Reconsidering strain theory: Operationalization,rival theories,and adult criminality

Recently a revisionist view of strain theory's empirical adequacy has emerged which holds that the theory's explanatory power depends on how it is operationalized. With an adult community sample, we empirically assess three separate measures of strain to explain self-reported crime: the gap between aspirations and expectations, blocked opportunities, and relative deprivation. The findings reveal that the aspirations-expectations measure is not related to criminal involvement, while perceived blocked opportunities and feelings of relative deprivation significantly affect adult offending. These relationships, however, fail to persist after measures from competing theories (i.e., low self-control, differential association, and social bond) are introduced as controls in the regression equations. Thus, measures from rival theories offer a more fruitful approach to explaining self-reported adult offending.A version of this paper was presented at the 1993 American Society of Criminology meetings, Phoenix, Arizona.     

The New Commons vs. The Second Enclosure Movement: Comments on an Emerging Agenda for Development Research

The relationship between property rights and development has always been a central concern for both theorists and policy makers. The growing role of information and communications technology in the economies of both North and South intensifies the salience of this issue. This commentary extends the discussion of the two visions of property rights that are introduced by Weber and Bussell (2005). In one, property rights are restructured along the lines pioneered by the open-source software community to create a “new commons” of productive tools; in the other, Northern corporations successfully defend their politically protected monopoly rights over intangible assets and even extend them through a “second enclosure movement” to an ever larger set of ideas, information, and images. Currently, the second enclosure movement remains dominant, but which of these visions is likely to predominate in the longer run depends on the interests and potential power of key actors and on the possibilities for alliances among them—not just Northern corporations, but Southern states and private entrepreneurs, as well. Peter Evans is professor of sociology and Marjorie Meyer Eliaser Chair of International Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. His research has focused on the comparative political economy of developing countries, particularly industrialization and the role of the state, as exemplified byEmbedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995). He has also worked urban environmental issues, producing the edited volumeLivable Cities: Urban Struggles for Livelihood and Sustainability (University of California Press, 2002). His current interest in the politics of globalization is reflected in his chapter, “Counter-hegemonic Globalization: Transnational Social Movements in the Contemporary Global Political Economy,” forthcoming in theHandbook of Political Sociology (Cambridge University Press).     

Equipoise and the Criteria for Reasonable Action

Critics of clinical equipoise have long argued that it represents an overly permissive, and therefore morally unacceptable, mechanism for resolving the tensions inherent in clinical research. In particular, the equipoise requirement is often attacked on the grounds that it is not sufficiently responsive to the interests of individual patients. In this paper, we outline a view of equipoise that not only withstands a stronger version of this objection, which was recently articulated by Deborah Hellman, but also plays important roles in clarifying the discussion.     

Child witnesses in criminal court

The last decade has witnessed a dramatic rise in public and professional concern regarding the special needs of children as witnesses in the court setting. This study was conducted to examine characteristics of criminal court cases involving children as potential witnesses that were adjudicated through a trial conviction, trial acquittal, or guilty plea, from among cases that went to court in a 12-month period in nine judicial circuits in three states. Three hundred sixteen criminal court cases involving children as potential witnesses were examined. The vast majority, of these cases involved sexual crimes against children. The results indicated that relatively few (16.8%) adjudicated cases were resolved through a trial proceeding. Sentencing varied from state to state and as a function of the disposition of the case. Future research should be conducted prospectively to determine (a) whether cases involving children as witnesses in criminal court are prosecuted at lower rates than cases involving adults and (b) the reasons that cases leave the criminal justice system prior to any court actions.This research was supported by State Justice Institute grant No. 88-11J-D-064. Points of view or opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the State Justice Institute.