Review of Paternoster et al.’s Study on Rational Choice Theory and Drunk Driving Behavior
Basic Research Question
The study by Paternoster et al. explores a fundamental question about the effect that other-regarding preferences and sanction threats have on the chance of drinking and driving. The study aims to explain the correlation between these factors and results. The article presents two theoretical hypotheses chosen as a framework: Hirschi’s social control theory and Fehr and Fischbacher’s observation that the promise of punishment is more prone to prevent criminal activity.
Study Introduction
The introductory part does not state any ethical concerns or protections. By the end of the theoretical overview, the authors explain their hypotheses. Firstly, the correlation between the other-regarding preferences and the chance to commit a crime will be inverse. Secondly, the promise of consequences will affect the more selfish participants more than others. The causal assertions were implied by previous research.
Major Concepts in the Research
In the methodology overview, the authors present a dependent variable of willingness to offend, a numeral value representing the chance that the participant will drink and drive in certain conditions. As for independent variables, Paternoster et al. present two indicators of other-regarding preferences.
The first one is based on the average proportion of allotted money in the dictator game, while the second one is coded 1 in case all the allotments in the games were bigger than half of the money. The second value is inverted and equals one as a measure of self-interested preference if the amount of money is smaller than half. The last self-interest-related value indicates the number of games where the first player chose not to offer any money.
Additional control values were introduced to find correlations to academic success, race, gender, and ethnicity. The dummy variables are nominal, while all the rest are ratios. The validity of these measures is high since the amount of allotted money is numerical and represents the participant’s personal choice.
Study Design and Sampling
This study is cross-sectional as it gathers information at a specific point in time without repeated surveys. The sample consisted of 230 large public university students, 45 percent of whom were male, the average age was 19 years, and the ethnic profile was diverse. The participants took a survey that included the dictator game and answered the questions to form a sufficient analytic base for the measured values.
Reference
Paternoster, R., Jaynes, C. M., & Wilson, T. (2017). “Rational Choice Theory and Interest in the ‘Fortune of Others‘.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 54, pp. 1-22. Web.