Loose Derivation Chains and Invisible Anomalies in Theory Testing: Evidence from Self-Control Research

Paul Meehl’s concept of “logical derivation chains” provides a diagnostic framework for understanding why criminological research often fails to achieve cumulative theoretical progress despite methodological sophistication. Using Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) self-control theory as a case study, I demonstrate how auxiliary assumptions accumulate throughout the research process, creating compound derivation chain failures that render empirical tests uninterpretable. Analysis of the Grasmick et al. (1993) scale reveals a “correlation paradox” where a correlation of r = -.31 (p < 2e-16), typically celebrated as impressive empirical support, corresponds to theoretical failure for 39% of individual cases. Item-specific analysis across two cross-cultural samples shows substantial heterogeneity within supposedly unidimensional scales, while cognitive and behavioral measures disagree about individual classifications in ~40% of cases. These findings suggest that contemporary statistical methods systematically privilege aggregate patterns over individual variation, rendering theoretically crucial anomalies invisible. The analysis concludes that criminologists should adopt constraint-aware research practices, including individual-level prediction assessment and systematic anomaly documentation, to distinguish genuine theoretical progress from statistical artifacts.