Transcript Chapter 5 Social Process Theories Chapter Summary     Chapter Five introduces the reader to the social process theories of crime. The chapter begins with an.

Chapter 5
Social Process Theories
1
Chapter Summary




Chapter Five introduces the reader to the social process
theories of crime.
The chapter begins with an overview of differential
association theory, and how this theory developed out of
the neoclassical theories.
This follows with a description of the social bond theories.
Theories regarding labeling and neutralization are the last
theories to be discussed in Chapter Five.
The author follows with an overview of the pros and cons of
each of the theories. Chapter Five concludes with the
policy implications set forth by each of the social process
theories.
2
Chapter Summary
After reading this chapter, students should be able to:
 Explain symbolic interactionism
 Describe & critique differential association theory
 Understand and critique social bond theory
 Explain the process of labeling theory and critique the
theory
 Describe neutralization theory
 Understand the policy implications of social process
theories
3
Introduction
 Social process criminologists operate from a
general sociological perspective known as
symbolic interactionism, which focuses on how
people interpret and define their social reality
and the meanings they attach to it in the process
of interacting with one another via language.
4
Introduction
 Thomas theorem: If men [and women] define
situations as real, they are real in their
consequences
 Social process theories seek to describe the
process of criminal and delinquent socialization and
how the process of social conflict pressures
individuals into committing antisocial acts.
5
Differential Association Theory
 Edward Sutherland championed differential
association theory.
 Nine propositions outlining the process by
which individuals come to acquire attitudes
favorable to criminal or delinquent behavior:
 Criminal behavior is learned.
 Criminal behavior is learned in interaction
with other persons in a process of
communication.
6
Differential Association Theory
 The principle part of learning criminal behavior
occurs within intimate personal groups.
 When criminal behavior is learned, the learning
includes techniques of committing the crime, the
specific direction of motives, drives,
rationalizations, and attitudes.
7
Differential Association Theory
 The specific direction of motives and drives is
learned from definitions of legal code as
favorable and unfavorable.
 A person becomes delinquent because of an
excess of definitions favorable to violations of
law over definitions unfavorable to violations of
law.
 Differential associations may vary in frequency,
duration, priority, and intensity.
8
Differential Association Theory
 The process of learning criminal behavior by
association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns
involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in
any other learning.
 While criminal behavior is an expression of general
needs and values, it is not explained by them since
non-criminal behavior is an expression of the same
needs and values.
9
Differential Association Theory
 Definitions: Meanings our
experiences, how we see things,
our attitudes, values & habitual
ways of viewing the world.
 Differential social organization:
allows differential association
theorists to adequately account
for the association people have
without reference to individual
differences.
10
Figure 5.1 Diagrammatic Presentation of
Differential Association Theory
Differential social
organization in
lower-class areas
Normative conflict
leads to definitions
favorable to law
violation
Differential
association with
others holding
such definitions
Crime and
delinquency
11
Ronald Acker’s Social Learning Theory
 Social learning theory applies the concepts of
operant psychology to the vague “definitions
favorable.”
 Operant psychology: A perspective on learning
that asserts that behavior is governed and shaped
by its consequences.
 Behavior has two general consequences; it is
reinforced or it is punished.
 Reinforcement: Positive or negative consequences
for behavior that make it more likely the behavior
will be repeated in similar situations.
12
Ronald Acker’s Social Learning Theory
-Punishment: Leads to the weakening or eliminating
of the behavior preceding it that may also be
positive or negative.
Rewards & punishments are differentially valued, &
shaping our behavior.
-Discrimination: Clues that signal whether a
particular behavior is likely to be followed by
reward or punishment.
13
Figure 5.2
Illustrating Types of Reinforcement and Punishment
Reinforcement Increases
Behavior
Punishment Decreases Behavior
Positive Reinforcement
Positive Punishment
(something rewarding received)
(something punishing applied)
Negative Reinforcement
Negative Punishment
(something punishing avoided)
(something rewarding lost)
14
Social Control Theories
 Social control: Any action on the part of others,
deliberate or not, that facilitates conformity to
social rules.
 Social control may be direct, formal, and coercive,
but indirect and informal social control is
preferable because it produces prosocial behavior
regardless of the presence or absence of external
coersion.
15
Walter Reckless’ Containment Theory
 Walter Reckless’ theory is an early control
that sought answers to why it is that some
people in similar environments are immune to
criminal temptations and others are not.
 Those of us who resist antisocial temptations
are contained by two overlapping forms of
containment: outer and inner.
 Outer containment is the social pressure on
individuals brought to bear by the family &
other important individuals and groups to
abide by community rules.
16
Walter Reckless’ Containment Theory
 Inner containment
relies heavily on how
persons see
themselves—their
self-concept.
 Persons with a negative
self-concept are more
likely to become
criminal and delinquent
than persons with a
positive self-concept.
17
Travis Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory
Travis Hirschi’s social control theory is a theory
that places primary importance on the family.
18
The Four Social Bonds
 Hirshi makes the assumption that the typical
delinquent lacks:
 Attachment: Emotional component of conformity.
 Commitment: Rational component of conformity and
refers to a lifestyle in which one has invested
considerable time and energy in the pursuit of a
lawful career.
 Involvement: A direct consequence of commitment;
it is a part of an overall conventional patter of
existence.
 Belief: The acceptance of the social norms
regulating conduct.
 Antisocial and criminal behavior will emerge
automatically if social controls are lacking.
19
From Social- to Self-Control: Gottfredson & Hirschi’s
Low Self-Control Theory
 Self-control: The extent to which different
people are vulnerable to the temptations of the
moment.
 Following an unrestrained path to pleasure often
leads to crime.
 Most crimes are spontaneous acts requiring little
skill and earn the criminal minimal, short term,
satisfaction.
20
Figure 5.3
Diagrammatic Representation of Hirschi's
Social Control Theory
Lack of social bonds
—attachments,
commitment,
involvement, belief
—that function as
social controls
Releases natural
inclinations to
satisfy needs
expediently
Crime and
delinquency
21
The Origin of Self-Control
 Low self-control
is established in early childhood, it tends to persist
throughout life, and it is the result of incompetent
parenting.
 Low self-control
is the default outcome that occurs in the absence
of adequate socialization.
 Low self-control is considered a stable component
of a criminal personality.
 A criminal opportunity is a situation that presents
itself to an offender by which he or she can
immediately satisfy needs with minimal mental or
physical effort.
22
Labeling Theory:
The Irony of Social Reaction
 The labeling or societal reaction
school takes seriously the power of
bad labels to stigmatize, and by
doing so they evoke the very
behavior the label signifies.
 Labeling theory shifts the focus
from the actor to the reactor.
 Tannenbaum (1938) viewed labeling
of a delinquent or criminal as “bad”
or “evil” as amounting to a selffulfilling prophecy.
23
Figure 5.4
Diagrammatic Representation of Self-Control
Theory
Inadequate
monitoring and
supervision
of children by
parents
and others
Failure to develop
self-control.
Low selfcontrol is the
default option
Low selfcontrol plus
opportunity
Crime and
delinquency
24
The Nature of Crime
 Labeling theorists asserted that crime is defined
into existence rather than discovered.
 There is no crime independent of cultural values
and norms.
 No act is by its nature criminal, because acts do
not have natures until they are witnessed, judged
good or bad, and reacted to as such by others.
25
Primary & Secondary Deviance
 Edwin Lemert: Primary deviance is the initial
nonconforming act that comes to the attention
of the authorities.
 Secondary deviance: Deviance that results from
society’s reaction to offenders’ primary deviance
 Labeled persons may alter their self-concepts in
conformity with the label.
 The label may exclude the person from
conventional employment opportunities & lead to
the loss of conventional friends.
26
Figure 5.5
Diagrammatic Presentation of Labeling Theory
Primary deviance
Flowing from a
variety of causes
that are of no
concern to labeling
theorists
Apprehension and
labeling as criminal or
delinquent. Person is
stigmatized with
a “master status.”
Offenders may
come to accept
labels and
change their
self-concepts to
fit those labels
Secondary
deviance
Delinquency and
crime consequent
to changes in
self-concept
27
Extending Labeling Theory
 John Braithwaite (1989): Nations
with low crime rates are those
where shaming has great social
power.
 Disintegrative shaming:
Condemnation received by
offenders in the criminal justice
system; this shaming is
counterproductive.
 Reintegrative shaming: A method
of condemning the offender’s acts
without condemning him or her
personhood.
28
Sykes and Matza’s Neutralization Theory
 Techniques of neutralization
theory suggests that although
delinquents know that their
behavior is wrong, they justify it as
“acceptable” on a number of
grounds:
 Five techniques of neutralization
 Denial of responsibility
 Denial of injury
 Denial of victim
 Condemnation of the condemners
 Appeal to higher loyalties
29
Sykes and Matza’s Neutralization Theory
 If we start engaging in behavior that we consider
morally wrong, but find that behavior rewarding,
we tend to develop a form of psychological
discomfort called cognitive dissonance.
 The elimination of uncomfortable inconsistencies
between attitudes and behavior becomes a
powerful motive to change on or the other.
 Techniques of neutralization are both ways of
easing uncomfortable feelings of guilt and shame,
and ways of loosening moral constraints.
30
Evaluation of Social Process Theories
 Differential association theory shares the
unconstrained vision in that it assumes that it is
antisocial behavior is learned, & not something
that comes naturally in the absence of prosocial
training.
 Critics of differential association stress that
antisocial behavior comes naturally to the
unsocialized individual & the theory ignores
individual differences.
31
Evaluation of Social Process Theories
 Ackers’ social learning theory specifies how
definitions favorable to law violation are learned.
 This is emphasized through the use of operant
conditioning, although it neglects the role of
individual differences in the ease or difficulty
with which persons learn.
 Hirschi’s social control theory is criticized for its
lack of emphasis on the social, economic & political
factors that impede stable and nurturing families.
32
Evaluation of Social Process Theories
 One of the positive elements of neutralization
theory is that it eliminates much of the over
determined image of subcultural values implied in
subculture theories.
 Neutralization theory says nothing about the
origins of the antisocial behavior the actors seek
to neutralize.
33
Evaluation of Social Process Theories
 The major criticism of self-control theory arises
from the Gottfredson and Hirschi’s claim that it
is a general theory meant to explain all crime.
 Labeling theory comes dangerously close to
claiming that the original causes of crime do not
matter.
34
Theory
Key Concepts
Strengths
Weaknesses
Differential
Association
Crime is learned in
association with peers
holding definitions
favorable to law violation.
Most likely to occur in
differentially organized
(lower-class)
neighborhoods.
Explains the onset of
offending and the
power of peer
pressure.
Neglects possibility of like
seeking like (birds of a
feather). Does not make
distinction between private
accepters and temporary
compliers.
Social
Learning
Definitions favorable to
law violation depend on
history of reinforcement
and punishment. Excess
rewards for criminal
behavior perpetuate it.
Adds powerful
concepts of operant
psychology to explain
how people learn
criminal behavior.
Links sociology to
psychology.
Neglects individual
differences affecting what
is reinforcing to whom and
the ease or difficulty with
which one learns.
Social
Bonding
Bonds to social
institutions prevent
crime, which otherwise
comes naturally. The
bonds are attachment,
commitment, involvement,
and belief.
The most popular and
empirically
supported theory.
Emphasizes
importance of the
family and provides
workable policy
recommendations.
Neglects structural
variables contributing to
family instability and to
loss of occupational
opportunities. Neglects
differences in the ease
with which attachment
is
35
achieved.
Theory
Key Concepts
Strengths
Weaknesses
Self-Control
Low self-control explains all
crime and analogous acts. Low
self-control occurs in the
absence of proper parenting.
Exposure to criminal
opportunities explains
differences in criminal
behavior among low self-control
individuals.
Identifies a single
measurable trait to be
responsible for many
antisocial behaviors.
Accords well with the
impulsive nature of most
criminal behavior. Links
sociology to psychology.
Claims too much for a
single trait. Neglects child
influences on parenting
behavior and the affects
of genes on low selfcontrol.
Labeling
Crime has no independent
reality. Original primary
deviance is unimportant; what
is important is the labeling
process, which leads to
secondary (continuing)
deviance. Labeling people
criminal leads them to organize
their self-concepts around that
label.
Explains consequences of
labeling with a “master
status.” Identifies the
social construction of
crime and points to the
power of some (the
powerful) to criminalize
the acts of others (the
powerless).
The neglect of causes of
primary deviance. Advice
that criminals should be
treated not punished
contradicts the theory
that says that there is
nothing intrinsically bad
about crime and therefore
there is nothing to “treat.”
Neutralization
Delinquents and criminals learn
to neutralize moral constraints
and thus their guilt for
committing crimes. They drift
in and out of crime.
Emphasizes that criminals
are no more fully
committed to antisocial
attitudes than they are to
prosocial attitudes. Shows
how criminals handle
feelings of guilt.
Says nothing about the
origins of behavior being
neutralized. More a theory
of antisocial
rationalization than of
crime.
36
Policy & Prevention:
Implications of Social Process Theory
 If learning crime and delinquency within a
particular culture is the problem, then changing
relative aspects of that culture appear to be the
answer; the provision of positive role models to
replace negative role models.
 Given the importance of nurturance and
attachment, both versions of control theory
support the idea of early family intervention
designed to cultivate these things.
37
Policy & Prevention:
Implications of Social Process Theory
 Social-control theory emphasizes opportunity as
well as self-control, thus some of the same
policies advocated by routine activities and
rational choice theorists (target hardening) are
being recommended.
 Labeling theory recommends that we allow
offenders to protect their self-images as noncriminals by not challenging their “techniques of
neutralization.”
38
Policy & Prevention:
Implications of Social Process Theory
The only policy implication of neutralization
theory is that criminal justice agents charged
with managing offenders should strongly challenge
their excuse making.
39