A Study about Cognitive vs Behavioral Measures
Using survey data, various measures of self-control, based respectively on cognitive and behavioral indicators, are compared in their ability to predict eight measures of crime/deviance. The results show that either type of measure produces supportive evidence for the theory, and the behavioral measures provide no better prediction than do the cognitive measures. Unlike cognitive type indicators, and contrary to the implications of the theory, different types of crime-analogous, imprudent behaviors are not highly interrelated, making it difficult to develop reliable behavioral measures. These results suggest that general support for self-control theory would likely not be any greater if all researchers had used behaviorally based measures, as recommended by the authors of the theory. Improving the level of prediction to the point where selfcontrol could claim to be the master variable, as envisioned by its proponents, does not seem to rest on a shift to behaviorally based measures. Instead, improvements in the theory itself, particularly the incorporation of contingencies, appears to offer more promise.
The net outcome should be a strong negative relationship between selfcontrol and criminal/deviant behavior (low self-control, high misbehavior; high self-control, low misbehavior). This relationship is theorized to be nondeterministic in the sense that low self-control does not always produce crime and many conditions may potentially affect whether it does or not. Nevertheless, the theorists contend that variables popular among sociologists, such as morality, strain, peer influences, social bonds, cultural elements, or social disadvantages actually have little influence. In effect, selfcontrol is said to predate and supercede most other conditions that have traditionally been thought to affect post-childhood misbehavior. Keep reading…
