THEORY COMPREHENSIVE EXAM: READING LIST AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER READING June 2016 The comprehensive examination builds on the ideas covered and readings assigned in the two required Theory courses in our Department’s Ph.D. program curriculum. Importantly, the criminology comprehensive exam is not merely a test of what students may have learned in these two courses. Rather, the comprehensive examination includes an understanding of the readings covered in these courses in addition to a test of the integration of knowledge drawn from other graduate courses taken in our Department and readings conducted outside of course work. Students are expected to read, understand, and include in their responses tests of theories that have been undertaken as well as classic and contemporary readings on the theories themselves (i.e., their assumptions, modifications, extensions, etc.). These responses should be informed by literature drawn from books and academic journals. Beyond the reading materials from the two required Theory courses, students must also examine the main journals in the field over the past five years to find and then read articles that assess the theories of crime. Although not exhaustive, these journals are: Criminology, Justice Quarterly, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, American Journal of Sociology, American Sociological Review, and Social Forces. Other journals that should be examined are: Crime and Delinquency, Journal of Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice & Behavior; Deviant Behavior, and Theoretical Criminology. When studying, students should be able to integrate theory and research. Students are expected to know the “empirical status” of each theory; that is, to what extent do existing research studies support each theory? More specific, it is important that students know the theories accurately (e.g., what the theory argues; how theorists within a tradition differ from one another; how a theory has developed and changed over time; what are the strengths and weaknesses of each theory, possible linkages to policy, issues surrounding the theory, etc.). In addition, students should be knowledgeable of the major points or conclusions that can be drawn from existing studies. Further, in conveying an answer, an effort must be made to discuss research studies in detail (e.g., the sample and measures used, specific findings, the reason why the study illuminates an important aspect about the theory). While textbooks can aid in providing a base understanding of theory, do not rely or heavily cite textbooks on theory as sources, rather cite the original work or research. Below is a listing of readings covered in Theory I and Theory II, grouped by area and by theoretical perspective. Again, the list is a guide and is not exhaustive; as detailed above, you are expected to supplement the readings by incorporating reading and research from outside the two classes. You should have already read the material listed below from taking the two theory courses. In preparing for the comprehensive examination students should re-read these materials in order to obtain a better grasp of each theory, issues associated with the theory, etc. and then elaborate by incorporating research not covered in the class, but can be found in material from other courses and material from reviews of the journals listed above in addition to any others that have recent and relevant theory tests.. Reading Reference List Books Akers, R. (2009) Social Learning and Social Structure: A General Theory of Crime & Deviance. Transaction Publishers. Gottfredson, M. and T. Hirsch. (1990) A General Theory of Crime. Stanford. Hirschi, T. (2004). Causes of Delinquency. Transaction Press. Kornhauser, R. (1978). Social Sources of Delinquency. University of Chicago Press. Kubrin, C., T. Stucky, and M. Krohn (2009). Researching Theories of Crime and Deviance. Oxford University Press. Laub, J. and R. Sampson (2004) Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives. Harvard University Press. Lynch, M. and R. Michalowski (2006) The New Primer in Radical Criminology: Critical Perspectives of Crime, Power and Identity. 4th (ed.) Criminal Justice Press. Messner, S., and R. Rosenfeld (2012). Crime and the American Dream. Cengage Learning. Mosher, C., T. Miethe, and T. Hart. (2011). The Mismeasure of Crime. Sage Publications. Sampson, R.J., and Laub, J.H. (1993) Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points Through Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vold, G., T. Bernard, and J. Snipes. Theoretical Criminology. Oxford Press. Any edition of Vold, Vold & Bernard or Bernard, Snipes & Gerould. Elements of Theory/ Policy Making: How Relevant is Criminology? Bernard, T. (1990) “Twenty Years of Testing Theories: What Have We Learned and Why?” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 27(4): 325-347. Gibbs, J. (1985) “The Methodology of Theory Construction in Criminology” in R. Meier (ed.) Theoretical Methods in Criminology. Sage. Gibbs, J. (1987). “The State of Criminological Theory”. Criminology, 25(4): 821. Hirschi, T. and H.C. Selvin (1967) Delinquency Research. NY: Free Press. (Reissued in 1996 – Transaction Publishing. Leavitt, G. (1999). “Criminological Theory as an Art Form: Implications for Criminal Justice Policy”. Crime & Delinquency, 45: 389. Weisburd, D. and A. Piquero (2008). “How Well Do Criminologists Explain Crime? Statistical Modeling in Published Studies”. Crime and Justice, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 453-502 Measurement of Crime Farnworth, M., T. Thornberry, M. Krohn, and A. Lizotte (1994). “Measurement in the Study of Class and Delinquency”. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32-61. Hindelang, M.J., T. Hirschi, and J.G. Weis. 1981. Measuring Delinquency. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. ———. 1979. “Correlates of delinquency: The illusion of discrepancy between self-report and official measures”. American Sociological Review 44:995–1014 Kubrin, C. and G. Ousey (2009). “Exploring the Connection between Immigration and Violent Crime in US Cities, 1980-2000”. Social Problems, 56(3): 447-473. Levitt, S. (2004) “Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Decline and Six that Do Not” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(1): 163–190. Mosher, C., T. Miethe, and T. Hart. (2011). The Mismeasure of Crime. Sage Publications. Peeples, F. and R. Loeber (1994). “Do Individual Factors and Neighborhood Context Explain Ethnic Differences in Juvenile Delinquency”. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 10(2): 141. Thornberry, T. and M. Krohn (2000). “The Self-Report for Measuring Delinquency and Crime”. Criminal Justice, 4 (1): 33-83. Tittle, C. and R. Meier (1990). “Specifying the SES/Delinquency Relationship”. Criminology, 28: 271- 299. Uggen, C. and S. McElrath (2013) “Six Social Sources of the U.S. Crime Drop. White Paper. Classical and Positive Traditions in Criminology Gottfredson, M. and T.Hirschi (1987). “The Positivist Tradition”. In M. Gottfredson and T. Hirschi (Eds.), Positive Criminology (pp. 9-22). Sage. Vold, G., T. Bernard, and J. Snipes (1998). “Classical Criminology” Ch 2. 14,in Theoretical Criminology. Oxford Press. Any edition of Vold, Vold & Bernard or Bernard, Snipes & Gerould. Taylor,I., P. Walton, and J. Young (1973). “Classical Criminology and the Positivist Revolution”. In Taylor, Walton, & Young (Eds.), The New Criminology for a Social Theory of Deviance. Ch. 1, 1. Harper Press. Rational Choice, Deterrence, Linkage to Policy Nagin, N. (2013). “Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century”. Crime and Justice, 42(1), 199-263. Piliavin, I., R. Gartner, C. Thorton, and R. Matsueda (1986). “Crime, Deterrence, and Rational Choice”. American Sociological Review, 51: 101. Piquero, A. and G. Progarsky (2002). “Beyond Stafford and Warr’s Reconceptualization of Deterrence: Personal and Vicarious Experiences, Impulsivity, and Offending Behavior”. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 39(2): 153-186. Sherman, L.(1993) “Defiance, Deterrence, and Irrelevance: A Theory of the Criminal Sanction.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30 (December):445-473. Stafford, M. and M. Warr. (1993). “A Reconceptualization of General and Specific Deterrence”. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30:123-35. Routine Activities/Life Style Theory Cohen, L. and M. Felson (1979). “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach”. American Sociological Review, 44: 588-608. Garofalo, J. (1987). “Reassessing the Lifestyle Model of Criminal Victimization”. In M. Gottfredson and T. Hirschi (Eds.), Positive Criminology (pp. 9-22). Sage. Mustaine, E. and R.Tweksbury (1998) “Predicting Risks of Larceny Theft Victimization: A Routine Activity Analysis Using Refined Lifestyle Measures” Criminology, 36 (4): 829. Biological/Bio-Social Perspectives Beaver, K.M. (2009). Biosocial criminology: A primer. Foreword & chapter 1 Barnes, J.C., K. Beaver, and B. Boutwell (2011). “Examining the Genetic Underpinnings to Moffitt’s Developmental Taxonomy: A Behavioral Genetic Analysis”. Criminology, 49(4): 923-954. Barnes, J.C., J. Wright, B. Boutwell, J. Schwartz, E. Connolly, J. Nedelec, and K. Beaver (2014). “Demonstrating the Validity of Twin Research in Criminology”. Criminology, 00(0): 1-39. Burt, C. and R. Simmons (2014). “Pulling Back the Curtain on Heritability Studies: Biosocial Criminology in the Postgenomic Era”. Criminology, 52(2): 223. Burt, C. and R. Simmons (2015). “Heritability Studies in the Postgenomic Era: The Fatal Flaw is Conceptual” Criminology, 53(1): 103-112. Mears,