Final Exam PDF

Preview

Summary

Social Structure and Anomie and Strain Theories Assumptions of strain theories - We are all naturally social and law-abiding - Roots of crime are produced by society and deviant - Criminal behaviours are normal responses to abnormal social conditions - Psychogenic components (problem-solving) Durkhe...

Description

Social Structure and Anomie and Strain Theories Assumptions of strain theories - We are all naturally social and law-abiding - Roots of crime are produced by society and deviant - Criminal behaviours are normal responses to abnormal social conditions - Psychogenic components (problem-solving) Durkheim’s idea of anomie (i.e., what is anomie?) - Anomie →  a state of normlessness or norm confusion within a society - Breakdown of social order as a result of loss of standards or values Stresses/Strains → Anomie → Goals not regulated → suicide/deviance/crime American society and anomie - Class-oriented society - Legitimate opportunities not equally distributed - In upper-classes, members have goals AND means → ex.) money for college, connections, etc. - In lower class, members have goals BUT NOT means (opportunities) Elements of Merton’s strain (goals, means and opportunities) - Goals → constant across all of American society - Means → what is appropriate behaviour to achieve goals? Legal job? Selling drugs? - Blocked legitimate opportunities → bc we are inherently social, must have blocked opportunities Merton’s modes of adaptation - Conformity (Most common) - Accept the goals and the means - Value by the rules but still want to succeed - NO CRIME Ritualism - Reject the goals of society (monetary success, status) but accept the means - Accept the fact that you’re a “failure” - NO CRIME - Innovation - Accept the goals, but reject the legitimate means to attain them - Get “creative” on how to get rich - CRIME 4. Retreatism - Reject the goals to society AND reject the means to attain them - Create new goals (ex., getting high) - DRUG USE 5. Rebellion - Work to change the goals and means - Change cultural goals using legitimate/illegitimate needs

Research on Merton 1. Merton’s theory highlights the role of broader structure and culture 2. Offers an explanation for the link b/w class and crime 3. Offers an alternative to control theories - Only explains lower SES crime, does not explain violent crime, weak empirical support Institutional Anomie - Interested in comparing why crime rates so high in U.S. vs other places (bc of social structures) - In the United States, the economy is the most important institution - As a result: 1. All other institutions are devalued 2. Other institutions accommodate economic demands 3. Economic norms penetrate other institutions Cultural elements of American society (achievement, individualism, universalism and fetishism with money) - American Dream is comprised of 4 clusters of values: 1. Achievement → worth is defined by success 2. Individualism → make it your own 3. Universalism → everyone is encourage to strive for success and everyone is judged on the same criteria (individual achievement) 4. Fetishism of money → success = money, no final stopping point How does the emphasis of the economy affect other institutions according to Messner and Rosenfeld? Agnew’s General Strain - Strain and stressors increase the likelihood of negative emotions like anger/frustration - These emotions create pressure for corrective action , and crime is one possible response How does Agnew’s theory improve upon Merton? - Describes those factors affecting the choice of delinquent vs. non delinquent adaptations - Helps us to understand why many strained individuals do not turn to delinquency - Points to several new sources of strain, in particular, focusing on three categories of strain Three types of strain discussed by Agnew - Three major types of deviance producing strain: 1. The failure to achieve positively valued goals 2. The removal of positively valued stimuli 3. The presentation of negatively (noxious) stimuli Negative affect and coping strategies

-

Cognitive options - Cognitively reinterpreting objective stressors → look at things in a different way Emotional options - Effort to reduce or alleviate negative emotions → drugs/exercise Behavioural options - Constructively reduce strain seek positive solution → bullied, talk to teacher, find a solution for it to stop

Control Theories Assumptions of control theory - Motivation to commit crime is a given → naturally motivated to commit crime - Hedonism → self interested - More interested why don’t people commit crime Stakes in conformity - Deviance results from weak social constraints - We connect to society via social groups → family, neighbourhood, school, work, etc “when you got nothing, you got nothing to lose” Hirschi’s social bonds - Individuals conform w/ strong social bonds and become deviant w/ weak - Under this theory, the solution is strengthening the bonds → to reduce criminal behaviour Four elements of a bond for Hirschi - Attachment → An individual’s relationship w/ others will affect what he/she does (ex. Parents, will deviant behaviour make them upset) - Belief → The individual’s endorsement of conventional norms and values will determine whether he/she will commit a crime (less they believe in law, more likely to commit crime) - Commitment → The more committed an individual is, the more they have to lose and the less likely they are to commit crimes that will jeopardize their previous commitments - Involvement → Involvement in conventional activities - The more involved an individual is, the less likely they are to commit crimes bc they simply do not have the time How do social bonds influence behavior Gottfredson and Hirschi - “Self-Control Theory” → Trying to explain all types of criminal behaviour - G&H were critical of all other theorists - Bc they first develop their propositions and after that they define the outcome - This allows theorists to make the outcome whatever they want - Argue we should step back and start by figuring out the characteristics of crime → what we know about crime and criminals Importance of parenting - Parenting is the key → monitoring, detection, punishment

- Poor parenting leads to low self-control in children Characteristics of low self-control - Impulsive - Insensitive - Risk-taking - Short-sightedness Analogous behaviors Age and crime in self-control theory - People low in self-control engage in criminal behaviour even at a low age - Continues in adolescence - Lower around older age - Don’t care about age effect (is true, do not even have to explain it) → those in low self-control always engage,why gap in high vs low self-control Labeling Theory Labeling and the role of social reaction - Labeling theory shifts the focus from the actor to the reactor - Deviance is both dependent and independent variable - Labels carry meaning, changes the way in which other people view you - Interested on the people who do the labeling The looking glass self - Concept of oneself is a reflection of others conception of us - We imagine how we appear to others - We develop our self through the judgements of others - Can be a self-fulfilling prophecy - Changes way we define ourselves Dramatization of evil - Tannenbaum (1938) - Most acts of “delinquency” are relatively minor and harmless - Society overreacts →  associating with a gang overreacts their actual actions - Viewed labeling of a delinquent or criminal as “bad” or “evel as amounting to a self-fulfilling prophecy Primary versus secondary deviance - Primary Deviance → initial nonconforming act that comes to the attention of the authorities - Of little to no importance, we all engage in some form of deviance at some point - Secondary deviance → deviance that results from society’s reaction to offenders’ primary deviance (Lemert, 1951) IMPORTANT - If you got caught doing dumb shit early on, you would not engage in secondary deviance if you had not been detected originally Master status

-

there are central traits of a person's identity that binds them to other traits (ex. Priest, physician, criminal) Retrospective interpretation identities can be reconstructed to create a new label (Shur,1971) - Reexamine past events and behaviours and reinterpret them to fit the new label of that person Indirect and direct effects of a label - direct-Changes to self-identity - Labeled persons may alter this self-concepts in conformity with the label - Indirect-Changes in social opportunities - The label may exclude the person from conventional employment opportunities - Lead to the loss of conventional friends - Both of these factors leads to an increase in criminal behaviour Reintegrative shaming, Procedural justice and defiance Reintegrative shaming - John Braithwaite → Australian Criminologist - Love the sinner, hate the sin - Punish the child, but tell them you still love them - How to punish the behaviour, but not penalize the person, support person back into society Shaming versus stigmatization - Shaming → behaviours (from others) that induce guilt, shame - Snide comment, verbal confrontations - In Western society, shaming has become uncoupled from formal punishment → Offenders privately sent away to warehouses by corrections or court “officials” - Stigmatizing - No effort made to reconcile offender w/ community - Offender as outcast - “Criminal” master status - Degradation ceremony followed by lack of ceremonies to “decertify” deviance Restorative justice - Emphasis on “repairing harm” - Punishment alone is not effective in changing good behaviour and is disruptive to community harmony and good relationships - Restitution as a means of restoring both parties; goal of reconciliation and restoration What causes defiance? - Weak bond to justice system - View system/police as illegitimate - Shameless reaction to administration The effect of unfair and unjust sanctions - Unfairly treated or process - Detrimental effect on the acceptance of decisions and institutions

-

Fairly treated or processed - Even negative outcomes tend to be accepted - Cooperation w/ police Factors that influence perceptions of fairness - Non-victimized rate police performance the highest - Those victimized three or more times, lowest rating of police performance Age and Crime How do most theories attend to age? Most criminological theories are static  → one thing can explain crime throughout entire life course (does not show how ppl change in life) - But age is one of the stable “facts” of crime - Not explained adequately by most theories - Researchers began asking what crime looks like over the life-course Stability versus change in offending - Antisocial behaviour is stable - Correlation b/w past and future criminal behaviour ranges from .6 to .7 (very strong) - Antisocial behaviour as early as age 6 related to delinquency - More severe behaviour has more stability - The vast majority of delinquents desist as they enter adulthood (mid 20s), but looking back most offending adults were antisocial during childhood Shape of the age-crime curve Most offenders desist Social selection versus cumulative continuity - Social selection (TRAIT) Explanation - Individuals possess a trait that is stable  and criminogenic - Explain stability, but change (desistance)? -if trait is stable, why do people desist from crime? - Cumulative Continuity ili - Initial antisocial behaviour (regardless of cause) has CONSEQUENCES Criminal careers versus career criminals - Career Criminals → individuals who offend at a high rate for a long period of time - Criminal Careers → “the longitudinal sequence of crimes committed by a criminal offender” Why might the age-crime curve be misleading? - Data is AGGREGATE - It could hide subgroups of offenders, or “offending trajectories” - Data are Cross-Sectional - Doesn’t track stability/change over time - Data is Official - Cannot tell us about the precursors to official delinquency (childhood antisocial behaviour) Hirschi and Gottfredson’s explanation (or lack thereof) of the age-crime relationship

-

Propensity relatively stable over life course People w/ high propensity (low self-control) ALWAYS commit more crime Everyone eventually stops Different factors may explain behaviour at different points in life course → parenting/peers

Age Graded Theory of Informal Social Control Know how Sampson and Laub draw on Hirschi (1969) The importance of the full life-course - Age-crime Debate: Too much focus on adolescence - It is important to look at the ENTIRE life course, from early childhood into old age What is meant by there being both continuity and change in behavior Continuity - Stability of trajectory - Individual differences (traits) possible Those who don’t commit crime stay bonded to society → do well in school, get stable jobs, get married Change - Turning points → more likely: quality marriage, quality employment, military service - Increases informal control Cumulative continuity - Cumulative Continuity → delinquency/crime has effect on “adult social bonds” Turning points - a change in the life course, and can lead to long-term changes in the life course Trajectory - a pathway, or line of development over the life course Transitions - marked by life events such as first job, first marriage Desistance - Aging out - Increase in socal bonds The importance of marriage and employment in desistance - Those who don’t commit crime stay bonded to society Strengthened and weakened social bonds and adult crime Adult onset offending Desistance by default - Aging out - Increase in socal bonds Human agency Dual Taxonomy What is meant by typologies and taxonomies

Adolescence-limited offenders - antisocial behaviour is temporary Life-course-persistent offenders - antisocial behaviour is permanent and stable Causes of crime for AL offenders (maturity gap and social mimicry) - Maturity-gap frustration → when adolescents want to be treated as adults, but they cant bc they are too young - Mimicry → when one species adopts the social behaviour of more successful species to obtain access to a valuable resource Causes of desistance for AL offenders - At the end of adolescence, motivation wanes b/c of entry into adulthood (no more maturity gap) - Recognition of the consequences of their delinquency - But can also encounter “snares” → if they get caught, prison, or could get pregnant, etc.

Causes of crime for LCP offenders - Interaction b/w neurological deficits (inability to follow instructions, more likely to have lead exposure, mother smoking) + ineffective parenting - Children will rebel, hostile, hard to make prosocial friends Why does crime persist in LCP offenders - Fail to learn conventional prosocial alternatives due to rejection and lack of opportunities - Become ensnared in deviant lifestyle Why might AL offenders not desist? Neuropsychological deficits and why they occur - neuropsychological deficits → (temperament, behaviour development, and cognitive abilities) - What can cause these differences to occur? - Disruption in fetal brain development/brain injury - Maternal drug use - Poor nutrition - Exposure to toxic agents - Birth complications - Lack of stimulation and affection - abuse/neglect Cumulative continuity and contemporary continuity in LCP offenders - What in the environment is affected? - Peer rejection - School failure - Parenting - THEREFORE - Cumulative continuity

- Contemporary continuity (still have N.P. Deficit, personality traits) Ensnared - Trapped Abstainers How do problem behaviors of LCP offenders change over time Age-crime curve for Moffitt - Most teens commit delinquent behaviour in adolescence, then drop - Almost all adolescents offend - Unusual for someone to not have committed ANY form of delinquency as an adolescent Integrated theories Purpose of integration - Goal is to identify commonalities b/w two or more theories and produce a “superior” explanation What is it? - Combine two or more theories Conceptual integration - Absorbing or subsuming concepts from one theory under another theory - Known as a “hostile take over” where “your ideas can just be subsumed under my ideas” Propositional integration - Identifying how two or more theories make the same predictions - BUT can change the causal sequence of the variables Theoretical elaboration - Retaining the assumptions of a theory, but elaborating on its weaknesses by incorporating new concepts Problems with integration (e.g., parsimony and logical inconsistency) - Integrated theories are merely oppositional theories in disguise, theories that pretend to open-mindedness while in fact taking sides in theoretical disputes - Separate and Unequal is Better - Calls for theoretical competition → we need to know which theory matters more

LAST STUDY TINGS: Problem solving skills, intelligence, creativity Inhabiting factors → criminal disposition, delinquent peers, weak social bonds, weak moral beliefs - 4 institutions of institutional anomie → economy, family, polity, education

-

Merton said anomie permanent, Durkeim temporary Strain according to Merton → disconnect of desired goals, and legitimate to opportunities Routines broken, unregulated goals, goals not accomplished = crime Merton → alternative to control theories, Role or broader structure and society Messner & Rosenfeld → institutional anomie Anger → increases level of felt injury, create a need for retaliation and revenge, lowers inhibition, boosts the individual towards action - Social control theory → Consensus, motivation to commit crime - Social control concepts → deviance results lack of social bonds, connect in society through social groups, social rewards = stake in conformity - Durkheim 3 concepts of morality → discipline, attachment, autonomy - Crime → little planning, immediate gratification - Analogous behaviour → deviant, not criminal (antisocial) - Criticisms of control theory → life course changes, antisocial attitudes/behaviours, focused on ordinary crimes, - Agnew (magnitude of strain) → Recency, centrality, duration/frequency of strain CONTROL THEORY - Do not → incarcerate, - Do → monitor teenagers, want funding for early childhood/child care, support tings w/ two family things - 3 types of control that prevents delinquency (Nye) → direct, indirect, internal - Criticisms of labelling → weak empirical support, disregards primary deviance, actions of deviant, - 2 influences of reintegrative shaming → interdependency(shamer and shamee)/communitarianism (mutual obligation/trust) - 4 concepts for procedural justice → Authority, trust, legitimacy, fair - Defiance theory → offender feels shameful, social bonds, legitimacy, - 4 types defiance → individual, general, indirect, direct - 3 causes of defiance → weak bonds, poor view of system/police, shameless reaction to criminal sanction - Braithwaite → Community should be facilitators, victims are most impt, c - Criticisms → difficult to test, not parsimonious, empirical issues - Glueck data → sampson & laub (age & crime) - 3 hypothesis of age-graded theory → Change, continuity, childhood - Continuity → stability of trajectory, cumulative continuity (adult social bonds), - Change → turning points (quality of marriage, service), - Moffitt → dual taxonomy - Abstainers → hit puberty late, isolated (no experience for social mimicry), not in criminal lifestyle - Moffitt → STATIC - Stability → commit crime since they were younger (will continue to adulthood) - Change → grow out of it, -...