How to Better Understand Criminal Desistance: Comparison of Three Theoretical Models and Methodological Challenges

Abstract

This study reviews theoretical comparisons regarding reentry issues of incarcerated people in order to promote a better understanding of individuals’ criminal desistance. There are three major competing criminal desistance theories, and they include the subjective (identity) theory explaining an individual’s subjective processes, structural (social bonds) theory focusing on structural conditions, and integrative (subjective-social model) theory describing personal commitment and motivation combined with structural resources. First, identity defined as a sense of self is directly linked to one’s motivation and behavioral guidelines. Thus, identity theory assumes that intentional changes in one’s sense of self are necessary for criminal desistance. The theory posits that only justice-involved individuals who intentionally transform their identities can attempt to utilize structural support to help them pursue change. Second, the structural theory on social bonds provides an appropriate theoretical foundation on how social bonds, such as employment, affect criminal desistance through a series of exogenous circumstances called turning points. Employment is an important example of a social bond for justice-involved individuals since it provides structure to one’s life. Third, the integrative model assumes that personal characteristics may interact within social contexts, in that an individual has to identify, select, and act within the structure they live in, through their cognitive transformation. This article also briefly discusses two major methodological challenges deriving from the utilization of the theory.