Social StructuRAL THEORIES

1. Emile Durkheim The “Chicago School” + Social Disorganization Anomie/Strain Theories Social StructuRAL THEORIES

2. French Scientist • Suicide • Humans nature: selfish and insatiable • Effective Societies able to “cap” desires • Socialization & Social Ties • Special concern with “Industrial Prosperity” • Coined the Term “Anomie”: • Institutionalized norms lose ability to control human behavior and human needs Emile Durkheim (late 1858-1917)

3. Durkhiem’s Legacy Rapidly Changing Society “Industrial Prosperity” Anomie (Norms are Weakened) Human Nature as Insatiable; must therefore cap or control Social Ties Important The Anomie/Strain Tradition The Social Disorganization and “Informal Control” Tradition

4. How does a city growth and develop? • Concentric Zones in Chicago Park & Burgess (1925) Industrial zone Zone in transition Residential zones

5. Juvenile Delinquency in Urban Areas 1942. • Mapped addresses of delinquents (court records) • Zone in transition stable and high delinquency rates over many years • Implications of these findings: 1. Stable, despite multiple waves of immigrants!! 2. Only certain areas of the city Something about this area causes delinquency Shaw and McKay

6. What were the characteristics of the zone in transition that may cause high delinquency rates? • Population Heterogeneity • Population Turnover • Physical Decay • Poverty/Inequality • Argue that these things impede informal social control • One started, crime becomes stable because delinquent values are transmitted? Social Disorganization

7. Sampson and Groves (1989) Using British Crime Survey Data (BCS) • ECOLOGICAL • CHARACTERISTICS • Population turnover • Poverty / inequality • Divorce rates • Single parents • SOCIAL CONTROL • Street supervision • Friendship networks • Participation in • organizations CRIME (VICTIMIZATION)

8. Sampson Friends (1997-Present) Version Data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods • Concentrated • Disadvantage • (Ecological) • Population turnover • Poverty / inequality • Race composition • Family disruption • Physical decay • Collective • Efficacy • Willingness to • supervise/confront • in neighborhood • Mutual trust and • willingness to help • neighbors • CRIME • Homicide • Violence as • “problem” • Victimization

9. William J. Wilson (Concentrated Poverty) • The “Underclass” or “Truly Disadvantaged” • Cultural Isolation no contact with “mainstream” individuals/institutions • Little respect for “life” • Hyper materialism, violence as “normative” • Some believe recent “crime drop” reflect move away from these values RETURN OF THE “CULTURAL TRANSMISSION”

10. William Julius Wilson and Robert Sampson • High proportion of the current members of the “Zone in Transition.” • Public Policy made matters worse (high rise “projects” of the 1950s-60s) • Why do African Americans not “move out” like prior ZIT residents (immigrants)? • Housing Segregation • Loss of Manufacturing Jobs • The irony of “Black Flight” S.D. as an explanation for high rates of African American offending

11. Build neighborhood “collective efficacy” • How do you do this? • Address ecological characteristics that ruin collective efficacy • Family disruption, concentrated poverty, residential mobility Policy Implications?

12. Robert K. Merton • Social Structure and Anomie (1938) • From Durkheim: Institutionalized norms are weakened in societies that place an intense value on economic success • Applied this to the United States • The “American Dream”

13. MODES OF CULTURAL INSTITUTIONALIZED ADAPTATION GOALS MEANS 1. Conformity + + 2. Innovation + - 3. Ritualism - + 4. Retreatism - - 5. Rebellion +/- +/- Strain Theory (Micro Level)

14. Criticisms of Merton’s Strain Theory • Is crime a “lower class” phenomena? • Cannot explain “expressive” crimes • Weak empirical support • Why do people “adapt” differently?

15. Agnew: General Strain Theory • Overhaul of Merton’s Strain Theory • Three sources of strain • Failure to achieve valued goals • Removal of valued stimuli • Can’t escape noxious stimuli

16. Agnew (GST) • StrainNegative Affective States • Anger, fear, frustration, depression • In lieu of “Coping Mechanisms,” anger and frustration can produce delinquency • StrainNeg EmotionalDelinquency

17. Messner and Rosenfeld CRIME AND THE AMERICAN DREAM

18. Elements of the “American Dream” • Achievement • Individualism • Universalism • The “fetishism” of money • These elements encourage “Anomic conditions”

19. Institutions in Society • Social institutions as the building blocks of society. • The Economy • The Polity • The Family • Education

20. Culture, Social Structure, and Crime Rates CULTURE The American Dream ANOMIE SOCIAL STRUCTURE Economic Dominance Weak Institutional Controls HIGH CRIME RATES

21. Hirschi(social bond) • Gottfredson and Hirschi (low self-control) • Sampson and Laub (age graded social control) Informal Social Control Theories

22. Strain theory: motivation from some sort of strain (e.g. blocked opportunity) • Learning theory: motivation from delinquent peers • Control theory: there is enough natural motivation towards crime • No need to “build in” extra motivation • Real question? Why aren’t we all criminal? Assumptions about “Motivation towards crime”

23. Direct Control • Direct punishments, rewards from parents, friends • Indirect Control • Refrain from deviance because you don’t want to risk friends, job, etc. • Internal Control • Good self-concept, self-control, conscience Types of Control

24. Social Bond Theory • “Bond” indicates “Indirect Control” • Direct controls (punishment, reinforcement) less important because delinquency occurs when out of parents’ reach (adolescence). • Attachment • Commitment (Elements of the social bond • Involvement are all related to each other) • Belief

25. A General Theory of Crime • Same control theory assumptions • If we are all inclined to be deviant, why conform? • Because most of us develop “self-control” • “Internal control” • Developed by age 8, as the result of “direct control” from parents Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990)

26. Nature of Crime, Nature of Low Self-Control People with low self-control are therefore… Impulsive Risk-taking Physical (as opposed to mental) Low verbal ability Short-sighted Insensitive Criminal Acts… Provide immediate gratification of desires Are risky/thrilling Are easy/simple Require little skill/planning Provide few/meager long term benefits Result in pain/discomfort to a victim

27. Gottfredson and Hirschi

28. “Age Graded Theory of Informal Social Control” • Sampson and Laub • We will cover this again in the “lifecourse” theory section • Takes Hirschi’s (1969) theory and made it “age graded” • The specific elements of the social bond change over the life-course • Also includes elements of “direct control” • Also throws in some other stuff (integrated theory)

29. Sampson and Laub Childhood Adolescence Adulthood • Parenting • Supervision • Discipline • Social Bonds • Family • School • Delinquent Peers Context Delinquency Adult Crime Individual Differences Length of Incarceration • Social Bonds • Marriage • Good Job

30. Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory • Target attachment, commitment, belief • Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory • Must focus on early childhood prevention • Train parents? • Sampson and Laub • Different targets for different ages • Importance of adult bonds (job, marriage) Policy Implications

31. Social process theory traditions ▪ Differential association/social learning ▪ Adequate socialization toward the incorrect norms and values ▪ Informal social control ▪ Inadequate socialization ▪ Labeling theory ▪ Socialized to accept delinquent identity as result of criminal justice system

32. Differential Association • Criminal Behavior is learned • Negatively, this means it is not “invented” • Communication within intimate groups • Learning involves techniques and attitudes • Attitudes expresses as “definitions of the situation” • A person becomes delinquent because of an “excess of definitions favorable to law violation” • The process involves the same learning process as all other behavior

33. Techniques of Neutralization ▪ Developed by Sykes and Matza ▪ First good attempt to measure Sutherland’s “definitions” • Documented common rationalizations (excuses) for delinquency among a sample of delinquents

34. Techniques of Neutralization ▪ Denial of responsibility ▪ Denial of injury ▪ Denial of victim ▪ Condemnation of the condemners ▪ Appeal to higher loyalties

35. Techniques of Neutralization Definitions or Something Else?? ▪ Sociology criticism  Such attitudes do not actually cause criminal behavior. ▪ Rationalization is utilized only after the offense is committed when behavior is called into question. ▪ Psychologist (Behaviorism): To the extent that these rationalizations neutralize guilt, they reinforce behavior (Negative Reinforcement)

36. Social Learning Theory ▪ Developed by Ronald Akers ▪ Early version: differential reinforcement ▪ Revision of differential association theory ▪ Added concepts of operant conditioning and imitation (observational learning) to explain how behavior was learne

37. Social Learning Theory Key concepts ▪ Differential associations ▪ Definitions ▪ Differential reinforcement ▪ Imitation

38. Social Learning Theory (Akers) Exposure to definitions or different role models Balance of definitions or role models produces initial behaviors Positive or negative reinforcement Definitions Behaviors Role models R(+/-) DA

39. Social Learning Theory ▪ Empirical research measures ▪ Attitudes that support crime (definitions) ▪ Exposure to delinquent peers/family members (differential associations) ▪ Rewards or punishment for delinquency (differential reinforcement)

40. Policy Implications:Social Learning Theory ▪ Use the principles of learning to ▪ Reduce access to delinquent peers ▪ Confront and change antisocial attitudes ▪ Change the balance of reinforcement so that it supports prosocial behavior ▪ Behavioral/cognitive restructuring programs

41. ▪ Developed by Frank Tannenbaum, Edwin Lemert, and Howard Becker ▪ Key concepts ▪ Emphasis is on interactions between individuals and institutions of formal control (e.g., police, courts, prisons). ▪ Contact with police and the courts may create negative self-image. ▪ Formal interventions may increase criminal behavior. Labeling Theory

42. ▪ View of crime and deviance as relative ▪ Deviant categorization depends on many factors ▪ Focus on how power and conflict shape society (social context) ▪ Moral entrepreneurs ▪Importance of self-concept ▪Symbolic interactionism and “Looking-glass self” Roots of the Labeling Perspective(1 of 3)

44. ▪ Little empirical support ▪ Inaccurate assumptions ▪ Primary deviance as relative, sporadic, and unimportant ▪ Nature of the person predicts official reaction more than the nature of the act ▪ Effect of official sanctions on future behavior ▪ Racial bias does exist…but not sole (or most important) cause of CJ response to crime ▪ Arrest sometimes decreases future crime A Critique of Labeling Theory

45. ▪ Policy implications ▪ Schur: “Radical nonintervention” ▪ Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (1974) ▪ Diversion programs ▪ Divert offenders away from the formal juvenile justice processing to programs run by other entities (i.e., social service programs) • Deinstitutionalization (esp. status offenders) • Due Process revolution in Juvenile Court Policy Implications:Labeling Theory

46. Labeling theory most popular in 1960s-1970s • The central ideas had been around as early as the 1930s • Good “fit” for the social context of 1960s • Ironic Twist • Government, trying to do good, actually makes people worse • Good fit with the “can’t trust the government” social movement era Labeling Theory in Context

47. ▪ Reintegrative Shaming • Developed by John Braithewaite ▪ Effect of formal punishment depends upon how a person is punished. ▪ Shaming and reintegrative punishment will decrease future crime. ▪ Stigmatizing punishment will increase future crime. LEADS TO RESTORATIVE JUSTICE Labeling Extensions II

48. Central Themes • Emphasis on “inequality” and “power” • Crime as “political” concept • CJS serves interests of powerful • Solution to crime is more equitable society • EXPLANATION OF LAW and CJ SYSTEM rather than crime Critical Theory

49. Conflict Theory Marxist/Radical Theory Feminist Criminology/Gender and Crime Variations of Critical Theory

50. George Vold Group Conflict • Multiple groups in society with varying levels of power ▪ Political interest groups ▪ Social movements ▪ Broad segments of society ▪ Political parties • Those who win conflict get control over the law and coercive power of the state Pluralistic Conflict—Explanation of the Law and Criminal Justice