This article presents an integrative, analytic, and interactive approach to explaining corruption. We find that extant research, while empirically rich, often lacks grounding on the micro level of analysis, operates on unspecified or implausible decision-making models, does not clearly distinguish between proximal and distal causes, and does not attempt to study the interactions between individual propensities and corruption-conducive settings (situational analysis). The theoretical traditions of rational choice and culture provide insight into some but not all corrupt acts, and are limited (...) in the extent to which they explain why and how an individual chooses to act corruptly. Drawing on analytic criminology, we propose situational action theory (SAT) as an alternative explanation of corruption as moral action that forefronts rule guidance, conditional relevance of controls, and the interplay of people and settings. This conceptual framework will allow researchers to build on existing empirical work while distinguishing causes of corruption from its mere correlates. The article concludes with some reflections on bridging the gap between situational theory and empirical research into corruption. (shrink)