Control Theories

1
Control Theories
2
Control theories are different

• Most theories assume that people naturally obey
  the lawand that special forces drive people to
  commit crime
• Biological
• Psychological
• Social
• Control theories (there are more than one) are
  different
• Assume that people would commit crimes if left
  alone
• Crime caused by weaknesses in restraining forces
• Crime NOT caused by driving forces
• Not by biology, not by psychology, not by social
  structure
• Therefore, to prevent crime, must have, devise
  and apply controls
• Need cops, judges, parents, social rules,
  law-abiding friends and groups...

3
Early control theories

• Reiss personal and social controls
• Personal controls thru ego and superego
• Failure to submit to social controls
• Skipping school, disciplinary problems
• Toby control through stake in conformity
• Students who do well in school have better
  prospects, thus have more to lose
• Contagion through peer support
• Nye social control through family
• Direct control through punishment
• Internal control - conscience
• Indirect control (ID with parents others)
• Control depends on availability of means to
  satisfy needs

4
Matza Delinquencyand Drift

• Most delinquents (Ds) not intrinsically
  different fromnon-delinquents
• Ds engage in law-abiding behavior most of the
  time
• Most Ds usually grow out of delinquency
• Drift Weakening of the moral bind of the law
• Ds dont reject conventional mores they
  neutralize them with excuses and justifications
• Sense of irresponsibility commit crimes but
  think theyre guiltless
• Sense of injustice wrongly dealt with by the
  CJ system
• Once bond is weakened, factors take over that
  cause juvenile to choose delinquency
• Ds beset by hopelessness and lack of control
  over future
• Ds gain a sense of power through acting
• Concept may not apply to serious Ds
• They may not be drifters may be committed or
  compulsive

http//youtu.be/RGVXzsTf-U0
5
Travis HirschiSocial Control Theory

• Individuals tightly bonded to conventionalsocial
  groups less likely to be delinquent
• Family
• School
• Non-delinquent peers
• There are four elements of the social bond
• Attachment to conventional others (affection,
  sensitivity to their feelings and needs)
• Commitment to conventional society
• Involvement in conventional activities
• Belief in following conventional rules

6
Hirschis test of social control theory
self-reports by 4,000 high-school student

• Attachment to conventional others
• Boys more attached to parents report less
  delinquency
• Boys less attached to or less successful in
  school report more delinquency
• Boys more attached to peers reported less
  delinquency
• Attachment to D peers can increase D if other
  controls not in place
• Commitment to conventional society
• Ds have low educational and occupational
  aspirations
• The higher the aspiration, the lower the D
• Involvement in conventional activities
• Youths who spent more time working, dating,
  watching TV, reading, etc. had higher D
  (inconsistent with control theory)
• But youths who reported being bored, spent less
  time on homework, more time talking to friends
  riding around in cars also had higher D
• Belief in following conventional rules
• Youths who thought it OK to break the law
  reported more delinquency
• No support for a lower-class culture
  Delinquent beliefs held by academically
  incompetent youths from all social strata

7
Hirschis controltheory issues

• Hirschi tested only for relatively
  trivialmisconduct few seriously delinquent
  youthsin the sample
• Are different causal processes at work for
  serious delinquency?
• Hirschis delinquency takes little time it is
  not an all-consuming lifestyle, such as an active
  criminal gang
• Hirschi assumes that control applies to all D
  behavior, trivial and serious
• Hirschi assumes that D behavior does not need a
  specific cause it is naturally motivated,
  requires no explanation other than it is fun
• Are shootings natural?
• Do individual pathologies matter? Aggression?
• Much support for Hirschis theory is tautological
• Youths who thought it OK to break the
  law...reported more delinquency
• Whats the difference between one group and the
  other? (Its like saying that delinquency causes
  delinquency.)

http//youtu.be/MKHlzp-bf3U
8
Gottfredson and Hirschi General Theory of
Crime

• All types of crime can be explained by low
  self-control opportunity to commit crime
• Self-control is internal
• Affected by external factors such as mentioned
  inHirschis social control theory only to age 8
• Ordinary crimes have similar characteristics
• Immediate gratification, few long-term benefits
• Exciting, risky, require little planning or skill
• Heavy cost to victim
• Ordinary criminals have low self-control
• Impulsive, insensitive
• Physical, non-verbal rather than mental
• Risk taking, short-sighted
• Above cause smoking, drinking, involvement in
  accidents

9
Gottfredson Hirschi poor child-rearing ?
lowself-control

• Adequate child-rearing properly socializesa
  child by imposing controls
• Monitoring and tracking childs behavior
• Recognizing deviance when it occurs
• Consistently punishing the behavior when
  recognized
• Controls are ultimately internalized
• By age 8 self-control is essentially set
• After age 8, change in rate of offending
  determined by opportunities
• Low self-control explains many relationships
• Delinquent peers ? delinquency Those with poor
  self-control seek each other out
• School performance ? delinquency Those with poor
  self-control avoid school
• Unemployment ? crime Those with poor
  self-control have trouble keeping jobs

http//vimeo.com/15514634
10
Issues with control theories

• Tautological low self-control defined by low
  self-control behavior
• Can low self-control explain white collar crime?
• Can low self-control explain variation
  (differences) in crime rates across time and
  place?
• Difficulty testing causal connection between poor
  child-rearing and self-control
• Is self-control really set by age 8?
• How do opportunities interact with low self
  control to produce crime?
• One test found a relationship between low-self
  control and opportunity for crimes of fraud, not
  for crimes of force
• Another test found that low self-control and
  opportunity have an explanatory effect on crime,
  but its very small
• Hirschi altered definition of self-control to be
  the tendency to consider the full range of costs
  of a particular act

11
Policy implications of control theories

• Support...
• Curfew laws
• After-school activities
• Job programs
• Head-Start early-childhood education
• Parental instruction
• Assistance to struggling families
• Oppose...
• Adult offender programs (may be too late)
• Police tactics that create opportunities to
  commitcrime (e.g., decoys, undercover work)