SOCIAL LEARNING

Social Learning

Table of Contents

Introduction2

Thesis Statement:3

Discussion and Analysis3

The Empirical Status of Social Learning Theory:9

The Scope of Social Learning Theory:10

Conclusion12

References13

Appendix15

Social Learning

Introduction

In 1973, Ronald L. Akers published the first of three editions of his seminal work, Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach. In that book, Akers laid out the basic elements of what has become one of the most popular and widely researched theories in criminology: social learning theory. Social learning theory, in its current form, spells out the specific mechanisms by which criminal behavior is learned. In particular, social learning theory maintains that criminal behavior is more likely to result when an individual associates more with those who engage in and approve of crime than with others who do not. Such a pattern of association provides more criminal than non-criminal role models, greater reinforcement of criminal than conforming behavior, and the shaping of more pro-crime than anti-crime attitudes that constitute the optimal environment in which criminal behavior is learned. The origins of social learning theory extend to an effort by Robert Burgess and Akers to integrate Edwin Sutherland's differential association theory with principles drawn from behavioral learning in psychology (Burgess & Akers, 1966). From these beginnings, Akers crafted a highly testable general theory of deviance and conformity, which has enjoyed immense empirical support, has been applied successfully to a variety of behaviors, and has fostered prevention programs that have been effective in reducing criminal and deviant behavior in the populations these programs serve. This paper discusses social learning theory in a holistic context.

Thesis Statement:

Social learning theory is an integration of differential association and behavioral learning theories. It wholly subsumes differential association theory by recasting it in the context of behavioral learning principles.

Discussion and Analysis

In differential association theory, Sutherland drew upon symbolic interactionism to emphasize that both criminal and law-abiding behavior are learned in interaction with others. Sutherland acknowledged that in American society, one is likely to associate, to varying degrees, with individuals who define law violation as favorable as well as with individuals who define law violation as unfavorable. When exposure to people with behavioral patterns and attitudes favorable to crime exceeds exposure to people with behavioral patterns and attitudes unfavorable to crime, criminal behavior is likely to be learned. When the balance is struck in the opposite direction, law-abiding behavior is likely to be learned instead.

Chief among the criticisms of differential association theory was the charge that it neglected to specify the precise underlying learning mechanism involved in the process of becoming a criminal. At the time Sutherland developed differential association theory, behaviorism in psychology, with its focus on learning, was in full swing. However, the behaviorism of the 1930s and 1940s largely excluded human cognition and the assignment of meaning to human action, principles at the core of the symbolic interactionist foundation of differential association theory. The radical behaviorism of B. F. Skinner in the 1950s and 1960s further divorced behavior from mind (Skinner, 1953); however, by the late 1960s, behaviorism had come increasingly under fire as cognitive psychology began ...