Certainty of Punishment and Criminal Thinking: Do the Rational and Non-rational Parameters of a Student’s Decision to Cheat on an Exam Interact?

References

• Ahmad, S. A., Ismail, I. S., Azmi, N. A., & Zakaria, N. B. (2014). Methodological issues in whistle-blowing intentions research: Addressing the social desirability bias and order effects. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 145, 204–210.
   Google Scholar
• Auspurg, K., & Hinz, T. (2015). Factorial survey experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, R., & Schutt, R. K. (2014). The practice of research in criminology and criminal justice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Beccaria, C. (1986). On crimes and punishments (trans. D. Young). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett. (Original work published 1764).
   Google Scholar
• Bouffard, J. A., & Exum, M. L. (2013). Rational choice beyond the classroom: Decision making in offenders versus college students. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 438–447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cornish, D. B., & Clark, R. V. (Eds.). (1986). The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York, NY: Putnam.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, S. F., Drinan, P. F., & Gallant, T. B. (2009). Cheating in school: What we know and what we can do. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Exum, M. L., & Layana, C. (2018). A test of the predictive validity of hypothetical intentions to offend. Journal of Crime and Justice, 41, 136–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freiburger, T. L., Romain, D.M., Randol, B. M., & Marcum, C. D. (2017). Cheating behaviors among undergraduate college students: Results from a factorial survey. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 28, 222–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, R., & Huby, M. (2004). The construction and interpretation of vignettes in social research. Social Work and Social Sciences Review, 11, 36–51.
   Google Scholar
• Huizinga, D., Esbensen, F., & Weihar, A. (1991). Are there multiple paths to delinquency? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 83–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindegaard, M. R., Bernasco, W., Jacques, S., & Zenebergen, B. (2014). Posterior gains and immediate pains: Offender emotions before, during and after robberies. In J.-L. Van Gelder, H. Elffers, D. Reynald, & D. Nagin (Eds.), Affect and cognition in criminal decision making (pp. 58–76). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Loughran, T. A., Brame, R., Fagan, J., Piquero, A. R., Mulvey, E. P., & Schubert, C. A. (2015, August). Studying deterrence among high-risk adolescents. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• McKibban, A. R., & Burdsal, C. A. (2013). Academic dishonesty: An in-depth investigation of assessing measurable constructs and a call for consistency in scholarship. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11, 185–197.
   Google Scholar
• Mendes, S. M. (2004). Certainty, severity, and their relative deterrent effects: Questionning the implications of the role of risk in criminal deterrence policy. Policy Studies Journal, 32, 59–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, J. L., & Anderson, A. B. (1986). Updating the deterrence doctrine. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 77, 418–438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, S. M., Bartholomew, N. R., Morgan, R. D., & Cukrowicz, K. C. (2017). A preliminary investigation of the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles–Layperson Edition–Short Form. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44, 756–769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagin, D. S. (2013). Deterrence in the twenty-first century. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice in America: 1975–2025 (pp. 199–264). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nagin, D. S., & Pogarsky, G. (2003). An experimental investigation of deterrence: Cheating, self-serving bias, and impulsivity. Criminology, 41, 167–193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, R. G. & Kaiser, M. K. (1985). The MANOVA approach for analyzing repeated measures designs: An extensive primer. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 316–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedneault, A., Beauregard, E., Harris, D. A., & Knight, R. A. (2017). Myopic decision making: An examination of crime decisions and their outcomes in sexual crimes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 50, 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pogarsky, G. (2002). Identifying “deterrable” offenders: Implications for research in deterrence. Justice Quarterly, 19, 431–452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pogarsky, G. (2004). Projected offending and contemporaneous rule-violation: Implications for heterotypic continuity. Criminology, 42, 111–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollet, T. V., & van der Meij, L. (2017). To remove or not to remove: The impact of outlier handling on significance testing in testosterone data. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 3, 43–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Gelder, J.-L. (2013). Beyond rational choice: The hot/cool perspective of criminal decision making. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19, 745–763.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Gelder, J.-L., & de Vries, R. E. (2014). Rational misbehavior? Evaluating an integrated dual-process model of criminal decision making. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30, 1–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (1990). The criminal lifestyle: Patterns of serious criminal conduct. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (1995). The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles: Part I. Reliability and preliminary validity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 22, 307–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2007). Measuring proactive and reactive criminal thinking with the PICTS: Correlations with outcome expectancies and hostile attribution biases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 371–385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2014). An item response theory analysis of the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles: Comparing male and female probationers and prisoners. Psychological Assessment, 26, 1050–1055.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2015). The decision to commit crime: Rational or nonrational? Criminology, Criminal Justice Law, & Society, 16(3), 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2016a). Friends, cognition, and delinquency: Proactive and reactive criminal thinking as mediators of the peer influence and peer selection effects among male delinquents. Justice Quarterly, 33, 1055–1079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2016b). Low self-control, peer rejection, reactive criminal thinking, and delinquent peer associations: Connecting the pieces of the crime puzzle. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 2, 209–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2017a). Effect of a brief cognitive behavioural intervention on criminal thinking and prison misconduct in male inmates: Variable-oriented and person-oriented analyses. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 27, 457–469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D. (2017b). Modelling the criminal lifestyle: Theorizing at the edge of chaos. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D., Frederick, A. A., & Schlauch, C. (2007). Postdicting arrests for proactive and reactive aggression with the PICTS proactive and reactive composite scales. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 1415–1430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D., Hagman, B. T., & Cohn, A. M. (2011). Toward a hierarchical model of criminal thinking: Evidence from item response theory and confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Assessment, 23, 925–936.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, G. D., & Ruscio, J. (2009). To sum or not to sum: Taxometric analysis with ordered categorical assessment items. Psychological Assessment, 21, 99–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wikström, P.-O. H. (2014). Why crime happens: A situational action theory. In G. Manzo (Ed.), Analytic sociology: Actions and networks (pp. 74–94). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Wortley, R. (2014). Rational choice and offender decision-making: Lessons from the cognitive sciences. In B. Leclerc & R. Wortley (Eds.), Cognition and crime: Offender decision-making and script analysis (pp. 237–252). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, V. (2010, November). Deterrence in criminal justice: Evaluating certainty vs. severity of punishment. Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project.
   Google Scholar
• Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar