IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v61y2021i5p1282-1299..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting the probability of violence in actor–target relational dyads: Self-control and interpersonal provocations as mutual properties
[‘Social Concern and Crime: Moving Beyond the Assumption of Simple Self-Interest’]

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher J Schreck
  • Mark T Berg
  • Ethan M Rogers

Abstract

If disputes are ever-present in human interaction, all relational dyads contain potential offenders and targets. We theorize that each dyad partner’s self-control independently influences the likelihood of violence and that low self-control will express itself in provocative behaviour. Using two waves from the Interpersonal and Conflict Resolution survey, with measures collected from each member of 443 couples, we create dyads and analyse the independent contributions of the specified variables for both would-be offenders and the potential target. We found that a potential target with low self-control was more likely to be attacked by the actor, irrespective of the actor’s self-control. This effect was explained by a tendency of both partners to engage in verbally provocative behaviour. These results are supportive of self-control theory’s predictions concerning the importance of target decision-making and indicate that other criminological theories can profit from considering the target’s role in violent crime causation.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher J Schreck & Mark T Berg & Ethan M Rogers, 2021. "Predicting the probability of violence in actor–target relational dyads: Self-control and interpersonal provocations as mutual properties [‘Social Concern and Crime: Moving Beyond the Assumption of," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 61(5), pages 1282-1299.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:5:p:1282-1299.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azab014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:5:p:1282-1299.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.