer to offenders and to the crime event, prioritizes the organization of knowledge, and produces scientific knowledge that is capable of improving offenders’ lives and reducing crime.