exam 1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Exam 1 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Exam 1

Loading in 2 Seconds...

  share
play fullscreen
1 / 20
erv

Exam 1 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

183 Views
Download Presentation
Exam 1
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. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Exam 1

  2. Testing A Hypothesis • Hypothesis: individuals who are committed to performing well will do better on the exam. • My measure of “commitment to theory class” 0: no assignments turned in 1: turned in, but no assignments > 8 2: at least one assignment > 8 Correlation between “commitment to theory class” and exam score…. r = .595 Alternative Measure = whether/not turn in an assignment… r = .475

  3. Control Theories Informal Social Control

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

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

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

  9. Enter Travis Hirschi Social Bond Theory

  10. 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!

  11. 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”

  12. 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

  13. Or, Put Another Way… The Social Bond Attachment Commitment Involvement Belief Crime Fun, thrilling, quick and easy satisfaction of desires

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

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

  16. 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….

  17. 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

  18. 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)

  19. 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?

  20. 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