Purpose In a recent issue of JDLCC , readers were presented with two opposing views of human agency and its value to life-course criminology. Paternoster (J Dev Life Course Criminol 3(4):350–372, 2017 ) proposes that agency be embraced as a key organizing concept in criminology, arguing that it is central to offender decision making and desistance from crime. In response, Cullen (J Dev Life Course Criminol 3(4):373–379, 2017 ) downplays the role of agency. He further argues that an emphasis on agency is antithetical to positivism, would undermine the search for the developmental and life-course causes of crime, and would legitimize punitive crime control policies. In this paper, I highlight the existence of a theoretical middle ground in the form of an alternative conceptualization of agency. In particular, I highlight the value of Albert Bandura’s sociocognitive approach to agency. Instead of asking whether agency plays a role in behavior, this approach leads us to ask the following: when , and under what conditions , is the meaningful exercise of agency likely to occur? Conclusion I argue that a sociocognitive approach largely avoids the potential pitfalls identified by Cullen and can readily be adapted to the contemporary study of desistance. It also draws attention to issues in need of further examination and can inspire new lines of desistance research.

中文翻译：

---

行动自由，选择自由和不受犯罪影响：人类代理研究中的陷阱和机会

目的在最新一期的JDLCC中，向读者展示了两种对人类代理及其对生命过程犯罪学的价值的相反观点。Paternoster（J Dev Life Course Criminol 3（4）：350–372，2017）提出，应将代理机构作为犯罪学中的关键组织概念，认为这对于犯罪者的决策和制止犯罪行为至关重要。作为回应，卡伦（J Dev Life Course Criminol 3（4）：373–379，2017）淡化了代理的作用。他进一步指出，对代理的强调与实证主义是对立的，会破坏对犯罪的发展和生活成因的寻求，并使惩罚性犯罪控制政策合法化。在本文中，我以代理的替代概念化形式强调了理论中间立场的存在。特别是，我强调阿尔伯特·班杜拉（Albert Bandura）的社会认知方法对代理商的价值。这种方法没有问代理机构是否在行为中起作用，而是导致我们提出以下问题：代理机构的有意义的行使何时，在什么条件下可能发生？结论我认为，社会认知方法在很大程度上避免了卡伦（Cullen）所识别出的潜在陷阱，并且可以很容易地适应当代的戒断研究。它还引起对需要进一步检查的问题的关注，并可以激发止断研究的新思路。代理的有意义的练习可能会发生吗？结论我认为，社会认知方法在很大程度上避免了卡伦（Cullen）所识别出的潜在陷阱，并且可以很容易地适应当代的戒断研究。它还引起对需要进一步检查的问题的关注，并可以激发止断研究的新思路。代理的有意义的练习可能会发生吗？结论我认为，社会认知方法在很大程度上避免了卡伦（Cullen）所识别出的潜在陷阱，并且可以很容易地适应当代的戒断研究。它还引起对需要进一步检查的问题的关注，并可以激发止断研究的新思路。