Criminology final

Quinney "Class, State, and Crime"

"In the course of securing the existing economic order... laws must be violated... capitalism produce[s its] own sources of crime" including: - Crimes of economic domination: price-fixing, Ponzi schemes - Crimes of government: Watergate, political assassinations - Crimes of control: police violence and brutality illegal surveillance, denying due process Crime among the oppressed class is an "individualistic reaction to the forces of capitalist production"

Chesney-Lind, A Feminist Theory of Female Delinquency

"There is considerable question as to whether existing theories that were developed to explain male delinquency can adequately explain female delinquency... However overlapping their experiences might be, boys and girls reside in different worlds... Growing up, [they] have very different experiences, they react to experiences differently, and are reacted to differently by those seeking to control them."

Zehr reading

"Victims, offenders, and community members often feel that justice does not adequately meet their needs. Justice professionals - judges, lawyers, prosecutors, probation and parole officers, prison staff - frequently express a sense of frustration as well. Many feel that the process of justice deepens societal wounds and conflicts rather than contributing to healing or peace. Restorative justice is an attempt to address some of these needs and limitations" (Zehr, p. 3). "Although the term "restorative justice" encompasses a variety of programs and practices, at its core it is a set of principles, a philosophy, an alternate set of guiding questions" (Zehr, p. 55).

Contemporary views

*Rowe reading Family, heredity, & genes - Family trees, twin studies (higher concordance among identical twins than among siblings), adoption studies (Twin & non-twin), molecular genetics (MAOA mutation affects serotonin levels), chromosomal abnormalities (XXY'ers and increased criminality) - Family, heredity, & genes: Criminality akin to disease or illness—genetically transmitted - Critiques: Mixed findings, no control group or random assignment, small sample sizes, neglect sociological factors, etc. Neurochemical factors - Men and testosterone, women and PMS, neurotransmitters (low serotonin) Diet and nutrition: twinkie defense Pregnancy & birth complications: Central nervous system (CNS) damage via mom's use of substances or complications during delivery Early puberty: Hanging out with older kids sooner, cognitive dissonance rebellion

Shift: primary

- Create decent-paying jobs for the (urban) poor - Gov't aid ($) for the un/underemployed - End racial segregation in housing - Restore social integration and strengthen social institutions - Reduce housing and population density - Reduce neighborhood dilapidation - Change social practices re: masculinity

Shift: tertiary

- Implement alternatives to incarceration - Reduce overcrowding, improve conditions of jails & prisons - Eliminate 3-strikes laws, punitive drug sentencing, and the death penalty - Expand community policing; hire more women & minority officers; reduce brutality & profiling - Increase gun control efforts - Increase intolerance toward white collar crime

shift: secondary

- Pre/post-natal info and services - Early childhood intervention programs for high-risk children/families - More domestic violence shelters/rape crisis centers - Affordable, high-quality day-care and flexible work schedules - Improve schools (especially in urban, low-income areas)

sociological theories emphasizing social process

- little attention to social structure and social inequality - focus on the interactions of individuals to explain crime (learning, socialization, human interaction, etc.) - macro view

Timeline

1. Early societies: Punishment from god(s) 2. middle ages: the devil 3. 18th C. rational criminals 4. 19th C. crime rates in France reveal patterns 5. Late 19th C. - Durkheim says deviance is inevitable/healthy - Biology and its critique (lombroso, shledon, etc.) 6. Early 20th C. Chicago School/ neighborhood characteristics 7. Mid 20th C.: - Sutherland's peers - Merton's anomie - Labeling, conflict, feminist theories

Anomie & Strain theory - Merton's idea—what is strain? How does it develop?

5 strategies we use to adapt to this strain: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, rebellion Individuals experience anomie (strain) when their aspirations are uncontrolled or unfulfilled—Merton applied this (Durkheimian) idea to deviance "Certain phases of social structure generate the circumstances in which infringement of the social codes constitutes a 'normal' response." He intended to explain high rates of crime amongst the poor evaluation: What about crime among non-poor, i.e. middle-class delinquency and white collar crime? What about violent and non-economic crimes? Not much empirical support defense/extension: - More recently, scholars have used this theory to explain middle-class and white collar crime - Messner & Rosenfeld (2007) extended Merton's ideas to develop their institutional anomie theory: "The American Dream thus has a dark side that must be considered in any serious effort to uncover the social sources of crime."

Anderson reading

A decent family tends to accept mainstream values more fully and tries to instill them in their children. In a street family, the parents often have a lack of consideration for others and a superficial sense of family and community, having difficulty reconciling the needs of their children. Anderson suggests that although some people in the street family communities try to keep their children away from the more violent side, most people still know and adhere to the code. Rules guiding the "campaign for respect" include watching out for yourself, not backing down, getting payback for being disrespected, etc. The rules follow the idea of preserving a respectable self image that is in accordance with the code in the streets. To succeed in the campaign for respect, one must hold onto this image. He can't let anyone diss him, he can't look weak, and he has to pay others back when they wrong him. The term "juice" refers to the amount of respect someone holds. The structural code in the streets gives a guide for behavior that is often norm-breaking when looked at from the outside. Larger sociological issues that perpetuate the existence of the code include racial discrimination that leads to economic disparities, differences in living conditions, police-community relations, and so much more. This theory is considered as a structural explanation of crime because of how the code is a way of life, a structural guide for communities to follow, that has led to criminal behavior that the code deems necessary in order to maintain standards in the community.

Code of the Street (Anderson)

A variation of a subculture-violence approach that emphasizes the use and threat of violence to maintain respect; the need for respect results from the despair and alienation in which the poor live

Explanations for crime/deviance throughout Middle Ages

A. Gods and Demons as Causes of Crime: act deviantly because God was testing their faith, punishing them, using their behavior as a warning to others, or because they were possessed by demons

big-picture overview of the major milestones in the chronology of the development of criminological theory and major strains of thought

A. Middle ages - Crime/deviance thought to be caused by demons or as punishment from God B. 17th & 18th Century—Age of Reason (Enlightenment)/ rational criminals - Science (and "reason") began to replace religion for explaining social phenomena - Philosophers developed the notion of free will - Still no real effort was made to understand the cause of crime; punishments were severe (torturous) and arbitrarily administered C. Mid-18th Century - Classical school of criminology develops, drawing from Enlightenment thinkers re: free will and human behavior; criminals calculated benefits against risks - Beccaria condemns criminal justice system, calls for certainty, swiftness, and fairness in sentencing (AKA Utilitarianism) - Bentham agrees, helps develop first police force and prison D. Neoclassical: All Classical and Neoclassical theories emphasize the rationality of criminals, belief in the deterrent power of law, and largely ignore social causes of crime - which is the basis of our contemporary CJS - Classical and Neoclassical theories led 'get tough' crime policies the ramped up in the late 1980s and early 1990s, which have not been shown to be effective ... but have led to mass incarceration *shift: Instead of looking for what is wrong with people, these researchers are looking for what is wrong with society Biological /19th C.—Phrenology, atavism /20th C.—Biological inferiority, somatology /Modern—Heredity & genes, neurochemicals, diet & nutrition, pregnancy & birth complications, early puberty Psychological /Psychoanalysis, moral development, intelligence, personality /Historical legacy of these works re: policy implications /New research on behavioral epigenetics blends bio, psych, and soc Social Structure: disorganization, anomie/ strain, subculture Social Process - Learning, control, life course Critical Perspective: - labeling theory, conflict and radical theories, feminist theories Queer theories

Classical school of criminology - Beccaria and Bentham - Utilitarianism

AKA "utilitarianism" (utility = purpose/ function) Founded by Cesare Beccaria (economist, philosopher), whose book On Crimes and Punishment (1764) condemned the torturous and arbitrary practices of the criminal justice system - Believed people act rationally, exercise free will: Hobbsean view of human nature, so state needed - Primary purpose of CJUS system was to reduce crime - Criminals should thus be punished fairly and proportionately ==No torture, less death, and no arbitrary (or disproportionate) sentences—like offenses should be treated alike == Punishment should also be swift and certain Jeremy Bentham: - Also thought people are rational, calculated actors and law need only be severe enough to deter crime - His ideas helped shaped modern police force in England and modern prisons

Anomie & Strain theory: - How did Agnew extend this idea to develop a general strain theory? How is Agnew's theory different from Merton's?

Agnew extended Merton's ideas to develop a general strain theory, which focuses on cultural goals other than monetary success Crime can be influenced by a number of factors: - Failure to achieve economic goals - Failure to achieve noneconomic goals - Removal of positive stimuli - Introduction of negative stimuli

Critiques of Classical school

Assumes: - people are motivated to engage in crime through the pursuit of the self interests - people are rational and engage in crime to minimize pain and maximize pleasure - swiftness, certainty, severity of punishment keep people from offending - CJUS system is capable of treating all persons equally Critiques: - There may be other motivations (e.g. crime of passion, political ends) - Maybe not so rational or calculating (e.g. juveniles, mentally ill); weight of pros and cons differs across persons - Other factors may have more of an impact - Empirical research indicates bias in the distribution of punishment

Age of Reason (17th & 18th C.) - How Enlightenment thinkers influenced criminological thought/their assumptions about human behavior - How criminals were treated during this time

B. Age of Reason (Enlightenment): 17th & 18th Centuries saw religion fade & philosophy grow as an explanation for social phenomena - God gave humans free will and reason to run our own affairs - Social contract: humans rationally agree to live in an organized society (the state) - Hobbes thought this necessary; Rousseau & Locke worried - Rousseau—human nature is basically good - Hobbes—human nature is bad - Locke—neither good nor bad, humans are a blank slate - this progress didn't affect the criminal justice system: Criminals were convicted on flimsy evidence and endured property forfeiture and torture, judges made arbitrary decisions influenced by personal and political gain—England had 200+ capital crimes

Rational Choice theory - Purely economic or not? - What does the research tell us about this theory?

Becker's (1968) expected utility model—purely economic - If the expected utility ($) from the crime is greater than value of NOT committing the crime, we chose to offend—and vice versa - Decision-making process similar to picking out a retail product - Other factors taken into account: can i make money through a legitimate job? how much? how much will i make if i offend? will i get arrested or punished? - Becker acknowledged that sometimes offenders do a bad job at deciding whether or not to offend, i.e. accurately assessing the risks and rewards Cornish & Clarke (2001) focus on event decisions "...explains the conditions needed for specific crimes to occur, not just why people become involved in crime in the first place." - Added that offenders also consider fun, excitement, and prestige (not just $), and that criminals often do not have time or ability to analyze all the risks & benefits - Implies criminals are not so different than non-criminals: Given the right situation (physical setting) and opportunity (desirable product), we might all be so-tempted Studies of active robbers, burglars, etc. tell us they do significant planning/calculation Robbers make sure nobody's around, burglars that nobody's home, white collar criminals cover tracks Others argue that criminals are not so thoughtful - Same studies also show that many criminals fail to consider the risks/take precautions - Many are under the influence during the crime or have a fatalistic attitude (expect to be caught)

Early 20th C. views - Biological inferiority (Hooten) - Somatology (Sheldon

Biological inferiority (Hooten, 1939): - Took body measurements of 14,000 male prisoners and 3,200 control subjects (in America) - Criminals had low foreheads, crooked noses, narrow jaws, small ears, long necks, stooped shoulders—though body type varied by criminal specialty - Called criminals "low-grade human organisms" and called for their sterilization or exile Body types (Sheldon, 1949): - Somatology—body type influenced personality hence criminality

bio/psycho summary

Both locate "cause" of crime within the individual Biological /19th C.—Phrenology, atavism /20th C.—Biological inferiority, somatology /Modern—Heredity & genes, neurochemicals, diet & nutrition, pregnancy & birth complications, early puberty Psychological /Psychoanalysis, moral development, intelligence, personality /Historical legacy of these works re: policy implications /New research on behavioral epigenetics blends bio, psych, and soc

Social disorganization and social ecology - Park & Burgess' concentric zone theory - What does current research tell us? Does this theory hold up today? - Indirect (Shaw & McKay) vs. direct effect of poverty

By 1930s, theorists began to emphasize structural causes of crime in cities - From 'sick individuals' 🡪 'bad social environments' - Crime in certain neighborhoods was attributed to "social disorganization" = Breakdown in social bonds and social control led to confusion about how to behave disorganized society: Characteristics of this disorganization included people (often poor immigrants) moving in/out, more divorce, dilapidated housing - These theories rely on official reports of delinquency (not the best measure) - Middle-class areas still have crime, but not these conditions - Inner-zones of cities can have high levels of social organization

Critiques of Sutherland's theory

Causal order—which comes first, delinquency or delinquent peers? Can adopt peers' behavior w/out norms Explains group delinquency better than individual/lone acts (e.g. murder, rape) Hard to test empirically Neglects women's delinquency

Rise of Positivism—why? Thanks to whom? How distinct from Classical theories?

Classical theorists (Beccaria, Bentham) said little about the cause(s) of crime, beyond the rational calculation that takes place; No attention to forces both inside (Biology, Psychology) and outside (Sociology) the individual that might influence their likelihood to engage in crime Comte—social philosopher who argued that human behavior is determined by forces beyond the individual's control Darwin—science could explain human development; established credibility of science for understanding human behavior and other social phenomena Critiques: Accepts state definition of crime/deviance (assumes consensus rather than conflict theory); Minimizes free will (or overemphasizes determinism); Says "criminals" are different (inferior) from "us" not only in behavior, but also in the biological, psychological, and social factors the determine behavior *Nonetheless, positivist theories are still THE dominant explanation for crime today

Consensus theory v. Conflict theory

Consensus: Durkheim - crime: any behavior that violates formal law; defined by the social collective - do members of society agree about what norms and laws should govern them? = yes - interests represented by laws: the social collective - Why people obey laws: They have internalized these norms & consider them appropriate to obey Conflict theory: Marx, Engels - crime: More broadly (some things are 'crimes' that are not illegal); defined by the powerful - Do members of society agree about what norms and laws should govern them? = no - interests represented by laws: the powerful - Why do people obey laws: Fear of punishment, lack of agency (disempowerment), resistance

Differential association (Sutherland)

Crime (and law-abiding behavior, for that matter) is learned through social interaction within intimate personal groups The criminal learning process includes: - how to offend - the attitudes that justify it - ability to evaluate laws as (not) worth following Crime is the result of exposure to an excess of definitions favorable to breaking the law over definitions unfavorable to breaking the law Differential association varies in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity - Friends you see often, for a long time each visit, early in life, who you value highly Valuable contribution in that... - Explains why some living in bad structural conditions offend and others in same conditions do not - Explains crime in the streets (i.e. violent & property crime) & crime in the suites (i.e. white-collar)

Feminist theories - focus on what key issues? Where does traditional crime theory fall short re: women and crime?

Crime cannot be fully understood and explained without appreciating the important role that gender plays; feminist theories can and should be used to reduce gender inequality in the areas of crime and criminal justice, as well as in the larger society Share several common assumptions: - Crime cannot be fully understood without appreciating the role gender plays; feminist theories should be used to reduce gender inequality in CJUS system and society - Point to women's subordination to men as rooted in capitalism and/or patriarchy Literature focuses on: (1) Victimization of women; (2) gender differences in crime; (3) why women offend; (4) women's experience of gender discrimination in the system

Differential reinforcement (Burgess and Akers)

Criminal behavior more likely to be learned if it is reinforced by peers/parents, as well as other sources (school authorities, police, media, others)

Learning theories

Differential association (Sutherland) Critiques of Sutherland's theory Other learning theories - Differential identification - Social learning - Differential reinforcement

Life-course theories - general premise and critique?

Draw from a broad range of theories: psychological, sociological, etc. Focus on explaining crime over the life-span - Infancy, childhood, adolescence, adulthood & on Identifies many known risk factors (poverty, poor parenting, etc.) - Parenting, success at school, and decent peers matter - Turning points (marriage, jobs) can matter, creating more social attachments & less opportunity to offend Some critics say this 'kitchen sink' approach yields theoretical mush

Social learning (Bandura)

Draws on psychological conditioning theories to explain aggression (learned through friends, parents, media)

learning theories expanded

During socialization process, we learn it's OK to violate social norms - Influence from peers, immediate environment, media Learning theories tell us how people come to adopt attitudes that promote criminality - Stresses the influence of external forces on the individual (as structural theories do) Assumes that individuals are "blank slates" and (criminal) behavior is learned

General critiques of Biological theories

Even if biological factors account for some violent aggression, what about other crime types? What about the relativity of deviance? (bar fight vs. wartime) Cannot explain group-rate differences Implication of inferiority & dangerous policy implications Increasing focus on bio-psycho-sociality

General critiques of sociological theories with a focus on social structure

Explains crime by the poor, but not white collar crime (and gender is neglected) Plenty of people in bad structural conditions don't offend—these theories cannot explain individual variation

Routine Activities theory - Three necessary components: motivated offender, desirable target, lack of guardianship***** - Explains some victimization trends (such as?) - Situational Crime prevention (what is it? Why do it? What theory does it rely on?)

Explains some victimization trends: - Younger folks, single person households - As technology makes items smaller & more valuable (more easily portable), property crime has risen - Seasonal changes in crime rates - Locations with lots of bars (alcohol outlets) have higher assault/robbery rates = Theorists acknowledge this ignores other motivations for committing crime, but argue we need to know the situational causes of crime Situational Crime Prevention: - Reduce exposure to motivated offenders, number of suitable targets, and lack of guardianship = Via lighting, video surveillance, security systems, "hot spot" policing, etc. What are the potential consequences, good and bad, of "hot spot" policing??

Shaw and McKay - Shaw & McKay's findings and their significance - Indirect (Shaw & McKay) vs. direct effect of poverty

Found that no matter who lived in the inner zones, delinquency rates stayed high (English/German/Irish 🡪 Polish/Eastern European 🡪 African Americans) As these groups of folks moved outward over time, their delinquency rates decreased = It's something about the neighborhood/ place! Explains crime through the conditions of the neighborhood, lack of social ties and socialization, which creates a disorganized society that leads to crime as a way to be economically secure or just as a way to create and instill relationships within the neighborhood. Crime is caused by the social disorganization within the inner/transitional zones in a city. To say a neighborhood is socially disorganized means that there has been a breakdown of social bonds and social control, which has led to confusion in how to behave in a non-criminal way. indirect: poverty > social disorganization > undermines social control mechanisms > crime direct: poverty > frustration, anger, economic need > crime

Rowe reading

In the Rowe reading, the biological evidence outlined include testosterone levels, serotonin levels, heart rate, skin conductivity, lower brain arousal, and brain anatomy/activity. Chapter six in Barkan's text also mentions testosterone and serotonin levels as being biological indicators of someone's likelihood of being a criminal. Rowe goes more in depth with physiological responses, compared to Barkan, such as in Rowe's examination of low heart rate correlating to a higher likelihood of criminality. In Barkan's text, there is more emphasis on biological evidence that has to do with outward appearances (phrenology, somatology) or with family, heredity and genetics. Both texts talk about some similar things while also discussing very different pieces of evidence for the biological influences of crime.

Containment theory (Reckless): Inner/outer containments, internal/external pushes

Inner Containments: self-concept, tolerance for frustration, set realistic goals Outer Containments: institutions, i.e family External Pushes: delinquent peers Internal pushes: immediate gratification, restlessness, hostility inner containments and outer containments help prevent juvenile offending

Summary of social process theories

Learning says we pick it up from out peers, family, and other influences who teach us delinquency can be acceptable Control says our social controls or self-controls are lacking; we don't have strong social attachments and/or impulse control life course mashes together various theories of crime to explain offending patterns across our lifespan

Focal concerns (Miller)

Less concerned with school performance - Delinquent kids pick up these values from being part of the lower-SES 'class' and its subculture Values of this subculture referred to as "focal concerns" and include... 1. Trouble 2. Toughness 3. Smartness 4. Excitement 5. Fate 6. Autonomy

Neoclassical perspectives

Modern theories of crime that ultimately rely on Classical assumptions of human behavior (i.e. free will, criminals behave rationally by calculating benefits/risks) Rational Choice theory, Deterrence theory, Routine Activities theory

Differential opportunity theory (Cloward and Ohlin)

Non-poor and poor have differential access to legitimate means as a way of obtaining monetary success Also have differential access to illegitimate means

Park & Burgess' concentric zone theory - Where does most crime occur? Why?

the transitional zone

Radical theories

Peacemaking criminology: - Pepinsky (2006) views crime as just one of many forms of suffering human endure; to reduce this suffering, people must find inner-peace and develop non-violent responses to conflict Green criminology: - Application of a criminological perspective to environmental harms

19th C. views

Phrenology (Gall) Atavism (Lombroso)

Phrenology (Gall) - why did this theory fail to catch on?

Physical attributes of skull revealed criminality (larger lower portion of brain)

Conflict & Radical theories - Theoretical underpinnings in work of Marx, Engels, and Weber - Focus on powerful vs. powerless, assumes conflict theory of law - Conflict perspectives - Radical perspectives

Powerful shape and wield the law to be used against the powerless (instrumental view of law) Influenced by the work of Marx, Engels, and Weber Bourgeoisie vs. proletariat

Critical theories

Previous sociological theories (Social Structure; Social Process) are traditional Positivist approaches - Attempt to explain why crime occurs, focus on influence of immediate social environment or whole society Critical theories focus on/question how people come to be considered criminal and how society responds to criminals, AKA "social reaction" theories - Emerged during turbulent 1960s and 1970s - influenced by Vietnam, Black Panther movement, Women's Rights movements

What does it mean to apply a public health model to crime? - Primary - what are the criminological policy implications?- - Secondary -- what are the criminological policy implications? - Tertiary -- what are the criminological policy implications?

Primary prevention: "seeks to prevent the occurrence [of crime and deviance] entirely" Secondary (developmental) prevention: identify practices and situations that put certain individuals at risk [for crime and deviance] Tertiary prevention: after [crime or deviance] has occurred, "seeks to minimize long-term consequences" of the problem

Psychological theories - Psychoanalytic (Freud) - Moral development (Kohlberg) - Intelligence/IQ - Personality

Psychoanalytic: Criminality is a result of internal disturbances from childhood issues (parent/child conflicts) says Freud Kohlberg: Criminals are stunted during moral development Intelligence: - Low IQ means poor school performance; less attachment to school & lower self-esteem; delinquency - Low IQ lower level of moral reasoning; more offending - Studies have linked this to race, which is problematic Personality: - Childhood temperament can be a predictor of later delinquency - e.g. linked to aggression, alienation, stress reaction, social potency

School failures and delinquent subcultures (Cohen)

Relies on Merton's concept of strain with focus on noneconomic factors Most boys' juvenile delinquency is non-utilitarian - More for thrills, status among peers than $... Cohen says delinquency is a result of status frustration - Lower-SES kids don't have the middle-class values (courtesy, hard work) it takes to succeed in school, so do poorly Turn to a subculture for status and respect

Labeling theory: Braithwaite, integrative vs. disintegrative shaming - Restorative justice programs - theoretical underpinnings/rationals, design, Dr. Pruss' experiences as facilitator - *Zehr reading

Revising and renewing labeling theory: - Focus on informal shaming by friends, relatives, loved ones as most influential (i.e. unofficial labeling) - More specific about circumstances under which labeling promotes vs. deters future criminality for individuals - Braithwaite's work on shaming: Disintegrative (stigmatization) vs. reintegrative (i.e. Japan) 1. Disintegrative humiliates, angers, denies legit opportunities, forces association with delinquent peers - Restorative justice

Subcultural theories

School failures and delinquent subcultures Focal concerns Differential opportunity theory Subculture of violence Code of the street *Anderson reading Summary: - Based on the idea that external (social) forces shape human behavior—including criminal behavior - Otherwise perfectly normal people can be compelled to criminality given the structural conditions under which they live—we must account for this to reduce crime - Critiques of these theories include: 1. Explains crime by the poor, but not white collar crime (and gender is neglected) 2. Plenty of people in bad structural conditions don't offend—these theories cannot explain individual variation little attention to indv. , focus on way society is organized to explain crime (poverty, social dis/organization, human interaction, etc), macro view

How do we reduce crime? What have we been doing? How is that working? Why and how are scholars calling for a shift in perspective?

Shift in perspective: - "Get tough" approaches to the crime problem have led to massive incarceration rates and high rates of recidivism (i.e. low return on investment) - Over the past decade, scholars and policy makers have begun to call for a different approach

Sociological theories emphasizing Social Structure

Social disorganization/ Social ecology says it's the neighborhood, lack of socialization & social ties: - determinism - street crime in urban impoverished areas - doesn't explain white collar/ middle-class crime - solve by: improve social organization Anomie/Strain says it's the struggle for (economic) success and the lack of means to achieve it (strain = gap b/w cultural goal $ and institutional means): - determinism - street crime in urban impoverished areas - doesn't explain crimes not motivated by money - solve by: increase structural (e.g. economic) equality Subcultural says it's the adoption of law-breaking norms learned through a subculture rooted in poverty and strain: - determinism - street crime in urban impoverished areas - doesn't explain white-collar crime/ middle-class crime - solve by: improve social organization and increase structural equality

General critiques of Psychological theories

Studies typically involve small, unrepresentative samples of folks who are institutionalized Does not factor in poverty, or how rates differ across time and space Causal order remains unclear: Correlation does not equal causation Suggests that criminals are psychologically abnormal Milgram, Zimbardo studies show plenty of 'normal' people are capable of some questionable behavior

Sykes & Matza reading - Denial of responsibility, injury, or victim, condemning our condemners, appeal to higher loyalties

Sykes and Matza build on Sutherland's differential association theory based on the idea that criminal activity is learned, and Sykes and Matza add onto that by researching the specific motives/rationalization behind the criminal acts. They look into how criminal behavior is reasoned for with the mindset that it is learned through the people the offender interacts with in their community. They contrast their theory of neutralization from Cohen's subcultural theory of status frustration by arguing that delinquents, through their perspective, understand and at some degree want to follow law-abiding society's norms, instead of Cohen's idea that delinquents have their own separate subculture where everyone "wants" to commit crime which differs from law-abiding society's norms of following the law. 5 Techniques of neutralization: meant to justify the criminal behavior to the deviant so that it doesn't feel as though they are breaking the law or going against norms.

techniques of neutralization

The denial of responsibility - delinquent acts are the result of forces outside of one's control; i.e, someone doesn't have parents that provide for them so they have to steal food from a store to eat. The denial of injury - the criminal act does not result in any serious harm; i.e, vandalizing a rich person's car when they can afford to fix it or buy a new one. The denial of victim - the delinquent acts out of retaliation or punishment; i.e, vandalising a teacher's house after repeatedly being picked on in class by the teacher. The condemnation of condemners - shifting focus from the delinquent's act to the reasons or behaviors of others that condemn them; i.e, the police are corrupt and arrested someone because of what neighborhood they're from The appeal to higher loyalties - the delinquent's act goes against the larger society's norms/demands to do what's best for the smaller social group that the delinquent belongs to; i.e, not telling on a friend who murdered someone else because it's wrong to snitch on your own friend

free will v. determinism

To what extent are our behaviors freely selected rather than caused by factors outside of our control? free will: economic AKA classical and neoclassical determinism: internal force (bio, psych) or external force (soc)

Atavism (Lombroso) - Why is Lombroso considered father of Positive school of criminology?

Took measurements of men in prison to compare with soldiers (in Italy) Found prisoners had abnormally long arms, skulls, and jaws; lots of body hair Findings discredited (Goring) but Positivist notion of criminals as 'different' remains

Durkheim's view on human nature and the role/necessity of society - Socialization and social ties keep individual impulses in check - Famous suicide study

Two mechanisms serve to hold individual impulses in check & create stable society: - Socialization: Strong set of norms or "collective conscience," how to be a good citizen - Social ties: Bonds to family, friends When these are lacking, people experience anomie (normlessness, adrift)

Subculture of violence (Wolfgang & Ferracuti)

Violent crime among the urban poor is explained by a subculture of violence Critics have said these kids are no more likely to accept violence than others ... and more the result of poverty, urban living, and race/class discrimination

Deterrence theory - General vs. specific deterrence - Critiques of deterrence theory - What does the research tell us about this theory?

We are calculating and self-interested individuals who assess the risks and benefits associated with our behavior, so potential and actual punishments should deter crime - if p'ment is swift, certain, and severe (publicized?) enough we can dissuade people from offending - This assumption underlies the "get tough" approach on crime (3-Strikes Laws, mandatory minimums) - Absolute vs. Marginal deterrence: Some p'ment deters more than no punishment vs. effect of increasing the certainty, severity, and swiftness of a legal punishment (i.e. LWOP vs. death) - General vs. Specific deterrence (AKA individual): General public decides not to break the law out of fear of p'ment vs. individual offenders already punished for breaking the law avoid offending/p'ment - Objective vs. Subjective: Impact of actual p'ment vs. perception of p'ment Issues affecting how much of a deterrent effect punishment can have: - Type of offense Instrumental vs. expressive - Offender's level of commitment: Low vs. high - Visibility of the offense Public vs. private = Which are easier to deter? Criticisms of deterrence theory: - Recall that some offenders report not taking the risks into consideration, having a fatalistic attitude, and being under the influence - Among some, arrest/incarceration is not as stigmatized and is viewed as an expectation - Prosecutors may not charge offenders as legislators intended - Chances of getting arrested/incarcerated are low Research: - Increasing the odds of arrest & the severity of punishment have only a weak general or specific effect on crime and delinquency, and perhaps no effect at all - In terms of specific deterrence, studies show punishment can actually INCREASE the odds of that person being arrested again = "Most studies on the impact of imprisonment on subsequent criminality find either no effect or a criminogenic effect"

Neutralization and drift theory (Sykes and Matza)

before committing delinquent acts, adolescents develop techniques of neutralization, or rationalization, to minimize any guilt they might feel from breaking the law Since most control theorists assume people are naturally selfish, they have paid no attention to the guilt that may accompany criminal behavior - This guilt is the central focus of this theory, and is premised by these techniques: Denial of responsibility, Denial of injury, Denial of victim, Condemnation of condemners, Appeal to higher loyalties Critiques of this theory include... - Some offenders feel no guilt - Does it always precede criminal behavior, or is it an after the fact justification?

Self-control theory (Gottfredson & Hirschi) and its tautological nature

criminal behavior results from low self-control, which in turn results from ineffective parenting Crime stems from lack of self-control - Low self-control results from bad child-rearing - Characterized by acting impulsively and spontaneously, taking risks/seeking adventure, being self-centered Some critique this theory as tautological - Crime is caused by low self-control; one indicator of low self-control is offending...wait, what?

Social bonding theory (Hirschi) - Attachment, commitment, involvement, belief - What does research tell us about this theory?

delinquency and crime are more common among indv. with weakened social bonds to conventional social institutions such as family and school Hirschi says people do not offend, despite their desire to, because of 4 types of social bonds: 1. Attachment—caring about opinions of others (parents, teachers, peers) 2. Commitment—energy & emotion invested in conventional pursuits (education) 3. Involvement—time spent on conventional pursuits 4. Belief—acceptance of norms of conventional society In terms of the family, research indicates... - Single-parent households may matter; strength of the parent-child bond certainly matters In terms of the school, research indicates... - Grades/attitudes toward teachers & extracurricular involvement matter; dropping out may matter In terms of religion, research indicates... - Religiosity may decrease drinking, drug use, & sex

Labeling theory - Premise, major issues addressed, and critiques

deviance is not a quality of the act a person commits; some people and behaviors are more likely than others to be labelled deviant; the deviant label may lead to continued deviance Addresses 3 major issues: 1. The definition (social construction) of deviance and crime: "Murder" - vs. wartime vs. police acting in the course of duty vs. death penalty 2. Possible discrimination in the application of official labeling and sanctions: - Often based on race, class, and/or gender - Chambliss' (1973) Saints and Roughnecks 3. The effect of labeling on continued criminality: - Dramatization of evil as first step, while official labeling = deviance amplification - Less concerned with primary deviance, more with secondary deviance Evaluation: - Overly passive view of the individual - Empirical research is inconsistent - Fails to explain primary deviance and ignores effect of social structure (economic factors, neighborhood) and process (peers, family) - Fails to explain secondary deviance in those never officially labeled as deviant (e.g. Dexter) - Re: policy, using formal law/labels less would lead to more crime (say deterrence theorists) - Ignores crime amongst powerful (say Radical theorists)

Durkheim suicide study

explores the differing suicide rates among Protestants and Catholics, arguing that stronger social control among Catholics results in lower suicide rates. According to Durkheim, Catholic society has normal levels of integration while Protestant society has low levels.

Biological theories

focus on individual abnormality and explain human behavior as the result of biological instincts micro level phrenology, atavism biological inferiority, somatology

other ecological work: theory of deviant places (Stark)

high pop density ^^^ 1. send more time outdoors to avoid family tension in crowded house 2. run into more delinquent peers vvvvv more convenience stores/ places to hang out in urban areas

Queer criminology - focus on what key issues?

highlights the stigmatization, criminalization, and the rejection of the queer community (meaning LGBTQ pop. (victims and offenders)) by academe and the criminal legal system Queer community individuals have been included in research samples, but their identities are not usually recognized queer criminology seeks to both move LGBTQ people from the margins to the center of criminological inquiry and investigate or challenge the ways that the criminal legal system has been used as a tool of oppression against queer peopel

Conflict perspectives - More Weberian in focus, meaning what?

law and crime result from conflict among the various groups in society; not just economic classes More Weberian in focus; crime is the result of conflict among various types of groups beyond economics Sellin's (1938) 'culture conflict' (Sicilian father ex.); Gusfield (1963) and temperance movement Generally apply best to crime stemming from larger social unrest / social movements or other consensual crimes (rather than street crime)

Micro-level theories (biology, psychology) vs. macro-level theories (sociological)

micro: why are some individuals more likely to commit crime? - If the roots of crime are in the individual (Biology, Psychology) we need to 'fix' the individual to reduce crime macro: why are some categories of people more likely to commit crime? why is crime more common in some locations than others? - If the roots of crime are based on criminogenic features of the social environment (Sociology) then we need to address those to reduce crime We need to understand BOTH levels - Most people who grow up in bad environments don't commit crime—to understand why certain people do, we need individual-level explanations

Kohlberg's moral ladder

preconventional: morality of self interest = avoid punishment or gain concrete awards conventional: morality of law and social rules = to gain approval/avoid disapproval postconventional: morality of abstract principles = to affirm agreed upon rights and personal ethical principles

Differential identification (Glaser)

proposes that personal contact is not necessary for the transmission of behavioral guidelines people will imitate what they see on tv Identification (not necessarily interaction) with (criminal) reference group predicts criminality

Restorative Justice

punishment designed to repair the damage done to the victim and community by an offender's criminal act Victims: information > truth-telling > empowerment > restitution or vindication Offenders: "Accountability" > encouragement to experience personal transformation > support to reintegrate into community > for some, at least temporary restraint Community: attention to their concerns as (secondary) victims > opportunities to build a sense of community and mutual accountability > foster conditions that promote healthy communities

Radical perspectives (AKA Critical, AKA Marxist) - More Marxian in focus, meaning what? - Common beliefs of radical theorists - Quinney's central claim in Class, State, and Crime - Peacemaking criminology - Green criminology

the wealthy use the legal system to protect their dominance and to suppress the poor; the criminal law and justice system reflects the interests of the powerful Influenced by Marx and Engels - financial elites control property and means of production, but lull lower classes by obscuring oppression Bonger (1916) on Capitalism, Egoism, and Crime - Found degree of capitalism positively associated with homicide rates in 100 countries - Move from altruism individual socio-economic gain = crime - International focus: Crime and the Economy in China, Vietnam, and Russia -Hall (1952) and the history of theft - Chambliss (1964) and the history of vagrancy

Control theories - Containment theory - Neutralization and drift theory - Sykes and Matza reading - Social bonding theory - Self-control theory

view humans as naturally selfish and criminal, but personal and social controls keep us from offending Assume individuals are naturally selfish and capable of criminal behavior: - Focused on understanding what keeps us from offending Two types of controls keep us from offending: 1. Personal controls: - Individual conscience, commitment to law, self-concept 2. Social controls: - Connections to family, school, religion