Chapter 1. Introduction 9

Chapter 2. The Research Setting: The GTC, Critiques, and Empirical Assessments 15
Ⅰ. The Structure of the GTC and Critiques 17
Ⅱ. Empirical Assessments 22
Ⅲ. Conclusion 34

Chapter 3. The Independent Self and the Interdependent Self: Situating Self-Control in Socio-Cultural Context 35

Chapter 4. Methods: The Pilot Study 43
Ⅰ. Measurement 47
Ⅱ. Data Collection 49

Chapter 5. Results 53

Chapter 6. Summary and Conclusions 63

References 67
Appendix
Appendix 1. EMPIRICAL STUDIES ON SELF-CONTROL IN KOREA 75
Appendix 2. QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS 81
Appendix 3. QUESTIONNAIRE (MODULE 1) 93
Appendix 4. QUESTIONNAIRE (MODULE 2) 101

The publication of A General Theory of Crime by Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi (1990) over 20 years ago is without question one of the more influential developments in contemporary criminology. The claims of the theory are bold; indeed, many would say audacious. The authors put forth a theoretical argument that is, in Schulz’s (2006:218) terms, “parsimonious to the extreme”. The General Theory of Crime (hereafter GTC) alleges that crime (or at least “crimes” as defined by the authors) can be understood with reference to a single overarching propensity － low self-control, as manifested given the available opportunities in the environment. Moreover, the authors reject the notion that any restrictive scope conditions need be applied to the theory. In his more recent commentary on the distinguishing characteristics of the GTC, Michael Gottfredson (2006:83) proudly pronounces:
 
“… the claims for self-control are quite strong. As a general cause, it should predict rate differences everywhere, for all crimes, delinquencies and related behaviors, for all times, among all groups and countries.”
 
Given the broad sweep and scope of the theory, and its rejection of much of the established theorizing in the discipline, it is not surprising that numerous critiques － theoretical and empirical － have emerged in the scholarly literature (discussed more fully below). Nevertheless, the impact of the GTC is indisputable. Engel (2012:1) has recently observed that the theory “has been tested on more than a million subjects.” In an otherwise scathing critique, Geis (2008:216) acknowledges “the intellectual ferment, discussion, and debate, and theoretical introspection and energy that ha[ve] emerged from the work of Gottfredson and Hirschi,” characterizing this as a “dazzling achievement.” John Hagan proved to be quite prescient when, in his endorsement of the book, he predicted that the arguments contained therein would set “an agenda that few will be able to ignore.”
The purpose of the present research is to build upon the GTC but to rectify what we consider to be one of its most glaring inadequacies. The authors disdainfully dismiss the utility of cross-cultural criminology and embrace the task of generating a “culture-free theory of crime” (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990:175). In our view, their approach in this regard is fundamentally misguided. It fails to appreciate the extent to which the very formulation of the GTC reflects the influence of culture. We concur with Marenin and Reisig’s (1995:502) observation in an early critique of the GTC that its core concepts, including that of self-control, “are saturated with culturally specific meanings.” Moreover, it seems much more plausible to us to expect that a truly ‘general’ theory of crime will explicitly incorporate rather than exclude cultural factors.
To this end, we set out to reformulate the GTC by incorporating insights from cultural psychology on the profound impact of the institutional setting on the very nature of the ‘self’ (Kitayama and Uskul 2011; Kitayama and Uchida 2005; Marcus and Kitayama 1991; see also Kobayashi et al. 2010). Researchers have demonstrated that individuals and groups assign different priority to independence and interdependence when ‘construing’ the self (Kitaymama and Uskul 2011:423). We argue that understanding the relationship between self-control and delinquency requires explicit attention to distinctive psychological processes, i.e., the ways in which the self tends to be construed － the extent to which the ‘independent self’ is construed or the ‘interdependent self’ is construed. Moreover, we expect that the associated processes of self-control will vary in theoretically predictable ways between East Asian and Western contexts. This report reviews relevant literature, develops the theoretical arguments, and discusses the results of analyses of some of the measurement properties of core concepts in our proposed reformulation of the GTC based on data from a pilot study of Korean youths. The pilot study is intended to lay the foundation for a research project to assess the elaborated theory in a cross-national context.