More handpicked essays just for you.
3 theories of deviance and their application
Concepts related to deviance
3 theories of deviance and their application
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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 positivist view of deviance places emphasis on individual's behavior being manipulated by outside forces (Goode, 2007, p. 23). Individual's are unable to contend with these outside forces which are beyond their control. Criminals and other deviants are created through biological defects which were responsible for their behavior, as it was something inherently organic and passed on through birth. The self-control theory of crime was developed by Travis Hirshi and Michael Gottfredson, two famous criminologists. Self-control theory, also known as the General Theory of crime, portrays deviance as stemming from the criminal's lack of ...
... middle of paper ...
...in Ridgway's actions, which were in a certain way directly his own, albeit formed through his parents lack of direction and action. Ridgway's deviance is not constrained to one aspect of deviant theory, but seemingly draws from both sides, as he has the mental desire to commit crime but in retrospect was formed at an early age to have a disregard for personal well-being. On the other hand, conflict theory helps define the lives of the victims as created solely through the failing of society's boundaries. So while Ridgway's deviant behavior is adequately explained by both theories discussed, the victims are solely the product of outward stimuli which led them down a lifestyle of wretchedness. Gary Ridgway will likely remain as America's most prolific mass murderer and behind his name lies a deviant individual crafted by an influx of problems, both personal and social.
From a psychological standpoint, Dellen Millard’s actions and personality are clearly not typical of the average human. Millard was extremely affluent, yet committed murder in order to steal a car he could have easily bought. ‘Why?’ is the question which psychologists would ask. Millard was raised wealthy, educated, and privileged; he was not abused as a child, nor was he denied affection or care. Unlike many psychopaths, sociopaths, and murderers, Millard did not seem to have a troubled or traumatic life at all. What experiences in Millard’s life could have given rise to his manipulative, thrill-seeking and criminal behaviour- as well as his apparent lack of conscience- in spite of his indulgent and ordinary upbringing? Psychology studies- and attempts to comprehend- human behaviour: the human mind, personality, and thinking. As such, psychologists would find interest in understanding the thoughts and motivation behind Millard’s cold-blooded actions. They might look towards his childhood for answers, and endeavour to discover the events in his past that shaped him to be the person he
As I was completing this assignment, I was watching the infamous Netflix documentary entitled Making a Murderer. The documentary follows the story of Steven Avery, who is currently in prison for the death of a woman, Teresa Halbach, in 2005. Steven Avery has been denying any involvement in the murder of Teresa Halbach for the past eleven years. In the middle of the reading, the documentary was exploring and analyzing Steven Avery’s deviant behavior as a young man (Making). As I observed what was being discussed about Steven Avery, I was able to build the connection between how society, and the community from which he came from, perceived Steven Avery and what Kai Erikson discussed in the first couple pages of the book with regards to deviance and its relation with regards to society.
These two men, both coming from different backgrounds, joined together and carried out a terrible choice that rendered consequences far worse than they imagined. Living under abuse, Perry Smith never obtained the necessary integrity to be able to pause and consider how his actions might affect other people. He matured into a man who acts before he thinks, all due to the suffering he endured as a child. Exposed to a violent father who did not instill basic teachings of life, Smith knew nothing but anger and misconduct as a means of responding to the world. He knew no other life. Without exposure to proper behavior or responsible conduct, he turned into a monster capable of killing an entire family without a blink of remorse. In the heat of the moment, Perry Smith slaughtered the Clutter family and barely stopped to take a breath. What could drive a man to do this in such cold blood? The answer lies within his upbringing, and how his childhood experiences shaped him to become the murderer of a small family in Holcomb, Kansas. ¨The hypothesis of unconscious motivation explains why the murderers perceived innocuous and relatively unknown victims as provocative and thereby suitable targets for aggression.¨ (Capote 191). ¨But it is Dr. Statten´s contention that only the first murder matters psychologically, and that when
There are many views on crime and deviance and many theories to why they occur.
Throughout all of American history there have been those who are well known for committing what are classified as deviant or criminal acts. Most of those who are well known by the public for their actions have committed deeds seen as extremely controversial such as being cult leaders, gang or mafia members, terrorists, rapists, or killers. The lists of members for each topic is numerous, however, there are a certain few that are more prominent than others. One criminal that stands out when speaking of killers in particular is Gary Ridgway, or as he is better known, the Green River Killer. Gary Ridgway is the nation’s most abundant serial killer, with the highest murder rate in America’s history (Gibson).
There is not one single theory or motive that causes one to commit a life of deviance. One who lives out a deviant life has interdependent motives such as the environment, access to means, and their upbringing. Fox Butterfield's work All God's Children outlines this notion through the depiction of the Bosket family and the focus on Willie. Four theories that are both interdependent on one another as well as motives for the deviant outcome of Willies life are the social disorganization theory, labeling theory, social process theory, and social control theory.
The movie The Boondock Saints provides an excellent example of positive deviance through innovation. The Social theory of deviance can easily explain the brothers’ actions. The movie can be used to study deviance as the brothers kill people who are mafia members, breaking the norms of society. Even though the acts they are committing are clearly illegal and deviant, the people of South Boston do not react in a negative way. Since the Social theory is very broad, it will be easier to look at the brother’s acts under three sub theories: Labeling, Conflict and Strain theories.
The case of whether serial killers are born with the lust to kill or if they are truly victims of their environment has been a hot debated question by both psychologists and the FBI today. A serial killer is traditionally defined as one that kills 3 or more people at different times with “cooling off” periods in between kills. Both psychological abuse as a child and psychological disorders are to blame for the making of a killer. The nature vs. nurture debate is best applied to the mysterious behaviors and cases of serial killers and their upbringing and environment. Nature is the genetic and biological connections a person has, personality traits, and how genetic make-up all relates to a killer. Nurture is examining the upbringing and environment that a person is around that affects what a person becomes. In some cases however, the effects of only upbringing or only biological problems were the reasons certain serial killers committed crimes. Although there is no definitive answer to what plays the bigger role: nature or nurture, they both are contributing factors that make a serial killer. These deviants of society are afflicted with problems in either their upbringing or have psychological disorders, and are able to blend into our everyday lives with no apparent differences, yet they wreck havoc through their unremorseful killings.
Goode, E. (2011). Constructionist Perspectives of Deviance. Deviant Behavior (Ninth Edition ed., ). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall, Inc..
Deviant theories from a positivist perspective are based on biological or social determinism. Determinism is the view that something “is determined or caused by forces beyond the individual’s control” (Thio, 2010, p. 7). Positivist sociologists apply the deterministic view to each individual deviant to determine the reason for his or her deviant behavior. Multiple theories from the positivist perspective try to explain the reason for deviant behavior. Phrenology and anomie-strain are two such theories that have been used to explain deviant behavior from this perspective.
Up until the 19th century, Classicist ideas dominated the way in which people looked at crime. However during the late 19th century a new form of “scientific criminology” emerged, called Positivism (Newburn, 2007). Positivism looked at the biological factors on why someone would commit a crime, this involved looking at the physical attributes of a person, looking at their genetic make-up and their biochemical factors.
Before the 1950’s theorists focused on what the difference was between deviants and criminals from “normal” citizens. In the 1950’s researchers were more involved exploring meaning and reasons behind deviant acts. This led to the most dominant question in the field of deviance, “what is the structural and culture factors that lead to deviant behavior?” This question is important when studying deviance because there is no clear answer, everyone sees deviance in different ways, and how deviance is created. Short and Meier states that in the 1960’s there was another shift in focus on the subject of deviance. The focus was what causes deviance, the study of reactions to deviance, and the study of rule breaking and rule making. In the 1960’s society was starting to speak out on what they believed should be a rule and what should not; this movement create chaos in the streets. However, it gave us a glimpse into what makes people become deviant, in the case it was the Vietnam War and the government. Short and Meier also write about the three levels that might help us understand were deviance comes from and how people interact to deviance. The first is the micro level, which emphasizes individual characteristics by biological, psychological, and social sciences. The second level is macrosociological that explains culture and
Eysenck, H.J., & Gudjonsson, G.H. (1989). The causes and cures of criminality. Contemporary Psychology, 36, 575-577.
Experts in the criminology field have searched for ways to comprehend criminal behavior by establishing a variety of theories. One of the most interesting theories is certainly the Conflict theory. Although, some criminologists refer to conflict theory as radical theory; there are a few differences that will be mentioned subsequently in this paper by defining both theories. It is also important to mention a summary containing a combination of the radical and conflict theory principles. The relevance and applicability of these specific theories will also be discussed as it is essential for the continuation of the same. Having a clear understanding of the conflict and radical theories’ roots, as well as its development, enhances the view of how
There are many criminological theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior or crime patterns. For instance, Agnew’s General Strain Theory can be applied to explain why the criminal John Dillinger committed various crimes. Agnew’s General Strain Theory assumes that all individuals experience strain, which, in turn, causes negative emotions that can result in legitimate or illegitimate coping, depending on an individual’s constraints or dispositions. Thus, the continuous criminal behavior throughout John Dillinger’s life can be explained using Agnew’s General Strain Theory in relation to strain, negative emotions, and dispositions.