本研究嘗試要以實證的資料來探討理性選擇與犯罪決定間的關連，相信本研究除可以回答Hirschi 的「人為何不犯罪？」外，也可以回答許多實證學派學者探討的「人為何犯罪？」的問題。本研究在於分析少年竊盜行為，驗證理性選擇如何影響少年竊盜。我們特別要分析理性選擇的兩個層面：犯罪功利因素與犯罪社會道德傷害因素，探討他們與少年偷竊犯罪之關連。本研究以桃園少年輔育院以及臺北少觀所曾經有竊盜犯罪紀錄者為對象，共收集143 位分析樣本。研究發現如下：犯罪功利因素的考量有助於少年偷竊犯罪的決定，這支持理性選擇的犯罪解釋；然而，來自犯罪可能帶來的社會傷害與生活困擾對於少年偷竊犯罪的嚇阻作用卻未能如本研究假設所預期者，他們對偷竊之作用不明顯。據此，我們認為犯罪學上保守的「罪有應得」刑事思想雖可以解釋少年犯罪的決定，但這樣的解釋仍有其限制的，尤其對於本研究犯罪本質較為嚴重的少年樣本而言，社會傷害與社會困擾並未能導致犯罪的嚇阻。如此，重罰的刑事思想並不是維持秩序的不二法門，犯罪學者仍應尋求其他犯罪學的解釋與政策模式，以解決少年犯罪問題。

The stduy intends to address the relationship between rational choice
and criminal behavior. It is believed that this study could offer explanation on Hirschi's problem on "why don't they do it?" as well as on the positivists'problem on "why do they do it?" Specifically, we would examine the theft and burglar behavior among juveniles. Two dimensions of rational choice,including criminal utility expectation and social disgrace, are examined. 143 samples are from juvenile detention centers and juvenile training school near Taipei city. Our data revealed that utility expectation seems to exercise a more significant role regarding juveniles’ involvements in theft activities.However, the fear and punishment that comes from social disgrace do not have an empirical ground concerning their deterrence on criminal offenses.We argue that the deterrence effect, particularly through social disgrace, has its limitation. At least, the above relationship is valid among our serious
juvenile offender samples. Criminologists still need to look for answers from other perspectives that could better explain the causes of crime and
delinquency.