Shoplifting as situated choice irsd3 meeting Amersfoort 2017

Prof. Dr. Lieven Pauwels
t. +32 9 264 68 37
f. +32 9 264 84 94
Lieven.Pauwels@ugent.be
A n n D e B u c k
A c a d e m i c A s s i s t a n t
C r i m i n o l o g y
a n n . d e b u c k @ u g e n t . b e
ISRD meeting| June 8-9, 2017
Shoplifting as situated choice. Mediating
and moderating effects of the moral sense
Ann De Buck (IRCP-Ghent University)
Lieven Pauwels (IRCP-Ghent University)

research publications consultancy conferences
www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
Lieven.Pauwels@UGent.be
1. INTRODUCTION
2. INTEGRATED THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3. CONCEPTUAL MODEL - PROPOSITIONS
4. ISRD-3: BELGIAN SURVEY
5. ANALYSES – SERIES OF BLOCKWISE LOGISTIC
REGRESSION MODELS
6. RESULTS
7. LIMITATIONS/ SUGGESTIONS FUTURE RESEARCH
OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION
2
Ann.debuck@ugent.be

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
Shoplifting as situated choice. Mediating and
moderating effects of the moral sense
INTRODUCTION
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
3
‘A situated choice is the result of processes of
deliberation in a given context’
(Pauwels & Hardyns 2016: p.37)

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
An integrated ‘micro-place conditions-controls-exposure’ - model
INTEGRATED THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK (1)
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
4
- Distant factors (‘causes of the causes’) AND proximate factors or
mechanisms that bring about intentions/choices to shoplifting
Distant factors
Accumulation of risk factors in
Social-ecological context (social
and moral structure of settings in
which individual develops)
- Informal controls : (family-
school)
• Social bonds
• Social integration
• Social monitoring
Proximate factors
Interaction between
Individual characteristics
(moral beliefs, moral emotions,
ability to selfcontrol)
Lifestyles (exposure to peer
processes – moral context –
provocations/temptations )

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
INTEGRATED THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK (2)
Date | Title
5
CONTEXT OF DEVELOPMENT
Why are people who they are ?
CONTEXT OF ACTION
Why do people what they do ?
‘it is the accumulation of risk in the life
course that is most strongly related to
adversity’
(Bronfenbrenner 1986; Catalano et al. 1996; Catalano et al. 2003;
Stouthamer-Loeber et al. 2002; Thornberry, 1989)
‘how do children become moral?’
(Krebs, 2011)
Situational context when making a
decision:
*exposure to criminogenic moral
settings/lifestyles (Osgood & Anderson 2004)
*interaction with individual
characteristics
Process whereby individual sees
shoplifting as a viable action alternative
(Parsons 1949; Pauwels & Hardyns 2016; Wikström et al. 2012)

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
WHAT IS MORALITY AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT ?
(an evolutionary -psychological account)
Date | Title
6
What ? ‘… a set of ideas (in people’s heads) about how
people who live in groups should behave in order
to meet and advance their interests in
cooperative ways.’
(Krebs, 2011: pg27)
Acquisition - Dispositions (intuitions)
- Social interactions (via language + forms of
social intelligence)
- Deliberative moral reasoning
(Krebs 2011)
Function of
morality
‘ ….to induce individuals to uphold the social
orders of their groups by constraining their
selfish urges……., promoting group harmony,
……., fostering their interests in ways that, if
everyone adopted them, would produce a better
life for all.’
(Krebs, 2011: p.27)
K r e b s D .

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
* a better understanding of determinants of intentions to shoplifting
* Test of a general integrated theoretical model by specifying how
and why people come to see shoplifting as an action alternative
* focus upon the role of proximate and distal factors in the
explanation of shoplifting as a situated choice
AIM OF THIS STUDY
Date | Title
7

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
Pragmatic reason:
the scenario question in the ISRD- survey was used to measure
intentions to shoplifting.
‘Can you imagine doing something like this (stealing from a shop)
knowing that you will not be caught ?’
WHY SHOPLIFTING ?
Date | Title
8
Theoretical reason:
test of the applicability of a general integrated theory
Advantage: measurement of INTENTIONS self-reported delinquency

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
CONCEPTUAL MODEL
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
9
Cumulative
negative life
events
Negative family
context
Negative
schoolbonds
Adverse social-
ecological
context
ACCUMULATION of risk
factors in development
MORAL SENSE
anticipated shame
weak moral rules
poor ability to self
control
INTENTIONS TO
SHOPLIFTING
Criminogenic
exposure
CONTEXT OF ACTION

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
3. The effect of criminogenic exposure is conditional upon the level of moral
sense and will be stronger for participants scoring high on poor moral
sense.
PROPOSITIONS
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
10
1. Accumulation of negative life events, risk factors from the family context
and school context and social-ecological conditions affect the individual
moral sense.
2. The moral sense increases the likelihood of intentions to shoplifting
controlling for cues in developmental context.
4. We tested to what extent these general assumptions were valid for
Belgian and immigrant boys and girls as a critical test for the stability of
the findings.

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
BELGIAN ISRD-3 SAMPLE
11
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
N= 4758 Percent (valid number)
BIOLOGICAL SEX
Boys
Girls
Missing: 0,3% (13)
50,1% (2375)
49,9% (2370)
AGE CATEGORIES
12y and younger
13-14 year
15-16 year
17jaar and older
Missing: 2,9% (136)
16,4% (759)
43,7% (2019)
34% (1573)
5,9% (271)
ETHNIC BACKGROUND
Belgian
Immigrant
Missing: 0,6% (29)
59,1% (2796)
40,9% (1933)
FAMILY STRUCTURE
Two-parent family
other
Missing: 7,1% (338)
72,2% (3192)
27,8% (1228)
CITY (SAMPLING)
Ghent
Liège
Aalst
Verviers
Missing: 0% (0)
33,8% (1609)
28,7% (1364)
25,3% (1204)
12,2% (581)
SCHOOL TYPE
General, non-vocational
vocational
Missing: 0% (0)
61,7% (2938)
38,3% (1820)
PLAY TRUANT
yes
No
Missing: 0,9% (44)
17% (803)
83% (3911)
- Schoolbased PAPI- survey
- 4 cities
- Participants : n=4758
(total sample)
(Pauwels, Pleysier, Vettenburg (2015)
Technical report : Ghent & Aalst; Gavray
(2015) Technical report : Liège &
Verviers)

ISRD-meeting| June 8-9, 2017 12
MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4
N= 2727 Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B)
CONTROLS
Gender (boys)
Age (>14years)
Ethnic background (Belgian)
.578***
.475***
n.s.
.679*
.614**
n.s.
n.s.
.672*
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
ACCUMULATION of risk factors in
developmental context
negative life events
negative parental context
negative school bonds
adverse neighborhood conditions
n.s.
1.377***
1.673***
1.279***
n.s.
n.s.
1.418***
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
1.369***
n.s.
POOR MORAL SENSE
Poor ability to anticipate shame
Weak moral rules
Low ability to self control
1.203*
1.766***
1.424***
n.s.
1.709***
1.316**
Criminogenic exposure 1.570***
Nagelkerke R² x 100 4.0 15 22.7 24.6
Effect estimates in a block-wise logistic modelling predicting intentions to shoplifting (FULL SAMPLE n=2727)
*p:<0.05 **p:<0.01 ***p:<0.001

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
PROPOSITIONS
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
13
1. Accumulation of negative life events, risk factors from the family
context and school context and social-ecological conditions affect
the individual moral sense.
2. The moral sense increases the likelihood of intentions to
shoplifting controlling for cues in developmental context.

ISRD-meeting | June 8-9, 2017 14
Effect estimates in a block-wise logistic modelling predicting intentions to shoplifting
FULL MODEL across GENDER and ETHNIC BACKGROUND (n=2727)
IMMIGRANT GIRLS BELGIAN GIRLS IMMIGRANT BOYS BELGIAN BOYS
N= 2727 Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B)
CONTROLS
Age (>14years) N.S. ,464* N.S. N.S.
ACCUMULATION of risk
factors in
negative parental
context
adverse neighborhood
conditions
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
1,622*
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
1,458*
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
1,342*
N.S.
POOR MORAL SENSE
Poor ability to
anticipate shame
Weak moral rules
Low ability to self
control
1,615*
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
1,846**
N.S.
1,604***
N.S.
N.S.
2,465***
N.S.
Criminogenic exposure 1,567* 2,165** 1,917** N.S.
Nagelkerke R² x 100 17,1 31,6 26,3 27,5
*p:<0.05 **p:<0.01 ***p:<0.001

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
ANALYSES : results
15
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
Interaction poor moral sense * criminogenic exposure (FULL SAMPLE N=4127)
( l i n e a r p ro b a b i l i t y m o d e l ( S c h u l z 2 0 1 6 ) )

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
3. The effect of criminogenic exposure is conditional upon the level
of moral sense and will be stronger for participants scoring high
on poor moral sense.
PROPOSITIONS
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
17
4. We tested to what extent these general assumptions were valid
for Belgian and immigrant boys and girls as a critical test for
the stability of the findings.

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
CUES FROM DEVELOPMENTAL CONTEXT INDIRECTLY AFFECT
INTENTIONS TO SHOPLIFTING
INTENTIONS TO SHOPLIFTING ARE ESPECIALLY THE RESULTING
OUTCOME OF
- INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS (poor moral sense),
- EXPOSURE TO CRIMINOGENIC CUES IN THE SETTING
- AND THEIR INTERACTION
CONCLUSION
Date | Title
18

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
LIMITATIONS / SUGGESTIONS FUTURE RESEARCH
(1)
THEORETICAL
19
- Ability to anticipate guilt ?
‘Guilt appears to be the “moral affect” of choice’ (Tangney, 1997: p.9)
(Svensson, Pauwels & Weerman 2017;; Tangney & Dearing 2002; Tangney,
Stuewig et al. 2011)
- Do people always act in the same way they intend to act ? (see also Sheeran 2002)
- !! Concepts closely related to the study of morality :
* CARE/COMPASSION about the welfare of others
* EMPATHY/SYMPATHY
* how do these dispositions/intuitions relate to GUILT and
SHAME and MORAL BELIEFS
- !! Research on different dimensions of the moral sense

20
PRELIMINARY RESULTS
interaction between low ability to anticipate shame * weak moral rules

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
21
Ann.debuck@ugent.be
LIMITATIONS / SUGGESTIONS FUTURE RESEARCH
(2)
- No variation in characteristics of the environment in which choices are
made.
(see Pauwels 2016; Wikström et al. 2012 for a randomized scenario study in violent decision making)
METHODOLOGICAL
!! – other methods in Criminology : online randomized scenario studies,
experiments using virtual reality ? (Van Gelder, 2016))
- a ‘narrow’ operationalization of ‘moral rules’
!! - Measurement of ‘moral intuitions’ = broader concept (see Haidt 2012)

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTION( m o d e l b a s e d o n W i k s t r ö m 2 0 1 1 )
vv
22
MORAL
SENSE
SHOPLIFTING
=
ALTERNATIVE
SHOPLIFTING
= NO
ALTERNATIVE
DELIBERATION
HABIT
SHOPLIFTING
NO
SHOPLIFTING
NO
SHOPLIFTING
SHOPLIFTING
Modification of Wikström ad Treiber (2016): SAT and Prevention

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). "Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives." Developmental
psychology 22(6): 723.
Catalano, R. F. and J. D. Hawkins (1996). A theory of antisocial behavior. Delinquency and crime: Current theories (1996). J. D. E.
Hawkins, Cambridge University Press: p.149.
Catalano, R. F., et al. (2003). "Raising healthy children through enhancing social development in elementary school: Results after
1.5 years." Journal of School Psychology 41(2): 143-164.
De Buck, A. & Pauwels, L. (2017 in press). ‘Determinanten van de intentie tot het plegen van winkeldiefstal bij jongeren. Een
geïntegreerde benadering.’ Handboek Politiediensten. Wolters Kluwer.
De Buck, A., Koeleman, A. & Pauwels, L. (2015). Een onderzoek naar individuele verschillen in regelovertredend gedrag op basis van
ISRD-3. Niet gepubliceerd stagerapport.
Gavray, C. (2015). Technical Report of the ISRD3 Study in Wallonia. Unpublished technical Report for the ISRD-Steering Committee.
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow, Macmillan.
Krebs, D.L. (2011). ‘The Origins of Morality: An evolutionary Account.’ Oxford University Press.
Osgood, D. W., & Anderson, A. L. (2004). Unstructured socializing and rates of delinquency. Criminology, 42(3), 519-550.
Parsons, T. (1949). The structure of social action (Vol. 491). New York: Free Press.
Pauwels, L. (2016). Geweld op school als handelingsalternatief?. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 58(1), 8-27.
Pauwels, L. & Hardyns, W. (2016). ‘Problematic youth group involvement as situated choice: testing an integrated conditions-
controls-exposure model’. Eleven International Publishing. Boom Uitgevers Den Haag.
Pauwels, Pleysier, Vettenburg (2015): Technical Report of the ISRD-3 study in Flanders.
Schulz, S. (2016). ‘Don’t Blow Your Cool’: Provocation, Violent Coping, and the Conditioning Effects of Self-Control. Journal of
Quantitative Criminology, 32(4), 561-587.
.
REFERENCES
ISRD-meeting| June 8-9,2017
23

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
Sheeran, P. (2002). ‘Intention-behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review. European review of
social psychology, 12(1), 1-36.
Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Wei, E., Farrington, D. P., & Wikström, P. O. H. (2002). Risk and
promotive effects in the explanation of persistent serious delinquency in boys. Journal of consulting
and clinical psychology, 70(1), 111.
Svensson, R., Pauwels, L. J., & Weerman, F. M. (2017). The Role of Moral Beliefs, Shame, and Guilt in
Criminal Decision Making. The Oxford Handbook of Offender Decision Making, 6, 228.
Tangney, J. P. (1991). "Moral affect: the good, the bad, and the ugly." Journal of personality and social
psychology 61(4): 598.
Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2003). Shame and guilt. Guilford Press.
Tangney, J. P., Stuewig, J., & Hafez, L. (2011). Shame, guilt, and remorse: Implications for offender
populations. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 22(5), 706-723.
Thornberry, T.P., Krohn, M.D., Liezotte, A.J., & Chard-Wierschem, D. (1993). The role of juvenile gangs in
facilitating delinquent behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 55-87.
Van Gelder Mr, J. L. (2016). CRIME Lab: pleidooi voor een nieuwe en vernieuwende criminologie.
Justitiele Verkenningen, 42(1).
Wikström, P.-O. H., et al. (2011). "Do people comply with the law because they fear getting caught?"
European Journal of Criminology 8(5): 401-420.
Wikström, P. O. H., Oberwittler, D., Treiber, K., & Hardie, B. (2012). Breaking rules: The social and
situational dynamics of young people's urban crime. OUP Oxford Wikström P-O & Treiber K. (2017).
Beyond Risk Factors: An AnalyticalApprocah to Crime Prevention. In (EDS) Teasdale B & Bradley M. S.:
Preventing Crime and Violence, Advances in Prevention Science. Volume 2. New York. Springer verlag.
Wikström P-O (2017) Character, Circumstances, and the Causes of Crime. In (Eds) Liebling A., Maruna S. &
McAra L.: The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. Oxford. Oxford University Press
Date | Title
24

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
THANK YOU !!
( K a h n e m a n 2 0 1 1 , S h e e r a n 2 0 0 2 )
25
Ann.debuck@ugent.be

www.ircp.org
Contact
t. +32 9 264 68 37
f. +32 9 264 84 94
IRCP
Ghent University
Universiteitstraat 4
B – 9000 Ghent

ISRD-meeting | June 8-9, 2017 27
Linear regression effect estimates predicting components of the moral sense
POOR ABILITY TO
ANTICIPATE SHAME
WEAK MORAL RULES LOW ABILITY TO SELF
CONTROL
N= 2727 β β β
CONTROLS
Gender (boys)
Age (>14years)
Ethnic background (Belg)
.181***
.077***
-.092***
.085***
.077***
.098***
.093***
N.S.
N.S.
Accumulation of risk factors in
negative parental context
adverse neighborhood
conditions
N.S.
.227***
.186***
.149***
N.S.
.308***
.182***
.148***
.038*
.252***
.160***
.137***
MODEL FIT
Adjusted R²
25.4 27.2 19.9
*p:<0.05 **p:<0.01 ***p:<0.001

ISRD-meeting | June 8-9,2017 28
CROSS TABS CHOICE TO SHOPLIFTING * LIFE TIME PREVALENCE SHOPLIFTING
life-time prev shopl
Totalno yes
Choice_shoplift ,00 Count 3557 568 4125
% within life-time prev shopl 96,1% 75,3% 92,6%
1,00 Count 145 186 331
Total Count 3702 754 4456
Risk Estimate
Value
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower Upper
Odds Ratio for
Choice_shoplift (,00 /
1,00)
8,033 6,354 10,156
For cohort life-time
prev shopl = no
1,968 1,741 2,225
For cohort life-time
prev shopl = yes
,245 ,217 ,277
N of Valid Cases 4456
Symmetric Measures
Value
Approximate
Significance
Nominal by Nominal Phi ,297 ,000
Cramer's V ,297 ,000
N of Valid Cases 4456

www.ircp.org
+32 9 264 68 37
FOCUS IN SHAME AND GUILT EXPERIENCES
SELF
OTHER
PERSON
SHAME
GUILT
BEHAVIOR
OTHER
PERSON
EFFECT ON OTHER PERSON
EVALUATION OF SELF
WHAT HAVE
I DONE …?
WHAT HAVE I
DONE…..?
Source : adapted version based on Tangney (2014)

t. +32 9 264 68 37
f. +32 9 264 84 94
Lieven.Pauwels@ugent.be

Shoplifting as situated choice irsd3 meeting Amersfoort 2017

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Shoplifting as situated choice irsd3 meeting Amersfoort 2017

Similar to Shoplifting as situated choice irsd3 meeting Amersfoort 2017 (20)

More from Lieven J.R. Pauwels

More from Lieven J.R. Pauwels (17)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Shoplifting as situated choice irsd3 meeting Amersfoort 2017