crim lecture 14 - general theory of crime

what did gottfredson and hirschi come up with

general theory of crime

who came up with general theory of crime

gottfredson and hirschi

gottfredson and hirschi overview

• focus on the family - what parents do or fail to do during a child’s upbringing

• development of self-control during early childhood is crucial in shaping criminal behavior

• low self-control is the main factor behind criminal behavior

  • impulsive, insensitive, physical rather than mental, risk-taking, short-sighted, and lacking in diligence

• crime is a product of low self-control

  • crime for immediate gratification, easy to commit, skill/planning not required

criminality vs crime

• criminality - individual’s propensity or likelihood to offend, influenced by traits such as low self-control

• crime - the actual event of breaking the law

• characteristics of crime align with traits of people who have low self-control

development of self control

• self control doesn’t develop naturally, requires concentrated effort

• major cause of low self-control is poor child rearing

• to properly teach self control, child rearing must include:

  • form an emotional bond with child

  • monitor child’s behavior

  • recognize deviant behavior

  • use non-corporal discipline to correct misbehavior

• IMPORTANT: self control largely established by age 8, remains relatively stable throughout life

• gottfredson and hirschi are purely talking from a sociological standpoint (even tho in the past we talked abt self control with psychological theories)

disparities in self control in development (gender + background)

• girls are typically socialized to have higher self control

  • boys more socially accepted to be more playful and aggressive, when women deviate from social norms they’re not feminine enough

• disparities in self-control levels may result from variations in parenting practices across different cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds

  • eg: marshmallow experiment, some groups of children seemed to have less self control, but with present opening experiment it was different

• social class itself not directly linked to self control BUT family environments associated with poverty may lack the resources for effective child rearing

empirical support for general theory of crime (3 studies)

• pratt and cullen’s meta analysis

  • low self-control is significant predictor of crime

  • low self contorl also correlated with drug use, alcohol use, gambling

• higgins and tweksbury

  • relation btwn self contorl and delinquency varied btwn genders

  • supports gottfredson and hirschis claim

  • males typically socialize with less rigorous parental monitoring, lower self control, more delinquency

• chapple

  • individuals with low self control more likely to face peer rejection

  • low self control ppl form social groups with others with similar traits, impulse and risk taking

limitations and critiques of general theory of crime (includes a fallacy)

• underestimating social influences

• some research suggests self control can be improved thru intervention

  • na and paternoster - found that self control can continue to develop during adolescence and adulthood

  • piquiero et al - life events and experiences can influence self control over time

• fallacy of autonomy - assumes that factors influencing crime are operating in isolation

  • suggests that poor parenting practices alone determine a child’s level of self control and subsequent delinquent behavior

  • doesnt adequately consider the broader social context that could be shaping the family environment

• doesnt address these questions: why do some individuals with low self contorl not commit crime and others with high self control may occasionally commit crimes

social bond theory vs general theory of crime

• both are control theories

• social bond theory highlights importance of relationships and social structures in preventing crime

• general theory of crime suggests that internal traits are more significant

discussion:

• Gottfredson and Hirschi argue that ALL offenders (regardless of crime type) have low self control. Is this the case? Do white collar offenders also have low self-control?

• How well does this theory apply to different forms of crime, such as violent crime vs. white-collar crime?

• doesnt apply well to white collar crime

• even some violent crimes are planned

• tries to oversimplify crime to one trait but doesnt take into account everything that comes into the trait

discussion - Are there some types of criminal behavior that might be better explained by other theories?

• white collar crime better explained by rational choice theory

• also routine activity theory - if punishment isn’t swift or certain there may be more motivated offenders

discussion - The theory argues that self-control is established early in life through parenting. What factors might affect a parent’s ability to effectively teach self-control to their children?

• number of children

• involvement - jobs

• other children taking parental role

• if parents lack self control

Bernie Madoff

• Instead of investing money from his investors he took it for himself

• Sentenced to 150 years in prison

• But he died in 2021

• Largest Ponzi scheme in history

piquero study

• do white collar criminals also have low self control

• analysis of 87 working adults returning to school in business courses

• completed measures of self control and desire for control

• responded to vignette - read scenario and said if theyd behave the same way

• key findings:

  • neither attitudinal nor behavioral self control related to likelihood of committing corporate crime

  • BUT desire for control was a significant predictor of corporate crime intentions

• implications:

  • challenges gottfredson and hirschis claim that low self control is the reason behind all crimes

  • weighing cost and benefits of actions

marshmallow test overview

• psychology

• inability to delay gratification

• tell child to wait until adult comes back to eat marshmallow and then they’d get another one

• many studies connecting early self-contorl and later cognitive and social skills

what did ayduk and mischel do

2 diff studies related to marshmallow test

who did the 2 studies related to marhshmallow test

ayduk and mischel

ayduk study

• failure to delay gratification at age 4 associated with increased crack cocaine use at ages 25-30 in those at higher risk of behavioral problems

• 152 preschoolers offered large amounts of consumable treat if they waited 15-20 mins, or they could ring a bell at any time to get a smaller amount

• longitudinal study - as adults asked whether they used crack

• predicated crack cocaine use among individuals who also scored high on a scale of rejection sensitivity (tendency to experience anxiety abt interpersonal rejection)

mischel study

• preschoolers who delayed gratification longer at the age of 4-5 were better able to tolerate frustration and cope maturely with stress during adolescence and also had better SAT scores

• more academically competent, more rational, more attentive

other factors in marshmallow test

• children that live in chaotic unstable environments may not plan for the future or delay gratification bc they lack predictability

• children who live in disorganized environments with parents who cant provide basic stability and predictability that allows them to anticipate and plan for the future

• it’s rational to eat the marshmallow - they don’t wait for a better reward bc theyre not expecting one to come

ego depletion idea and one guy

• person uses up willpower when exerting self control, making it harder to engage in more self control shortly after

• baumeister:

  • self regulation is a process by which ppl exert self control

  • it’s a limited resource like a muscle

  • when limited strength is used, person falls into state of ego depletion

  • further self regulation efforts less successful than normal

what did stucke and baumeister do

ego depletion and aggression experiment

who did the ego depletion and aggression experiment

stucke and baumeister

ego depletion and aggression experimental design (not the 2 conditions yet)

• 60 subjects randomly assigned to control group or ego strength depletion group

• told that the study was on the effect of hunger and creativity and told not to eat for 3 hours before the experiment

• told to read fable and give it an ending

• plate of cookies, cake, and chocolates on table

ego depletion and aggression experiment - 2 conditions

• ego depletion condition - subjects told not to eat while working on the task

  • told that former studies showed hungry ppl were better so if they want good results they shouldn’t eat

  • the plate is there in case they cant stand the hunger

• control condition - subjects told could eat as much or as little as they wanted

  • chance of success higher if they remained hungry tho

ego depletion and aggression experiment - after task completed

• in both conditions, experimenter re-entered

• provoked subjects to see ego-depletion response

  • “and it took u so much time to write such a boring ending!”

• after experiment, participants asked to complete evaluation of experimenter

  • told their judgment could influence future funding and report on internship of experimenter

ego depletion and aggression experiment - goal and results

• goal - to see which group would give more negtaive feedback

  • whether being mentally drained made people more aggressive

• results - ego-depletion group gave significantly lower ratings

  • when participants used self-control during experiment, this drained their energy, so they acted more aggressively after

• concept of ego depletion could explain why individuals in high risk high crime neighborhoods engage in higher levels of antisocial behavior

  • challenges require self control, so they use it up and are more likely to act out

summary of control theories of crime

• assume people are naturally inclined to engage in criminal behavior

  • external contorls - attachment, committment, involvement

  • internal controls - self control

• attempt to explain why some people dont commit crime

• hirschis social control theory - people dont commit crimes bc of social attachments and committment to conventional activities

• gottfredson and hirschis general theory of crime - later argued that low self control is the only cause of crime

• psychological research also shows that the inability to defer gratification is associated with higher levels of antisocial behavior