Essentially, through a process of conceptual integration, different aspects of each theory can be used together to compensate for what each individual theory fails to explain, and thus can broaden both scope than the political usefulness of the theories (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001). For example, low self-control theory states that low self-control is always the cause of crime. This may be true for some criminals, but many criminals, such as those involved in white-collar crime, do not adhere to the principles of low self-control. Furthermore, while low self-control theory is useful in explaining why individuals may act in certain ways, it does not explain the situations that must be met for a crime to occur (Brunet, 2002). On the other hand, routine activity theory describes the situational factors that must be present for a crime to occur, but it is more difficult to apply this theory to sexting because the offender and the victim do not necessarily have to meet for the crime occurs. Wilsem,