Social Process Theory Summarize The Theory Of Victimization

Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike psychological and biological theories they are mostly macro level theories which attempt to explain rates of crime for a group or an area rather than explaining why an individual committed a crime. (Kubrin, 2012). There is however some micro level sociological theories of crime that attempts to explain the individual’s motivation for criminal behavior (Kubrin, 2012). Of the contemporary

There are many theories in the field of criminology that seek to explain the reasons behind why people commit crimes. Social process theory is one such theory and asserts that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with others (Schmalleger, 2012). There are four types of social process theories including: social learning theory, social control theory, labeling theory, and dramaturgical perspective. This paper will explore two of the theories including social learning theory and social control theory. The paper will discuss social process theory and the history of its development, the theory’s importance to criminology, examples of

Criminology is the scientific study of the nature, extent, cause, and control of criminal behavior (Siegel 4). Criminology is not just understanding criminal actions but also studying how to correct and prevent crime, overall. There are five major Criminological theories, (1) Classical Theory, (2) Positivist Theory, (3) Marxist / Conflict Theory, (4) Sociological Theory, and (5) Multifactor / Integrated Theory.

When it comes to victimization there are many different theories and types of victims. Mendelsohn explains his theory through “situational victimization factors.” (Robert, 2013). Basically this boils down to the victim being at the wrong place, around other offenders, or in a high crime area. Hentig prefers to describe victims with “personal factors associated with victimization.” (Robert, 2013). Hentig believes things such as, a person’s social standing, childhood, or mental/emotional state determine their likely hood becoming a victim. Lastly we have Sellin and Wolfgang theory that situations determine someone becoming a victim.

While state dependence asserts that victimization is a risk factor for more victimization to happen, risk heterogeneity argues that certain victims possess characteristics that make them likely targets for both an initial victimization and recurring subsequent victimization. That is to say, recurring victims may have certain attributes that “flag” them as particularly attractive or vulnerable targets for future victimization. Of course, the nature of this “flag effect” depends on the situation and type of crime. Consider a typical convenience store robbery. Certain characteristics of convenience stores may set them apart from other potential retail targets and thereby increase their chances of being repeatedly victimized, even by different offenders. For instance, a store may be repeatedly targeted because it is conveniently located near a freeway on/off ramp; has few customers during late night hours; or is staffed with a single employee. These characteristics raise flags or signals to potential offenders that this store is an “easy” target for

The second theory I would like to discuss is the Strain theory. The strain theory basically states that crime breeds in the gap, imbalance, or disjunction between culturally induced aspirations for economic success and structurally distributed possibilities of achievement. The theory assumes fairly uniform economic success aspirations across social class and the theory attempts to explain why crime is concentrated among the lower classes that have the least legitimate opportunities for achievement. It is the combination of the cultural emphasis and the social structure which produces intense pressure for

A person who experiences a traumatic event may be expected to experience a range of psychological effects, and, for many years, it was assumed that these psychological effects would be the same regardless of the cause of the injury. However, a growing body of knowledge is demonstrating that the impact of criminal victimization is different than the impact of other types of injuries because the intent element makes a difference in how the victim perceives the harm. In addition, victims of different crimes may respond differently to victimization. The psychological effects of victimization are important because they can help guide the criminal justice system for how to interact with victims and how to make the process more victim-appropriate. For example, victims of violent crimes, like sexual assaults, may benefit more from a victim-centered criminal justice approach than victims of other types of crimes (Resick, 1987). However, one of the problems with the traditional approach to victimology is that it has distinguished between different groups of victims. Emerging research suggest that victim needs are similar across the entire spectrum of crime, particularly the victims' needs for information about the crime and the needs for financial restitution to make them whole (ten Boom & Kuijpers, 2012).

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 way individuals learn to interact with society as children tends to predict how they will interact with society and respond to its environments as adults. There are social theories that help the understanding of why individuals choose deviant behaviors and how they progress through life. Social process theories view criminal and deviant criminal behaviors as evolving mechanisms learned through societal interaction. Social development theories view deviant and criminal behaviors as part of a maturation process. Social theories are conclusions that have come about based on the response of individuals to

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

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.

Theories of victimization essentially does something morally unpopular, by discussing how the victim caused their own victimization. Identified below are four theories of victimizations and examples of both strength and weakness of each. The goal for this paper is to briefly define at the four theories in order to grasp a better understanding of how individuals can lessen the opportunity to become a victim of a crime.

Proximity hypothesis says that victims who live near crime are putting themselves at risk of becoming a victim. Someone who makes a little more than their neighbor can easily be a target of some sort of theft.

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.

The social process theory suggests that criminals are raised in an environment that forms them to make unlawful decisions. People are influenced by what they are taught and their surroundings such as where they were raised, their guardians, and people they associated with. Individuals actions and thought process is going to be based off of what their first instinct is and their first instinct is going to be what they know best. For example, if a boy is raised in a home where their family shows their anger by reacting physically, then that child will be more likely the one that is getting in fights at school than the child who grew up in a home where fighting was never present. No one is born with the mind be