Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on social control theory
Social control theory is
Summary of social control theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on social control theory
Although there are several theories as to why people commit crime, I mainly believe in one. Why doesn’t everyone commit crime? Some people do it so easily, yet you do not see everyone breaking the law. I believe that the social control theory explains all of this very well.
The social control theory was created by Travis Hirschi. While most theories ask why people commit crime, the social control theory asks why people do not commit crime. Hirschi believed that a social bond links people to their community prevents people from committing crime. There are four elements to this social bond.
This first element is attachment. This means that people are concerned about others’ feelings. In turn, they will be less likely to do something that is
…show more content…
wrong. Hirschi believed that attachments to school, parents, and friends help to prevent people from committing crime. The second element is commitment. When people who are committed to their society are less likely to commit crimes. They are committed to their society when they’re successful in it. This is because they owe some of their success to the social system that gave them the opportunity to be successful. Involvement is the third element.
When people are involved in conventional activities, they don’t have to time to commit crime. The idea of involvement is the backbone for many after school programs. Not only are these programs fun for children but it also keeps them busy.
The fourth and final element is beliefs. People who believe in the conventional value system of society are less likely to commit crime. If someone were to have a weakened moral code they would be more likely to break the law.
I am a firm believer in the social control theory. I think that deep down everyone wants to commit some sort of crime. However, our social bond keeps us in check. I know there are many times in my life when I have wanted to destroy someone's car or take something that I could not afford. However, I know these things are wrong and my parents would be very disappointed in me. Right there is an example of attachment and beliefs.
To put this to the test I asked my stressed out friend a question. I asked her, "If it was socially acceptable, would you throw a chair through that window?" She responded with a resounding yes. I then ask her why she would not do it now. She said that she did not want to get kicked out of the school. This would be an example of
commitment. My next example is going to include my brother. When he twenty-five years old, he and a few of his friends tried to rob a pawn shop for their guns. He ended up being locked up in the county jail for about ten months. Now, he and my mother were constantly getting into fights and constantly ran away when he was younger. He was also never very successful in life, constantly bouncing from one minimum pay job to the next. He was also regularly skipping school. With this free time, he would hang out with his friends, who were not very good people. I also remember him never taking responsibility for the things he did. He never showed any signs of morality. It was obvious that he was lacking in all four elements of the social bond. On the other hand, when he became married and had children, it was obvious that he was doing better. He started to get better jobs and made better choices. He started to develop attachment. The cycle started over again, however, when he his wife cheated on him. They became divorced and he ended up losing custody of his children. Now, he is once again in the habit of always getting into trouble. There are many stories like these. I believe that there are ways to help with this problem. One of the major ones is to open more after school programs that can appeal to children and teens. These programs need to especially be put into place in less economically developed neighborhoods. I believe that this would definitely reduce the crime rate. I also think there needs to be programs that help underqualified teenagers get part-time jobs. Part-time jobs can help teenagers by giving them something to do and preparing them for the real world. It can also lead to real successes which can lead to better commitment. This is not just my personal opinion, there have been many studies that show that these types of programs can help increase involvement and commitment. In an issue of Afterschool Brief, it was said that, “Self-care and boredom can increase the likelihood that a young person will experiment with drugs and alcohol by as much as 50 percent.” They also said that, “teens who do not participate in afterschool programs are nearly three times more likely to use marijuana or other drugs, and also more likely to drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes and engage in sexual activity than teens not in afterschool programs (Afterschool Alliance).” To be honest, I do not think that there is much that can be done with adult offenders. They have probably grown up without the social bond for so long that it is difficult for them to develop it. There are probably only a few ways that they could, however, they all involve that person helping themselves. They could form attachments or even begin to become more involved in their community. I believe that everyone has the urge to break the law every once and a while. However, like the social control theory says, there are forces that are preventing us from doing so.
In 1969 Hirschi started his analysis of the typical criminal who he found to have the following characteristics; they were usually young males, lacked a father or strong male presence in their home, lived in impoverished areas, had continuous difficulties in school, and most were unemployed (Walsh & Hemmens). From these details, Hirschi concluded that individuals most likely to commit crimes also have three more characteristics, which are not being socially inclined by the expectations of others, having free time to commit such acts, doesn’t have much to lose if caught (except freedom), and a general undermining of the moral perspective behind most laws, especially ones they are breaking. Hirschi went even further and deduced the four elements by stating that the individuals committing crimes lack these elements associated with “prosocial” behavior. The first
Control theory states that all people are potential deviants and that social bonds determine the outcome. If the family has strong social bond, such as the Simpson’s, though they have problems they are able to overcome them remain a loving family. The strong bonded family keeps their bonds strong by a healthy mix of parenting, discipline, and time spent together. On the contrary the family that has weak social bonds, the submissive parent and son, often have deviant children who defy them. These weak social bonds accumulate through lack of parenting and not a lot of social interaction with each
Control Theory focuses on the question, “why do people conform?”. This theory argues that it is easier to satisfy an individual’s needs and wants through crime, but most people still don’t commit illegal acts. The reason for this is because of the restraints placed on people that stop them from breaking the law. But obviously, some people’s restraints exist more than others’. Some people feel freer to engage on crime. There are three major things that stop people from participating in deviant criminal activities: direct control, stake in conformity, and internal control. Jeffrey Dahmer lacked all
accepted social or moral standards. Deviance most of the time is the "gateway" to crime.
In conclusion, there are many ways to implement fun in learning. Are there various ways to keep a child in school, and focused on their studies instead of seeking excitement from crime? Providing and funding after school programs are not just going to be a success factor amongst most adolescents, it will become such a consummation in the decrease of crime being committed by children. Thus, leaving many with the thought of “why haven’t we thought of this sooner?” The talk of budget cuts should be diminished, and replaced with ideas of programs and supplies needed to take education to the next
First and foremost, the theory states that criminal behavior is learned, meaning that the behaviors of an individual are influenced and shaped by those they associate with (Clinard & Meier, 2015). The primary reference point here is the nuclear family. Parents teach their children how to walk and talk, who grow up with siblings or in some cases, elderly relatives. With good reason, it is widely held that these interactions create the foundation of the individual’s conception of societal norms and values. That being said, if the individual is capable of assessing proper behavior in society, they are also capable of learning what is considered
Trait theory views criminality as a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. It is based on a mix between biological factors and environmental factors. Certain traits alone cannot determine criminality. We are born with certain traits and these traits along with certain environmental factors can cause criminality (Siegel, 2013). According to (Siegel, 2013), the study of sociobiology sparked interest in biological or genetic makeup as an explanation for crime and delinquency. The thought is that biological or genetic makeup controls human behavior, and if this is true, then it should also be responsible for determining whether a person chooses crime or conventional behavior. This theory is referred to as trait theory (Siegel, 2013). According to Siegel (2013), due to the fact that offenders are different, one cannot pinpoint causality to crime to just a single biological or psychological attribute. Trait theorist looks at personal traits like intelligence, personality, and chemical and genetic makeup; and environmental factors, such as family life, educational attainment, economic factors, and neighborhood conditions (Siegel, 2013). There are the Biosocial Trait theories an...
An integrated theory is a combination of 2 or 3 theories that offers many explanations on why crime is occurring, compared to a traditional criminal theory that just focus on one type of aspect (Lilly et al.2010). The purpose of integrated theories is to help explain many aspects into what causes criminal behavior and why one becomes delinquent. From this an argument arises can integrated theories be used to explain all criminal behavior. Integrated theories are successful in explaining certain aspects of crime on what causes one to become deviant; however one theory alone cannot explain why an individual engages in crime. This paper will examine three integrated theories and look in-depth how these theories can explain different aspects on why criminal behavior occurs and the weakness of each theory. The three integrated theories that will be discussed in this paper are Cloward and Ohlin Differential Opportunity theory, Robert Agnew General Strain theory, and lastly Travis Hirschi’s Social Bond theory.
Travis Hirschi presented a social bonding theory in 1969. The main idea of the social bonding theory is that each and every individual has a drive to act in selfish and even aggressive ways that might possibly lead to criminal behavior. Social bonding theory is somewhat have similarities with the Durkheim theory that “we are all animals, and thus naturally capable of committing criminal acts” (Tibbetts, 2012, p. 162). However, the stronger a person is bonded to the conventional society, for example, family, schools, communities, the less prone a person is to be involved in criminal activity. The great example of this would be the serial killer Nannie Doss. Since early age she did not have any bonds either to her family with an abusive father or to community she lived in. Most of the time during her childhood she was isolated from any social interactions with her schoolmates or friends.
In order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the criminal behavior theories, the word theory needs to be defined. “A theory is an explanation. It tells why or how things are related to each other. A theory of crime explains why or how a certain thing or certain things are related to criminal behavior.” (Bohn and Vogel)
Social Control Theory presumes that people will naturally commit crime if there were left to their own devices (i.e. no laws in society) and people do not commit crimes because of certain controlling forces, such as social bonds that hold individuals back partaking on their anti social behavior (Bell, 2011). Examples of controlling forces are family, school, peers, and the law. Young people who are t... ... middle of paper ... ... nd delinquent are more likely to partake in committing criminal behavior (Shaefer and Haaland, 2011, p.155-156).
...ulture and beliefs. Another reason one might commit a crime, is when people fail to achieve society’s expectations through legal means such as hard work and delayed gratification, they may attempt to achieve success through crime. People also develop motivation and the skills to commit crime through the people they associate with. Some criminals commit crimes because of the controls that society places on a person through institutions such as schools, workplaces, churches, and families. Sometimes there are occasions where a persons actions goes against what society considers normal, and as a result it is instead considered a crime. Also some criminals continue their criminal acts because they have been shunned by their society because once a person is labeled a criminal, society takes away their opportunities, which in most cases leads to more criminal behavior.
In conclusion, Social Bond Theory has been around for many years and has stood the test of time. The four bonds, attachment, involvement, commitment and belief are all held by individuals and play a major part in determining criminality. While it does not describe deviance perfectly, it does match what is believed to be the basic human view of why people become criminals. The view of Social Bond Theory is that all humans are basically evil and that deviance is a natural process. It is just a matter of how weak or strong these bonds are that either promotes, or deters deviance.
This theory is also known as social bond theory because it elaborates that instead of some natural inclinations toward crime, the individuals are deter from committing criminal activities due to strong social bonds. However, if the social bond of an individual is weak, the probability of involvement in a crime of increases. It is analysed from the research study of Warkentin and Willison (2009) that as per this theory individuals have natural tendency towards committing crimes if there are no social bonds. Moreover, it is also noticed that social bonds have positive influence on the reduction of criminal behaviour. This means that criminal activities within organisation can be controlled by emphasising on social bonds. The inhibitors of unwanted behaviour are divided into four types, which include belief, commitment, attachment, and
Different schools of thought propose varying theoretical models of criminality. It is agreeable that criminal behaviour is deep rooted in societies and screams for attention. Biological, Social ecological and psychological model theories are key to helping researchers gain deeper comprehension of criminal behaviour and ways to avert them before they become a menace to society. All these theories put forward a multitude of factors on the outlooks on crime. All these theories have valid relevancy to continuous research on criminal behaviour.