In the late 1970s, there was a revived interest in certain aspects of classical criminology. Unlike most 20th century thinking about criminology, rational choice theorists like Marcus Felson and Lawrence Cohen did not focus on the root causes of crime (like social or economic factors). Instead, like classical theorists before them, they argued that criminals are rational creatures who make basic calculations about the potential costs and benefits of any criminal act before committing it.

According to rational choice theory, a crime is divided into the following three elements:

1. the type of crime
   
2. the time and place of the crime
   
3. the target of the crime

Before a crime is committed each of these elements is rationally analyzed by the criminal. For example, if a person desperately needs money one day, she may choose to commit a robbery. Her decision to rob an elderly citizen or a drug dealer depends on her understanding of who may provide her with more cash. If she chooses to rob an elderly citizen, she may decide to commit the robbery at the beginning of the month when most elderly citizens receive their benefit checks. The criminal will also carefully think about the address of the house that she will rob. She will prefer a house that is in a secluded part of town rather than near a busy thoroughfare. The important point is that each of these decisions is the product of rational thought on the part of the criminal.

What motivates people to commit a particular criminal act? Robbers typically steal because they want to buy drugs or clothing. Burglars typically commit their crimes because they enjoy the feeling of excitement and thrill. Car thieves commit their crimes because they may enjoy the prestige they get from their peers or simply because they need transportation. But unless criminals make the choice to act on their motives, a crime will not occur.