Do as I Say, Not as I Do? Examining Possible Individual-Level Moderators in the Relationship Between Criminal Attitudes and Offending

• Published date: 01 May 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/00938548211038995
• Date: 01 May 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2022, Vol. 49, No. 5, May 2022, 761 –777.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211038995

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

761

DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO?

Examining Possible Individual-Level Moderators in

the Relationship Between Criminal Attitudes and

Offending

CASHEN M. BOCCIO

The University of Texas at San Antonio

Several criminological theories and numerous research studies suggest that criminal attitudes are related to delinquency and

criminal behavior. In contrast, there is also an emerging body of literature that suggests that the behavior of many individuals

is not consistent with their attitudes. This study addresses this contradiction in the literature by examining two possible

individual-level moderators (i.e., self-control and depressive symptoms) that may explain why some adolescents may be

involved in delinquent behavior when they report having attitudes disapproving of delinquency. The findings reveal that

attitudes disapproving of delinquency are negatively associated with delinquent involvement; however, many respondents

with attitudes of disapproving of delinquency still engaged in delinquent behavior. In addition, the findings suggest that self-

control and depressive symptoms may moderate the association between attitudes disapproving of delinquency and delin-

quent involvement.

Keywords: attitudes; delinquency; self-control; substance use; depression

INTRODUCTION

Criminological theory and research links crime-related attitudes to engagement in crimi-

nal and delinquent behavior. The two most prominent theories linking attitudes to criminal

behavior are differential association theory (Sutherland, 1947) and social learning theory

(Akers, 1985). Differential association theory, for example, suggests that individuals will

commit crime when they have an excess of pro-crime attitudes in comparison with anti-

crime attitudes (Sutherland, 1947). Stated another way, individuals who view crime

favorably will be more likely to offend, whereas those who have a negative view of crime

will abstain from criminal behavior. Social learning theory also holds to a similar line of

thinking, where pro-crime attitudes are theorized to be associated with engagement in delin-

quent and criminal behavior (Akers, 1985). Research conducted in this area generally

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Cashen M. Boccio, Department of Criminology

& Criminal Justice, The University of Texas at San Antonio, 501 W. Cesar Chavez Blvd., San Antonio, TX

78249-1644; e-mail: cashen.boccio@utsa.edu

1038995CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211038995Criminal Justice and BehaviorBoccio / Criminal Attitudes and Offending

research-article2022

762 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

indicates that crime-related attitudes are associated with criminal behavior (Andrews &

Bonta, 2006; Matsueda, 1982, 1988; Pratt & Cullen, 2000; Pratt et al., 2010). For instance,

previous research indicates that pro-crime attitudes are associated with involvement in an

array of criminal behaviors such as illegal drug use, property crime, and violence (Alarid

et al., 2000).

Despite theory and research studies suggesting that individuals with pro-crime attitudes

are likely to commit more crime than those without pro-crime attitudes, there is a growing

body of literature that suggests many individuals often behave in ways inconsistent with

their attitudes (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977; Glasman & Albarrican, 2006; Megens & Weerman,

2010). More succinctly, extant research suggests that many individuals with anti-crime atti-

tudes (e.g., attitudes disapproving of crime) still offend (Megens & Weerman, 2010). These

findings raise questions concerning why individuals with negative views of crime still

offend? Some research suggests that this inconsistency may be due to the influence of situ-

ational factors not captured in measures of general attitudes toward crime/behavior (Ajzen,

1989; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977). Another possible explanation is that although anti-crime

attitudes are generally associated with lower levels of criminal involvement, the association

between anti-crime attitudes and behavior may be conditioned by individual-level factors

(Ajzen, 1987; Higgins & Makin, 2004; Wikstrӧm & Svensson, 2010). For instance, it is

possible that for many individuals, having anti-crime attitudes may be seen as a protective

factor for engagement in crime, whereas for some individuals, who may be less concerned

with long-term consequences and/or might be more prone to frustration, the protective

effects of anti-crime attitudes on criminal behavior may be somewhat eroded. In essence, it

is possible that individuals with certain characteristics (i.e., low self-control) may be better

able to form rationalizations and excuses for delinquent behavior that allows them to behave

in ways that deviate from their stated attitudes. In other words, individuals with certain

characteristics may be able to more easily “drift” from their purported attitudes concerning

delinquency (Matza, 1964; Sykes & Matza, 1957). In line with this thinking, there is some

evidence to suggest that the influence of crime-related attitudes may be moderated by indi-

vidual traits such as low self-control (Higgins & Makin, 2004). The aim of the current study

is to test whether the association between crime-related attitudes and criminal offending is

conditioned by individual-level factors such as self-control and depressive symptoms.

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN CRIMINAL ATTITUDES AND OFFENDING

Previous research links pro-crime attitudes with criminal and delinquent behavior (Alarid

et al., 2000; Andrews & Bonta, 2006; Pratt et al., 2010). The relevance of crime-related

attitudes for the field of criminology is clearly outlined in Sutherland’s (1947) differential

association theory. Briefly, this theory suggests that individuals learn definitions and atti-

tudes about behavior (including criminal behavior) from intimate personal contacts. These

definitions are thought to include attitudes, rationalizations, justifications, motives, drives,

and so on concerning behavior. Persons who come to hold an excess of attitudes in favor of

violating the law, as opposed to attitudes in favor of conforming to the law, are theorized to

be more likely to be involved in criminal behavior (Sutherland, 1947). In short, according

to this theory, those who view crime favorably are more likely to offend than those who

have a negative view of crime.

The proposed relationship between attitudes and criminal behavior is also prevalent in

Akers’s social learning theory (Akers, 1985). Akers expanded differential association theory