Toward Integrated Processual Theories of Crime: Assessing the Developmental Effects of Executive Function, Self-Control, and Decision-Making on Offending

• Author: Sultan Altikriti
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854820942280
• Published date: 01 February 2021
• Date: 01 February 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2021, Vol. 48, No. 2, February 2021, 215 –233.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820942280

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

215

TOWARD INTEGRATED PROCESSUAL

THEORIES OF CRIME

Assessing the Developmental Effects of Executive

Function, Self-Control, and Decision-Making on

Offending

SULTAN ALTIKRITI

University of Cincinnati

Research on executive function indicates that self-control stems partially from normative brain development. Extant research

has also provided evidence of an association between self-control and offender decision-making. Yet, to date, there has been

no attempt to account for these associations within one model. The current study used structural equation modeling to esti-

mate the links between executive function, self-control, moral disengagement, and perceptions of risk and reward in a sample

of male offenders (n = 1,170) from the Pathways to Desistance data. The results indicated that executive function affects

self-control, which subsequently influences perceptions of offending and offending behavior, supporting the integration of

these concepts under one processual model. Moreover, moral disengagement, certainty of punishment, and rewards of offend-

ing mediated the majority of the effects of self-control on offending. The results from the current study advance theories in

the life-course/developmental perspective and inform policy toward a developmentally oriented juvenile justice system.

Keywords: theory; self-control; deterrence; biosocial; longitudinal; quantitative methods

The concepts of executive function, self-control, moral disengagement, and perceptions

of risk and reward have all been established as important predictors of offending behav-

ior. Prior research has illustrated a robust correspondence between executive function and

self-control (Fino et al., 2014). Subsequently, self-control appears to influence moral disen-

gagement (Vitell et al., 2009) and perceptions of risk and reward (Piquero & Tibbetts, 1996).

Importantly, these concepts have also been found to be interconnected. The developmental

processes linking these three concepts with offending, however, have yet to be assessed.

Despite the expanding research on concepts of individual differences and situational

AUTHOR’S NOTE: I would like to thank John Wooldredge, J. C. Barnes, Joseph Nedelec, and Christopher

Sullivan for their guidance and feedback with this article. I would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers

for their helpful comments and suggestions. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to

Sultan Altikriti, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, P.O. Box 210389, Cincinnati, OH 45221-

0389; e-mail: altikrsn@ucmail.uc.edu

942280CJBXXX10.1177/0093854820942280Criminal Justice and BehaviorAltikriti / Short Title

research-article2020

216 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

determinants of offending, there remains a need for a inclusive assessment of the inter-

twined relationships among the concepts of executive function, self-control, moral disen-

gagement, and perceptions of risk and reward.

Complex developmental outcomes are not a product of a single factor, but rather multiple

factors, events, and characteristics acting in concert (Loeber & Farrington, 2000). The chal-

lenge of integrating multiple theories in predicting offending is the contradicting founda-

tions on which theories are often built. Theories vary regarding views on human nature,

causes of crime, and other fundamental assumptions, making their integration a challenging

task (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). With some qualification, however, developmental theo-

ries—focusing on change over time—and the rational choice/deterrence perspective—

focusing on situational decisions—can be seen as isomorphic in their view on the underlying

sources of crime (Hirschi, 1986). Integrating such theories would enable researchers to

predict offending outcomes more accurately and comprehensively (Grasmick et al., 1993).

Through a series of propositions, Pratt (2016) highlighted the compatibility of several over-

lapping concepts from the developmental and rational choice perspectives. The main theme

in Pratt’s proposal was the theoretical integration of these perspectives centered around a

dynamic self-control theory of crime. This framework merged two typically competing

perspectives of offending patterns: individual propensity and situational factors. Such inte-

gration calls for an assessment of the interplay between distal personality traits and situa-

tional factors in predicting offending.

In their assessment of the effects of individual differences and situational factors, Nagin

and Paternoster (1993) were among the first to evaluate elements of both developmental

criminology and rational choice in predicting offending. Nagin and Paternoster (1993)

tested the situational factors of perceived utility, shame, and sanction perceptions, along

with the characteristic of self-control to predict intentions to commit theft, sexual assault,

and drunk driving. Their results suggested that self-control impacts offending perceptions

and intentions to offend, lending support to both individual differences and situational per-

spectives of offending. Piquero and Tibbetts (1996) extended these findings by specifying

several pathways from self-control, through perceived risk and reward, to the outcomes,

intentions to offend. These studies, however, did not include a measure of executive func-

tion, which is an important part of the developmental process (Nigg, 2017). Furthermore,

the use of college samples in both studies potentially limits the generalizability of the find-

ings, especially considering that college students may not accurately represent the thought

processes of perceptions of risk and reward typical of an offending sample. Finally, these

studies used cross-sectional designs and hypothetical offending outcomes, which distorted

the line between the predictors (i.e., perceptions of consequences) and the outcomes (i.e.,

intentions to offend).

Against this backdrop, the current study used a longitudinal design to assess the proces-

sual relationships between executive function, self-control, moral disengagement, and per-

ceptions of risk and reward with actualized offending outcomes. Integrating these theories

in a longitudinal analysis allows for a broader assessment of the effects of individual differ-

ences (i.e., executive function and self-control) and situational influences (i.e., moral disen-

gagement and perceptions of risk and reward) in predicting offending. Moreover, combining

these distinct concepts provides more avenues for correctional treatment and intervention.

The following sections provide an overview of the literature on the relationships between