Studied by 20 people
An American sociologist who was ahead of his time and developed differential association theory and offered 9 propositions why individuals engaged in criminal behaviour:
Crime is Learned
Small Intimate Groups
Technique
Negative Societal Attitude
Frequency, Duration, Priority, Intensity
Any Other Behaviour
Same Goals as You
About understanding/recognition to work with criminals (NOT empathy) and developed by Sutherland.
how an individual becomes an individual NOT why it happens
purely behaviourist view
American criminologist who developed social learning theory to explain criminality. Was inspired by differential association theory and behavourial learning theories'
4 concepts could be used to explain criminality (Criminal Acts and Deviant Behaviours)
differential association
differential reinforcement
imitation
definitions (favourable to deviance/adherance to law)
Testability
Concepts are too vague to accurately measure
Failure to Explain Motive
Suggests all behaviours (good/bad) are learned
Failure to Explain Serious Crime Against People
Like rape, assault, murder
Suggest crime must be learned; focuses on learning to conform to the rules of society
People are hedonistic
Suggest formal & informal social controls are required to prevent criminal and deviant behaviour
an American born sociologist who developed social bond theory - one of the most tested theories in criminology.
Proposed an explanation to criminal and deviant behaviour through 4 concepts:
attachment
commitment
involvement
belief
Human beings are born hedonistic; inherently self-interested. Seeks to explain why some people refrain from crime rather than do crime
People don’t do crime because they are bonded to society
Consequences
Poor people were blamed for crimes
People believed being bored equals crime
American born criminologist who developed control balance theory.
suggests individuals with balanced control ratios are less likely to commit deviance than individuals who have control surplus or control deficit
Control Balance Theory acts as a predictor of who is at risk of being a deviance
Motivation is pre-dispositional and situational
Developed the general theory of crime.
Proposed an explanation not just for criminal behaviour but for reckless behaviour, deviance, and sinful behaviour
Importance of parenting in crime reduction
Child’s level of self-control is established by age 8
Too simplistic
Fails to account for environmental factors and social factors
American born sociologist who developed the concept of labeling theory (societal reaction theory)
after committing criminal/deviant acts, individuals are labeled based on the offense
If individual can reject/rationalize/justify the label, it will have little impact on them
A crime or deviance that has been committed because an individual was labeled based on the primary deviance
Where the label cannot be rationalized
ex: a youth is labelled a drug dealer, thus opportunities are restricted to them and they must do other crimes
American-born sociologist who expanded on the concepts of labeling theory. Similar to Beccaria (deterrence theory)
Society creates crime
“Social groups create deviance by making rules that create deviance; by applying these rules to people and labeling them outsiders, deviant behaviour is behaviour that people label”
Introduced the concept of master status
A Canadian sociologist who supported the idea that “those who are labeled as deviant by society are more likely to become a deviant”
human beings identified with personal identity and social identity
social identity is more appropriate than social status
those who are deemed criminal/deviant will be more comfortable finding support in a social setting with similar persons
identified 2 types of stigmatized individuals…
Discredited
Discreditable
3 Sources of stigma…
Character Traits
Group Identity
Physical
Which came first: the act leading to the label or the label? If labeling causes crime, the label comes first
Acceptance/rejection of the label can undo years of learning appropriate behaviour
Proposition of labeling is not supported
English born criminologist who developed reintegrative shaming theory
acknowledged the negative/stigmatizing labels used to identify individuals - had an impact on individual’s actions
Reintegration - without it, those released from prison will reoffend
Supported by recidivism data
Empirical testing of the theory is limited
studies that have tested this theory have mixed results about its effectiveness to reduce future criminal offending
discounts underlying assumptions about human nature that are vital to consider when developing policies to reduce crime
To fully understand an individual’s behaviour, longitudinal data are required as social development (like cognitive development) is a continuing process
at certain points in an individual’s life, certain behaviours appear appropriate or even warranted - those attitudes can change overtime because of continuing social development
Focus on an individual’s life, his social relations, and interactions with others over the course of life
Two criminologists who conducted a study with 500 delinquent boys and 500 non-delinquent boys
Found that there were several factors that influenced continued criminal behaviour
Many had aged out of committing crime
Continued crime kids had unloving parents, discipline issues, etc.
Indicated support for criminological theories related to self control and a lesser extent biological and psychological theories of crime and deviance
Passage of time is related to a decrease in criminality
individuals who have delinquent peers, discipline issues, etc. are more prone to delinquency
each individual is on a pathway into the future
Desistance is key
A theory designed with components of existing theories to explain why certain individuals commit crime
Combines concepts of attachment/commitment/and belief from Hirschi’s social bond theory & delinquency variables from Aker’s social learning theory (differential association and reinforcement)
AKA attachment leads to reduction of delinquency
