A crying shame: The over-rationalized conception of man in the rational choice perspective

The rational choice perspective explains all forms of crime by viewing offenders as reasoning criminals. In this article, we take this approach to task by trying out its heuristic potential. More specifically, we look at how well it works for one special type of crime, i.e. street robbery. On the basis of a detailed analysis of offender accounts we argue that rational choice theory fails adequately to conceptualize some of the essential aspects of this form of criminal behaviour: impulsiveness, expressivity, moral ambiguity and shame. We argue that adequate explanation and understanding of criminality requires taking more seriously the affective aspects of criminal behaviour and the normative meanings that perpetrators attribute to their own behaviour before, during and after the crime.