The Generality of Deviance advances the idea that all forms of deviant, criminal, reckless, and sinful behavior have one thing in common: the tendency to pursue immediate benefits without concern for long-term costs. The editors argue, and the contributors confirm, that such disparate behaviors as smoking, auto accidents, burglary, and rape are similar in that they all involve disregard for their inevitable consequences: poor health, injury, loss of freedom, shame, or disrepute. The chapters here show how various forms of deviance relate to one another and can be explained by a common theory involving self-management.The editors illustrate how the idea of self-control challenges the psychological concept of aggression and provides a more useful alternative for understanding deviant behavior. They also apply the theory to the family, showing how this institution is central to crime control. Other contributors bring fresh perspectives to a variety of topics: the uncanny similarities between victims of car accidents and perpetrators of crime; the connection between drugs and crime; feminist explanations of rape; gender differences in crime rates; drunk drivers among high school students; and the progression of a delinquent's life from adolescence to adulthood.In short, this book makes a convincing case that it is a waste of intellectual effort and public funds to treat different forms of crime and deviant behavior as distinct problems. Studied collectively, various crimes may be seen to have the same causes and, hence, one cure. The Generality of Deviance will be a significant and provocative addition to the libraries of criminolegists, psychologists, and sociologists, those attempting to solve as well as to identify problems.

The study of decisions in the criminal justice process provides a useful focus for the examination of many fundamental aspects of criminal jus tice. These decisions are not always highly visible. They are made, or dinarily, within wide areas of discretion. The aims of the decisions are not always clear, and, indeed, the principal objectives of these decisions are often the subject of much debate. Usually they are not guided by explicit decision policies. Often the participants are unable to verbalize the basis for the selection of decision alternatives. Adequate information for the decisions is usually unavailable. Rarely can the decisions be demonstrated to be rational. By a rationaldecision we mean "that decision among those possible for the decisionmaker which, in the light of the information available, maximizes the probability of the achievement of the purpose of the decisionmaker in that specific and particular case" (Wilkins, 1974a: 70; also 1969). This definition, which stems from statistical decision theory, points to three fundamental characteristics of decisions. First, it is as sumed that a choice of possible decisions (or, more precisely, of possible alternatives) is available. If only one choice is possible, there is no de cision problem, and the question of rationality does not arise. Usually, of course, there will be a choice, even if the alternative is to decide not to decide-a choice that, of course, often has profound consequences."

In this enlightening study, the authors implement a unique research approach to offer a greater understanding of policy reform of pretrial release and detention practices in the criminal courts in Boston, Miami, and Phoenix.

The study of decisions in the criminal justice process provides a useful focus for the examination of many fundamental aspects of criminal jus tice. These decisions are not always highly visible. They are made, or dinarily, within wide areas of discretion. The aims of the decisions are not always clear, and, indeed, the principal objectives of these decisions are often the subject of much debate. Usually they are not guided by explicit decision policies. Often the participants are unable to verbalize the basis for the selection of decision alternatives. Adequate information for the decisions is usually unavailable. Rarely can the decisions be demonstrated to be rational. By a rationaldecision we mean "that decision among those possible for the decisionmaker which, in the light of the information available, maximizes the probability of the achievement of the purpose of the decisionmaker in that specific and particular case" (Wilkins, 1974a: 70; also 1969). This definition, which stems from statistical decision theory, points to three fundamental characteristics of decisions. First, it is as sumed that a choice of possible decisions (or, more precisely, of possible alternatives) is available. If only one choice is possible, there is no de cision problem, and the question of rationality does not arise. Usually, of course, there will be a choice, even if the alternative is to decide not to decide-a choice that, of course, often has profound consequences."

By articulating a general theory of crime and related behavior, the authors present a new and comprehensive statement of what the criminological enterprise should be about. They argue that prevalent academic criminology--whether sociological, psychological, biological, or economic--has been unable to provide believable explanations of criminal behavior.
The long-discarded classical tradition in criminology was based on choice and free will, and saw crime as the natural consequence of unrestrained human tendencies to seek pleasure and to avoid pain. It concerned itself with the nature of crime and paid little attention to the criminal. The scientific, or disciplinary, tradition is based on causation and determinism, and has dominated twentieth-century criminology. It concerns itself with the nature of the criminal and pays little attention to the crime itself. Though the two traditions are considered incompatible, this book brings classical and modern criminology together by requiring that their conceptions be consistent with each other and with the results of research.
The authors explore the essential nature of crime, finding that scientific and popular conceptions of crime are misleading, and they assess the truth of disciplinary claims about crime, concluding that such claims are contrary to the nature of crime and, interestingly enough, to the data produced by the disciplines themselves. They then put forward their own theory of crime, which asserts that the essential element of criminality is the absence of self-control. Persons with high self-control consider the long-term consequences of their behavior; those with low self-control do not. Such control is learned, usually early in life, and once learned, is highly resistant to change.
In the remainder of the book, the authors apply their theory to the persistent problems of criminology. Why are men, adolescents, and minorities more likely than their counterparts to commit criminal acts? What is the role of the school in the causation of delinquincy? To what extent could crime be reduced by providing meaningful work? Why do some societies have much lower crime rates than others? Does white-collar crime require its own theory? Is there such a thing as organized crime? In all cases, the theory forces fundamental reconsideration of the conventional wisdom of academians and crimina justic practitioners. The authors conclude by exploring the implications of the theory for the future study and control of crime.

By articulating a general theory of crime and related behavior, the authors present a new and comprehensive statement of what the criminological enterprise should be about. They argue that prevalent academic criminology--whether sociological, psychological, biological, or economic--has been unable to provide believable explanations of criminal behavior.
The long-discarded classical tradition in criminology was based on choice and free will, and saw crime as the natural consequence of unrestrained human tendencies to seek pleasure and to avoid pain. It concerned itself with the nature of crime and paid little attention to the criminal. The scientific, or disciplinary, tradition is based on causation and determinism, and has dominated twentieth-century criminology. It concerns itself with the nature of the criminal and pays little attention to the crime itself. Though the two traditions are considered incompatible, this book brings classical and modern criminology together by requiring that their conceptions be consistent with each other and with the results of research.
The authors explore the essential nature of crime, finding that scientific and popular conceptions of crime are misleading, and they assess the truth of disciplinary claims about crime, concluding that such claims are contrary to the nature of crime and, interestingly enough, to the data produced by the disciplines themselves. They then put forward their own theory of crime, which asserts that the essential element of criminality is the absence of self-control. Persons with high self-control consider the long-term consequences of their behavior; those with low self-control do not. Such control is learned, usually early in life, and once learned, is highly resistant to change.
In the remainder of the book, the authors apply their theory to the persistent problems of criminology. Why are men, adolescents, and minorities more likely than their counterparts to commit criminal acts? What is the role of the school in the causation of delinquincy? To what extent could crime be reduced by providing meaningful work? Why do some societies have much lower crime rates than others? Does white-collar crime require its own theory? Is there such a thing as organized crime? In all cases, the theory forces fundamental reconsideration of the conventional wisdom of academians and crimina justic practitioners. The authors conclude by exploring the implications of the theory for the future study and control of crime.

The Generality of Deviance advances the idea that all forms of deviant, criminal, reckless, and sinful behavior have one thing in common: the tendency to pursue immediate benefits without concern for long-term costs. The editors argue, and the contributors confirm, that such disparate behaviors as smoking, auto accidents, burglary, and rape are similar in that they all involve disregard for their inevitable consequences: poor health, injury, loss of freedom, shame, or disrepute. The chapters here show how various forms of deviance relate to one another and can be explained by a common theory involving self-management.

The editors illustrate how the idea of self-control challenges the psychological concept of aggression and provides a more useful alternative for understanding deviant behavior. They also apply the theory to the family, showing how this institution is central to crime control. Other contributors bring fresh perspectives to a variety of topics: the uncanny similarities between victims of car accidents and perpetrators of crime; the connection between drugs and crime; feminist explanations of rape; gender differences in crime rates; drunk drivers among high school students; and the progression of a delinquent's life from adolescence to adulthood.

In short, this book makes a convincing case that it is a waste of intellectual effort and public funds to treat different forms of crime and deviant behavior as distinct problems. Studied collectively, various crimes may be seen to have the same causes and, hence, one cure. "The Generality of Deviance "will be a significant and provocative addition to the libraries of criminolegists, psychologists, and sociologists, those attempting to solve as well as to identify problems.