Social Control Theory Of Crime

The social control theory suggests that “people engage in criminal activity when their bond to society has weakened” (Ortiz, 2011). This theory

as a general concept, social learning theory has been applied to the many different fields of social science to explain why certain individuals develop motivation to commit (or abstain from) crime and develop the skills to commit crime through the people they associate with. Social Learning Theory (SLT) is one of the most frequently looked at theories in the criminology field. This theory was introduced by Ronald L. Akers as a reformulation of Edwin H. Sutherland 's (1947) differential association theory of crime meld with principles of behavior psychology (Bradshaw, 2011). Akers retained the concepts of differential association and definitions from Sutherland 's theory, but conceptualized them in more behavioral terms and

There are numerous researches about social strain theory and criminal offending. Robert “Merton states that the study of social strain believes that individual tend to respond to the gap between society’s values and their own

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

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

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

The Culture of Control, Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society, David Garland (2001) is certainly one worth the read. Garland, one of the leading criminologists, begins the book with a fantastic insight on ‘history of the present’ of penological developments in the US, compares it with Britain in late 1970’s. He picks out indicative theories by Foucault and several examples to support his arguments. He portrays an intricate argument about the rise of crime control and punitiveness. Garland continues throughout to link new developments in both countries to identify each countries crime control stratergy and the effect of their strategies. He ends it with further theories and opinions on crime control and social order. Garlands purpose of writing the book is to give a deep analysis and an absorbing read of crime control in USA and UK to his readers. The purpose of the following review is to give the readers a brief understanding of some issues by Garland on crime and social order in contemporary society.

Social control theory has become one of the more widely accepted explanations in the field of criminology in its attempt to account for rates in crime and deviant behavior. Unlike theories that seek to explain why people engage in deviant behavior, social control theories approach deviancy from a different direction, questioning why people refrain from violating established norms, rules, and moralities. The theory seeks to explain how the normative systems of rules and obligations in a given society serve to maintain a strong sense of social cohesion, order and conformity to widely accepted and established norms. Central to this theory is a perspective which predicts that deviant behavior is much more likely to emerge when

Famous sociologist Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi presented the Self-Control Theory also known as the General Theory of Crime in 1990. Equally noteworthy, their A General Theory of Crime ranks second in citations accorded to all books in the 1990’s (Pratt & Cullen, 2000). Self-control theory focuses attention on events in early childhood, long before crime and delinquency manifest themselves (Bernard & Vold, 2010). Gottfredson and Hirschi believed their theory could explain all types of crime and delinquency. The main concept of their theory focused on low self-control. Hirschi and Gottfredson believed ineffective parenting were the main cause of low self-control in children. Low-self control is associated with

In recent years Puerto Rico has shown staggering homicide rates, establishing the cause(s) for this development would be the first step in resolving the dilemma. Researching an assortment of criminological theories, history and statistics should be used to explain the increasing rates before offering any recommendations to Puerto Rican Homicide investigators and governmental authorities (local or federal).

Crime is a social construct because it is an idea that is established by a society to control the behaviors of the people within the society (“Radical Concept of Crime”). What is considered to be criminal varies within different area and cultures and even time. Things that were legal two hundred years ago are illegal now. For example, in the 18th and 19th century when slavery was allowed in America, there were a lot of people who saw nothing wrong with it because they had been socialized to accept and justify it. If you ask most Americans now about slavery, they would say that it was a tragedy or that they just cannot understand how it happened. This is because we are now being socialized to think of slavery as wrong. Even though many citizens

As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.

Crime is a socially constructed phenomenon. It is not static but dynamic and is defined into existence. It changes over time and place. For example, early definitions of crime such as classicism defined individuals as rational, free and responsible for their own actions. The emergence of positivism was an attempt to bring scientific methodology to criminology. Positivists believe in objectively quantifying cause and effect. In the early twentieth century a sociological lens was applied. Functionalist sociologists such as Durkheim argued that crime had a positive function for society by reinforcing societal norms and values (Ziyanak and Williams 2014). Anomie and strain theory proposed later by Robert Merton examined how poorer classes experienced frustration through lack of opportunities leading to strain. There are many others including labelling, control and cultural deviance, however; this shows that our understanding of criminology is not static and like crime itself it changes over time and place.

Many people have different theories as to why crime exists. Some believe crime happens because of the individual’s culture, education (or lack there of), or even their race. Others believe crime is associated with whom we surround ourselves with. There are three sociological theories that suggest why crime happens in society; they are social learning theory, social control theory, and social reaction (labeling) theory. These theories suggest it is our relationships and social interactions that influence our behavior.

Crime is defined as an illegal act that violates the written laws that govern a society. ‘Crimes are those actions deemed disturbing or disruptive to society as to justify state intervention’ (Pease, 2002). Deviant behaviour is going against the social ‘norms’ or constructs that society deems appropriate. This deviant behaviour would be controlled using informal sanctions in the form of family, peers and social groups. For instance if you were to belch in public you may receive a glare, someone could make a comment for which you would be shamed into conforming. When dealing with criminal behaviour the criminal justice systems would impose a punishment, such as a fine or imprisonment this would be formal social control. However they are subject to change over time as they reflect changing values and attitudes. According to Pilkington et al “Crime and deviance are relative to time, place and culture” (2006, pg.204) for example homosexuality was decriminalised in 1967 and the legal age of consent between two men has decreased from 21 to 16 years of age. ‘Not all crimes are deviant and not all deviant acts are illegal or criminal’ Siegel (2007, pg.6) this is why the relationship between the two is not straightforward. Sociologists argue ‘crime is socially constructed definitions of crime depend on how society interprets particular actions’ Chapman (2004, pg.127). Not all deviance is negative for example,