Juvenile delinquency is a social issue that has been without much success with regards to its redress. This has mostly been contributed to failures to fully understand the concept. The best way to address such an issue can only be through the understanding of the causation mechanism that has led to the situation. There is a dire need to get an understanding of the causes of juvenile delinquency within the society being the only way to adequately comes up with preventive measures against delinquency. This is based on the sheer knowledge and fact that treatment of these deemed offenders can only be upon a clear understanding as well as appreciation of its causation mechanisms that gave rise to its preference.
Albert Bandura in 1977, published his proposed Social Learning Theory, to which end he was of the opinion that human learning is as a matter of fact a continuous reciprocal collaboration of three factors, namely; cognitive, behavioral, and lastly environmental. This has in some quarters been referred to as observational learning. This so called social learning theory as was discussed by Wiesner, Capaldi, Patterson (2003, p. 318) was focused on behavior modeling, to which end it proposed that a child first observes and later imitates the observed behavior of the adults or of the other children that are around him or her.
To this end, three theories have been proposed that reflect the biological, sociological as well as psychological to try and understand this concept. This has greatly been fronted by Italian physician Cesare Lomboroso who proposed that some people were born with inherent antisocial behaviors (Bartol, 2005). There have also been proposals that certain physical attributes like high cheek bones, fat lips, and lar...
... middle of paper ...
... cases they are also more often than not complexly interwoven within any single case. It is not thus satisfactory to infer to a single theory as an attempt to explain these complexities of the said and perceived conditions and circumstances that lead to delinquency.
References
Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A.M. (2006). Criminal Behavior: A Psychosocial Approach. Pearson
Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Bartol, C.R. (2005). Juvenile Delinquency: A Systems Approach, Delinquency and Justice: A
Psychosocial Approach.
Broidy, L. (2001). A Test of General Strain Theory. Criminology
Merton, R. K. (1957). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York (Vol. 11). Free Press
Weisner, M., Capaldi, D.M., &Patterson, G. R. (2003). Development of antisocial behavior and
crime across the life-span from a social interactional perspective: The Coercion Model.
Many theories of crime are macro theories, which are used to explain crime based on a large group of people or society. While macro theories are the predominant type of theory used to explain crime, there are also a variety of “individual”, or micro, factors which are equally important. Two such individual factors s are maternal cigarette smoking (MCS) and cognitive ability, or Intelligence Quotient (IQ). MCS has been shown to negatively impact the neurological development of a fetus, with serious
Youth, Crime and Justice Assignment Introduction; Youth crime is generally thought as being a very recent and modern day phenomenon, however this is widely untrue. Juvenile crime has been recorded ever since the early 17th Century and yet it has only been within the last 100 years that it has become such a significant issue with the general public (Goldson and Muncie, 2006). It is widely known that the present population are much more aware of youth crime and the implications it causes than ever
Theory is an important part of discovering and understanding why people commit crime. It is difficult to understand how a prejudice or bias towards someone can be linked to criminal behavior. The general theory of crime coined by Travis Hirschi and Michael Gottfredson can be applied to hate crime. The general theory of crime explains that people are born pre-disposed to crime and that they have natural tendencies to commit crime (Tibbetts, 2015, p 161). The only difference between those who are criminals
Crime theories appear to descend of two big schools of criminology. The classical school of criminology which is based on the offender as a rational being, aware for his criminal deeds, and the positivist school of criminology regarding sociological prospects influencing individuals’ lives’ and affect them in a positive or negative manner. The point of reference for this essay will be that when it comes for theories of crime, such as rational choice and routine activities theories, will be examined
To commit a crime or not to commit crime, a question that seems self-explanatory but is an ongoing struggle that appears in all societies. Sociologists look to explain this crime and deviance and have developed many theories as an explanation. The anomie theory was developed to explain crime and deviant behaviour in America, and the relationship between crime and social structure. Robert Merton was the leading sociologist in the development of the anomie theory and said crime occurred because there
concepts and theories explored within. First, this paper will begin with outlining the historical social context under which subcultural theories of crime came into being in the mid twentieth century in North America. Second, this paper will begin with the first posed subcultural theory of crime; Delinquent boys by Albert Cohen. Third, Skyes and Matza’s, ‘Techniques of Neutralization’ as a theory will be examined and commented on. Fourth, Walter B. Miller’s subcultural theory of crime on Lower-class
Organized Crime is a complicated animal. It is defined as “transnational, national, or local groupings of highly centralized enterprises run by criminals, who intend to engage in illegal activity, most commonly for monetary profit.” (FBI, 2010). Organized crime is unique in its requirement of an organizational element. This organizational structure helps differentiate the definition of organized crime from that of simply a group of people involved in criminal activity. (FBI, 2010). According to Kristin
The world will always be full of crime, thus it is necessary for scientist to grow along with the gruesome and increasing amount of violations. Due to this it sparked scientist to develop crime theories in which emerged to explain why crime is caused by individuals. Some of the few theories that have advanced over the past century and provided many answers to why crimes are committed are biological theories, psychological theories and learning theories. These theories provide an insight to its first
learning etc. Addiction theories look at the interaction of personal and social factors that offenders are exposed to which make them commit crime and become persistent in offending. Theorists Murray and Herrnstein solely look at IQ (Intelligent quotient) which is a standardising test assessing the human intelligence as the main factor for committing crime, whereas theorist Peele look at the use of substance and alcohol and other emotional experiences offenders get when they commit crime. This is where the
developed theories in an attempt to understand why people commit crime. Although, many theories have been created to establish a link between man and criminology many researchers suspect different factors lead man to criminal behavior. Furthermore, we will analyze the following theories, which include positivist theory, biological theory, and psychology theory to correlate their relationship to crime, and identify differences between them beginning with the positivist theory. The positivist theory is
Theories of crime inferred include the biological theory; positivism, atavism and somatotype. Positivism infers that offenses are made due to many factors outside of the offender’s control, making them crime prone (White and Haines, 2000, pp. 36). Atavism believed ‘criminals were biological throwbacks … people more primitive’ (Bernard and Vold et al., 2010, pp. 38). People committing the coward punch ‘don’t ever develop and many are delayed’ and that it is an atavistic feature that is ‘very primitive
Biological crime theory describes that an individual is born with the desire to commit a certain crime. Evolutionary factors influence an individual’s involvement in criminal behavior. “Biological theories focus on aspects of the physical body, such as inherited genes, evolutionary factors, brain structures, or the role of hormones in influencing behavior” (Marsh, I, 2006, 3). Murderers that are innate to kill are born with factors such as mental illnesses that are the driving force as to why one
There are many theories and explanations as to why crime occurs or as to why some individuals become criminals while others do not, some theories or explanations focus on the individual and other theories focus more on the social elements that can cause and individual to engage in criminal activity. It is difficult to make a concrete conclusion on which theories or explanations are better or are more conniving than the others given the situational nature of crime. Through examination of psychological
Humans commit crimes for a variety of reasons that may sometimes be difficult to understand. Criminology is comprised of numerous theories that attempt to predict and prevent different criminals’ behaviors. Beth has been charged multiple times for shoplifting and fraud ever since she was fourteen years old. There are several important facts about Beth to consider in order to figure out which theory best explains her criminal activities. She started consuming alcohol since the age of twelve, was pregnant
have developed theories in an attempt to understand why people commit crime. Although, many theories have been created to establish a link between man and criminology many researchers suspect different factors lead man to criminal behavior. Furthermore, we will analyze the following theories, which include positivist theory, biological theory, and psychology theory to correlate their relationship to crime and identify the differences among them beginning with the positivist theory. The positivist