Age Graded Theory Analysis

When viewing delinquency through the lens of age, it is observed that the prevalence of offending tends to increase from late childhood, peak in the teenage years (from 15 to 19) and then decline in the early 20s (Farrington and Petechuck, 2013). This bell-shaped age trend, often called the age-crime curve, is, according to Farrington and Petechuk (2013), universal in Western populations. However, when offenses are broken down into specific categories, the age-crime curve tends to vary from the one just mentioned. For example, the curve for violence tends to peak later than that for property crimes (Blokland, Arjan and Palmen, 2012). Girls peak earlier than boys (Farrington, 1986). The curve is higher and wider for young males (especially

Each of these theories had led to many new theories used today, such as the Rational Choice theory, Biosocial and Psychological Theory, Critical Theory, Cultural Deviance Theory, Life Course Theory, and many more. The one thing in common with every theory is that they all explain at least one behavioral factor that leads to crime. Today, all these theories, and more, are researched and taken into account when trying to understand why a criminal does what they do.

While brainstorming for examples of normative age-graded, normative history-graded and nonnormative examples; I found it easier to pick out the normative age-graded and normative history-graded examples versus the nonnormative examples. I feel thankful and lucky to say this because that means I was not abused, lost my parents at a young age or anything too memorable. In fact, my nonnormative examples stray from the norm of being negative and actually are some of the most positive pieces to my life.

This paper summarizes four theories of criminology. Rational choice theory states that criminals act based on a thought process that weighs the pros and cons of criminality. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that most criminals are people capable of having rational thoughts before committing a crime. Trait theory is the view of criminology that suggests criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that criminals choose to commit crime because of a brain anomaly or chemical imbalance. Social structure theory is “a view that disadvantaged economic class position is a primary cause of crime” (Seigel 139). Those who follow this theory often believe social forces can have a great effect on whether or not a person commits a crime. An example would be those who are poor are more being more prone to commit crime. Social process theory is a view that criminality depends on how a person interacts with different organizations and institutions and processes in society. For example, a family would be considered

“In the late 1980s, Robert Sampson and John Laub stumbled across the files from a decades-old research project conducted by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck of the Harvard Law School. This study that followed young boys from childhood into early adulthood and led them to question previous criminological research practice and develop their age-graded theory. It has been said that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Therefore, it is no surprise that, when criminologists study adult offenders, they discover almost all of them committed crimes as an adolescent. However, it is not logical to assume that everyone who engages in crime as an adolescent will commit crimes as an adult. Moreover, if one continues this faulty line of reasoning

The officer also spoke about how criminal behavior can be passed down from generation to generation, how criminals that start young and are not exposed enough to good influences, and how criminals lack the opportunities to move up the social and career ladder. This goes in line with Valenzuela’s (2014) definitions of social learning theory. This is marked by how criminals learn criminal behavior through social interaction. The officer blamed the parents, who he assumed were criminals as well, which causes the young adult or juvenile to commit crime since “they do not know any better.” He made a few assumptions that these criminals and their parents lacked in education as they dropped out of school and lived in primarily unsafe neighborhoods marked with gang and drug cultures. This could be seen as strain theory, as social structures produced lack of opportunity to go up the social ladder and succeed, therefore leading someone to commit crime instead. One

In the life course theory there transitions that occur in a person’s life as a part of growing up and developing like many other social theories on crime, it is the family relationship’s that guide these transitions to take place accordingly. If these transitions are not properly guided or become disrupted it can lead to criminal behavior in the child. Likewise, children in poverty or who have altered family dynamics are more likely to experience these disruption’s to their transitions. The time of transitions is very important to development the previous transition provide a

The aim of this essay is to compare, contrast and evaluate two sociological theories of crime causation and two psychological theories of crime causation.

Rob Sampson and John Laub developed their age-graded, life-course theory of crime using some data studied by criminologists. In the 1940s, Sheldon and Eleanor Gluck conducted a longitudinal study of troubled boys in Boston and studied them through adolescence. Sampson and Laub found their data in the basement of the Harvard Library, reanalyzed it and identified turning points in a delinquent career. Sampson and Laub’s age-graded theory holds that the social sources of behavior change over the life course.They looked at the individual's childhood and their life into adulthood found out that some of the troubled boys stayed in trouble for the rest of their lives, while others had no legal problems.

theory has experienced empirical support as a means to explain crime from adult and youth

(UCR Publications,2012) Though it may sound that I currently live in a city where the crime rate is higher than other cities in the US but I live on a golf course where the majority of the neighbors are older and wealthy. Like every city there’s a good side of town and a bad side. Not to be stereotypical but most of the crimes occur in those parts of town, usually in the area were low income people live. As well as homeless people may be found. I don’t want to seem biased either because even in the good parts of town these crimes may occur. The patterns that are seen here is that the crime start very high it stays like that for a while, then it suddenly drops as newer generation start to grow and begin to experiment or begin to get involve in unhealthy habits, or their environment is compromised.

Conflict theory and labeling theory are two similar theories in the world of crime. It has been debated whether or not there is a clear line separating the two theories. By evaluating the two theories, the differences between them can become more obvious and it becomes easier to separate the two. In addition to conflict theory and labeling theory, there is another type of theories that are used to explain crime. These theories focus more on a criminal 's lifetime and how their criminal records have evolved over time. Two of the leading theories in this realm of criminology are Moffit’s theory of life course persistent offenders and Sampson and Laub’s age-graded theory of informal social control. These theories both explain why people commit or don 't commit crime. There are similarities between the theories and also differences. By analyzing all four of these theories, a better understanding can be gained related to crime.

Sampson and Laub’s age-graded theory argues that strengthening social bonds increase informal social control and reduces crime and other forms of deviance at any age, as individuals make significant transitions throughout their lifetime, the essence of their social interactions change, alongside the power of various informal influences on criminality. In addition, the theory exhibits a complementary relationship between the concepts of continuity and change.

While there are several noteworthy life-course theories in addition to Thornberry’s theory, one is deserving of special consideration because it represents a revision of an earlier theory based on developmental findings. That is the General Theory of Crime proposed by Travis Hirschi and Michael R. Gottfredson (1990). Hirschi, as you may recall, had earlier set out the influential social bonding theory in 1969. However, he and Gottfredson reviewed the research and decided that most theories of crime and delinquency causation were wrong. What Hirschi and Gottfredson wrote was succinct and to the

The criminological theories that are being examined within the study are state dependent and population heterogeneity theories. Heterogeneity theories state that there is usually an early proneness for individuals to commit crime and that this vulnerability and difference in the early development of an individual persists over time. On the other hand, state dependent theories are to the effect that the events and actions that occur in the course of someone’s life influences the probability of subsequent actions and events. The researchers adopt the population heterogeneity perspective which states that crime results from the persistent antisocial tendencies that are developed early in life (Gunnison, & McCartan, 2010). With regard to state dependence, the