Pulling It All Together: Integrated Theories of Crime - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Pulling It All Together: Integrated Theories of CrimeSlide2

Doing Theoretical Integration

Up to now, we have examined many micro- and some macro-level theories including the three major theories in contemporary criminology

Learning

Anomie/strain

Control Each of the above theories had some empirical support and was able to explain some of the variation in crimeThus, some have argued that we should integrate theoriesTo integrate theories is to formulate relationships among themDo not just list the variables from the different theories; rather, describe the relationships among the variablesSlide3

Doing Theoretical Integration

Most common way to integrate theories is by using the “end-to-end” approach

Describe the temporal ordering between variables so that the dependent variables of some theories constitute the independent variables of others

Example:

strain  joining of a delinquent subculture  crimeThere are multiple integrated theoriesLombroso’s work combining psychological, biological, and social variablesTheories that argue there is an interaction between individual traits and the social environmentShaw and McKay combine strain, learning, and control theoriesSlide4

Doing Theoretical Integration

Most integrated theories have been at the micro-level; however, a few have attempted to integrate macro-level theories

Macro-level theories try to explain crime rates in groups

One macro-level integrated theory is institutional-anomie theory

Integrates Merton’s theory and social disorganization theory Slide5

Doing Theoretical Integration

Some attempt to integrate macro- and micro-level theories

Describe how macro-level variables influence the criminal behavior of individuals

However, some oppose the integration of theories, especially Hirschi

The most common objection is that the theories being integrated are based on opposing assumptions, and thus one theory would have to be substantially alteredExample: strain theory and control theory have different assumptions about criminal motivationArgue, instead, that we should focus on the development of individual theoriesSlide6

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Combines Hirschi’s social bond and differential association/learning theories using end-to-end integration

Thornberry, however, calls this theoretical elaboration and not integration

Arguing there is no requirement to resolve disputes among other theories

Weak social bonds, association with delinquent peers, and delinquent values contribute to delinquent behaviorHowever, he still does describe how macro-level variables may affect the micro-level variables in his theoryDraws attention to developmental processes and reciprocal effects of variablesDescribes how variables in his theory change in importance over the life course and uses the theory to explain career patterns in crimeSlide7

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Control theory argues delinquency emerges when the social and cultural constraints over human conduct are substantially attenuated

There is a natural impulse toward crime

Learning theory posits there are no natural impulses toward crime

Delinquent behavior must be learned through the same processes and mechanisms as conforming behaviorSlide8

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Argue control and learning theories are limited in that:

They rely on unidirectional rather than reciprocal causal structures

They are nondevelopmental, specifying causal models for only a narrow age range, usually mid-adolescence

They tend to assume uniform causal effects throughout the social structure Slide9

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Interactional theory attempts to address the three limitations

The basic premise of interactional theory is that human behavior occurs in social interaction and can therefore best be explained by models that focus on interactive processes

Argues people interact with other people and institutions and that behavioral outcomes are formed by that interactive processSlide10

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Interactional theory develops from the same intellectual tradition as the traditional theories

Asserts the fundamental cause of delinquency lies in weakening social constraints over the conduct of the individual, which allows for a much wider array of behavior

For the freedom from weakened bonds to lead to delinquency, an interactive setting in which delinquency is learned, performed, and reinforced is requiredSlide11

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

An interactional theory must respond to two overriding issues:

How are traditional social constraints over behavior weakened

How is the resulting freedom channeled into delinquent patterns

Interactional theory focuses on the interrelationship of six concepts:Attachment to parents (control)Commitment to school (control)Belief in conventional values (control)

Associations with delinquent peers (learning)Adopting delinquent values (learning)

Engaging in delinquent behaviorSlide12

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification

Presents a causal model allowing for reciprocal relationships among the six concepts

The model below refers to the period of early adolescence from about ages 11 to 13 when delinquent careers are beginning

Slide13

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social learning variables

The specification of causal effects begins by examining three concepts of social learning theories:

Delinquent peers

Delinquent valuesDelinquent behaviorTraditional social learning theories specify a causal order among these variables in which:Delinquent  Delinquent

 Delinquent Peers Values Behavior

However, other theoretical perspectives and empirical work has suggested reversing the causal order suggesting those who engage in delinquent behavior seek out delinquent friends

Thornberry argues that we should not focus on the unidirectional nature of this relationship and instead see it as reciprocal:

Delinquent



Delinquent

Peers Behavior

Slide14

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social learning variables

See similar arguments with the other social learning variables

Social learning theory states:

Delinquent  Delinquent and Delinquent  Delinquent Peers Values Values BehaviorHowever, other theories postulate: Delinquent 

Delinquent and Delinquent  Delinquent Values Peers Behavior Values

Again, Thornberry argues there is a reciprocal effect among these concepts:

Delinquent



Delinquent and Delinquent



Delinquent

Peers Values Values BehaviorSlide15

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social learning variables

Although each of the social learning concepts appears to have reciprocal interrelationships, the strengths of the associations between the variables and subsequent delinquent behavior are not equal during early adolescence

Beliefs that delinquent conduct is acceptable are emerging but not fully developed at this time, thus are viewed more as an effect than a cause of delinquent behavior

Beliefs are seen as being produced by delinquent peers and behaviorHowever, as these beliefs/values emerge they have feedback effects and further reinforce the behavior and association with delinquent peersSlide16

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social control variables

The primary mechanisms that bond adolescents to the conventional world are:

Attachment to parents

Commitment to schoolBelief in conventional values During early adolescence, family is the most salient arena for social interaction and involvement, and thus has a stronger influence on the other aspects of the youth’s lifeSlide17

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social control variables

Having strong affective bonds or attachment to parents is predicted to affect four other variables:

Commitment to school

Belief in conventional valuesLack of association with delinquent othersLack of delinquent behaviorHowever, not being committed to school, having delinquent values, associating with delinquent peers, and engaging in delinquent behavior can diminish the level of attachment between parent and child because these factors are contrary to parental expectations

These behaviors suggest the child does not care about the parents’ wishes and jeopardizes the affective bond between the parents and childSlide18

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social control variables

Belief in conventional values is involved in two different causal loops:

It strongly affects commitment to school and then is affected by commitment to school

Want to do well in school and when do well, it reinforces beliefs in conventional valuesIt affects associations with delinquent peersIf do not believe in conventional values, more apt to associate with delinquent others, who then further attenuate their beliefs in conventional valuesBelief in conventional values does not have a particularly strong impact on the initiation of delinquent behavior

Not affected by delinquent behavior, nor related to delinquent valuesAppears to be quite invariant regardless of class or delinquency statusSlide19

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social control variables

Commitment to school is involved in reciprocal loops with the other bonding variables:

Kids who are attached to their parents are more likely to be committed to and succeed in school, which reinforces close ties to their parents

Youths who believe in conventional values are likely to be committed to school, and success in school reinforces these beliefsCommitment to school also has direct effects on two delinquency variablesStudents committed to success in school are unlikely to associate with delinquent peers or engage in serious delinquent behaviorHave built a stake in conformity and do not want to jeopardize their accomplishmentsCommitment to school has an indirect effect on delinquent values via association with delinquent peers and delinquent behavior

Commitment to school is affected by each of the “delinquent variables”Youths who accept values consistent with delinquent behavior, associate with delinquent peers, and engage in delinquent behavior are unlikely to be committed to schoolSlide20

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Model specification of social control variables

Keep in mind that attachment to parents, commitment to school, and belief in conventional values are not static attributes

Rather, these concepts interact with one another during the developmental process

Remember, these variables have reciprocal effects with each other and with the learning variablesSlide21

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Developmental extensions

Middle adolescence (approximately 15–16)

Represents the highest rates of involvement in delinquency and is the reference period for most theories of crime

There are some differences in the relationships between the variables presented for early adolescentsIn middle adolescence, attachment to parents is involved in few strong relationshipsStill has an important impact on school commitment and preventing associations with delinquent peers, but the overall strength of parental attachment is weak for this age groupMost salient variables are external from the home and associated with the youth’s peer and school networks There is an increased importance of delinquent values as a causal factorSeen as much as a cause as an effect of delinquent behavior

Delinquent values are strongly articulated at this time and are major reinforcers of both delinquent associations and behaviorYouths who have these values are less likely to be committed to school and less likely to be attached to parents with the feedback effect to school stronger than the feedback effect to the familySlide22

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Developmental extensions

Later adolescence (approximately 18–20)

Two new variables are added at this time:

Commitment to conventional activities (e.g., military, work, college) Transition from the family of origin to one’s own family (e.g., marriage, parenthood)Attachment to parents and commitment to school only have minor effects at this point and become exogenous variablesDelinquent values, delinquent peers, and delinquent behavior still are embedded in a causal loopLoop likely to occur among adolescents who, at earlier ages, were freed from the controlling influences of parents and school and via feedback loops delinquent peers, values, and behavior further alienate the youth from parents and diminish commitment to school

Once this spiral begins, the probability of sustained delinquency increases

If this situation continues uninterrupted, it yields higher and higher rates of crime as subjects mature, which is inconsistent with the desistance that often occurs at this age periodSlide23

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Developmental extensions

Later adolescence (approximately 18–20)

Developmental approaches explain desistence by saying that as developmental processes unfold, life circumstances change, developmental milestones are met, new social roles are created, and new networks of attachments and commitments emerge

These changes are represented by commitment to conventional activities and commitment to familyCommitment to conventional activity is influenced by a number of variables (e.g., earlier attachment to parents, commitment to school, belief in conventional values, work, college, military service) and lowers the chance of delinquent behavior and associations with delinquent peers because it builds up a stake in conformityThe commitment to conventional activities tends to resonate throughout the system and reduce criminal involvementCommitment to family has similar, but weaker, effects than commitment to conventional activity Reduces delinquent associations and delinquent values and increases commitment to conventional activitiesThese changes, however, do not occur in all cases

The more serious and prolonged delinquent careers, the more likely delinquency continues into adulthoodSlide24

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Structural effects

Structural variables, including race, class, sex, and community of residence refer to the person’s location in the structure of social roles and statuses

Thornberry only examines social class

Focuses on lower class, working lower class, and the middle classLower class: chronically or sporadically unemployed, receive welfare, subsist at or below the poverty levelWorking lower class: stable work patterns, training for semi-skilled jobs, incomes that allow for some economic stability Middle class: achieved some kind of economic success and stability, can reasonably expect to remain at that level or improve their standing over timeSlide25

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Structural effects

Social class affects the interactional variables and the behavioral trajectories of individuals

Lower-class youths are more likely than middle-class youths to have:

Disrupted family processes and environmentsPoorer preparation for schoolBelief structures influenced by the traditions of the American lower classGreater exposure to neighborhoods with high rates of crimeExpect children from the lower class to be initially less bonded to conventional society and more exposed to delinquent values, peers, and behaviors

As one moves toward the working lower class, both the likelihood and potency of the factors just listed decrease but are still not as strong as the middle classMiddle-class youth start with greater stability and economic security, which reduces their initial involvement with delinquencySlide26

Thornberry: “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency”

Structural effects

Thus, initial values of interactional variables are systematically related to the social class of origin

Youths from the lowest class have the highest probability of moving forward on a trajectory of increasing delinquency

Youths from the working lower class have more volatile behavioral trajectories and less certain outcomes because the initial values on these interactional variables are mixedYouths from the middle class will move toward a conforming lifestyleSocial class also impacts the development over time of the interactional variablesSlide27

Extending Thornberry’s Interactional Theory

Tentative data support parts of Thornberry’s theory, especially the reciprocal relationships between the learning variables and delinquency

Thornberry and Krohn expanded interactional theory in 2005

Consider a broader range of age periods, including preschool and childhood years

Discuss the role of biological factors and individual traitsArgue a small group of individuals start engaging in delinquency during preschool and many of these people become high-rate offenders over much of their livesClaim this is due partly to individual traits that are a function of both biological factors and the social environmentExamples: parenting problems, povertyPeople who begin offending in adolescence are less likely to have these traits or are less likely to come from extremely deprived environmentsSlide28

More Integrated Theories

Akers argues his social learning theory is more general than other micro-level theories in sociology

Conceptually integrates other theories

Argues the concepts from these theories can be rephrased using the language of social learning theory

Hirschi’s bond of commitment essentially refers to negative punishmentClaims social learning theory can be used to make predictions about the relationships between these concepts and their effect on devianceAcknowledges that these predictions differ from those of the original theories (e.g., control theory sees any attachment to others as protective, whereas learning theory sees attachment to only conventional others as protective)Slide29

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Cullen’s social support theory does not use end-to-end or conceptual integration

Rather, points to a central causal process—the extent to which social support is provided to individuals—that affects crime for reasons related to strain, social control, and social learning theories

First to draw explicit attention to social support

Social support has a direct causal effect on crimeAlso, it has a causal effect on other variables that influence crime, such as social controlFurther, it conditions the effects of other variables (e.g., strain) on crimeIntegrates by highlighting and elaborating on a common theme in several crime theoriesSlide30

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Cullen’s goal is to make social support an organizing concept for criminology

Argues there are four major dimensions of support:

The distinction between objective delivery and the perception of support

Support is usually divided into two categories: (a) instrumental and (b) expressiveInstrumental support involves the use of the relationship as a means to a goalExpressive support involves the use of relationship as an end as well as a meansIncludes affective functions of supportSupport occurs on different social levels (micro- and macro-level support)

Support can be delivered through formal agencies and informal relationsSlide31

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

America has higher rates of serious crime than other industrialized nations because it is a less supportive society

The U.S. is not structurally or culturally organized to be socially supportive

Societies differ in their communitarian qualityExtent to which societies have the qualities of mutual help and trustThe U.S. is low in communitarianism and has a culture of excessive individualism Corollary: The more a society is deficient in the support needed, the higher its crime rate will be

The U.S. has a poor welfare system and is less supportive, making informal controls less effective Slide32

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

The less social support there is in a community, the higher the crime rate will be

Governmental assistance to the poor tends to lessen violent crime across ecological units

Crime rates are higher in areas with higher rates of family disruption, weak friendship networks, and low participation in local voluntary organizationsHigher crime rates in areas where there is social and cultural disinvestmentReduces the social buffer or human capital needed to absorb the shock or cushion the effect of uneven economic growth and periodic recessionsSlide33

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

The more support a family provides, the less likely it is that a person will engage in crime

Empirical evidence supports this

Delinquency is related inversely to child–parent involvement Parental rejection is positively related to delinquencyDelinquent boys are more likely to have parents who did not think about their futuresFamilies are a source of social capitalBe careful of the fallacy of autonomyThe belief that what goes on in the family can be separated from the forces that affect it from the outside Slide34

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

The more support a family provides, the less likely it is that a person will engage in crime

Two corollaries:

The more support that is given to families, the less crime will occurCan be informational, emotional, material, or instrumental supportMost successful interventions offer more than one type of supportChanges in the levels of support for and by families have contributed since the 1960s to increases in crime and to the concentration of serious violence in high-risk, inner-city neighborhoodsSlide35

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

The more social support in a person’s social network, the less crime will occur

Supports can mitigate stress

Can prevent stress from arising or can lessen negative consequences if stresses should emergeSocial support lessens the effects of exposure to criminogenic strainsHelps cope with criminogenic strainsSlide36

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

Across the life cycle, social support increases the likelihood that offenders will turn away from a criminal pathway

Marriage provides material and emotional support

Employment provides social supportAnticipation of a lack of social support increases criminal involvementAmong youths, informal relationships can provide support and allow them to feel part of something, rather than being isolatedIsolation may lead the individual to believe he/she will always lack the instrumental and expressive supports needed to change the circumstances he/she is inSlide37

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

Giving social support lessens involvement in crime

Less likely to be involved in crime when devoted to spouses/children

Women’s traditional responsibility for the delivery of social support and nurturance to others may explain the dramatically lower crime rates for women Crime is less likely when social support for conformity exceeds social support for crimeThere is differential social support and, when the support for conformity outweighs social support for crime, crime is less likelyCorollary:Social support from conformist sources is most likely to reduce criminal involvementSlide38

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Propositions

Social support often is a precondition for effective social control

Control can be effective in the context of support (Braithwaite’s reintegrative shaming theory)

Family support of offenders during and after incarceration improves the chances of a successful completion of paroleWarm parenting and restrictiveness has the best resultsSlide39

Cullen: “Social Support and Crime”

Cullen’s theory is compatible with much of the existing data and has received tentative support in preliminary empirical tests

At the macro-level, studies suggest that crime rates are lower in countries and communities that provide more social support (e.g., welfare assistance, unemployment insurance, high levels of state spending on healthcare and education, private charitable contributions)

Directly reduces crime rates and reduces the effects of economic deprivation and inequality on crime rates

At the micro-level, studies suggest that people who receive support from conventional others are less likely to engage in crimeSlide40

Tittle’s Control Balance Theory

Argues the central causal process for crime is the amount of control imbalance experienced by the individual and control imbalance affects crime for reasons related to several theories, especially strain, control, and deterrence/rational choice theoriesSlide41

Tittle’s Control Balance Theory

A control imbalance occurs when individuals are subject to more or less control than they exercise over others

Control deficits—subject to more control than they can exercise

May engage in deviance to reduce such deficits

Control surpluses—subject to less control than they can exerciseMay engage in deviance to assert or extend their controlIndividual factors (e.g., IQ, interpersonal skills) and social factors (e.g., gender, age, class) influence the degree of control deficit or surplus one experiencesSlide42

Tittle’s Control Balance Theory

Whether an individual who experiences control imbalances engages in deviance depends on several factors

Examples: desire for autonomy, blockage of goals, situational provocations, opportunity to engage in delinquency, benefit/cost ratio, moral beliefs

Explains his theory can explain the known facts about crime such as the relationship between sex, age, race, and marital status on crime

Research on whether control imbalances are more likely to affect crime under the conditions described by Tittle has produced mixed resultsCertain research finds that control imbalances have a larger effect on crime/deviance when self-control is low, while other research does not find thisSlide43

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Does not focus on a central causal variable or use end-to-end integration

Employs a

variable-centered approach to integrationAttempts to describe those variables that have relatively large, direct effects on crimeSlide44

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Argues clusters of variables affect crime related to all of the leading theories of crime

Describes how each of the clusters of variables are related to one another and work together to affect crime

Argues the clusters are reciprocally related to one anotherSlide45

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Crime is most likely when the constraints against crime are low and the motivations for crime are high

Constraints against crime refer to those factors that hold individuals back or restrain them from committing crime

Several major types of constraints:

External controlStake in conformityInternal control Slide46

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

External control

Refers to the likelihood that others will detect and sanction criminal behavior

Examples: police, parents grounding you, friends shunning you, school officials expelling you

Individuals are high in external control to the extent that others:Set clear rules for them that prohibit crime and related behaviorMonitor their behavior to detect rule violationsConsistently sanction their rule violations in a meaningful mannerSlide47

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Stake in conformity

The amount one has to lose if caught and punished

Investment in conventional society

Individuals have a large stake in conformity to the extent that:They have strong emotional bonds to conventional othersThey engage in positively valued activities with conventional others or receive positive benefits from interacting with conventional othersThey are doing well in school, like school, expect to get an advanced education, or have obtained an advanced education

They have “good” jobs that they like or they expect to get such jobsThey have an excellent reputation among conventional othersSlide48

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Internal control

Believe that crime is wrong or immoral

Have been taught this belief from early in life by parents, teachers, neighbors, religious figures, and others

Internalize these beliefsHave high levels of self-controlSlide49

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The motivations for crime

Refer to those factors that entice or pressure individuals to engage in crime

Grouped into two categories:

Factors that entice or pull individuals into crimeRational choice, routine activities, and social learning theoriesTaught to engage in crime in three major ways: (a) reinforced for crime, (b) exposed to successful criminal models, and (c) taught beliefs favorable to crimeCome to view crime as desirable or appropriate

Factors that pressure or push individuals to engage in crimeStrain theory

Strain leads to negative emotions which creates a pressure for corrective action which could be crimeSlide50

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Individual and social variables affect the constraints and motivations for crime

Focus on the variables with large, direct effects on crime

Groups the causes into clusters organized around five life domains:

Personality traits of low self-control and irritability (self)Poor parenting practices and no/bad marriages (family)Negative school experiences and limited education (school)Peer delinquency (peer)Unemployment and work in “bad” jobs (work)Slide51

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Self (low self-control and irritability)

Individuals who possess the super-trait of low self-control are impulsive, giving little thought to the long-term consequences of their behavior, and like exciting, risky activities

Individuals who possess the super-trait of irritability are likely to experience events as aversive, attribute these events to malicious behavior, experience intense emotional reactions (especially anger), and show little concern for the feelings and rights of othersSlide52

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Family (poor parenting and no/poor marriages)

Poor parental supervision/discipline, weak bonds between parents and juveniles, family conflict, failure to provide social support, and having criminal parents affect delinquency

When juveniles become adults, the poor parenting variables become less relevant to the explanation of crime

As adults, failure to marry and divorce are more relevant Slide53

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

School (negative school experiences and limited education)

Negative bonding to teachers and school, poor academic performance, little time on homework, low educational and occupational goals, poor supervision and discipline, and low social support from teachers are the key variables

Education influences the constraints against and the motivations for crime primarily through its effect on the individual’s work, marital life, and peer associations Slide54

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Peers (peer delinquency)

Having close friends who engage in crime, having frequent conflicts with and being abused by peers, and spending much time with peers in unstructured, unsupervised activities are the key variables

Peer delinquency is less common among adultsSlide55

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Work (unemployment and bad jobs)

Unemployment, poor supervision/discipline, negative bonding to work, poor work performance, poor working conditions, and having criminal co-workers are related to delinquency Slide56

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The five life domains generally have large effects on the individual’s level of offending

However, some life domains have larger effects than others, depending on the individual’s stage in life

Childhood

Low self-control/irritability and poor parenting have the largest effectsAdolescenceLow self-control/irritability and peer delinquency have the largest effectsAdulthoodLow self-control/irritability, peer delinquency, no/bad marriages, and unemployment/bad jobs have the largest effectsSlide57

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The life domains not only affect crime but also affect one another

Calls this the web of crime

Problems in the life domains seem to mutually reinforce and contribute to one another

Many criminals are trapped in the web of crimeTheir personality, family, peer, school, and work experiences are all conducive to crimeTend to offend at high ratesHowever, some escape this web when they make the transition to adulthood, usually because they get involved in good marriages or become bonded to decent jobsSlide58

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Web of crime

Irritability and low self-control

Increases the chance of poor parenting, failure to marry, negative school experiences, obtaining little education, associating with delinquent peers, and being unemployed or employed in bad jobs

These effects occur for four reasons:People with these traits devote little effort to conventional pursuits and prefer environments conducive to crimeThey often fail at conventional pursuits and are forced into environments conducive to crimeThey provoke negative reactions from others

They are more likely to perceive given environments in ways conducive to crimeSlide59

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Web of crime

Poor parenting

Have relatively moderate to large effects on the other life domains, with parenting practices during childhood being especially important

Negative school experiencesIncrease low self-control, poor parenting practices, peer delinquency, unemployment/bad jobs, and no/bad marriagesPeer delinquency Increases low self-control, poor parenting, negative school experiences, no/bad marriages, and unemployment/bad jobsMost pronounced during adolescence and becomes less common among adultsSlide60

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Web of crime

No/bad jobs

Work occupies a central role in the lives of adults

Overall, each life domain directly and indirectly affects crime through its effects on other domainsSlide61

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Crime affects its causes, and prior crime directly affects subsequent crime

Prior crime affects subsequent crime largely because of its effects on the five life domains

Engaging in crime often contributes to low self-control/irritability, poor parenting, no/bad marriages, negative school experiences, peer delinquency, and no/bad jobs

Prior crime also affects the constraints against and motivations for crimeReduces fear of external sanctions, increases certain types of strain, and provides certain benefits to the individual Slide62

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Crime affects its causes, and prior crime directly affects subsequent crime

This draws heavily on labeling theory

Individuals who are labeled are more likely to engage in crime

Others treat the labeled person as criminalConventional others reject or treat them badly, and employers do not want to hire themThe labeled individual associates with other labeled individuals The label leads to a reduction in the constraints against and an increase in the motivation for crimeTakes into account those that have been both formally and informally labeledSlide63

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The effect of prior crime on subsequent crime depends on:

How others react to the crime

Four key ways others might react:

Fail to respond to the crimeRespond in a harsh/rejecting mannerRespond in an approving/supportive mannerRespond in a manner that firmly rejects the crime, but is accepting of the person

The first three increase the likelihood prior crime would lead to subsequent crime, while the last one decreases the likelihoodCan experience more than one type of response

The response experienced is largely determined by the individual’s standing on the five life domains, with those with criminogenic life domains being more likely to experience the first three responses

Less likely to have crimes detected

More likely to have already been labeled “bad“ or “criminal”

Others do not care about these people

More likely to associate with criminal othersSlide64

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The effect of prior crime on subsequent crime depends on:

The characteristics of the criminal

The individual’s response is influenced by his/her standing on the five life domains

Those low in self-control/high in irritability, who have poor parenting, have negative school experiences, and are high in peer delinquency are more likely to react to their crime in a way that increases subsequent crimeFind crime excitingMore likely to benefit from crimeSee crime as an effective solutionLess deterred by negative reactionsLess concerned about the negative consequences

Less to lose from crimeMore likely to become angry at the negative reactions of othersSlide65

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The causes of crime interact with one another

The effect of each life domain is influenced or conditioned by the individual’s standing on the other life domains

One life domain is likely to lead to crime when the other life domains are also conducive to crime

Variables in each life domain affect both the constraints against and the motivations for crimeGiven these facts, a cause is more likely to increase crime when other causes are present because the individual is:Freer to engage in crime because their constraints are lowerMore likely to cope in a negative manner

More likely to view crime as a desirable or appropriate response Slide66

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The life domains interact by affecting one another

Problems in one domain increase the likelihood of problems in another domain

Do not always lead to problems because the effect of one life domain on another is influenced by or conditioned by the remaining life domainsSlide67

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

The causes tend to have nonlinear effects on crime and one another

Linear effects occur when a given increase in a causal variable always leads to the same amount of change in a dependent variable, like crime

Can be plotted on a graph in a straight line

Nonlinear effects cannot be plotted with a straight lineMust be plotted with a curved or zig-zagged lineNonlinear effects are most commonMost causes have to pass a certain threshold point before they start to have a meaningful effect on crimeSlide68

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

Effects are largely contemporaneous in nature, although each cause has a large lagged effect on crime

Contemporaneous effects refer to effects that occur within a relatively short period of time

Lagged effects take a longer time for the effect to emerge

The life domains mainly have contemporaneous effects because crime is largely a function of current constraints and motivationsMost people respond to the conditions they are currently experiencingHowever, each cause also has a large lagged effect on itselfSlide69

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

An overview of the general theory

Crime is caused by five clusters of variables, organized into the life domains of self, family, school, peers, and work that vary over the life course

The variables in each domain increase crime by reducing the constraints against crime and increasing the motivations for crime

Each life domain affects the other domains, although some effects are stronger than others and effect sizes often change over the life coursePrior crime has a direct effect on subsequent crime and an indirect effect through the life domainsThe life domains interact in affecting crime and one another

The life domains have nonlinear and largely contemporaneous effects on crime and one anotherSlide70

Agnew: “Why Criminals Offend: A General Theory of Crime and Delinquency”

A range of outside factors affect the individual’s standing on the life domains

Focuses on the effects of age, sex, race/ethnicity, parent’s SES, and community characteristics

These have large direct effects on all or most of the life domains

The life domains are more likely to be conducive to crime when individuals are in the adolescent years, are male, are African American or members of certain other racial/ethnic groups, have parents who are low in SES, and reside in poor, inner-city communitiesThese factors allow the general theory to explain group differences in crime rates, with such differences being due to the fact that groups differ in their standing on the life domainsSlide71

Robinson and Beaver’s Theory

A variable-centered approach

Incorporates variables at the cellular, organ, organism, group, community/organization, and societal levels

Variables impact one another and interact in their effect on crime

Genetic and environmental factors interact in their effect on crimePays close attention to biological factorsEmbraces complexity focusing on a large number of causes at many levelsSlide72

Wikstrom’s Situational Action Theory (SAT)

Focuses on how characteristics of the person and environment work together to impact crime

Crimes are acts that violate moral rules embodied in the law

Whether individuals engage in crime is influenced by their morality

Morality influences action alternatives people perceive in particular settingsIn most cases, people do not perceive crime as an option and conform out of habitIf crime is an option, people’s morality along with self control influence their decision to commit crimeSelf control refers to the ability to act in accordance to one’s morality when tempted or provokedMoral context refers to moral norms in a setting and the extent to which the norms are enforced through informal and formal controlsSlide73

Wikstrom’s Situational Action Theory (SAT)

Focuses on how characteristics of the person and environment work together to impact crime

Crime most likely when individuals with a propensity for crime (morality favoring crime and low self-control) encounter criminogenic settings

Individual’s morality can influence likelihood of encountering criminogenic settings

SAT draws on differential association, social learning, self-control, social control, and other theoriesFeatures of the larger social environment affect crime through their impact on morality, self control, and settings people encounterSlide74

Summary

There are varied approaches to integrating theories

Some describe the relationships among the various theories of crime (Thornberry)

Some identify a central causal variable (Tittle and Cullen)

Some try to identify and describe the relationships between those concrete or observable variables that cause crime (Agnew)Most integrated theories focus on micro-level offendingArgue that a complete explanation of crime requires consideration of both background factors and situational factorsThe causal factors are often reciprocally related, interact with one another, and their impact changes over the life course