Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What are the causes of crimes
Causes of crime in society
Causes of crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Crime manifests itself in various ways in society and oftentimes difficult to pinpoint what drives people to commit certain actions. The Columbine shooting was a particular incident that ended in tears and suffering which resulted in numerous research as to what was going through the minds of these young individuals at the time of the shooting. Therefore, this paper will analyze specifically the role of differential association- reinforcement as altered by Akers in propelling Dylan Klebold to commit such heinous act, while also giving credit to Edwin Sutherland for first formulating the framework of differential association. “Dylan Klebold was born to a middle class family on September 11th 1981” (Dylan Klebold Biography, 2016). “His father In addition to this overview Sutherland outlines nine specific factors which may enhance one’s ability to learn the criminal behaviors but for the purposes of this paper, three of the nine will be analyzed closely; Firstly, “criminal behavior must be learned through interaction with other persons in the process of communication” (Gongenvare & Dotter, 2007, 384). Furthermore, the idea of communication is broken down into two forms, verbal and gestures. Sutherland indicates that through gestures the conversation elicits a stimuli that allows for response from each individual, by analyzing these responses can indicate attitudes towards the topic or object. 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, In light of this, looking more in depth into Aker’s alteration of this theory he takes into account the three factors listed above but proposes that on top of it “behavior is learned based on the principles of Skinner’s operant conditioning with classical conditioning as a secondary factor” (Burgess & Akers, 1966, 137). This gives way to the idea of reinforcement, that social reinforcement enhances the learning of criminal behaviors. For this process to take flight Akers outlines the necessary components. Firstly “the group/gang must have normative definitions of what they perceive is right or wrong which will eventually turn into discriminative stimuli” (Bartol, Curt, & Bartol, 2010, 97) which are signals transmitted by subcultural or peer groups to indicate whether certain actions should be rewarded or punished. In this regards, “the strength and likelihood of one adopting these values are indicative of the amount of reinforcement and the frequency of it” (Burgess & Akers, 1966,
Differential Association Theory The film “Blow” covers many different topics of differential association theories. The attitudes, the values, and the motives for criminal behavior as learned behavior. The film Blow, goes into the start of a young kid name George Jung, his parents want him to have values and live a wonderful life for himself. George is raised with father owning his own business, a stay home mother.
Interaction and communication in intimate groups is important element in the process of learning. The learning included acquisition of the necessary skills and techniques of committing the crime, sometimes they are complicated, sometimes simple. Second, the person learned the definitions of favorable and unfavorable legal codes, which provided the person a specific direction of motives, drives, rationalization, and attitudes. The definitions may mainly learned from delinquent peers and family structure. When the definitions favorable to violation of law a person has learned excess definitions unfavorable to violation of law, then the person would become delinquent. Lastly, the person would commit crime when an objective opportunity existed (Sutherland,
Social learning theory was first developed by Robert L. Burgess and Ronald L Akers in 1966 (Social Learning theory, 2016). In 1973, Akers wrote a book entitled Deviant Behaviour: A Social Learning Approach, which discussed Aker’s conception of the social learning theory. He developed social learning theory by extending Sutherland’s theory of differential association (Cochran & Sellers, 2017). Social learning theory is based on the principles of Pavlov’s operant and classical conditioning. Akers believes that crime is like any other social behavior because it is learned through social interaction (Social Learning theory, 2016). Social learning theory states that the probability of an individual committing a crime or engaging in criminal behaviour is increased when they differentially associate with others who commit criminal behavior (Cochran & Sellers, 2017). Social learning theory is classified as a general theory of crime, and has been used to explain many types of criminal behaviour (Social Learning theory, 2016). Furthermore, social learning theory is one of the most tested contemporary theories of crime. There are four fundamental components of social learning theory; differential association, definitions, differential reinforcement and imitation (Social Learning theory,
Harris was “the callously brutal mastermind” while Klebold was the “quivering depressive who journaled obsessively about love and attended the Columbine prom three days before opening fire” (Columbine High School, History). On an article published by Cullen on Slate.com, it reveals the true motivation and meaning behind the actions of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.
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
Trait Theory suggests that the criminal behavior that one may partake in is related to personality traits inherited at birth. “Psychological traits are stable personality patterns that tend to endure throughout the life course and across social and cultural contexts.” (Schmalleger, 2016) This theory also suggests that these traits give criminals “predispositions to respond to a given situation in
Crimes are deliberate acts, with the intent of benefiting the offender. 2. Benefiting unsuccessfully in choosing the best decisions because of the risks and uncertainty involved. 3. Decision making significantly varies with the nature of the crime. 4. Involvement decisions are quite different from the commission (event decision) of a specific act. 5. Involvement decisions are divided into three stages: first time involvement (initiation), continued involvement (habituation) and ceasing to offend (desistance), 6. Event decisions include a sequence of choices made at each stage of the criminal act, involvement model, background factors and situational life styles, initiation (of becoming involved in a crime), habituation (deciding to continue with crime), distance (deciding to stop criminal behavior) and event model – criminal even
Sutherland’s theory suggests that people learn to commit crime and deviant behaviors from others. His theory is similar to what is mentioned in the book. An example of this would be how Billy’s friends, who most of them were much older than he, would take him out on Saturdays to Dorchester and they would teach him “the art of snatching items” from convenience stores (155) Laub and Sampson agree with this theory of learning by association. It is important to see the correlation between peers and self and the values they share. Rather than be independent, the “learning offender” adopts the values of his
Akers (2000) states that, “The principle of differential Association is that a person commits criminal acts because he or she has learned “Definitions” (rationalizations and attitudes) favorable to violation of law in “excess” of the definitions unfavorable to violation of law” (p. 73). The key notion of Akers’ theory is that individuals who commit crime, do so because they have educated themselves on various types of behaviors and attitudes that dwell on law-breaking. This also happens to be one of the perceptions included in Sutherland’s Differential Association
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.
Winfree, T., & Abadinsky, H. (2nd Ed.). (2003). Understanding Crime: Theory and Practice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth publishers.
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.
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.
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.
Different schools of thought propose varying theoretical models of criminality. It is agreeable that criminal behaviour is deep rooted in societies and screams for attention. Biological, Social ecological and psychological model theories are key to helping researchers gain deeper comprehension of criminal behaviour and ways to avert them before they become a menace to society. All these theories put forward a multitude of factors on the outlooks on crime. All these theories have valid relevancy to continuous research on criminal behaviour.