Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Crime and social processes
Crime and social processes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
John Igagni’s murder, although unsolved, can be explained using modern day theories and approaches to crime. Edward O. Wilson’s socio-biological approach and the theory of differential association, both can be utilized when explaining the murder of John Igagni. Wilson’s theory analyzes the crime using a much larger scale of time and focuses on the adaptive history behind the action and the root instinct that motivates the behavior. In this approach, Wilson is affirming the thoughts of territoriality and how the instinctual need for territory that use to be prevalent in an earlier generation still impacts behavior today (O’Brady, 2014). Why this murder was committed could also be explained using the theory of differential association as this …show more content…
With this fact, we can apply sociobiological theory to explain why Igagni was killed. Since the days of the first people, people have always assumed a need for territory, which correlates with the human need for survival. For example living on top of a hill, would have been smart in the middle ages as they could have seen their enemies coming. Through evolution, this genetic impulse for Territory has simmered down into a constant feeling of needing more. Most humans fulfill this desire with materialistic possessions such as the new iPhone and a big house. But for members of society from lower classes who can’t purchase these things, or for people who can’t find satisfaction in material, participating in gang activity can sometimes fulfill this lust for power and territory. Igagni’s murderer could 've committed the murder for many specific reasons but whether it have been for money, revenge, land, information or just an example, all of these traits fall under the umbrella of territorial desire. This desire can be illustrated using the approach taken by Wilson, affirming the thoughts of territoriality and how the approach can create criminal actions. In the textbook, they specifically give the example of gang violence saying “the violence associated with street gangs would be a good example of the aggressiveness associated with territoriality.” (O’Grady, 2014, 78). The evolutionary desire of territory can be demonstrated by gang violence, specifically the murder of John Igagni, therefore the sociobiological theory of crime gives us a clear and concise approach to analyzing gang homicide in
Differential association theory was founded by Edwin H. Sutherland (Lilly, 2012, p. 43). This theory states that “any person will inevitably come into contact with definitions favorable to violation of the law and with definitions unfavorable to violation of the law” (Lilly, 2012, p. 44). Whichever definition is more prominent in a person’s mind, will lead to their decision of “whether the person embraces crime as an acceptable way of life” (Lilly, 2012, p. 44). Sutherland composed nine propositions that explained the theory. He explained that “crime is learned through the process of differential association” (Lilly, 2012, p. 45). The nine propositions explained that “criminal behavior is learned” (Lilly, 2012, p. 45). He explained that by communicating with others, especially those that are close to them they are more likely to pick up behaviors from those people. Differential association theory also explains that learning criminal behaviors “involves all the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning” (Lilly, 2012, p. 45). While learning a criminal behavior one not only learns “the techniques of committing the crime” but also the “specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes” involved with crime (Lilly, 2012, p. 45). This is theory is shown throughout the book when the young Mr. Moore was influenced by the life of crime that was present in his
The subculture of violence theory revolves around individuals using violent acts in need of survival. In this theory, people kill because one was living their lifestyle through violent acts as normal behavior. According to Thio, Taylor, and Schwartz they mention, “violent behavior is more effective than nonpoor families’ (Thio et al, 2013, p. 79). Most poor neighborhoods have higher chances of committing crimes, especially, knowing that the behavior of the actions is reflected towards survival. These behaviors can be reflected on the family, peers, and community aspects. Living in poor neighborhoods, can be scary when not knowing what type of violent act or individuals that live around one. For example; some individuals might be influenced with gangs or fall into the wrong crowd. Individuals, who choose violence, are influenced by the experience from these gang groups, peers, parents, or normal neighborhood behaviors. These individuals live through the violence acts to kill because this is the type of lifestyle they are living in. I believe that people are violent because they believe killing is an escape to get away from issues and own problems. Also, people might turn to killing because it’s the main solution for survival. For example; if one is being harassed, one might feel that violence could to a key factor to protect themselves in this type of
Differential association theory best explains the burglary deviance. There are many principles associated with this type of learning theory. Edwin Sutherland’s theory discusses how crime is a learned behavior where one’s family, peers, and environment are of great influence. Differential association theory seeks to prove that criminal behavior is learned and this paper will evaluate the connection between the two.
Psychology’s contribution to the assessment would be a better comprehension of the etiology of violence as it relates to living in the urban setting of Chicago. The discipline of Psychology could isolate and define the factors that serve as precursors to violent behavior within the urban setting. In the study of “gang” or herd mentality, as it relates to gang violence, research efforts might involve...
Simon, Robert I. "Serial Killers, Evil, And Us." National Forum 80.4 (2000): 23. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
Secondly, differential association varies based on the intensity, duration, frequency, priority, and timing of one’s process of learning. Through this notion, the individual’s self is disregarded and more emphasis is placed on the extrinsic factors. Furthermore, “it is an individual’s experiences and the ways in which the individual defines those experiences which constitute to the learning of criminality”. (Gongenvare & Dotter, 2007,
The study of criminology involves many different theories in which people attempt to explain reasoning behind criminal behavior. Although there are many different theories the focus of this paper is the comparison and contrasting sides of The Differential Association Theory (DAT) of Edwin Sutherland and the Neoclassicism Rational Choice Theory. The Differential Theory falls under Social Process Theories which focuses on sociological perspective of crime. The Rational Choice Theory falls under Neoclassicism which believes that criminal behavior is ultimately a choice.
In this paper, I am going to going to examine the criminological theory of Differential Association theory by Edwin H. Sutherland. Also I am going to examine Kirk White from the film The Wild and Wonderful World of the Whites of West Virginia. Furthermore, I am going to apply Edwin H. Sutherland’s Differential Association theory to explain and understand the deviant actions of this character. I conclude that Differential association theory will explain why this character act in a deviant why.
This paper explores three criminological theories as to why Jeffrey Dahmer committed his crimes. Although these approaches vary in terms of defining the cause of crime, one thing is certain, there is no single cause of crime; the crime is rooted in a diversity of causes and takes a variety of forms depending on the situation in which the crimes occur. However, the published articles vary in their definitions and uses of Criminological Theory. Rawlins (2005) suggest that the criminal phenomenon is too complex to be explained by a single theory. Other theories suggest differently and; therefore, have varying explanations. This paper examines the Psychological, Biochemical, and Social Process theories to slightly explain Jeffrey Dahmer’s actions.
Crime exists everywhere. It is exists in our country, in the big cities, the small towns, schools, and even in homes. Crime is defined as “any action that is a violation of law”. These violations may be pending, but in order to at least lower the crime rate, an understanding of why the crimes are committed must first be sought. There are many theories that are able to explain crimes, but three very important ones are rational choice theory, social disorganization theory and strain theory.
In Green River, Running Red, author Ann Rule describes a killer without remorse, who is the product of both personal and social influences, in effect forcing him to murder women and to continue to do so for over a decade as a fulfillment of his fantasies. When endeavoring to rationalize the causes of such a mind, theories of deviance, when separated into two distinct categories, positivist and constructionism. Positivist theories, such as the general theory of crime, allows for individual's to piece together events in the life of Gary Ridgway, the Green River killer which would undeniably lead him to a twisted sense of reality, combined with sexual fantasies and a tendency to justify perverted acts of murder. Constructionist theories, specifically conflict theory, are able to shed light on the lives and decisions made by the victims, who were all led to such lifestyles through outward sources. In determining the causes and motivations behind both the offender and the victims, theories of deviance leave little to be speculated on when placing blame on either psychological or social factors.
The two main categories in this typology are homicide related to intimate partner or family relationships, in which victim and perpetrator are relatives, share the same household and/or an intimate relationship; and other interpersonal homicide, in which the victim and perpetrator may or may not know each other. The relationship in intimate partner/ family-related homicide is distinguished from the relationship in the other interpersonal homicide category by the level of emotional attachment and other links, often of an economic or legal nature, between victim and perpetrator. Homicides within this typology can be the result of a premeditated design or of a random act of violence, but the nature of the relationship between perpetrator and victim is a fundamental feature of this crime. Straddling the divide between the private and public spheres, much of this type of violence is attributed to the very nature of coexisting with and among
In today’s society, one will find that there are many different factors that go into the development of a criminal mind, and it is impossible to single out one particular cause of criminal behavior. Criminal behavior often stems from both biological and environmental factors. In many cases criminals share similar physical traits which the general population do not usually have. For example criminals have smaller brains than properly adjusted individuals. However biological reasons cannot solely be the cause of criminal behavior. Therefore, one must look to other sources as to how a criminal mind is developed. Social and environmental factors also are at fault for developing a person to the point at which they are lead to committing a criminal act. Often, someone who has committed a violent crime shows evidence of a poorly developed childhood, or the unsuitable current conditions in which the subject lives. In addition if one studies victimology which is the role that the victim plays in the crime, it is apparent that there are many different causes for criminal behavior. Through the examination of biological factors, in addition to the social and environmental factors which make up a criminal mind, one can conclude that a criminal often is born with traits common to those of criminals, it is the environment that exist around them that brings out the criminal within them to commit indecent acts of crime.
Understanding Psychology and Crime; Perspectives on Theory and Action, New York. PENNINGTON, D ( 2002) , Introducing Psychology: Approaches, Topics and Methods, London, Hodder Arnold TANNENBAUN, B, (2007),Profs link criminal behaviour to genetics [online] , Available at: http://thedp.com/index.php/article/2007/11/profs_link_criminal_behavior_to_genetics [accessed 16th October 2011]. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/41182390/Explanations-of-Criminal-behaviour
Human antisocial behaviour is complex and trying to understand it has always proven to be a daunting intelligent task, especially in modern culturally diverse societies. Crime, broadly defined as behaviour through which individuals obtain resources for others through uncouth means, presents as one of the most refractory internal social dilemmas. Understanding individual criminal acts such a murder, rape or motives behind them is intricate, rather their behavioral definitions and causes offers a more clear platform for argumentative reasoning. Criminal behaviour, regardless of manner, involves use of barbaric methodologies to obtain symbolic or material resources. Criminal behavior results from methodical processes that involve intricate interactions among isolated, societal, and environmental factors in people’s lives.