1 / 17

Control Theories

Control Theories. Informal Social Control. Assumptions about human nature. Humans are hedonistic, self-serving beings We are “inclined” towards deviance from birth “natural motivation” no “positive” motivation required “variation in motivations toward deviance”

frey
Download Presentation

Control Theories

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Control Theories Informal Social Control

  2. Assumptions about human nature • Humans are hedonistic, self-serving beings • We are “inclined” towards deviance from birth • “natural motivation” • no “positive” motivation required • “variation in motivations toward deviance” • Is this different from Differential Association/Social Learning? • Sutherland: All crime is learned, not invented

  3. If we are inclined toward deviance... • Key Question: Why aren’t most of us deviant? • Hirschi: “There is much evidence that we would be if we dared.” • Answer: Informal Social Control

  4. Are control theories “different?” • Akers • They don’t try to explain “non-crime” or conformity • Different sides of the same coin • Control Theorists • Completely different assumptions about human nature and “motivation” towards crime

  5. Ivan Nye (1958) • Identified 3 types of informal control 1. Direct Controls 2. Indirect Controls 3. Internal Controls

  6. Walter Reckless: Containment Theory Inner (Good self concept) Containment • Outer Containment • parents/school • supervision • Pushes and Pulls • poverty, anger,delinquent • subculture DELINQUENCY OUT HERE !!!!!!

  7. Enter Travis Hirschi Social Bond Theory

  8. Social Bond Theory • Causes of Delinquency (1969) • Was an attack on other theories as much as a statement of his theory • Self-report data (CA high schools) • Measures from “competing theories” • This book was the first of its kind!

  9. Hirschi’s Criticisms of Past Theory 1. A “pure” control theory needs no or external “motivation” to explain crime. • Exclude “pushes and pulls” from control theory • Other theories present an “over-socialized” human 2. Internal control is too “subjective” and nearly impossible to measure. • Exclude “conscience, self-concept, or self-control” • Subsumed under “Attachment”

  10. 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

  11. Attachment • The “emotional bond” • Sensitivity towards others (especially parents) • Measured as • Identification with and emulation of parents • Concern with teacher’s opinion of oneself

  12. Commitment • The “rational bond” • One’s “stake in conformity” • Social Capital • Measures: • academic achievement • grades • test scores • educational aspirations

  13. Involvement • “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop” • Involvement in conventional activity • Simply less time for deviance • Measures: • time playing basketball, baby-sitting, doing homework….

  14. Belief • Belief in the validity of the law • Hold values consistent with the law • Measures • Neutralizations (from Sykes/Matza) • Belief in the value of education • Respect for police and the law

  15. How can “neutralizations” support both social learning theory and control theory? Neutralizations as a “Pirate” variable 1. Sutherland/Akers: “definitions” that motivate delinquency 2. Hirschi: indicator of weak moral beliefs 3. Bandura: disengagement of cognitive self-evaluation (can be negative reinforcement)

  16. Research on Bonds • Hirschi’s own research supportive • But, couldn’t explain delinquent peers • So, “birds of a feather” explanation • Subsequent research • Attachment, commitment, beliefs are related • Relationships are moderate to weak • Causal ordering?

  17. Delinquent Peers and Parents • Hirschi: Any bonding insulates a person from delinquency • Even if the person you bond to is delinquent • Akers: Bonding to delinquent persons increases delinquency • Who’s right? AKERS

More Related