More handpicked essays just for you.
Case study of social learning theory
Case study of social learning theory
Case study of social learning theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Case study of social learning theory
Social behavior responds to a complicated network of rewards and punishments. The more a behavior is rewarded, the more likely it is to continue. On the flip side of this, the more a behavior is met with negative consequences, the more it is likely to stop. In any given social situation, whether someone commits a crime is largely dependent on his past behavior, or whether someone has received a positive reinforcement to a that crime. According to Social Learning Theory, crime is a direct response to this reinforcement. So in other words, if rewards are greater than punishments, the crime will be committed. Social Learning Theory is meant to operate as a general theory of crime. There are seven stages of learned criminal behavior. The first
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
One possible explanation for criminal behavior within society is Travis Hirschi’s theory of social bonding. Instead of asking “who commits crime?” he believes we should be asking “who doesn’t commit crime?” In his theory, Hirschi explains that all people naturally break laws and, therefore, everyone is equally prone to do bad things.
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,
Through Social Learning Theory, an individual can be studied based on the behavior acquired by a role model. Verbal conditioning procedures and observation influences the response to an individual’s personality. Environment factors contribute to the Social Learning Theory. Antisocial model is a major contribute to crime, which influences negative characteristics. The Social Leaning Theory has three core social concepts the must be followed: observational learning, intrinsic reinforcement and modeling process.
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.
1. Cesare Lombroso applied the methods of natural science (observation, measurement, experimentation, statistical analysis) to the study of criminal behavior. Lombroso rejected the classical theory of crime, associated with Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, which explained criminal activity as freely chosen behavior based on the rational calculation of benefit and loss, pleasure and pain. Critically analyze both schools of thought and provide an opinion as to what theory you believe is more relevant.
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...
Social learning theory argues that individual behavior is shaped through the process of reinforcement and punishment. It argues crime is largely detrmined during childhood as a result to incompetent parenting, and tends to persist thereafter.. Differential reinforcement is defined as the balance of anticipated or actual rewards and punishments that follow or are consequences of behaviors. Social learning theory focuses on four principles: Differential association, differential reinforcement, imitation and definitions. The debt of differential association theory can be seen in these for principal said to affect the individual's probability of committing law violations.
In conclusion, social learning theory and labeling theory are both widely viewed. Society should understand why crime happens as it pertains to theories of crime in order to mitigate it. There are many examples that prove both theories. Lastly, there are programs which are beneficial to people of society and that with these programs we can mitigate the crime around
Nature versus nurture has been argued in attempt to understand how criminals behave. The theory of what influences psychopath and serial killers’ violent and destructive pathways has not been agreed on till this day. Criminals such as psychopaths and serial killers have been researched for the past two decades. Scientists have found that genetics is a determining factor of who becomes a serial killer. It is important to understand the determinants involved within a serial killer, because if these social and environmental causes are discovered, they can be altered and controlled to reduce crime (Lykken, 1993). With more studies, we would therefore prevent mass murders and could assist in significant reductions of crime within society.
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... ... middle of paper ... ... nd delinquent are more likely to partake in committing criminal behavior (Shaefer and Haaland, 2011, p.155-156).
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.
There was a fight between two people in the middle of summer seventeen. The two males, Brad and Chad were fighting profusely around the campfire, eventually even rolling into the lake, still throwing punches and wrestling, the two individuals eventually tried to drown each other. This event was phase three of the crisis cycle, where the males were no longer rationally thinking and were out of control. The CauseAt the beach fire, there were several groups of friends, and several different discussions going on, one particular discussion involved politics, specifically Donald Trump and people’s opinions on how he would do as President. Chad overheard this discussion and lashed out calling Brad names and saying he was uneducated for thinking Trump would do a good job as President.
Learning plays a large role in the development of future criminal behavior. This concept has led to the question “If people learn to become criminals, who taught the first criminal?” There are several ways to pick up on criminal activity without being taught in the traditional sense. Even beyond the scope of the classroom, learning is not always just finding out new information and applying it. Sometimes it is training your brain to think that taking short cuts around rules will be worth the risk of getting caught. The fruits of your criminal labor seem infinitely sweeter when you do not have to work as hard to obtain them. Maybe in hind sight, people will realize the