Abstract
A taped interview with a former street-gang leader in Chicago is interpreted as supporting the economic theory of crime. This theory predicts that participation in crime varies directly with net benefits and inversely with the attractiveness of legitimate occupations. The alternative sociological explanation—that crime is caused by deviant personality or exceptional environment— is ambiguous. Parts of that theory are open to more than one interpretation, while its prediction that individuals do not respond to punishments or incentives is deficient.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.