In prior tests of Beckerian rational choice theory, the notion that individuals are responsive to the (dis)incentives associated with crime has been supported. Much of this research has comprised composite scores of perceived rewards and risks of multiple, often disparate, crime types that are then used to predict “general” offending behavior. Although the results of such prior tests are informative, we believe that this tendency has resulted in two shortcomings. First, a central component of mathematical rational choice theory is overlooked, namely, that responsivity to incentives will be crime specific. That is, offenders should prefer crime types that subjectively offer greater rewards and fewer risks relative to other crimes. Second, individual differences in offending specialization are not addressed, of which Clarke and Cornish (1985) and Shover (1996) argued rational choice theories are well suited to explain. Using a sample of serious offenders, we find that in a given time period, individuals are more likely to engage in crime types they viewed as more intrinsically rewarding and less risky compared with other crimes. Furthermore, individuals displayed greater specialization in violence to the extent they view violence as more rewarding and less risky than property offenses

中文翻译：

---

感知的逮捕风险，心理奖励和犯罪专业化：理性选择理论的部分检验†

在贝克尔理性选择理论的先前检验中，人们对个人对与犯罪相关的（不利）诱因做出反应的观点提出了支持。这项研究的大部分内容包括多种通常不同的犯罪类型的感知奖励和风险的综合评分，然后用于预测“一般”犯罪行为。尽管这些先前测试的结果是有益的，但我们认为这种趋势导致了两个缺点。首先，数学理性选择理论的主要组成部分被忽略了，即，对激励的响应将是犯罪特定的。也就是说，与其他犯罪相比，罪犯应该更喜欢主观上能提供更多报酬和更少风险的犯罪类型。其次，没有解决犯罪专业化方面的个体差异，其中Clarke和Cornish（1985）和Shover（1996）认为理性选择理论非常适合于解释。通过使用严重犯罪者的样本，我们发现在给定的时间段内，与其他犯罪相比，个人更有可能从事他们认为具有内在奖励和较低风险的犯罪类型。此外，与暴力侵害相比，个人认为暴力具有更大的收益和更低的风险，因此他们在暴力方面表现出更大的专业性