Final Exam

Final Exam - Final Exam Soc 012 Control Theories Why don't...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Final Exam Soc 012 Control Theories Why don’t people commit crimes? Social Bonding Theory Hirschi late 60s Micro-level Consensus Theory - Assumed that crimes came from low social bonds to social institution Attachment: sensitivity and interest in conventional others Commitment: time, energy, and effort put into conventional activities Involvement: actual amount of time in conventional behavior that limits time Belief: having values or high morals from social bonds Criticism: - Attachment to delinquent friends - Involvement is a weak predictor - Change over a lifetime Social Bond Theory - Assume humans naturally deviate - Focuses on conventional others and institutions only - Criminals “hang out” with other criminals - Associations are viewed as insulating - Assumes commonly agreed upon social rules and norms Social Learning Theory - Assumes humans are “blank slates” - Focuses on both conventional and deviant others - Criminals have to learn techniques and attitudes from others - Associations are seen as potentionally criminogenic - Assumes differing social rules and Norms Hegemonic Masculinity – hierarchy of gender, dominant form of gender that feminists say men perform to stay on top and therefore commit crimes Theory of Low Self-Control Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990 Micro-level Consensus Theory - Focuses on internal (psychological) control - General theory on crime - Criminals are thought to lack self-control - Likely to smoke, speed, use drugs and do other risky behaviors - Caused by ineffective parenting and combo of genetic predispositions (low IQ) - It is self-control that determines social control They see criminals as: - Impulsive - Insensitive - Risk Seekers - Short Sighted
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Explaining Behavioral Changes: - More opportunities to offend as a kid than as an adult - As people get older they get weaker and less physical Criticisms: - Poor job explaining changes in crime - Gender and race? - Organized crime and white-collar crimes are not explained Anomie/Strain Theory Robert Merton 1968 Macro-level Consensus theory Anomie (or Normlessness): - Cultural Goals vs. Institutional Means - If the goals outweigh the means than anomie exists Cultural MalintegrationI: the American dreams, money - Not everyone has the same as the other person - “Haves” and “have-nots” - Those without those means undergo strain and are forced to adapt to their stressful situations, which increases crime Modes of Adaption: - Conformity is not adapting but accepting and keep society going - Innovation is to accept the cultural goals ($) but not the means, in the “end justifies the means” but can be illegal, CRIME - Ritualism is to not accept the cultural goals but follow the means (drones) - Retreatists is not accept either and do nothing - Rebellion make your own goals and means, suggests change Criticisms: - Fails to recognize one source of strain, what are the others? -
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/18/2008 for the course SOC 012 taught by Professor Felson,richardb during the Fall '07 term at Penn State.

Page1 / 10

Final Exam - Final Exam Soc 012 Control Theories Why don't...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online