Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Influences of family
The Burgess Concentric Zone Theory was the foundation for many social theorist ideas when it came to bridging the gap between crime and neighborhoods. A map which modeled sectioned off rings, demonstrated that all major cities were built on the same concept. With this model in hand, social theorist such as Shaw and McKay, Sutherland, Akers and others of note were able to compare side by side with crime statistics of youth, that in fact majority of crime is linked to specific areas. These areas such as the zone of transition had the highest crime rate. After countless interviews and analysis, the reason for such high crime was due to neighborhood disorganization. With families moving in and out on a consistent basis, the informal form of maintaining …show more content…
As kids grow up, they’re unable to fully align their actions with reason and conjure their own beliefs without outside influences. According to Shaw and McKay, younger people who associate with peers that are gang members or affiliates are more likely to partake in similar activities. Ultimately “criminal behavior is learned through social interactions.” (p.44). Although those who grow up in a disorganized community are more likely to develop a weaker sense of control, doesn’t necessarily mean they cannot develop a strong one. Similar to those who have grown up in a well-controlled neighborhood, there will always be both criminal influences and conventional influences. Sutherland introduces this idea though his theory of differential association. Whichever influence stand dominate over time, that particular person will embrace one side or the other. These idea of differential association gave inspiration to dig even further into this claim. With different sources of influences such as, relationships with family, organizations and public relations can either support the youth’s values or hinder them. So, looking at a well-organized neighborhood. In most cases, family members are well educated, formulate positive organizations and have little to no trouble with the law. As a result, impacts the youth in a way which we consider law-abiding. On the other hand, those who are part of an organized community are
...g, Critical, Peacemaking, Life Course and Strain theories could also be used to explain crime in these neighborhoods. According to Emile Durkheim, mores are different depending on the type of community. On a spectrum, from organic or the lower socio-economic neighborhood to mechanical or the well-structured community in this case Chestnut Hill. In a mechanical society, there is greater cohesion, sharing common values or goals. As could be expected, crime is predicted to be higher in more organic the community is.
He is a decorated veteran, scholar and successful business leader upon graduating. In comparison to the other Wes Moore who never seemed to escape his childhood and ended up in prison. The theory that best explains the authors’ noninvolvement in a life of crime vs. the criminality of the other Wes Moore is the social disorganization theory. Shaw and McKay, the founders of this theory, believed that “juvenile delinquency could be understood only by considering the social context in which youths lived. A context that itself was a product of major societal transformations wrought by rapid urbanization, unbridled industrialization, and massive population shifts” (Lilly, Cullen & Ball, 2015). The theory is centered around transitional zones and competition determined how people were distributed spatially among these zones (Lilly et al., 2015). This model founded by Ernest Burgess showed that high priced residential areas were in the outer zones and the inner zones consisted of poverty (Lilly et al.,
The two theories that are being analyzed in this paper are Ronald Akers’ Social Learning Theory and Travis Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory. Hirschi's social bonding theory is one of many control theories which all take on the task of explaining the core cause of crime; however, this particular theory seems to be the most popular and able to stand the test of time. The Social Bond theory contains four elements that explain what criminals lack that causes them to be more prone to illegal activity, these elements are attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. On the other end of the spectrum is Akers’ Social Learning Theory, which attempts to explain the correlation between and individual's social environment and their behavior depending on what is praised or punished in an individual's specific social organization. (Walsh & Hemmens)
First and foremost, the theory states that criminal behavior is learned, meaning that the behaviors of an individual are influenced and shaped by those they associate with (Clinard & Meier, 2015). The primary reference point here is the nuclear family. Parents teach their children how to walk and talk, who grow up with siblings or in some cases, elderly relatives. With good reason, it is widely held that these interactions create the foundation of the individual’s conception of societal norms and values. That being said, if the individual is capable of assessing proper behavior in society, they are also capable of learning what is considered
There are many different views on the origins of criminal behaviors within societies. One possible reason for why people commit crimes could be because they learned it from others. Edwin Sutherland works to explain this tactic through his theory of differential association. His theory states that criminal behavior is learned in interaction with others in intimate, personal groups. The learning of criminal behavior depends on the strength of the relationship with those who commit deviant actions. This learning also depends on their definitions of legal codes. For example, some people in society rationalize traffic speeding if it is only a couple miles over the speed limit while others are strongly against speeding at any degree. When a person’s
Two major sociological theories explain youth crime at the macro level. The first is Social Disorganization theory, created in 1969 by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay. The theory resulted from a study of juvenile delinquency in Chicago using information from 1900 to 1940, which attempts to answer the question of how aspects of the structure of a community contribute to social control. The study found that a community that is unable to achieve common values has a high rate of delinquency. Shaw and McKay looked at the physical appearance of the neighborhoods, the average income of the population, the ethnicity of the neighborhood, the percent of renters versus owners, and how fast the population of the area changed. These factors all contribute to neighborhood delinquency.
The Cocaine Kids: The Inside Story of a Teenage Drug Ring is an intriguing narrative of the experiences Terry Williams witnessed first hand while observing the lives of “The Kids” and their involvement in the cocaine trade. Throughout this piece, there are numerous behaviors displayed by the drug dealers that are each examples of and can be attributed to well-defined criminological theories. This paper will explore how such criminological theories are associated with how and why individuals are introduced into the world of drug selling, as well as, why they leave it. I will elaborate on this by revealing the motivations and conditions that seem to pressurize these individuals to be drug dealers. Although there are multiples shown, the specific theories I will explore are all based on the same idea that an individual becomes a criminal by learning how to be one through experiences, examples, role models, etc. Such theories include the theory of Differential Association, Subculture of Violence Theory, and the Social Learning Theory.
Why are some neighborhoods more prone to experience violent episodes than others? What is the extent and in what sociologically measurable ways do communities contribute to the causation and prevention of crime in their neighborhoods? Are neighborhood-level predictors adequate to explain differences in violent crime rates in the respective communities? These are some of the questions addressed by this statistically intense paper published in Science 1997, by Sampson, Raudenbush and Earls.
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 individuals commit crime through their association with or exposure to others. According to Akers, people learn how to be offenders based on their observations around them and their association with peers. Theorist Akers states that for one, “people can become involved in crime through imitation—that is by modeling criminal conduct. Second, and most significant, Akers contended that definition and imitation are most instrumental in determining initial forays into crime” (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball 2011:57). Although Akers’ theory has been linked to juvenile delinquency in the past, it has also been tested as a possible cause of crime overall. Individuals learn from observation that criminal behavior is justifiable in certain circumstances. In connection with juvenile delinquency and crime, peers and intimate groups have the most effect on individuals when associated with criminal behavior. One is more likely to mimic the behavior of someone who they have close ties with, whether the behavior is justifiable or...
A problem many communities are faced with is delinquency and gangs. Delinquency and gangs begin to pull in the similarities and focus more on the meaning connected to youth violence from the past to the present. Based on this context, individuals have an understanding the different ways delinquent juveniles are affected by certain policies. Delinquent youth come in many different age groups, sex, ethic group, and race, while society may look at delinquency as starting out as soon as children enter grade school delinquency starts when a child can fully comprehend there wrong doing.
Therefore, the community has informal social control, or the connection between social organization and crime. Some of the helpful factors to a community can be informal surveillance, movement-governing rules, and direct intervention. They also contain unity, structure, and integration. All of these qualities are proven to improve crime rate. Socially disorganized communities lack those qualities. According to our lecture, “characteristics such as poverty, residential mobility, and racial/ethnic heterogeneity contribute to social disorganization.” A major example would be when a community has weak social ties. This can be caused from a lack of resources needed to help others, such as single-parent families or poor families. These weak social ties cause social disorganization, which then leads higher levels of crime. According to Seigel, Social disorganization theory concentrates on the circumstances in the inner city that affect crimes. These circumstances include the deterioration of the neighborhoods, the lack of social control, gangs and other groups who violate the law, and the opposing social values within these neighborhoods (Siegel,
In their Social Disorganization Theory, Shaw and McKay concluded that “bad parts of town” could be found in almost every large city. This is because as observed within the ecological model of expansion in the growth of large cities, there was a distinct interplay of factors influencing Social Disorganization in their zones of transition. Shaw can McKay concluded that it was a place that bred crime (the zone of transition) and that crime is much higher in the zone of transition because of the presence of poverty, residential mobility, and ethnic heterogeneity (Course Textbook, CH.7). These zones of transition were generally speaking seen as “ lower class
Many young people join street gangs due to weak family relationships and poor social control. Social Control Theory presumes that people will naturally commit crime if there were left to their own devices (i.e. no laws in society) and people do not commit crimes because of certain controlling forces, such as social bonds that hold individuals back partaking on their anti social behavior (Bell, 2011). Examples of controlling forces are family, school, peers, and the law. Young people who are t...
With excitements, many teens get hurry out to disobey authority or involvement in crimes. The young may be engrossed to the mob’s way of living as it stays out of the law and takes place in illegal behaviors. Others prefer to be in the mob because of the many problems they encounter at homes. With the promise of a greater life by the gangs then the excited teens get attracted to the illegal activities of the mob (Bryman, 2008).
In the article “Prevalence and Development of Child Delinquency” written by Howard N. Snyder, he explains that “Older juveniles often influence younger children. In addition, studies have shown that juveniles who associate with deviant peers are more likely to be involved in delinquent behavior and arrested at a younger age than those who do not associate with such deviant juveniles” (Snyder 36). Children that are abused and/or associate themselves with delinquents run a greater risk of developing delinquent behavior themselves. According to "Breaking the Cycle of Violence: A Rational Approach to At-Risk Youth." Written by Judy Briscoe, “Peer rejection may also influence child and adolescent delinquency by inducing the rejected child to associate with deviant peer groups and gangs. Gang membership provides a ready source of co-offenders for juvenile delinquency and reflects the greatest degree of deviant peer influence on offending. Also, youth tend to join gangs at younger ages than in the past, which leads to an increased number of youthful offenders.” (Briscoe 8) Although children tend to have the same values and beliefs as their parents, their different experiences and influences while growing up shape their beliefs and their view of the world, which has a direct impact on their ability to make rational decisions. It’s possible that if a child had