Social Explanations of Crime

Chapter 3

Some History on Behaviourism

Classical (Pavlovian) Conditioning

Stimulus-response Associations

Behaviourism as perspective on human nature

Watson: Eliminate the “mind”

because it could not be observed or measured

Interplay between stimulus & response only

All behaviour controlled by external environment

Learning Theories

All behaviour is learned Instrumental (operant) learning

Skinner & behaviourism Facilitates personal adaptation Consequences and rewards Reinforcements & Punishments

Response is strengthened by outcome that follows Response is weakened by outcome that follows Positive & Negative reinforcement vs. Punishment

Skinnerian Perspective

Environmental stimuli are primary• behaviour can be understood by examining

simplest stimulus-response chains of behaviour

Focuses on emitted behavioursJuveniles repeat rewarded behaviour

(reinforcement) and do not repeat behaviour that is punished

Shoplifting; Burglary; Robbery Physical rewards &/or social & psychological reinforcements

WHY DON’T WE ALL DO CRIME?

Strong connection between deviant behaviour and aversive consequencesPunishment weakens a response or makes it

less likely to recur

Opportunity to make connections (active problem solvers; socialization)

When Punishment Works

Immediately punishing a self-destructive behaviour

Milder punishments appear to work as well as harsh ones

Consistency is important Younger criminals:

reduces rates of arrest but not recidivism; severity of punishment makes no diff (fines &

probation as effective as jail); when get away with crime, behaviour is

intermittently reinforced

When Punishment Fails If administered inappropriately Recipient may respond with anxiety, fear or

rage Effectiveness is often temporary Most misbehaviour is difficult to punish

immediately Punishment conveys little info – only teaches

how to avoid it An action intended to punish may be

reinforcing

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

Focus on ‘inner’ processes in learning Assumption: people learn primarily by

observing and listening to others. Social environment is most important factor in

acquisition of behaviour and reinforcement for the maintenance of behaviour.

Guides our sentencing practices !

Basic concept: people in all walks of life have the potential to become delinquents or criminals.

SOCIAL(COGNITIVE) LEARNING

Cognitive processes: Perceptions, thoughts, expectancies, competencies, & values

Learning is a change in knowledge that has the potential for affecting behaviour.

Albert Bandura Modeling

Edwin Sutherland Differential association theory

Observational Learning - Bandura

Imitational aspects of social learning:Can acquire behaviour simply by watching

others (models) and refined through practice & reinforcement

Direct participation & reinforcement not necessary Not what model says; about what model DOES Observed behaviour more likely to be replicated if

model rewarded Maintained behaviour depends on situation and

expectancies for personal gain Substantial body of evidence supporting theory

The Modelling Process (Bandura: 1977)

Four basic steps Attention

Observe acts

Retention Reproduction

reinforcement

Motivation

Differential Association Theory Edwin Sutherland (cultural, not individual roots) Explains crime across the social structure:

Criminal behaviour is learned through intimate social relationships (peers)

Views about deviance learned through exposure to value system (*attitudes) that are pro-deviant

Deviant communities ‘differentially organized’ subcultures (own values, traditions, & norms for behaviour)

Many forms of crime require people to work with each other (& to be learned same as non-deviant activities)

Accounts for acquisition of criminal tendencies, not maintenance of performance

Differential Association TheoryExposure to competing definitions of appropriate

and inappropriate conduct

Definitions favourableor unfavourable to criminal behaviour

are learned throughinteraction in

intimate social groups

Excess of definitionsfavourable to law

violation

Delinquent andcriminal behaviour

Learning and criminalmotivations and

techniques

Youtube Links

Stanley Cup Riot in Vancouver – 1994

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2II3UIV2ars

The Milgram Experiment

http://youtube.com/watch?v=274wQJmdRQg

Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment

http://youtube.com/watch?v=E-21DE_064s&NR=1

The Family

May provides the reinforcement that shapes behaviour and models for criminal behaviour

Studied from 2 anglesFamily interactions

Do parenting styles and other circumstances bear on development or future delinquency?

Family structure Is having many siblings a protective factor? Is a single-parent household a risk factor?

‘broken home’ or homes ‘broken’

Family Structuring

Reflects the quality of parenting provided:Constant criticism, neglect or verbal abuse?Low supervision?Lack of discipline? Inconsistent discipline?

Harsh physical punishment?

Hoffman’s Child-Rearing Styles

NOTE: research is correlational Personality & behaviour function of many factors

such as: Heredity Parenting styles Bi-directional influence of parent-child Other experiences

In general, physical punishment, inconsistent punishment; poor parental monitoring, poor discipline & lack of family cohesion linked to violent delinquency

The Power of Parents

Nonshared environment is more important influence on personality

Few parents have a single child-rearing style that is consistent over time & that they use with all children (stressors, moods, child’s age & temperament)

Even with consistency, may be little relation between what they do & how child turns out Columbine High School murders

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKDvT1f6HDc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJ13CZ4Hekg

Reena Virk

Family Relationships

DivorceNot divorce per se or absence of father figureStress & discord prior to separation appears

as operating factor for risk of delinquency Not enough time with children; depressed;

stressed out, self-absorbed

Children may feel unloved & normal practices are disrupted (discipline) & reduces attachment between parent and child

Family and Crime

Criminal parents are more likely to have criminal children:Social modeling: role modelPoorer & more chaoticParenting styles of criminal parents poorDrugs & alcohol more prevalent in home

School & Peer Influences

School is one of most influential environments Academic failure

Peer rejection far more traumatic than punitive treatment

Reflects contact with antisocial youths: Some delinquent acquaintances or friends No positive acquaintances Strong allegiance to peers

Subversive (antisocial) values and ideas Technique of neutralization

Peer Influences: Antisocial Attitudes

Reflects criminal or otherwise antisocial attitudes:Delinquent attitudesUnconventional attitudesNot actively seeking helpActively rejecting helpCallous attitudeDefiant attitude

Social Control Theory Hirschi (1969) – importance of social bonds

(protective factors against crime) Argues that crime and delinquency occurs when

individuals not socialized to be law-abiding Do not have the controls that normally hold basic

human nature in check Child’s relationship with parent is most important

factor in delinquency involvement

Objection to theory: only partially accounts for deviant behaviour – how do bonds break down?

Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory

Weak attachment to conventional people and

insensitivity to their opinions

Weak commitment to conventional social

enterprises like education, work & social rewards

Weak involvement in legitimate law-abiding

activity

Weak belief in conventional values &the validity of the law

Delinquent or criminal conduct

Deterrence Theory

Frequency of crime will vary inversely with certainty, swiftness, & severity of punishment

Works because of fear of external sanctions and negative consequences (we deter ourselves)

Objection to theory: many crimes are impulsive or emotion based & little consideration of consequences

Deterrence Theory

Delinquent or criminal conduct

Lack of severity(gravity of sanction)

Lack of certainty(high likelihood of

punishment)

Lack of celerity(short period of time

separating misconductfrom punishment)

Labelling Theory Official (social) label & sanctioned process

Society reacts to violations against social norms by applying labels & stigmatizing behaviour of other groups

Self-fulfilling prophecy (deviant label may actually increase deviant behaviour due to label’s negative impacts on one’s social status, ‘life chances’, and sense of self)

Assumptions Acts are not intrinsically deviant Crime is a label that becomes attached to behaviour

for social reasons Criminal justice agents are influenced by

characteristics of offender (age, race, class)

Labelling

Deviancy is socially constructedNot act itself but contextual meaning attached

to it that defines if deviant or not So the focus is on:

Who gets defined/labelled deviant?How does this process occur?What are the consequences of being labelled

deviant?

Stigmatization

Labels inform us as to the conduct but explain very little about the motivations

Labels carry a “generalized symbolic value” Social, self & structural stigma Stigma causes and perpetuates further

deviant behaviour

General Tenets of Labelling Perspective

Ongoing involvement in deviance

Multiplicity of influences Initial primary devianceUnofficial and/or official labelling

Deviant shunned by conventional society

Development ofDeviant self-image,

Self-concept &identity

Impact of Labelling Theory

Objection to theory: focuses on deviance of marginalized groups & oversimplifies relation between attitudes, self-concept & behaviour. Not totally arbitrary.

E.g.; Mental illness Deinstitutionalization between 1965 & 1985 Exposure to institutional life created & reinforced negative self-

images; slowing down recovery & reintegration into community

Age and Gender

Majority of crime committed by males in early teens and twenties

Most theories relate most strongly to particular stages in an offender’s life

Most research conducted with samples of males Theorizing about female offenders uses different

sets of explanatory factors (victims, mental illness, home & family factors)

Criminal ‘Career’ Development

Different developmental pathways (trajectories) suggest how childhood & adolescence antisocial behaviour (ASB) is shaped & maintained

Strong evidence that most serious, persistent delinquency begins early & worsens with age Age of onset & chronic offending in adolescence

Beginning to target development of ASB during preschool years

Moffitt: characteristics of child

Moffitt’s Developmental Theory of Crime

The Dual Trajectories in the Origins of Conduct Disorder (CD)

"Early Starters“ <13 (& continue) "Late Starters“ 13+

Life-course-persistent (LCP) offenders

Adolescent limited (AL) offenders

DSM-IV conduct disorder: childhood-onset type

DSM-IV conduct disorder: adolescent-onset type

Minor aggression (bullying, fighting), lying, hurting animals, biting and hitting

by age 4

Serious aggression (mugging, forced sex, use of weapon), stealing, running

away, truancy, breaking & entering

Neurological problems: attention deficit or hyperactivity

Little to no problems with peer rejection; have learned how to get

along with others

5-10% of the male juvenile offender population (2% females)

Majority of juvenile offender population; ceases or stops offending

around age 18

Merton’s Strain Theory ANOMIE: “without norms” Gives the influence of society upon the individual a central position

Crime is a social construction & defined by those in power (persisting structural social gap that pushes people to break rules – normal, maybe even necessary)

Life is about success Crime increases when the social structure prevents people from achieving

culturally defined goals (getting money) through legitimate means (job)

Where legitimate and conventional means of success are unavailable

1. Unequal opportunity

2. Strain & stress ensue (permanent conflict)

3. Adapt by conforming to rules or deviance becomes a means to an end

Merton’s Strain TheoryMembers of lower classsocialized to embrace

conventional middle-class values & norms

People in lower class confrontlack of legitimate opportunities

to achieve middle-class success

Strain and frustration ensue

Legitimate modeof adaptation“Conformity”

Illegitimate modes of adapation

“Nonconforming”

Summary

Importance of antisocial/antiauthority & pro-criminal attitudes & beliefs in the promotion of criminal behaviour in young people

Broad range of situational & personal factors involved in delinquency

RISK FACTORS (not to be confused with causal factors)

Social, Parental & Family Relative poverty and social class Peers Education Family relationship, structure Gender & Age Substance abuse Antisocial attitudes

Vojkovic Article