Analysis Of Travis Hirschi's Social Control Theory

Social control theory and social learning theory are two theories that suggest why deviant behavior is chosen to be acted upon by some individuals and not others. Both take a different stance on the issue. Social control theory suggests people’s behavior is based on their bonds to society, if they have strong bonds to society they conform and if not they have a tendency to act out or become involved in criminal or deviant behavior. Social learning theory suggest that through vicarious learning people learn from observing others and based on what the observe make the choice of whether to copy those actions to obtain desired results or chose not to if

Social control is when a person unites to society that prevents them from violating rules therefore; if the bond weakens, they are free to commit delinquent acts. Travis Hirschi, a sociologist, argued that the social bond a person maintains with society contains the commitment to the pursuit of conventional activities, such as

Social control/bond theory was developed by Travis Hirschi in1969. The social control approach is one of the three major sociological perspectives in understanding crime in our contemporary criminology. The theory holds that individuals will break the law as a result of the breakdown of the social bonds (Akers & Sellers, 2004, p. 16). Control theorists believe that an individual conformity to societal social values and rules produced by socialization and maintained through social ties to the people and institutions. The social bond may include family attachment, an individual commitment to social norms or institutions like school, employment, churches and mosques. The key elements of the social bonds theory are an attachment to other individuals in the society and the desire to remain committed to following rules. In addition, an individual involvement in typical social behaviours as well as one 's belief or the value systems a person ascribes. According to the theory, crime and delinquency will result when a person bond to society is weak or lose (Demuth & Brown, 2004, p.65). Moreover, as social bonds increase in strength, individual costs of crime increases as well and this ultimately act as a barrier for committing a crime.

Social control theory is used to help one understand and reduce levels of criminal activity. It is based upon the idea that an individual’s basic belief system, morals, values, commitments and relationships foster a lawful environment. Most individuals who possess these values and beliefs tend to have a level of self-control over their actions and are consequently prepared to remain on the correct side of the law. Furthermore, social control theory is used to examine how society can influence criminal behaviour. It also emphasizes the idea that when an individual is involved and in-touch with their community, they are less likely to commit acts of delinquency.

Social control theory is critical to criminology because of the strength and impacts a relationship or bond between people have. These relationships are influenced and shaped by behavior, personality and the environment they choose to surround themselves in. Direct social control is important for children, having a healthy family relationship and role models create a balance with social control. If a society works together to create positive support for each other it helps control the crime that is once influenced by negative activities and poor role models.

Also known as Hirschi’s Social Bonds theory, suggests that individuals who are closely bonded to social groups within their society are less likely to engage in criminal or deviant behaviours. There are four features of this theory, 1) attachment, 2) commitment, 3) involvement and 4) belief (Hirschi, 1986).

Individuals with strong and stable attachments to others within society, such as family, friends and community institutions are presumed to be less likely to violate social norms, because such behaviour would distress these respective attachments (Reginald et al, 1995). Second, is commitment, meaning having an individual investment in social activities. For example, an individual who has invested time, energy and resources into conforming to social norms, such as educational and career goals, is less likely to become involved in a gang (Goodwill 2009). In particular, since they have invested heavily in conforming these individuals have more to lose than those who have not invested in their future in a conforming fashion. (Reginald et al, 1995). Third, is involvement, which Hirschi utilized in order to illustrate that when large amounts of structured time are invested in socially approved activities, such as sports or work, the time for available deviance is drastically reduced (Reginald et al, 1995). Specifically, active engagement in conventional endeavors acts as a powerful protective factor against delinquency (Huebner and Betts, 2002). Hirschi’s final element of social bonding is belief. This pertains to an actor’s level of belief in the moral validity of shared social values and norms (Reginald et al, 1995). When an individual strongly believes in the conventional norms they are less likely to deviate from

The two theories I have decided to merge are Agnew’s General Strain Theory and Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory. I picked General Strain Theory because it does a good job at discussing some of the things that can trigger the release of a person’s negative emotions which in turn may lead to deviant behavior. I also decided to write about Social Bond Theory because it describes some of the factors that keep people from committing crime. Both of the theories have strengths and weaknesses individually, but when merged they help fill in each other’s gaps. (Agnew, 2011; Hirschi, 2011) +1 (888) 295-7904

This theory has a different focus than typical theories; in this theory, conformity is emphasized, specifically, with the focus being on the reasoning behind why people conform and obey society’s rules, instead of why people deviate from norms. This theory operates under the basic assumption that delinquent behavior occurs because of a person’s bond or tie to society being weak or non-existent. There are four elements that make up this bond: attachment to others, commitment, involvement, and belief. Thus, the stronger the bond’s element, the less likely a person is going to engage in crime; likewise, the weaker the element of the bond is, the more likely a person is going to commit crime. Also, all four identified elements are said to be connected and interdependent, so a weakness in one element will more than likely lead to weaknesses in the other elements. In other words, these elements control a person’s level of conformity; crime control stems from one’s ties to conventional society. This theory also assumes that people are born naturally selfish; however, this is not a born tendency or trait. Rather, this means that the motivation for crime in society is evenly spread out since everyone has the same inclination for crime. Similarly, under this theory, the way people are controlled by society through these bonds is

Control theory, Anomie theory and Strain theory provide very different explanations of why people commit crimes based upon assumptions about how humans function. Control theory suggests that humans are naturally drawn to breaking the law. Humans are driven to fulfill their needs and desires. Crime provides one method by which humans can reach their goals. Control theorists would thus ask why everyone does not turn to crime to meet their wants and needs. The question shifts from the typical why do people commit crime to why do people not commit crime (Cullen and Agnew, 2011). Hirschi suggest that crime and social bonds are linked, such that crime occurs in absence of a strong social bond. The four elements of the social bonds are

Trying to understand why crime happens if a very important concept. Throughout history, criminologist have debated on which theory of crime is most accurate. Currently, social bond and social learning theory are two of the leading theories in the criminological world. Between these two theories there are a variety of differences and similarities. In addition to these theories Gottfredson and Hirschi have published a book where they use the concept of self control to describe crime. Analyzing these three theories can be important to understanding the current criminological world.

The theoretical stability of social control theory rests upon the existence of four variables which are not only thought to have a correlative relationship amongst each other but are viewed as pivotal perquisites in deterring deviant behavior. These variables are attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. Attachment refers to the obligatory connections and expectations that relate the individual to other persons in society. Through the individual's attachments to other people's expectations, norms become internalized by the individual. Commitment refers to the fear of law-breaking behavior and assumes that the organization of society is situated such that the interests of most persons of the given society would be endangered if they decide to engage in criminal and/or deviant acts. Involvement refers to the conventional activities that makes a person too busy to find time and/or the opportunity to engage in deviant behavior. As for Belief, the theory holds that a common, if not, single value system exists in society in which both he law-abiding individual as well as deviant both value. The opinions and impressions that are dependent on constant social reinforcement comprise belief. A person is more likely to conform to social norms when he believes in them. However, there is possibly a wide variability amongst the society as to how much one adheres to the belief that they should obey the norms and rules of society.

As crime continues to occur, criminologists begin to define new theories to explain our seemingly naturalistic tendencies on what mental processes take place for an individual to actually partake in criminal activity. The symbolic interactionist perspective defines itself by its strong beliefs in the fact that criminals are defined by their social processes. The social process theory states that criminality is a function of people’s interactions with various groups, organizations and processes in society. For example, an individual’s connection with family, school, friends, religion and media would all be main factors in determining how their criminal structure within their personality came

Crime has existed in societies across the world for centuries, and is defined as any offense harmful against the public. However, the true nature of crime is more complex as there are many different motives and causes behind a criminal act, which cannot be contributed to a single factor (Barlow & Decker, 2010). Within the field of criminology, a number of theories exist that attempt to explain why some individuals commit crime, while others abstain from it. Some theories attribute crime to the specific environment; they believe that an individual commits crime when certain ecological conditions are met (Felson, 2001). Others argue that crime is caused by the individual themselves; that criminals are the result of unrestrained thoughts and low self-control (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 2001). This paper will analyze aspects of a real world scenario using both routine activity theory and low self-control theory, for the purpose of better understanding and evaluating certain criminal behavior.

Social bonds in some cases can prevent people from committing a crime. However, if these bonds are broken, criminal behavior