The Influence Of Group Dynamics On Criminal Behavior

The biological theories are essential to the criminal justice profession so that they won't assume that a person's genetic characteristics cause a person to commit a crime. However, there are born criminals and “these types of criminals are the most dangerous, and can be identified through his or her stigmata or identifying characteristics” (Akers, Sellers, See, & Kieser, 2013, p. 10). Biological theories are the bases for severe criminal behavior mostly found among people who are born with an innate impulse to commit a

Is criminal behavior a learned behavior? Is it simply dependent upon ones environment or is it much more complex? Many theorists have examined criminal behavior, such as Edwin Sutherland, Pavlov along with Hirschi. Sutherland, who devised the differential association theory, according this theory he stated that criminality is learned from those who are close to us, or whom we have a close association with. An individual’s behavior may be deviant if those whom they are associated with are also involved in aberrant behavior. Sutherland’s theory that criminal behavior is “learned” then eliminates psychological and biological

Within the city of Knoxville, Tennessee, the low income areas and housing developments are rampant with what we call order maintenance crimes. These are mostly misdemeanor crimes such as drugs, public intoxication, vandalism, loitering, panhandling, and prostitution. These crimes cause disruptions in the community and usually involve the same individuals time after time. Most of the individuals are not from the communities where these violations are committed.

High crime rates are an ongoing issue through the United States, however the motivation and the cause of crime has yet to be entirely identified. Ronald Akers would say that criminality is a behavior that is learned based on what an individual sees and observes others doing. When an individual commits a crime, he or she is acting on impulse based on actions that they have seen others engage in. Initially during childhood, individuals learn actions and behavior by watching and listening to others, and out of impulse they mimic the behavior that is observed. Theorist Ronald Akers extended Sutherland’s differential association theory with a modern viewpoint known as the social learning theory. The social learning theory states that

Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behavior, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory,.

The authors Edwin Sutherland and Donald Cressey’s article about the differential association theory of deviance define both criminal and noncriminal behavior essentially the same. In the opening paragraph, the authors make several statements referencing normative behavior as the same or similar to criminal behavior. It would seem, based on the article, that the difference between criminal and noncriminal behavior is based on how individuals chose to act upon gaining the knowledge.

When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).

I also agree with you in that more research needs to be done in the areas of pinning down why there seems to be correlations to certain sub-groups of people and the commission of crime. Moreover, we are placing faith in a broken justice system to make the declaration of who should be punished, who needs treatment, and who needs both. Furthermore, even if our system could make these declarations correctly, it does not have the resources to provide the corresponding treatment and eventual

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the social learning theory of crime, and how it relates to certain criminal acts. Ronald Akers would say that a person’s desire to engage in crime is learned “through exposure to and the adoption of definitions favorable to crime” (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox 2014, p. 140). When an individual commits a crime they are acting on impulse because of actions they saw others engage in primarily during childhood, and therefore mimic those actions. Akers saw the need to extend Sutherland’s Differential association theory therefore creating a modern viewpoint known as Social learning theory (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox 2014). Social learning theory has four main mechanism of learning to describe how crime is learned.

The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anticriminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms involved in any other learning process.

Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behaviour. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment.

The social learning theory states that criminal behavior is learned. Criminals learn their bad behaviors from close relationships they may have with criminal peers (Siegel & Worrall, 2016). Children look up to their parents; they want to be just like them. So, if children grow up surround by crime, they think that it is both normal and acceptable, and it is likely that they will participate in criminal behavior when they are older. As a result of learning this behavior, it is passed down through generations and is never broken. This can also be learned from friendships people may have with negative influences. Young adults and children want to fit in with their peers, so if they are surrounded with those who commit crimes, they are probably going to do the same because “everyone is doing it”.

Differential association theory enables the prediction crime and an understand the cause of criminal behaviour. The Thomas Antwi Bosiakoh in Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning defines it as “a process by which individuals come to have differential access to criminal values through interaction with other people” In summary it suggests that delinquent behaviour is learned thought interaction with other pro-criminal people. Initially DAT was presented by Sutherland in 1939, however in 1947 it was revised, consisting of nine outlining principles. These include: criminal behaviour is learned, criminal behaviour is learned in interactions with other people, criminal behaviour occurs in an intimate group, criminal learnings include techniques and motives, motives are learned from definitions of legal codes as favourable or unfavourable, a person is a criminal because of excess of of definitions favourable to the violation of law over definitions unfavourable to the violation of law, differential association varies, the processes of learning criminal behaviour is the same mechanism as learning any other processes and both criminal and noncriminal behaviours are expression of the same needs and value. These outlining principles form the bases of the theory. DAT has remained one of the most influential theories in understanding the impact of group behaviour and the formation of criminal behaviour.

For many years, sociologists and psychologists have tried to explain the origins of deviant behavior in the society. However, in order to understand the nature and structure of criminal behavior, there is need to understand a myriad of factors, such as societal functions, beliefs, norms, values, as well as sanctions. All these are part of a system in the society, and they play a significant role in influencing the behavior of individuals. For this reason, scholars have come up with social theories, which aim to explain why some individuals indulge themselves in deviant acts. Robert Merton and Peter Blau are among some of the sociologists who have dedicated their time and effort to developing comprehensive and informed perspectives towards crime in the society. This paper seeks to address the viewpoints of Merton and Blau, comparing and contrasting how Robert Merton and Peter Blau explain why people commit crimes and identifying the rationale behind their evaluations and assertions regarding criminal behavior in society. Assertively, both theorists present that a conflict between individual and collective responsibilities or obligations is the main source of criminal behavior in the society.

20). This illustrates that not only is persons' genetics contributing to criminal behaviour 'but' also the environment in which the they are socialised can initiate deviancy.