Consistency Is One Of The Most Effective Tools In Using Both Rewards And Punishments To Mold Behaviors

Theories of crime should objective on the characteristics of communities that promote high crime rates in the community or on the characteristics of individuals that foster criminal behavior by the individual. There should be relentless rewards and punishments for molding the behaviors.

Social learning theories of crime are micro-social theories that propose that law violation is a learned behavior. These theories recognize both the position under which an individual learns criminal behavior and the processes an individual undergoes when learning to commit crime. The major up to designated day social learning theorist in criminology is Ronald Akers.

Integrating scholarly concepts from sociology and behavioral psychology, Akers's social learning theory is proposed to interpret both deviant and conforming behavior. The theory has evolved a large deal of empirical support and assists as groundwork for many delinquency and pharmaceutical avoidance programs(Akers 45).

Social learning theory finds its thoughtful sources to the work of Edwin Sutherland. In the 1930s, Sutherland begun developing differential association theory, and in 1947, in his classic Principles of Criminology textbook, he complicated nine prescribed propositions to interpret crime(Burgess 128). Sutherland contended that criminal behavior is learned through communication with other ones in intimate individual groups.

By this, he proposed that criminal behavior is not an inherited trait but other than is started by interaction with other ones, particularly those in a person's family or companionship networks. He more over contended that both the procedures for committing crime competently and mind-set justifying the violation of law are learned. These justifications, which he called “the accurate major heading of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes,” are communicated through a person's exposure to the mind-set conveyed by others. He utilized the period definitions to recognize this mind-set, claiming that the people with who one associates may contain delineations that are either favorable or unfavorable to law violation. In other sayings, some people in a person's natural environment will contain delineations that disapprove of crime, while other ones will contain delineations that either approve of crime or glimpse little origin why laws should be obeyed.

Because individuals combine with many people all through their lives, it is probable that they will be disclosed to a kind of delineations, both favorable and unfavorable to law violation. Each individual is disclosed to his or her own exclusive configuration of delineations that adjust in both power and stage of favorability to law violation. The key proposition in Sutherland's differential association theory is that criminal behavior is learned when an individual is disclosed to more delineations favorable to law violation than delineations unfavorable to law violation. Those people disclosed to more people who approve of crime and less people who disapprove of crime are more probable to learn to commit criminal behavior; this is the benchmark of differential association.

The outcome of differential association on the subsequent learning of criminal behavior is not simplistic, however. Associations adjust in frequency, extent, major concern, and ...