, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT
1.1. Critically evaluate Cohen and Felson's (1979) Rational Choice Theory as an explanation for
criminal behaviour. In your answer, explain the core assumptions of the theory, discuss how
offenders are thought to make decisions, and provide contemporary examples.
Cohen and Felson's Rational Choice Theory (1979) offers an explanation for criminal behavior based
on the premise that offenders make calculated decisions to commit crimes based on a cost-benefit
analysis. In this model, crime is viewed as a rational decision-making process where individuals
weigh the potential rewards against the perceived risks. This perspective contrasts with earlier
theories of crime, which focused on biological or social determinism. By providing a structured
framework, Rational Choice Theory presents crime as an outcome of logical thought, influenced by
situational variables and individual preferences. This essay critically evaluates the core assumptions
of the theory, how offenders make decisions, and contemporary examples where it applies.
Core Assumptions of Rational Choice Theory
Cohen and Felson’s Rational Choice Theory is grounded in several key assumptions:
Offenders as Rational Actors: The theory assumes that criminals are rational individuals who
engage in a cost-benefit analysis when deciding to commit a crime. In other words, offenders
calculate whether the benefits of committing a crime outweigh the potential risks (Cohen &
Felson, 1979). This idea is similar to economic theory, where individuals make choices based
on maximizing their utility.
Opportunity is Key: The theory emphasizes that crime is not solely about criminal motivations
or social influences but is also significantly driven by opportunity. Cohen and Felson (1979)
argue that crime occurs when an offender perceives an opportunity to commit a crime with
minimal risk. The presence of targets, lack of guardianship, and environmental factors are
crucial in determining whether a crime will take place.
Focus on Situational Factors: Rational Choice Theory shifts the focus from the social or
psychological characteristics of offenders to situational contexts. The presence of certain
factors, such as the accessibility of targets, lack of surveillance, and the time and place of an
opportunity, is said to influence the likelihood of criminal behavior (Cornish & Clarke, 1986).
Decision-Making Process of Offenders
According to Cohen and Felson, the process through which offenders make decisions involves
several steps:
Perception of the Crime Opportunity: The first step involves the recognition of a crime
opportunity. Offenders assess situations where they perceive low risks and high rewards. For
instance, a well-lit street at night might seem like a low-risk environment for a robbery if there
are no visible witnesses or cameras.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: Once a crime opportunity is identified, offenders weigh the benefits
(e.g., financial gain, thrill) against the perceived risks (e.g., arrest, injury). If the perceived
benefits are greater than the risks, the crime is more likely to be committed (Clarke & Cornish,
1985).
1.1. Critically evaluate Cohen and Felson's (1979) Rational Choice Theory as an explanation for
criminal behaviour. In your answer, explain the core assumptions of the theory, discuss how
offenders are thought to make decisions, and provide contemporary examples.
Cohen and Felson's Rational Choice Theory (1979) offers an explanation for criminal behavior based
on the premise that offenders make calculated decisions to commit crimes based on a cost-benefit
analysis. In this model, crime is viewed as a rational decision-making process where individuals
weigh the potential rewards against the perceived risks. This perspective contrasts with earlier
theories of crime, which focused on biological or social determinism. By providing a structured
framework, Rational Choice Theory presents crime as an outcome of logical thought, influenced by
situational variables and individual preferences. This essay critically evaluates the core assumptions
of the theory, how offenders make decisions, and contemporary examples where it applies.
Core Assumptions of Rational Choice Theory
Cohen and Felson’s Rational Choice Theory is grounded in several key assumptions:
Offenders as Rational Actors: The theory assumes that criminals are rational individuals who
engage in a cost-benefit analysis when deciding to commit a crime. In other words, offenders
calculate whether the benefits of committing a crime outweigh the potential risks (Cohen &
Felson, 1979). This idea is similar to economic theory, where individuals make choices based
on maximizing their utility.
Opportunity is Key: The theory emphasizes that crime is not solely about criminal motivations
or social influences but is also significantly driven by opportunity. Cohen and Felson (1979)
argue that crime occurs when an offender perceives an opportunity to commit a crime with
minimal risk. The presence of targets, lack of guardianship, and environmental factors are
crucial in determining whether a crime will take place.
Focus on Situational Factors: Rational Choice Theory shifts the focus from the social or
psychological characteristics of offenders to situational contexts. The presence of certain
factors, such as the accessibility of targets, lack of surveillance, and the time and place of an
opportunity, is said to influence the likelihood of criminal behavior (Cornish & Clarke, 1986).
Decision-Making Process of Offenders
According to Cohen and Felson, the process through which offenders make decisions involves
several steps:
Perception of the Crime Opportunity: The first step involves the recognition of a crime
opportunity. Offenders assess situations where they perceive low risks and high rewards. For
instance, a well-lit street at night might seem like a low-risk environment for a robbery if there
are no visible witnesses or cameras.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: Once a crime opportunity is identified, offenders weigh the benefits
(e.g., financial gain, thrill) against the perceived risks (e.g., arrest, injury). If the perceived
benefits are greater than the risks, the crime is more likely to be committed (Clarke & Cornish,
1985).
