An Empirical Test of Tittle's Control Balance Theory*

An Empirical Test of Tittle's Control Balance Theory*

AN EMPIRICAL TEST OF TITTLE’S CONTROL BALANCE THEORY* ALEX R. PIQUERO Temple University National Consortium on Violence Research MATTHEW HICKMAN Temple University Classic statements of control theory propose that individuals who are controlled or bonded will be more likely to be deterred from deviance, while those who are not controlled or bonded will be more likely to turn to deviance. In a recent restatement of control theory, Tittle (1995) offers an alternative viewpoint. Though he agrees that a lack of control (a control deficit) can lead to repressive forms of deviance (predation, defiance, and submission), Tittle also asserts that overcontrol (a control surplus) may lead to autonomous types of deviance (exploitation, plun- der, and decadence). Terming it control balance theory, Tittle argues that the amount of control to which one is subject relative to the amount of control one can exercise (i.e., the control ratio) affects not only the probability that one will engage in a deviant act, but also the specific form or type of deviance. In this article, we focus on one of the key hypotheses of control balance theory: an individual’s control bal- ance ratio predicts deviant behavior. We examine this hypothesis using two vignettes designed to investigate the repressive acts of predation and defiance. Segmented, nonlinear regression results yield mixed evi- dence in that both control surpluses and control deficits significantly predict predation and defiance. The theoretical implications of our results for control balance theory are discussed. In Control Balance, Tittle (1995) presented a general theory that was designed to account for all forms of deviance. Largely built as an inte- grated theory of crime that borrows concepts from multiple theories, con- trol balance, in essence, holds that the amount of control to which one is subject relative to the amount of control one can exercise determines the probability of deviance occurring as well as the type of deviance likely to occur (Tittle, 1995:135). Guided by the position that control is a central *We would like to thank Bob Bursik, Charles Tittle, and four anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. This article benefited significantly from their suggestions. Please address all correspondence to: Alex Piquero, Temple University, Department of Criminal Justice, Gladfelter Hall (5th Floor), Philadelphia, PA 19122. E-mail: [email protected]. CRIMINOLOGY VOLUME37 NUMBER2 1999 319 320 PIQUERO AND HICKMAN concept in conformity (e.g., Gibbs, 1989, 1994; Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990; Hirschi, 1969; Nye, 1958; Reckless, 1961; Reiss, 1951; Sampson and Laub, 1993), Tittle (p.183) asserts that when an individual’s control ratio is balanced (i.e., the amount of control to which one is subject is equal to the amount of control one can exercise), conformity will result. Control imbalances, on the other hand, are related to nonconforming behavior and can take one of two forms. A control deficit emerges when the numerator of the control balance ratio (the amount of control to which one is subject) exceeds the denominator of the control balance ratio (the amount of con- trol one can exercise). A control surplus emerges when the numerator of the control balance ratio is less than the denominator of the control bal- ance ratio. According to Tittle (p.143), being controlled is a continuous variable conveying the extent to which the expression of one’s desires and/or impulses is potentially limited by other people’s abilities (whether actually exercised or not) to help, regulate, hinder, and/or punish, or by the physi- cal and social arrangements of the world. On this deficit side of the con- trol balance ratio, various forms of repressive deviance help individuals “escape” control deficits in an effort to return the control balance ratio to equilibrium, if only temporarily. The manner in which these individuals compensate for their control deficit is to turn to deviant acts (e.g., preda- tion, defiance, or submission) that attempt to restore control balance. Similarly, individuals who exercise control over others tend to engage in deviance in order to “extend” their control. Since individuals with control surpluses are always seeking more control, their deviant actions result in further disequilibrium, if only temporarily. For Tittle, exercising control is a continuous variable reflecting the degree to which one can limit other people’s realization of their goals or can escape limitations on one’s own behavioral motivations that stem from the actions of others or from the physical and social arrangement of the world. The way these individuals compensate for their control surplus is to turn to deviant actions involving exploitation, plunder, and decadence. On this surplus side of the control balance ratio, autonomous deviance helps individuals extend control surpluses. While control balance adopts the premise of extant control theories that constraint on ability to act is a key variable in explaining crime and/or deviance (Tittle, 1995:142), an interesting distinction between control bal- ance theory and its earlier control predecessors is the notion that both low control and high control may lead to crime and deviance in certain situa- tions (see also Nye, 1958). This prediction stands in sharp contrast to pre- vious accounts of control theory (Hirschi, 1969), which assert that only low control leads to crime and deviance. Where Tittle’s theory diverges from these other control theories is in the possibility that higher control does, in TImLE’S CONTROL BALANCE THEORY 321 some cases, lead to crime and deviance.1 For heuristic purposes, we present a graphical presentation of the con- trol balance ratio in Figure 1. By hypothesizing that both low and high amounts of control can lead to deviance, the control balance curve poses a direct challenge to the linearity prevalent in many criminological theories, a challenge that Tittle (1997:lOl) expressly set out to accomplish.2 Figure 1 The Continuum of Control Balance I Control Control Control Deficit Balance Surplus THE NOTION OF DEVIANCE IN CONTROL BALANCE Tittle (1995:124) defines deviance as “any behavior that the majority of a given group regards as unacceptable or that typically evokes a collective response of a negative type.” He further elaborates on six different types of deviance, which shift in direction to the right and left of conformity (pp. 137-141,189). On the surplus side of the continuum, to the right of con- formity, there are three autonomous forms of deviance: exploitation, plun- der, and decadence. On the deficit side of the continuum, to the left of 1. Another important distinction in control balance is that motivation is not con- stant as it is in other conceptions of social control (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990; Hir- schi, 1969). 2. In the original presentation of his theory, Tittle (1995) noted specific predic- tions about the type of deviant act that would occur as one moved in either direction from a balance of control. In response to Braithwaite’s (1997) critique, Tittle (1997) appears to step back a bit from this claim. Here, we are not concerned with the speci- ficity of different types of deviant acts; rather, we provide a more general empirical test. 322 PIQUERO AND HICKMAN conformity, there are three repressive types of deviance: predation, defi- ance, and submission. The first repressive form of deviance is predation. This type of act involves direct physical violence and includes theft, sexual assault, rob- bery, property crime, sexual harassment, and parental use of guilt to elicit child attention. The second form of repression is defiance, or challenges to conventional norms. These acts violate normative expectations but are undertaken to avoid inflicting much harm upon the desired object of hos- tility. Examples of defiant acts include vandalism, violating curfew, unconventional sexual behavior, and sullenness by a marital partner. The final type of repressive deviance is submission. This form of deviance con- sists of “passive, unthinking, slavish obedience to the expectations, com- mands, or anticipated desires of others” (Tittle, 1995139). Examples of submissive acts include helping repress others to please power holders and allowing oneself to be physically abused, humiliated, or sexually degraded. Three autonomous types of deviance are also explained by the theory. The first type takes the form of exploitation. Tittle defines exploitation as indirect predation, such as using others to do your dirty work and contract killings. The second autonomous act in control balance is plunder. Acts that are plunderous are committed by individuals or organizations who “pursue their own ends with little awareness or regard for much else” (Tit- tle, 1995:139). Examples of plunderous acts include pollution by oil com- panies and attempted genocide directed against racial or ethnic groups by powerful segments of a population. The third and final autonomous type of deviance concerns decadence. Decadent acts are irrational acts, which are completed according to Tittle (p.139), “only by whim of the moment.” Examples of decadent acts include group sex with children and humiliating people for entertainment.3 By itself, a control imbalance only presents a potential for deviance to occur. Much like routine activity models of offending (Cohen and Felson, 1979), Tittle contends that actual deviance is a product of predispositional and situational motivation, constraint, and opportunity. The predisposi- tion toward deviant motivation is a product of one’s innate bodily and psychic needs, an “almost universal” (Tittle, 1995:145) desire for auton- omy, and most important, the individual’s control ratio (p.177). Actual deviant motivation emerges when an individual becomes aware of the con- trol imbalance and the possibility that a deviant act will alter hidher con- trol ratio in a favorable way (i.e., escape a control deficit or extend a control surplus). This awareness results from situational provocations of 3.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    24 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us