Possible Changes in a Review on Personal Criminological Theory

Frank Schmalleger explains the theory of social disorganization as one that depicts both social change as well as conflict, and lack of any agreement as the origin of its cause for both criminal behavior as well as nonconformity to society and closed associated with the ecological school of criminology (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 152). The philosophy behind the organization and structure of a society and how that contributes to criminal behavior within society is by stressing poverty, economic conditions, lack of education, lack of skills, are not sought-after in the work place, and divergent cultural values. Criminal behavior is the result of the person’s assignment of location within the structure of society.

Criminological theories interpret the competing paradigms of Human Nature, Social Order, Definition of Crime, Extent and Distribution of Crime, Causes of Crime, and Policy, differently. Even though these theories have added to societies understanding of criminal behaviour, all have been unable to explain why punishment or treatment of offenders is unable to prevent deviancy, and thus are ineffective methods of control. The new penology is a contemporary response that favours the management of criminals by predicting future harm on society. However, all criminological theories are linked as they are a product of the historical time and place, and because of their contextual history, they will continue to reappear depending on the current

This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.

Sutherland’s theory piggyback on Social Disorganization theory by answering some of the critic’s questions about why only some people in crime-prone neighbors commit crime while many others do not. While Aker’s theory pick up where Sutherland

•is between 300-500 words in length, not including the title page, abstract (if used), and References page;

However, this generation of social disorganization theory did not define what “social disorganization” was, which was nearly unacceptable. Moreover, they only used official data of delinquency in their research, which had obvious middleclass bias, and overlooked social stratification. Besides these, this generation of social disorganization theory could not explain why many people in the Zone II did not commit crime and only a small fraction of whom committed most of the crimes, aka “good boy in the bad neighborhood” problem.

The assumption with this theory is that those neighborhoods that are disorganized and messy will have higher crime rates than neighborhoods that are clean and orderly. In neighborhoods that are messy and disorganized, it starts to become the norm, and there starts to become less control that leads to disorder and crime.

There are many different aspects of criminal justice policy. One in particular is the different theories of crime and how they affect the criminal justice system. The Classical School of criminology is a theory about evolving from a capital punishment type of view to more humane ways of punishing people. Positivist criminology is maintaining the control of human behavior and criminal behavior. They did this through three different categories of Biological studies, which are five methodologies of crime that were mainly focused on biological theories, Psychological theories, which contains four separate theories, and the Sociological theories, which also includes four different methods of explaining why crime exists. The last theory is

Social disorganization theory explains the ecological difference in levels of crime, simply based on cultural and structural factors that influence the social order in a given community. Social disorganization is triggered by poverty, social stability, ethnic heterogeneity, and a few key elements. Although Clifford Shaw and Henry D. McKay (1942), were known for social disorganization theory, in 1947 Edwin Sutherland introduced the notion of a ecological differences in crime that is the result of differential social organization. Despite similar arguments on social organization, Shaw and Mckay argued that the cultural integration explained the ecological variation in crime rates as a result of the negative impact on the community. Also elaborating on structural socioeconomic factors shaping informal control like poverty, heterogeneity, and residential mobility. Later Robert Sampson and Byron Groves (1989), refined the work of Shaw and Mckay by highlighting on the importance of social ties and new measures of social disorganization.

The social disorganization theory is directed towards social conditions. This theory argues that crime is due to social conflicts, change, and lack of consensus in the group.

An abstract is a single paragraph, without indentation, that summarizes the key points of the manuscript in 150 to 250 words. For simpler papers in Paul Rose’s classes, a somewhat shorter abstract is fine. The purpose of the abstract is to provide the reader with a brief overview of the paper. When in doubt about a rule, check the sixth edition APA manual rather than relying on this template. (I prefer only one space after a period, but two spaces are suggested by the sixth-edition APA manual at the top of page 88.) This document has a history that compels me to give credit where it’s due. Many years ago I downloaded a fifth-edition template from an unspecified author’s web site at Northcentral University. I modified the template extensively and repeatedly for my own purposes and in the early years I shared my highly-modified templates only with my own students. By now, I have edited this document so many times in so many ways that the current template bears virtually no similarity to the old Northcentral document. I want to be clear, however, that I am in debt to an unknown author who spared me the inconvenience of having to create my own templates from scratch.

The Social Disorganization Theory evolved further when, David Bordua started his research in 1959 trying to replicate Lander’s research. His goal was to clear up criticism brought forth from Lander’s outcomes during his research study. Lander and Bordua were trying to prove identical outcomes with their study however; they used a couple of different variables to get their findings. For example, Lander used foreign born and non-white individuals for his study who also were homeowners, while Bordua used everyone in the population and included people who rented their home. Another difference is that Lander was using a census from the 1940s’ while Bordua chose to do his research based on the 1950s’ census. Bordua used the data from the Detroit, Michigan juvenile court as the basis of his research. He ended up with the same general conclusions as Lander’s 1954 research and mostly contradictory to Shaw and McKay’s 1954 studies. Bordua found a relationship between overcrowded areas and juvenile delinquency, not necessarily was crime based on below standard housing. He also concluded that income did not play a significant role of the indicators of delinquency, but being foreign born did have a high correlation with delinquency. (Walker, 2009).

According to the example provided, overall crime rates in North America between 1970 and 1980 were systematically increasing in an upwards fashion. Researchers concluded that the dysfunction of family values was essential to understanding the dramatic escalation. Specifically, they pinpointed to single-parent households and families in which religion had been omitted from daily lifestyles. While this hypothesis may seem structurally sound in reading the information provided, it is lacking in depth. In other words, there is not enough explanation into how the independent variables ultimately connect to the dependent variable (the increase of crime rates). In this paper, I will be putting my knowledge from Criminology 260 per the criteria for

A common theory in criminology and in sociology suggests that class and race are vital roles regional crime rates. Previous research indicates that the distribution of class and race within certain residential areas has a key role in the outcome of certain violent acts. In his study, Income Inequality, Race, and Place: Does the Distribution of Race and Class within Neighborhoods Affect Crime Rates, John R. Hipp states “Specifically, studies have tested how the distribution of economic resources across neighbor-hoods, as measured by income or poverty, affects neighborhood crime rates or the how the distribution of racial/ethnic minority members across neighborhoods, as measured by the percent nonwhite, and so on, affects neighborhood crime rates (Hipp 2007). While one may traditionally assume that minorities neighborhoods yield a more intensive crime rate, this is not necessarily true.

The assumptions made in the article include the vague use of the word “criminals.” The author does not specify any crimes or types of violent behavior that the people in the study committed, leading the reader to assume that they could range anywhere from jaywalkers to serial killers. The author also uses the term “religion” many times, but only references Christianity when it