Deviance is a term used to describe behavior that goes against the established social and cultural norms. The concept of deviance is complex because norms vary significantly across different times, places, and groups (Barlow & Decker, 2010). Essentially, individuals commit deviant behavior when society defines it as such. In modern society, deviance is considered to be a socially dangerous act, prohibited by law under the threat of punishment (Barlow & Decker, 2010). Within the field of criminology, a number of theories exist that attempt to explain why some people engage in deviant behavior, while others abstain from it. Some theories attribute crime to a cost-benefit analysis; they believe that an individual commits crime after weighing …show more content…
Each theory has its own basis to explain why individuals commit crimes but regardless of the theory used, the end goal of criminology is to develop ways to control crime or rehabilitate the criminal (Barlow & Decker, 2010). To this effect, this paper will analyze aspects of a real-world scenario, using both Rational Choice theory and Cognitive (IQ) deficits theory, for the purpose of further understanding and evaluating certain deviant behavior.
There are many theories that attempt to explain the cause of an individual’s criminal behavior. One such theory is rational choice theory as proposed by Cornish and Clarke (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001). The first mentions of rational choice theory can be traced back to the classical tradition developed by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham in the eighteenth century. They believed that “man is a calculating animal” and has free will in making decisions (Browning et al., 2000, p.153). Since then, the theory has been expanded upon and extended to cover a wide range of crimes. Cornish and Clarke have elaborated their own approach into a rational choice perspective, in which they set out several key assumptions (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001). These assumptions include
…show more content…
There may not be a single psychological or biological theory that can completely explain their behavior. For example, rational choice theory can explain the motivation behind Tim and Lionel’s choice to share the nude photos as they believed it to be more rewarding to do so. However, this theory assumes every individual is a rational being and makes rational choices, but it is clearly evident that Tim and Lionel are limited in their ability to conduct analysis and think of alternatives (Browning et al., 2000). In opposition to rational choice theory, cognitive deficit theory argues that individuals lack free will and this can explain how Tim and Lionel were ‘forced’ by their biological constraints to make the decision they did. Yet this approach assumes that an individual has a pre-determined future which cannot be changed. However, if Tim and Lionel received proper social support and were able to adjust in society, then perhaps they would not have been ‘forced’ to make the same decision. Despite the faults in each individual theory, if we examine the main aspects of the theories, then it is possible to develop a more inclusive theory to explain deviant acts more effectively (Barlow & Decker, 2010). For example, if we can account for the weaknesses of rational choice theory by explaining it through the
Situational crime prevention is an idea criminologists use in order to reduce the chances of crime initially taking place. This theory does not aim to punish criminals after the crime has taken place like the criminal justice system does, but however the opposite, it aims to reduce the chances of the crime taking place to start with. Ron Clarke (2005) describes this theory as an approach that aims to reduce the opportunities out there for crime, involving rational choice theory. Clark focuses on three methods within this theory, directing at specific crimes, altering the environment we live in and aiming to reduce the benefits of committing crimes.
Individuals commits a crime since they make a rational choice to do so by weighing the risks and benefits of committing the act. If the risks that is, the punishment outweigh the benefits, then the person will commit the act (Fritsch et al, 2015). Thus, people generally act in their self-interest and make decisions to commit crime after weighing the potential risks which include getting caught and punished against the rewards.
According to Clarke and Cornish (2001, p. 34), “the rational choice perspective was explicitly developed to assist policy thinking … specifically through detailed modeling of criminal decision making. The theory theorizes that offenders who have chosen to commit criminal acts, do so because of the reward it brings to them. Coupled with the different conditions that are needed for specific crimes to occur, with its emphasizes on the role of crime opportunities in causation.
A theoretical perspective that has been used to explain white-collar crime is rational choice theory (Paternoster and Simpson, 1996; Piquero et al., 2005). Its bases its argument on the idea that people consider their decisions prior to undertaking criminal acts, and then act in their self-interest. Emphasizing that the decision to commit a criminal offense is within the control of the individual (Quackenbush, 2004). This decision is based upon an evaluation of the associated costs and benefits of the act. In other words, the perspective presupposes that rational individuals will make the decision to commit a crime when the anticipated ...
Every society has its conventional norms that everyone is required to adhere to all the time. Violation of the dominant norms is usually met with harsh punishments since the society consider violation of societal norms as deviance. Deviance, according to Thio, Taylor and Schwartz (2012), is any behavior that violates the society's dominant norms. Conversely, in sociology, the term deviance is used to refer to the violation of the societal social norms. According to Henslin et al. (2013), deviant behaviors vary in magnitude and can be as small as violating traffic rules to murder. Normally, what is considered deviant behavior varies from one society to another. For instance, whereas some societies consider possession or use of marijuana as a deviant behavior, such as Canada, some societies, such as Jamaica does not consider marijuana possession or use as a deviant behavior. In Canada, section 4.3 of the criminal code considers possession or use of marijuana a crime, thus a deviant behavior. This implies that possession or use of marijuana violates the Canadian social norms. Although sociologists agree as to the definition of deviance, Henslin et al. (2013) noted that there has been a strong disagreement as to why people engage in deviant behaviors. The persistent disagreements have resulted in the emergence of different theories of deviance that attempts to explain how deviance operates in society. The theories include structural strain theory, labeling theory, social control theory, differential association theory and deterrence theory. However, as much as the perspectives of all the theories can be relied on, differential association theory appears to be a theory that best explains how deviance operat...
Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational Choice theory, criminal control policy, and criminology relevance. Policy essay, 43-52.
When people commit crime, some of those people understand that consequences come along the way. They understand the means, ends and cost of their actions, the benefits that come for committing a crime. In criminology, rational choice theory plays a role when people commit crime. People will act in their self-interest and make choices to commit crime after weighing the potential risks against the rewards. In two different articles, it will demonstrate how rational choice theory comes into play, as for the second one, why this theory would not work in this particular crime.
Rational Choice theory says that criminal behavior is not only a response to social pressures and upbringing, but it is also a choice. The offender’s choices may not always be rational and may draw on previously established beliefs about their opportunities to commit acts of violence. This theory focuses on the effectiveness of interventions to decide how to best reduce the benefits of crime and increase the cost of criminal action. Rational Choice theory is in the classical school, which is based on the idea that individuals choose to engage in crime (Gosselin, pp. 67-68, 2014).
The rational choice theory went through different stages before shaping into a mature criminology theory. As criminologists noticed a more comprehensive perspective between how individual perceptions work in between costs and benefits of crime, it enhances the function of rational choice theory which it is able to give an insight on how criminals engage the thoughts of offending at its final stage. The 1960s and 1980s America were particularly chosen as examples of how rational choice theory could be used to explain crimes and chaotic social order often triggered by historical events, then changing its social norms at the time. These periods also witnessed important changes for the theory to evolve from adopting assumptions from other theories
Among the goals of rational choice theory is to explain all types of crime (Cornish and Clarke, 1986). However, it does not propose that there is an underlying unity between different types of crime like other theories. Instead, these diverse elements are important in explaining why such events occur. Also, it incorporates factors that lead to crime, emphasizes the pattern of decisions throughout a criminal career, and accounts for situational variables of crime.
Criminology has undergone various changes over the years in terms of ideas, concepts and theories. Before the ideas of early and modern criminology, crime was explained by Moralism, or the idea that criminal behavior was caused by evil spirits, sin or the devil(1). Thankfully, these ideas soon fell out of favor in the age of enlightenment and gave way to classical theories of criminal behavior. While early criminology was based off of classical, biological and psychological theories, modern criminology is not much different as many of these theories simply evolved. Modern criminology is still composed of psychological and biological theories, and classical theories simply evolved into neoclassical theories. These theories, both modern
This theory suggest that psychological behavior of crime is the result of individual’s differences in thinking process. “There are four basic ideas when it comes to psychological theories of crime”. (Boys, 2003). The general assumptions suggest that failure in psychological development is the result of crime. Learned behaviors of aggression and violence can be another result of crime. Inherent personality traits is as well another result of crime. An example of this theory can be a person who lies all the time versus a person who rarely lies. The person who does not lies, feels guilty or uncomfortable when he or she does. On the other hand, the person who do lies feels more comfortable about lying and does not feel bad about either. Psychological theory also suggest that it is the person’s thoughts and feelings that detect their actions. Problems and thinking can also lead to criminal behavior because the person believes that what he or she is doing is not wrong so they keep doing it. People who come from a violent environment can make them to be violent as well. It is kind of like a tradition that families past around to their kids and then they pass it on their kids. I believe that most of the time criminal behavior comes from where we learn criminal activities. The role parent’s play is very important to their
There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory, psychosis and brain injury theory. In the next few paragraphs examples of each will be shown.
Criminality constitutes strategic mannerisms characterized by apathy to misery inflicted on others, egocentricity and depressed self-control. Habitual criminal behaviour seeks to satisfy the offender’s desires for material prestige, power or pleasurable feelings regardless to damage inflicted to victim or society. Such behaviors extend mistrust, fuel prejudice, and largely corrupt social cohesion. Biological, psychological and environmental attributes are thought to heavily influence antisocial and criminal behaviour. Numerous studies have proven that active emulation, genetic predispositions and psychosocial labeling are all complementary to development and expressions of criminal behaviour. There has historically been a myriad of theories that attempt to explain criminal behaviour through different perspectives, all which constitute intricate paradigms that play a role in expressio...
What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality theory, to impulse theory, and cognitive theory. The multiple factors influencing people’s behaviour including criminal behavior are also considered. These include family circumstances, their personality, and mental health issues. The essay will consider the roles that society and individuals have in defining and contributing to people engaging in criminal behaviours.