Theories Exam 3 Study Guide PDF

**Social Learning:** Sutherland & Akers - **Social Control:** Reis, Nye's, Reckless, Skyes & Matza - **Social (bonding)**: Hirschi & Gottfredson - **Labeling and Reintegrative shaming:** Becker, Cooley, Braithwaite **Social Learning:** [**Sutherland**] & Akers **SUTHERLAND:** - Cri...

**Social Learning:** Sutherland & Akers - **Social Control:** Reis, Nye's, Reckless, Skyes & Matza - **Social (bonding)**: Hirschi & Gottfredson - **Labeling and Reintegrative shaming:** Becker, Cooley, Braithwaite **Social Learning:** [**Sutherland**] & Akers **SUTHERLAND:** - Criminologist who\'s work was heavily influenced by the Chicago School. - Had 9 principles of Criminology. - Focused on **Differential Association** Theory **Social Learning:** Sutherland & **[Akers]** **AKERS:** - **Revised Differential Association** to 7 principles. - Incorporated **social psychology**, with r**einforcement through conditioning** - **Operant** and **Classical** - Had 4 concepts **[Differential Association]**: Learning happens in intimate group settings *(Most empirical Support)* -Primary & secondary groups -Reference, Virtual, and symbolic groups -**Modalities of association**: F,D,P,I **[Definitions]**: Beliefs / attitudes attached to a behavior *(Most empirical Support)* **Types of definitions**: **General or negative** -- Conventional values, stealing is wrong. Specific definitions: **Positive or neutralizing** **P**-Beliefs that make a behavior morally desirable **N**-Beliefs that make a behavior excusable and justified **Differential reinforcement:** Balance of rewards and punishments following a behavior. *(Least empirical Support)* - Past behavior predicts future behavior - Delinquency has a group nature - Individual delinquency relates to peer delinquency **Social Control: [Reis],** Nye's, Reckless, Skyes & Matza **Reiss had the theory of internal and external controls.** - Delinquency was caused from failed social controls **Personal** Control: **Internal** reason (self-control) **Social** control: **external** reasons (family, church, etc.) **Social Control:** Reis**,** **[Nye's]**, Reckless, Skyes & Matza - Nye's agreed with Reiss but added a little cherry on top **Personal** Control: **Internal** reason (self-control) **Social** control: **external** reasons (family, church, etc.) - **[Direct]** control: punishment that is threatened or imposed and the compliance is rewarded by parents - **[Indirect]** control: possible consequences, disapproval from parents or others. **Social Control:** Reis**,** Nye's, **[Reckless]**, Skyes & Matza - Reckless had Containment Theory **Push and pull factors** motivate delinquency - Inner and outer **containment** constrain behavior - [Counteract] push and pull factors **Social Control:** Reis**,** Nye's, Reckless, **[Skyes & Matza]** - Delinquency was at odds with conventional societal norms. - Delinquency requires justification, excuses, and rationalizations. [5 techniques of Neutralization: ] Denial of responsibility Denial of Injury Denial of victim Condemn the condemners Appeal to higher loyalties **Social (bonding)**: **[Hirschi]** & Gottfredson - An **increase** in **weak** or **broken** social bonds leads to an **increase** in **deviance**. [4 components:] Attachment Commitment Involvement Belief - Attachment to conventional people defines how norms are internalized. - CANNOT have an increase attachment to delinquent peers - **INCREASE** attachment leads to **INCREASE** in constrains by social norms - **DECREASE** attachment leads to **INCREASE** in being free of moral constraints. - INCREASE in commitment to conform DECREASES deviance - **INCREASE** involvement **DECREAES** deviance because you have less time for deviance. **Belief: endorsement of general conventional norms and values** - Beliefs varies across people and context - Beliefs change based on attachments and commitments **Moderate to low effect** of bonding elements on delinquency **[Greatest empirical support:]** parental attachment and prosocial peer attachment and involvement. **Social (bonding)**: **[Hirschi & Gottfredson]** - **"A general theory of crime"** that explains all individual differences in the **propensity** to commit or abstain from certain behavior. - **[Source]** of self-control is **effective** **"socialization"** - **Devlopment of self-control happens through adequate child-rearing** - **[Less self-control] comes from ineffective or incomplete socialization.** - **Self-control is fixed by age 7** **[6 characteristics of less self-control ]** Impulsivity Risk seeking Simplicity Anger Self-centeredness Physicality **Age crime curve: an artifact of changes in opportunity NOT criminal propensity.** **Labeling and Reintegrative shaming: [Becker]**, Cooley, Braithwaite - **The informal or formal application of stigmatization, deviant labels by society on individuals.** -Labels can be both **cause** and **effect** **Dependent variable** explains why (certain behavior is wrong and why certain people are selected) **Independent** suggest "labels" cause crime to keep happening. - HOWARD BECKER: 20^th^ century sociologist "outsiders" the clearest and earliest statement of "labeling" - **Social groups create deviance** by making rules that lead to deviance & applying rules to certain people. - **Deviance** is **NOT** a **quality** of the act but a **consequence** of application. - **The deviant** is a person who the label successfully applies to **[Symbolic interactionism]**= an individual\'s identity and self-concept that exist only in the context of social interactions **Labeling and Reintegrative shaming:** Becker, **[Cooley]**, Braithwaite **Cooley** = looking-glass self - Our self-concepts are reflections of others conceptions of us - **Negative labels** are the **independent variable** causing crime. **Primary deviance:** arises from variety of sources and is sporadic and transitory **An individual commits deviance without** realizing the act is deviant or without holding a deviant self-concept Labeling can lead to **secondary deviance\...** - **By altering self-concept** - **Limiting conventional opportunities and relationships** - **Encourage movement into deviant subcultures** **Labeling and Reintegrative shaming:** Becker, Cooley, **[Braithwaite]** **Crime, shame, and reintegration** Current CJS amounts to **retributive justice** and CJ policies. **Shaming** = social disapproval with the intention of invoking remorse **Disintegrative shaming** = NO attempt made to reconcile the shamed or offender w community Makes case for **[restorative justice]** approach by proposing reintegrative shaming theory. [Aims:] Empowerment Restoration Reintegration Emotional and social healing