Situational Action Theory (SAT) explains people’s acts of crime as an outcome of the interaction between their crime propensity (dependent on their personal morals and ability to exercise self-control) and their criminogenic exposure (dependent on the criminogenic circumstances of the settings in which they take part). In this paper, utilising UK (PADS+) and Swedish (MINDS) data for the ages 15-16, we will explore cross-nationally to what extent the SAT framework can help explain within and between gender differences in young people’s crime involvement.

This paper examines gender differences in young people’s crime involvement by testing the core propositions of Situational Action Theory (SAT) in the UK and Sweden. Using data from the Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study (PADS+) and the Malmö Individual and Neighbourhood Development Study (MINDS) we explore cross-national differences in crime propensity and exposure to criminogenic settings and the extent to which these can explain gender differences in crime involvement. Data from two waves of data collection (age 15 and age 16) are used. Findings show gender differences in crime involvement across both countries with lower levels of crime involvement among females. However, the differences in crime involvement between females and males appear to be greater in the UK than in Sweden. These findings are discussed in relation to differences in exposure and propensity.

In this paper we will test one of the key assumptions of Situational Action Theory: that individuals’ (law-relevant) morality is more fundamental to their crime involvement than their ability to exercise self-control. We specifically hypothesize that, for individuals with a strong morality, their capability to exercise self-control plays less of a role in their crime involvement than it does for individuals with a weak morality, whose capability to exercise self-control may substantially influence their engagement in crime. To test this hypothesis we use data from the Peterborough Youth Study (PYS), a cross-sectional survey of 1957 adolescents aged 14—15 from the UK city of Peterborough. The findings support the main hypothesis: young people with a strong (law-relevant) morality do not engage in crime, regardless of their ability to exercise self-control. However, among those with a weaker (law-relevant) morality, their ability to exercise self-control is an important factor in their crime involvement.

Most cross-national studies of crime and violence explore variation in levels of crime without empirically addressing the causes of these variations. Drawing upon the theoretical framework of the situational action theory of crime causation (e.g. Wikström 2006), in this study we aim to explore and test whether the difference in levels of violence among young people in England and Sweden can be explained (fully or partly) by country differences in young people's crime propensities and lifestyles and their interaction. To achieve this we use data from the English Peterborough Youth Study and the Swedish Eskilstuna Youth Study. The findings show that in both cities (1) young people's self-reported violent behaviour is predicted by crime propensity and lifestyle, and their interaction, and (2) a substantial proportion (40 percent) of the difference in the level of violence vanishes when taking into account national differences in young people's crime propensity and lifestyles. We conclude that the findings support the notion that one major cause of the difference in the level of violence among young people in England and Sweden is that more young people in England have a higher crime propensity and are living criminogenic lifestyles than in Sweden.

This volume brings together research theories with the practical issues of carrying out research, to provide a clear and fascinating guide to contemporary criminological research projects. The experience of leading experts is combined with first-hand accounts from new scholars, to create an invaluable source of information.

In this paper we present an alternative conception of self-control and its role in crime causation to the one advanced by Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) in their influential General Theory of Crime. Our conception is based on the theoretical framework outlined in the situational action theory of crime causation (e.g. Wikström 2006a). We propose that self-control is best analysed as a situational concept (a factor in the process of choice) rather than as an individual trait. We suggest that the core individual trait influencing an individual's ability to exercise self-control is executive capability. We maintain that there are also important environmental influences on an individual's ability to exercise self-control. We submit that the ability to exercise self-control is a relevant factor in crime causation only in situations where an individual considers (deliberates) whether or not to engage in an act of crime. We argue that for most people (in most circumstances) whether or not they engage in acts of crime is not a question of their ability to exercise self-control but rather a question of their morality. In short, this paper aims to clarify the concepts of ‘executive capability’, ‘self-control’ and ‘crime’, and to specify their relationships and role in the explanation of crime.