control theories

control theories

1. basics/development/early theories

   • Newburn: no single control the - CT are theories that take various forms but at heart assume everyone would commit c given the opportunity but are prevented by controls (internal/external) - humans have innate weakness making them unable to resist the temptation to commit c but regulation by sch, fam, N & V and beliefs control people causing them to conform.... Look at why people dont commit crime
   • Development: traced back to Aristotle who said that the greatest c are caused by excess not by necessity... Hobbes = f of punishment and social contract stops people from committing c
   • Reiss: psy form of control - found breach in probation license was due to people having low self-control and weak ego/superego - no motivation to commit c justabsence of controls
   • Nye: soc/psy controls - fam is most important control.. c is a result of insufficient internal (develop conscience by socialisation), direct (sanctions) and indirect control (attachment to early caregivers)... c is due to too much or too little control.... Rs found that child are less likely to commit c if strong family bond
   • Toby: soc controls.. stakes in conformity influence crime - stakes in conformity are investment in conventional society - those with high stakes are less likely to commit c because they have more to lose... peers can inhabit ad motivate c behaviour

2. Walter Reckless: containment theory

   • Concern with problems of containment and control in modern organic society - " in a fluid mobile society which has freedom of action for people, the person is able to soar like a balloon without ballast of social relations!
   • Self-concept - way view ourselves - if view as law abiding then more likely to follow law as orientated towards legitimate and realistic goals = conform
   • Frustration tolerance - capacity for dealing with sociall induced frustrations
   • Norm retention - adherences to, acceptions with, identification with, legitimation of and defence of law, norms and values = confomity
   • Evaluation: Schram - weak support from rs on f and minorites - doesnt go far enough towards specifying the factors important for predicting C
   • 2 protective factors: inner containment (sense of morals and ethics as well as magaing frustrations) and outer containment reaosnable expectations menaing roles and sense of belonging).
   • Hagan :) rs support for Reckless theory - teachers in high crime area nominated good boys and found that they had stronger self-image and more conventions behaviour 4 years later
   • Hagan :( but more research is needed due to poor operationalisation and weak methodology in prevous studies - attempts to account for both criminogenic forces and individual responses but the containment theory is just descriptive model and no evidence of the process

3. Dukheim: forrunner for CT

   • modern industrial revolution caused collapse of social solidarity and destruction of fundamental social bonds uniting individuals - different social order for each individual within society now - collective force has weakend and there is now a relaxation of social bonds causing a anomie, individualisation, lack of control and no shared N&V
   • Egoistics self - comprimised on animal urges that are not controlled by social rules

4. Matz: delinquency and drift

   • loosening of social controls frees people to respond to any conventional or criminal forces that come by them
   • criticised traditional theories for predicting too much c & d and for failing to explain why many grow out of c & d - emp too much different between d and non-d... said c & d are not d all the time and most of the time they are involved in lawabiding behaviour
   • Drift - this is midway between freedon and control - control has been loosened in social structure and adolescents create subcultures which hold an important source of control around illegal action.. c & d therefore exists in limbo between conventional norms and c - responding in turn to the demands of each but post-poning commitment and evading decision (drift)
   • also developed the concept of neutralisation - criminals neutralise their actions so they dont feel guilty... deny responsibility, deny injury, deny existence of victim, condemnation of condemners, appeal to higher loyalties
   • Schram: explain why people grow out of crime but doesnt explain chronic or serious offenders

5. Hagan: power control theory

   • power relations between mum and dad influence control over sons and daughters... in traditional households boys are control less by parents so have bigger chance to commit crime or take risks..
   • Cullen and Agnew :( lacks empirical rs - hard to rs - other factors... why do people grow out of crime.... doesnt address single parent families
   • Hagan attempts to rectify major shortcomings of control theory but it ignores female offending
   • Agnew - social control variables only explain 1-2% of future deliquency

6. Travis Hirschi: social bond theory

   • Lilley et al - without social bonds between individuals in society crime would be inevitable
   • 4 inter-related elements in creation and maintenance of social bonds: attachment (if dont care about others and dont care about n & v then more likely to commit crime - the acceptance of n & v and development on conscience depends on attachment), involvement (involvement in social activities leave less room for c & d - sch/fam/peers insulates people from temptation whilst indifference, apathy and intolerance produce c), commitment (investment people make in society through education and business means they have more to lose) and belief (in societies n & v).
   • Siegal and McCormick - 4 aspects of social control are thought to interact and isolate people from C & D
   • Causes of c are lack of attachment, lack of involvement, no commitment and lack of beliefs - commitment to conventions n & v (work and education) prevent people from committing c... criminals have weak and distant relations with others whereas non-criminals have strong bonds
   • Self-report found social class is not related to C and D but youths who were strongly attached to their parents were less likely to commit c
   • Box - Self-report showed link with class and crime - so do official statistics
   • Schram :( doesn't explain criminal careers - effects on attachment on crime depends on who the person is attached to
   • Hagan :) social bond theory has been well received and has been support by many findings still need more rs however
   • Rs by Hirschi, a partial replication by Hindelang and a review of studies by Barnard provide strong support for social bond theory - strong parental attachment, commitment to conventional values and involvemnet in conventional activities with conventional peers was found to be predictive of non-deliquet activoty
   • Rosenbaum - theory explains some types of crime better than others
   • Schram - doesn't explain the long-term life long crime but still one of the most accepted theories

7. Gottfredson and Hirschi: general theory of crime

   • Tried to explain causes for all types of crime and focused on events in early childhood - theory indicates that child rearing is most important contributing factors in self-control
   • Self-control rather than social control.. self-control is based on internal factors whereas social control is linked with external factors
   • Social controls are only relevant to explain criminal behaviour only to the extent they influence self-control
   • Characteristics of ordinary c involves immediate satisfaction of desires but actually produce few long term benefits... person if often impulsive, insensitive, physical, risk taking, short sighted and non-verbal.. these can be identified prior to age of responsibility and are usually in certain people and are consistent/persistent throughout life course.
   • Baron - found those with low self-control was more powerful indicator of c & d
   • Lilley - low self-control was found in those who ppt in D behaviour throughout their life
   • Piquero - not just self-control, there are other influences on human behaviour
   • Siegel and McCormick - other influences on c & d not just self-control
   • Brendgen - those adolescents who exp less monitoring by parents were likely to demonstrate proactive aggression and violence in adolescents suggesting parental involvement impacts c & d more than self-control
   • Gibbons - does not explain serious offending - only minor offending
   • How you can measure self-concept empirically
   • tautological - circular reasoning - relies on assumption that we have self-control and are free willed - deterministic
   • doesn't explain all crime like they suggest - just white collar crime
   • suggests self-control is persistent over time - age crime curve/age crime continuum suggests not
   • underestimates role of socio-economic factors -many offenders unemployed or suffer from relative deprivation or addiction or mental
   • Currie - emphasise on self-control is the fallacy of autonomy - maybe we aren't free willed, what about the influence of structural issues (class, law and law enforcers) - states that what happens in family is separate to social policy, inequality, racism, unemployment and social neglect - what of it isnt
   • Neglects the different motivations behind crime - c of passion e.g.
   • Cohen - does not explain why people commit c, only why they don't
   • Global fallacy - tend to make useful a specific theory of crime to explain all crime - can it
   • Reed, Yeager and Steffensmier - H and G rely on uniform crime reports for measure of white collar crime - they only measure fraud, embezzlement and forgery - these are the less serious crime and those that resemble conventional crime the most - inadequate