If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. ,I I SHOCAP Serious Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Program

I ,.. ..Ii - 'M~""'O 4 H J' 4 m I I I I I I I I I tUff Police ,I I Human I I~==~', Services I I I I I I I I i I EXPLANATIONS OF DELINQUENCY I FACT AND FICTION

I William V. Pelfrey, Ph.D. 120238 U.S. Department of Justice I National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily I represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice.

Permission to reproduce this~. material has been granted by I _:I?ub1iQ_QQ'lJLi~tin,LOJJ 1)"-PI---~ _ _lL~~~e_par:.:tment oL-.J-Ila:t.ic...e to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). I Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the~owner.

I Prepared under Cooperative Agreement Number ~~-J:s-cx-KOO1 from the Office of Juvenile Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, by Public Administration Service, 1497 Chain Bridge I Road, Suite # 202, McLean, VA 22101. (703) 734-8970. I Points of view or opmlOns in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or I policies of the United States Department of Justice. I

I i I

------~--- I I VIII. Strain Causing Delinquency 25 Modes of Adaptation 26 I Opportunity Theory 27 Middle-Class Measuring Rod 28 I Conclusion 29 IX. Social and Cultural Causes of Delinquency 30 I Ecology and Delinquency 31 Lower-Class Culture Generating Delinquency 31 I Subculture of Violence 32 Conclusion 33 I X. Learning Delinquency Through Social Interaction 34 I Symbolic Interaction 35 Differential Association 35 I Social Learning Theory 37 Conclusion 38 I XI. labelling Theory 39 Symbolic Interaction 39 I Labelling 40 Self-Image 41 I Conclusion 41

XII. Political and Conflict Explanation of Delinquency 42 I Conflict Theory 42 Conflict and Delinquency 43 I Instrumental Theory 44 Power-Control Theory 45 I Power-Authority Approach 45 Conclusion 46 I XIII. Conclusion 47 I I iii I I I

I XIV. Explanations of Delinquency: Fact and Fiction (Selected Bibliography) 48 General References on Causes of Delinquency 48 I Classical School 50 Positive School 50 I Biological Theories 50 Psychological Theories 53 I Sociological Theories 55 I Appendix A: Influences of Certain institutions on Delinquency (Matrix) 60 I I I I I I I I I I

I iv I I I t Explanations of Delinquency: I Fact and Fiction

I Trying to interpret the youth's hostility, The police officer had seen scenes like the judge stared at the young man in front this unfold many times. This young man had of him. Was he as uncaring as his record been stoic during his arrest and hearings. I indicated? Had he been influenced by Others took different tactics and used other wiser and more mature offenders? apologies, confessions and tears to cleanse I Why had he engaged in these seemingly their souls or manipulate the system. Only senseless criminal acts? Is soci~ty to a seasoned observer could guess at the dif­ blame? Is this young man salvageable? As ferent motives. Had the die been ca.st with I the judge drummed his fmgers on the desk this young man? Is there any hope for his top, he realized that he had ample facts future? concerning the youth's offense but only I guesses concerning the causes of his be­ A caring teacher willing to expend hours havior. of extra work with problem children may be a rarity in many school systems today. Such I a teacher sat in the audience and sadly watched the proceedings. This young man had potential and the capability to do well, I but he had chosen other ways to define "success." Could she have motivated him another way? Could she have spent more I time with him and stimulated his interest in academic success? Could she have trained him to defer gratification and think to the I future? Could she have seen this coming The young man's mother sat tensely and referred him to others within the school watching the judge and her son. She had system more capable of handling his not been surprised when told that her son I problems? was in the detention center and, thinking back, she had even anticipated that call. Were the thoughts that filled the She had tried so hard and failed so miserab­ I courtroom ignoring the possibility that this ly with this child that it was almost as if he young man alone was responsible for his were destined to do the things he had done. behavior--that he had freely chosen to com­ Had she caused his behavior? Was it unfair I mit the offenses? to this child and to her other children to have divorced and given him only a one­ The answers to all of these questions are I parent home? Had she been too lenient? yes--and no--and maybe. Each of these Too strict? What could she have done dif­ people interested in this young man's situa­ ferently? What could she do differently in tion had valuable information but did not I the future? Still no answers, only guesses. know how to assess it or apply it. There is I 1 I I a vast amount of criminological literature criminology. Bet'\\~en these two extremes that would have helped each of them better are hosts of behavior explanations focusing I understand this youth and also understand on the biological, psychological and their role in causing or altering his be­ sociological schools of thought. These havior. Criminology is a young discipline, perspectives do not generally have discrete I and the "true" origins of crime and delin­ beginning and ending points, but each has quency continue to evade us. With the a "golden age" during which it was the most knowledge of the literature including re­ acceptable explanation of deviant behavior. I search supporting or refuting the theories The purpose here is not to engage in an of delinquency, we can make more well-in­ indepth analysis of the explanations of formed decisions. delinquency but to present an overview of I the major perspectives. This work will not limit itself to an introduction of the theoretical perspectives but will synopsize I research "facts" supporting or refuting the theories. Some theories clearly lack factual support while others have factual integrity. I As the reader proceeds through the various explanations of delinquency, it will be evi­ Theories of crime and delinquency I dent that some are false explanations and range from the non-behavioral, classical some have promise. But it will also be evi­ school of criminology which began in 1764 dent that it is naive to think there is a single to the contemporary, but again, non-be­ I evil that "causes" delinquency. havioral, radical/conflict approach to I I I I I I I I I 2 I I I It Origin of Explanations of Crime: I Classical School

I stead, this treatise began the discipline of Perspectives and Theories criminology and influenced political think­ Discussed in This Section: ing regarding crime, justice and the I criminal justice system for many, many years. There is still evidence of the classical I Causes of Crime school in our criminal justice system today. Punishment Causes of Crime I Social Contract The classical school of criminology does not place a great deal of emphasis on the I causes of criminal behavior. The assump­ tion is that men operate from a "free will" In the mid-18th century, criminal "jus­ perspective. We freely choose to do right I tice" was arbitrary and discriminatory. A or wrong, and if we choose to do wrong we youth who stole a loaf of bread was often as suffer the consequences of that choice. likely to be executed as one who murdered, Outside influences such as our social sys­ I raped or robbed. The determining factors tem, our community, or our economic of a person's sentence for a crime were not status have little bearing on crime, accord­ the element of crime itself but the person's ing to the classical theorists. In this respect, I or the victim's status and standing in the the classical school did nothing to change community. There was no body of science the opinions of criminal justice officials in or literature to help officials make their the mid to late 18th century. All believed I decisions. that people have free will and can freely choose to do whatever they please regard­ I It was against this backdrop that Be­ less of biological, psychological or social ccaria wrote On Crimes and Punishment variables. Beccaria frrst wrote this paper anonymous­ I ly because he was shy and retiring and be­ Punishment cause he thought his ideas were so far afield. His comrades, a small group of men I who met periodically in taverns to drink and The classical school, and specifically discuss varying philosophies, had en­ Beccaria's treatise, maintains that there couraged Beccaria to write such a paper should be a schedule of punishments so that I because of his astute conversations regard­ the punishment would fit the crime regard­ ing crime and justice. Beccaria wrote his less of one's station in life. This type of paper with no thought of it achieving recog­ schedule would remove a great deal of the I nition outside this small group of men. In- arbitrariness and capriciousness from decisions made by criminal justice officials.

I 3 I I

This strategy is consistent with the lack of war of all against all." In order to live in a information regarding the causes of social system, each of us must relinquish I criminal behavior and the purpose of some rights for the benefit of society. If, on punishment. the other hand, we break the rules of the social system--Iaws--then the social system I The sole purpose of punishment, ac­ has a perfect right to punish us. The "con­ cording to the classical theorists, is deter­ tract" implies that the social system will rence. Punishment should serve as an protect us as much as possible in return for I example to the offender and others that the our agreeing to giving the society the criminal act is unacceptable behavior. In general power to punish this regard, Beccaria opposed capital I punishment saying that the offender would Conclusion serve as a better example for a longer I period of time if incarcerated than if ex­ ecuted quickly. In sum, the classical school of criminol­ ogy maintained that there was no "cause" of crime or delinquency other than one's free I will and ability to choose right or wrong. If one chose to commit a crime, it was society's right, and even responsibility, to I punish. This punishment was for the pur­ pose of deterring the individual and deter­ I ring others who might consider similar behavior. Beccaria maintained that there should be a schedule of punishments so that I The classical school favored the legal discretion and therefore discrimination definition of crime because there was really would be kept to a minimum. no alternative. No social definition of I crime had been developed, and Beccaria was proposing a strict interpretation of the law. He would have preferred to remove all I discretion from the criminal justice system in an effort to remove all discrimination from the process. I You would think that a school of Social Contract thought that began in 1764 would have I passed into oblivion long ago. This is not Society's right to punish stems from the the case with the classical school of philosophical view of "the social contract" criminology. Not only are remnants of this I to which we all presumably agree. The so­ thinking still apparent, the entire classical cial contract implies that each of us gives up philosophy is the basis for at least part of some rights for the benefit of society. Ifwe our criminal justice system. The police and I all sought our own pleasures without regard prosecutors are concerned more with the to the rights or happiness of others, there legal defmition of crime and operate under I would be what one philosopher called "a the assumption that people act from free I 4 I I

will. In the adjudicatory phase of the of beha vior are really not considered. It is I courts, the same assumptions are held. The in the next phase of the criminal justice basic questions for these three phases of the system, the sentencing phase, that we begin criminal justice system are "Did a crime to consider the causes of delinquent or I occur?" and 'Did the accused commit the criminal behavior. It is at this point that we crime?" If the answers to these two ques­ move beyond the classical school into what tions are yes, then the police, the prosecutor has been called the positive school of I and the court have little alternative but to criminology. arrest, prosecute and convict. The causes I I I I I I I I I I ,I ,I :1

\-I 5 I I III. Evil Causes Evil: The Positive School I to be very aware of the possibility of becom­ Perspectives or Theories ing a victim. A letter to the editor of the I New York Times states, "Crime makes Discussed in This Section: hostages of us all ... the fear of crime--con­ cern over basic survival--clutters I Positive School everyone's mind, diverting thought and energy." Determinism I Crime is both a social pathology and an Criminology index of such pathology. When we read of the crimes of Ted Bundy or Charles Man­ I son, we see them as sick people--physically, psychologically or socially--yet when we I read of an increase in the crime rate of a certain city or geographical area, we think The problem of crime is quickly reach­ not of the people who commit the crimes I ing the crisis stage in the United States. but of the city or area that "generated" the Youth gangs terrorize the cities, and crime. Criminologists do much the same burglary rings are rampant in the suburbs. thing. Some view crime as an individual I The fear of crime becomes so debilitating characteristic, while others view it as a that many citizens of this country--the land societal or social ill. Still others maintain of the free, home of the brave--turn their that crime is a political phenomenon I homes into fortresses with locks, alarm sys­ caused by the distribution of wealth and tems, burglar-bars and guard dogs so that power. These things that "caused" the they can retreat to their dens with their delinquent or criminal behavior are the I families around them, their guns in their topics of concern to the positive school of hands and their televisions tuned to the criminology. nightly news reflecting on the latest styles I of murder, rape and robbery. Certainly this may seem to be an exaggeration, but in fact, Positive School the fear of crime can and does curtail our I movements and our pleasures by causing us The basic assumption of the positive school of criminology is that human be­ havior is determined by forces outside the I individual's control. The perspective main­ tains that we do not act as free agents and do not possess free will because everything I we do is influenced by our biological make­ up, our psychological condition and our ~o. cial surroundings. We learn to eat Wlth I knives, forks and spoons not because it is I 6 I I easier but because it is more socially accept­ aggression, over-activity or a disregard for able. Allergies and chronic illnesses plague the rights of others. Obviously, this would I some, while others are always hearty and not fit into any legal definition of crime, but robust. Certainly we can change some of it would be the subject of concern and con­ the influencing factors, and we can compen­ sideration by criminologists trying to un­ I sate for certain types of determinants of derstand the causes and influences of . behavior. Criminologists maintain that delinquency . youth are more susceptible to influences I than adults because they generally lack the Criminology ability or maturity to compensate for these biological, psychological or social influen­ I ces. Criminology is vital and dynamic. It is constantly fluctuatin~ from perspective to perspective. This movement is not capri­ I cious but is based on research and revela­ tion. In discussing the continuity within criminological theory, Meier maintains that I "There is nothing which is absolutely or uniquely new, but rather there are improve­ ments on existing developments." In the I succeeding portions of this booklet, we will Unlike the classical school, the positive consider various perspectives within the school of criminology rejects a strictly legal positive school of criminology and look at I definition of crime or delinquency and points of relevance and irrelevance as well looks more to abnonnal or deviant clues of as continuity and divergence. Each one's future behavior. The positive school perspective will be critically examined as to I of criminology would consider one's class­ its ability to solve the puzzle of delinquency. room demeanor as important if it reflected I I I I I I I I 7 I I I IV. Biological Causes of Delinquency I chance of success than an effort to Perspectives or Theories eliminate unemployment." Treating the in­ dividual is easier than treating the social I Discussed in This Section: system, but has criminology reached the point where delinquents can be accurately I Phrenology diagnosed and treated? We maybe getting close. Physical Characteristics I Phrenology was one of the flrst perspec­ Heredity tives favored by anatomists in Europe, Great Britain and America in the late 18th I Somatotypes and early 19th centuries. Although these theorists have been called "the medicine Neurological Dysfunction men" of criminology, they began the effort I to identify the biological or physical charac­ Chemistry and Crime teristics representative of criminals. The practice of phrenology maintains that one I Minimal Brain Dysfunction can "read" the bumps on the head to deter­ (learning Disabilities) mine the areas of development and over­ II development of the brain. The assumption XVY Males was that the skull conforms to the shape of the brain and the brain controls all be­ I havior. 'Mapping" the bumps would allow the phrenologists to predict the behavior of a person. Today we give little credence to such theories. I If we sit down and pragmatically con­ sider all of the variables that we .think are related to delinquent behavior and reject I all of them that we really cannot control or treat, our list becomes very short. In fact, I we are left with oply one: the offender. Sarnoff A. Mednick, a psychologist and The "scientific study" of character and one of the most respected criminologists, I behavior based on anatomy served as a prefers the biological theories in saying that springboard for a more acceptable theory we are in a better ''position to change of delinquency--criminal anthropology. I biological function to prevent crime than to Criminal anthropology gained attention in change the way mothers raise their the late 19th century when an Italian children." After years of research, Med­ physician, Cesare Lombroso, systematically I nick maintains that "A pill has a better studied hundreds of criminals for evidence I 8 I I

of physical abnormalities which would indi­ The biological theorists who followed cate that these people reflected charac­ Lombroso used techniques that were just as I teristics of earlier evolutionary forms. This unsound by today's standards, although degeneracy was presumed to show that the they were quite acceptable at that time. criminal was "less than human in some ways Two researchers, Dugdale and Goddard, I and was biologically deficient." The studied families in the early 20th century to deficiency was thought to cause the delin­ determine the influence of heredity on quencyor criminality. Evidence of being a criminal behavior. Many of the assump­ I tions of these researchers were either inap­ propriate or invalid (such as illegitimacy causing a genetic strain that predisposes I one to criminal behavior) but again they were using the best research methods of the time. These two researchers, in separate I research projects, concluded that heredity caused many forms of criminal and delin­ I quent behavior. Dugdale's research, begun I~hrow-back to a more primitive state" or in the late 19th century and concluded by an atavist included deviations of head size another researcher in the early 20th cen­ I and shape, fleshy or swollen lips, long arms tury, trac'''.d. the history of a family known as and hair characteristic of the opposite sex. the I'J ukes." One branch of the family tree It is interesting to note the event that led to stemmed from the mother, Ada Juke, and I this theory. The physician who formulated her illegitimate offspring. Dugdale charac­ the theory, Cesare Lombroso, became ac­ terized Ada Juke as the "mother of quainted with a dangerous criminal named criminals" and found that of 1000 of her I Villella. Villella was a powerful, aggres­ descendants, 200 were paupers, 60 thieves, sive man. When Villella died, Lombroso performed an autopsy and discovered an I unusual formation which reminded him of the brains of lower primates. His immedi­ ate conclusion was that this criminal, Villel­ I la, was an atavist or ancestor to modern man. Lombroso and his followers then set out to locate the physical and biological I characteristics that set apart criminals from the normal population. Sloping foreheads, 7 murderers, 40 persons with venereal dis­ I large earlobes, beady eyes and tattoos were eases, 140 "general" criminals, 50 pros­ some of the items they thought were "re­ titutes and many others were assorted lated" to criminal behavior. Today we "deviants." Dugdale's definitions were at I would scoff at such conclusions, but the real times a little sloppy. If, in his research, value of the work done by these biological Dugdale found a female descendent of Ada theorists, Lombroso, Garofalo and Ferri-­ Juke who was reputedly promiscuous but I credited with being the founders of the without evidence of being arrested or iden­ positive school of criminology--is that they tified as a prostitute, he labeled her worse began the scientific inquiry into the causes than a prostitute, an "unindustrious harlot." I of delinquent and criminal behavior. Obviously there was no evidence for this I 9 I I

label and no sound or scientific rationale Virtually all of these early theories have I for fitting the lady in that category. Dug­ been refuted by more current research. dale did not consider the effects of environ­ ment on the people he studied but focused I strictly on ille gitimacy and heredity. Again the value of this type of research was that it opened up new avenues of inquiry for fu­ I ture criminologists. I

Modern biological theorists possess the I scientific rigor that was missing in the ear­ lier approaches. Today's researchers look to biochemical relationships, endocrine im­ I balances, chromosomal complements, brain wave activity and other biological Another branch of the biological theory determinants of behavior. I was that of body type or "somatotype." This approach argued that delinquents have dif­ Inherited Crime I ferent physiques than non-delinquents and that one's physique is representative of his "Like father, like son" is a cliche that we temperament. William Sheldon was the accept without question. Children inherit I most famous proponent of this view. He their parent's build, hair color, eyes, aller­ maintained that young men with a muscular gies and heart problems. It is reasonable build or "mesomorphs" are more active, ag­ then to believe that a violent disposition can I gressive and violent and are the most likely be inherited. Again, the inherited traits may predispose a person to crime or to be delinquent. The other body builds, violence. Modern studies of the genetic I endomorphs (heavy build and slow moving) relationship to crime and delinquency sup­ and ectomorphs (tall and thin), each have port the proposition that crime and different temperaL1ents. The endomorph violence may be inherited. I is more likely to be lethargic and jolly, while the ectomorph is less social and more intel­ One way of supporting or refuting the lectual than other body types. Sheldon influence of genetics on delinquent be­ I studied the body types and behaviors of havior is to study the similarity of twins. If some 500 young men in arriving at his con­ identical (monozygotic) twins are "concor­ I clusions, but modern theorists maintain dant" or similar regarding delinquency and that many other variables should be con­ criminal behavior, the proposition would sidered in addition to body type. be supported. After studying thousands of I twin pairs in Denmark, Karl Christiansen The early biological theorists focused determined that identical twins who have on the relationship between physical char­ identical genetic make-up are twice as like­ I acteristics and one's propensity to do crime. ly to behave similarly than fraternal twins, I 10 I I who share only 50 percent of their genetic are quick to point out that behavior is not combination. Still, the influence of the en­ inherited. The central nervous system and I vironment cannot be ignored since the certain chemical combinations do, how­ twins were exposed to the same home-life ever, have links with heredity. and community. I A number of studies have found that criminals have trouble learning to avoid punishment. The criminal's nervous sys­ I tem is slow in responding to controlling factors such as fear of pain, punishment or getting caught I For example, Harvard researcher An­ I A better way of testing the genetic in­ neliese Pontus found that one-third of the ference is to compare the behavior of criminals she studied were inflexible and adopted children with that of their biologi­ could not "shift gears" to withdraw from or I cal parents. An extensive study by Sarnoff conclude a dangerous situation. These Mednick and Bernard Hutchings found were the same criminals who tended to be that sons whose biological fathers were recidivists. It was as if once their behavior I criminals but whose adoptive fathers were was initiated--to include burglary, robbery non -criminal were twice as likely to be and assault--they had to carry it out. Such delinquent than adopted sons whose behavior was related to brain dysfunction. I fathers were not criminals. Again, the in­ fluence of the environment was considered and, if a young man's biological and adop­ I tive fathers were criminal, he was over three times more likely to be criminal than if either were non-criminal. I What are the implications of genetic I research on delinquency? Those youth who may inherit criminal tendencies should Habitually aggressive delinquents have warrant serious consideration once they brain wave abnormalities at the rate of five I have shown an inclination to delinquency. times the normal population, according to ·"If criminality is even partly genetic, this recent research by Charlotte Johnson and could have a lot of implications for the William Pelham. The results of the brain I criminal justice system, which assumes that wave abnormalities include hostility, criminal acts are voluntary," Mednick destructiveness, hyperactivity and poor im­ notes. ''If we can control repeat offenders, pulse control. I we can control most of the violence." Some youth display a callousness and a Neurological Dysfunction failure to consider the consequences of I their actions. This proposition has been supported by objective, scientific tests such Tust what is it that is inherited that as skin conductance tests, which use I causes delinquent behavior? Researchers I I I

machines to measure the electrical conduc­ ab sence of chemicals that suppress I tivity of the skin in response to anxiety, fear violence. These studies are 'lengthening or arousal. These tests have consistently the list of hard-focused pieces of evidence shown that the criminal, especially the that the brain itself has something to do I violent criminal, is different, and his or her with criminal or violent behavior," accord·· nervous system causes the body to behave ing to Park Dietz. differently than others. One study has used I skin conductance tests to predict accurately Other studies considering diet and be­ which of a group of adolescents would be­ havior have found that high concentrations come delinquent. of sweets and carbohydrates as well as cer­ tain vitamins such as A, B3, B6 and C are related to aggressiveness, restlessness and I antisocial behavior. Hyperactivity among children is I generally caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain. This imbalance can be com­ pensated for by other chemicals such as I amphetamines, although this would seem counterproductive. The child's body is In examining 190 violent persons, Frank forced into hyperactivity in order to com­ I Elliott found that 94% had minimal brain pensate for the lack of internal, chemical dysfunction, epilepsy, head injuries or stimulus-producers. Once the imbalance is tumors. He found evidence of "significant compensated for, the brain allows the body I neurological or metabolic abnormalities" in to relax. the group. Dorothy Otnow Lewis and others have found that a significant number I of death row inmates studied had suffered Other Biological Theories severe head injuries. Another study of violent prisoners showed that 75 percent One longstanding argument as to the I had lost consciousness from head injuries causes of delinquency has been that mini­ and about half had abnormal brain wave mal brain dysfunction (MBD), an abnor­ patterns. The rate of temporal lobe epilep­ mality of the brain structure which causes I sy, often associated with violence, has, aggressive or injurious behavior, is directly among violent prisoners, been reported to related to delinquency. One type ofMBD be 10 times the normal rate. which is most often related to delinquency I is learning disability. For many years, it was believed that children with learning dis­ Chemist~..!,!!! ..9..r,_im_e ____ abilities exhibited behavioral disorders. I The reason for their delinquent behavior Violence and aggression have been as­ mayor may not be directly related to the :;;ociated with the presence or absence of learning disability, but the belief was that a I certain chemicals in the brain. Numerous learning disability was a good predictor of studies have shown that violent offenders delinquency. Recent studies seem to refute have high levels of those neurotransmitters that belief. Studies by Pasternak and Lyon I (chemicals that facilitate or inhibit specific seem to question the relationship between brain activity) that cause violence and an I 12 I I learning disabilities and delinquency. In possess the XYY chromosomal comple­ these studies, the researchers used self­ ment is very few, and the crimes committed I reported delinquency rather than official by those who are XYY males are not as delinquency as the dependent variable and violent or as serious as crimes committed by found that children with learning dis­ non-XYY males. The most remarkable I abilities did not commit more or more serious acts of delinquency than those without learning disabilities. These I children come into juvenile court with a background of disruptive behavior, poor I school performance and the like. There­ fore, the juvenile justice system is more likely to react in a custodial way toward I these children than those who have a better case of the XYY male and criminal be­ school and behavioral record. havior was that of Richard Speck who mur­ dered seven nurses in Chicago. As part of I his defense, Mr. Speck maintained that he was an XYY male and therefore was des­ tined to perform the acts he did and had no I control over his behavior. The jury failed to recognize that argument I Verdict? One type of biological theory of passing I interest to researchers is the relationship The modern approaches to research between chromosomes and crime. Every into the biological theories are showing cell in the human body contains 23 pairs of great promise. The results will certainly not I chromosomes. One pair comprises the sex be a panacea but, since Mednick's research chromosomes. In the normal male, these shows that 1.6 percent of offenders commit sex chromosomes are labeled XY. Studies 43.4 percent of violent crimes, by identify­ I of prisoners, however, have indicated the ing and treating the biological causes of presence of XYY males or "super males" in crime among a few offenders, we can the prison popUlation. Men with these achieve remarkable results. I chromosome abnormalities appeared much more often in prisons or as patients The biological theories attempt to iden­ in institutes for the criminally insane than tify the factors associated with a tendency I in the general population. These findings to violence and aggression. Once the fac­ led to the belief that the chromosome com­ tors are isolated, treatment may be effec­ I plement may produce or determine aggres­ tive. As more and better diagnostic sive criminal behavior. Close inspection of techniques are developed in medicine, the this research seems to indicate that the evidence may increase. At the very least, I chromosomal complement theory is not as the biological explanations are supported important or valid as it first appeared. The by research and cannot be ignored. number of males in the population who I I 13 I I I v. Psychological Causes of Delinquency I "mentally ill." Violence and mental illness have been linked through the history of I Perspectives or Theories civilized man. The first mental hospital in the American colonies was begun after a Discussed in This Section: forceful argument by Benjamin Franklin I that mental illness and violence went hand Psychoanalytical Approach in hand. Interestingly, the research of the past 20 years has ~ to support the belief I Development of the Child that those who are severely mentally dis­ turbed are more likely to commit serious I FrustrationaAggression offenses. One extensive studybyHenn and his colleagues found that of 2,000 people learning Theory arrested for homicide, only about one per­ I cent could be considered "psychotic" or suf­ Psychological-Environmental fering from serious mental illnesses. Other Factors studies have shown that clinicians have I seemed obligated to diagnose offenders as IQ and Delinquency something. Psychology and Psychiatry have a wide range of categories into which of­ I fenders can be classified. Classification and categorization are major elements of the post-adjudicatory process in our it I A pioneer in the study of delinquency, juvenile and adult justice systems, so is David Abrahamsen, once said, "Every ele­ easy to see why criminal behavior is linked so often to psychological defects. I ment that prevents children from develop­ ing in a healthy way both physically and emotionally tends to bring about a pattern I of emotional disturbances, which is always at the root of antisocial or criminal be­ havior. 1I This belief that the psychological I theories are the driving forces in the ex­ planation of delinquency has been a prominent part of criminology. No field of I study has established stronger inroads in Psychology and psychiatry are complex the explanation of delinquency than areas of study and do not easily lend them­ psychology. selves to brief or cursory discussions. I Nevertheless, the following pages will at­ When we read of a brutal murder or an tempt to give "snapshots" of the major offender who tortures his victim, the ob­ perspectives, along with evidence support­ I vious conclusion is that the offender is ing or refuting the approach. I 14 I I

Psychoanalytical Approach The infantile period consists of three phases. The first phase is the oral stage of I Sigmund Freud, the father of development. Everything pleasurable in psychoanalysis, has been responsible for the early life of an infant centers around food and nursing. The area of the mouth is I much of the popularity of this approach. In unconsciously associated with pleasure, explaining violence, Freud painted the pic­ ture of a sealed container, the human love and security. Mishandling the oral phase can happen through cutting the phase I psyche, where pressures build from birth. If short or allowing it to continue past an ap­ there are no mechanisms for draining off propriate time. If the child is weaned early the pressure, a process he labeled catharsis, I or denied satisfaction orally, he may feel the pressure builds until an explosion oc­ insecure or feel a loss of love and desperate­ curs. This "explosion" is likely to involve ly seek love and security in later years. If aggression and violence. I the oral phase continues too long, the child becomes spoiled and demands immediate According to the psychoanalytic view, gratification. Excessive eating, drinking, violence is an expression of tension or I smoking and talking are believed to be psychic energy built up as a result of the adult forms of pleasurable oral eroticism. faulty emotional development of the per­ Other defects are passivity and dependency son and the absence of appropriate outlets I which are believed to relate to aggression. for the pressure. This pressure is par­ ticularly apparent in adolescents. 'The main characteristic of the juvenile delin­ I quent is that he acts out his inner conflicts. Emotionally immature, he is unable to I withstand pain and discomfort or to postpone immediate gratification of his desires," according to Abrahamsen. I Adolescence is normally a time of inner tensions, excessive energy and ambiguity. The second phase of the emotional It is a "twilight" time when the adolescent is development of the infant, according to I neither child nor adult. The person still has psychoanalysts, is the anal phase. During childish needs and desires such as immedi­ this stage, toilet training occurs. Rigid ate gratification and a desire for depend­ toilet training can produce a stubborn, for­ I ency but also has adult expectations mal and suspicious person. Lax or indif­ imposed by himself and others. If the emo­ ferent toilet training can result in a careless, tional foundation is weak, the results can be sloppy and unresponsive person. There are I catastrophic. restrictions, demands, approval and disap­ proval related to this stage which, if handled According to psychoanalysis, a poor poorly, can result in a negative, rebellious, I emotional foundation for an adolescent or hostile, fearful or submissive person. adult is the result of the faulty psychological development of the child. This develop­ The genital phase of the child's develop­ I ment is divided into three periods--the in­ ment is generally between the ages of three fantile period, the latency period and the and six. The child becomes aware of sexual puberty period. feelings and often develops intense love for I I 15 I I

the parent of the opposite sex. The normal According to many researchers, there is I child overcomes feelings of lovelhate and little value to the psychoanalytic perspec­ hostility, but if the development is faulty, tive. The determination ofproblems is sub­ the child may rebel against authority, jective, and patients who receive I remain hostile and antisocial. psychoanalytic treatment have no better chance of success than those who receive no The latency period is actually repression treatment. I or postponement of sexual development. If mishandled, through authoritarianism or Abrahamsen's evaluation of criminal permissiveness, the child enters the future behavior led him to conclude that crime I being hostile, oppressive or promiscuous. could be "explained" using the simple for­ mula: Puberty is the last phase of the child's I development. It is at this stage that the c= T + S child is most confused and tense about his R or her behavior. If the previous stages have I been mishandled, the child may become Where "C II stands for criminality, IITII for rebellious and hostile or shy and fearful. Tendency, IISII for situation and IIRII forresis­ I tances to criminal behavior. Everyone has "When an individual shows criminalistic the tendency to do crime. As Tolstoy said, tendencies in his teens, it is not because he 'The seeds of crime are in all of us. 1I The I suddenly becomes delinquent at that time, tendency may be biological or psychologi­ but because he has been suffering from a cal. Situational forces may include peer character deformation since childhood pressure, opportunity, perceived need or I which was more or less hidden and so un­ stress. The resistance to delinquent be­ noticed earlier," according to Abrahamsen. havior would be internal controls such as The psychoanalytic view tries to determine strong superego and self concept. The in­ I the appropriate balance between the id and teresting thing about this crime "formulall is the superego so that the person is able to that it considers environmental or IIsitua­ control himself. Once previous difficulties tionalll factors and not just psychological I or deficiencies in development have been ones. identified through psychoanalysis, the treatment consists of realigning relation­ Frustration-Aggression I ships with others and appropriate catharsis. People who are frustrated or threatened I are more likely to be aggressive. This view is held by some psychologists who see ag­ gression as an automatic response to I frustration. The leading proponent of this view, Berkowitz, has conducted many ex­ periments to determine stimuli that may I increase or facilitate aggression. These stimuli include pain, odors, temperature changes and noises. Other experiments I have focused on "aggressive stimuli" such as I 16 I I weapons. 'The mere sight of the weapon peers or members of one's subculture and might elicit ideas, images, and expressive media models. The combination of these I reactions that had been linked with aggres­ models gives credibility to some of the so­ sion in the past," said Berkowitz. When cial psychological theories to be discussed these stimuli are present, the person is later. I more .ikely to behave aggressively. The research has been moderately supportive of Psychological .. Environmental this view. Factors I Learning Theory Related to the frustration-aggression I theory, some researchers conclude that the One of the problems with the frustra­ denser the population, the more aggressive tion-aggression view is the learning of ag­ the public. Population density studies I gressive responses to stimuli. Learning is a began with studies of the behavior of psychological phenomenon (but with laboratory rats. The animals became more strong social ties as we will see later). We aggressive and violent as their territory was I learn and maintain behavior that produces reduced. The over-population of the rat the results we want and expect. The result colonies led to "abnormal" behavior. reinforces the behavior. If we '1earn" that I violence produces submission and reduces The population density theory is attrac­ defiance, that may be the procedure a per­ tive considering the high rates of delin­ son relies upon when faced with frustration quency in urban areas. Unfortunately, I or when having difficulty succeeding. The recent studies fail to support a relationship learning models may include parents, between density of population and friends, cartoons, "heroes," newspapers or violence. When social and economic con­ I movies. ditions are considered, violence may decrease with increases in population den­ I Some researchers have found that ag­ sity. gressive parents produce aggressive children. Parents represent the most I powerful model for their children, and if they are aggressive (and violent) toward their children, each other or other people, I the children learn that this is an appropriate and successful way of controlling others or reacting to situations. Even if schools, I counselors or concerned friends try to mediate the learned aggression, during times of stress, we revert to the earliest Robert Baron sought to explain I successful behavior in responding to the violence and aggression due to ambient situation. That behavior may be violent. temperature. 'Long hot summers" that produce riots give credence to this theory. I Bandura, one of the most respected When we are uncomfortable--too hot or learning theorists, has identified three too cold--we become irritable. From ''ir­ models for a youth's behavior: the family, ritable" to ''violent'' is not a long step. The I I 17 I I

research on this topic as well as air pollution 'The poor school achievement of delin­ I and aggression has been equivocal, with quents probably is the result of some com­ some studies supportive of the proposition bination of intelligence and temperament, and others refuting it and this combination may, in tum, help ex­ I plain their delinquency." IQ and Delinquency I Conclusion Some of the earliest criminologists' studies considered "feeblemindedness" and As has probably been evident, the I crime and the relationship between intel­ review of the psychological theories has ligence and delinquency, It comes as no gotten progressively "softer" and became surprise to criminal justice practitioners more involved in social or environmental I that children with low IQs are responsible explanations coupled with the psychologi­ for a large percentage of offenses. Travis cal. Abrahamsen's explanations included Hirschi and Michael Hendelang said "the situational or social factors. Learning I weight of evidence is that IQ is more impor­ theory begs the question "From whom and tant" in predicting delinquency than many how does one learn?" of the other factors such as race and social I class. Don Gibbons suggests, 'The facts Curt and Anne Bartol, leading re­ seem clear that intelligence is an extremely searchers in the psychosocial approach to important variable that differentiates criminal behavior, stated, "the research I juvenile offenders from non-delinquents, literature fails to support the widespread in spite of much sociological wisdom to the and enduring myth that the severely men­ contrary." tally disturbed tend to be killers or unpre­ I dictable violent offenders." We must look I elsewhere for our answers. A psychologist and a psychiatrist, Stan­ ton Samenow and Samuel Yochelson, con­ I cluded a 14-year study of criminals and the criminally insane, with the statements "our period of 're-search' ended when we real­ I ized that criminal thinking and action pat­ The research seems clear that there is a terns were not explained by the sociological relationship between IQ and delinquency. or psychological molds into which the I The difficulty is understanding the meaning material was being forced." Offenders ap­ of the relationship. IQ is certainly related preciated the "excuses" for their crimes to school performance, and school perfor­ which psychology and psychiatry provided. I mance is related to delinquency. U sing this They said "a period of 'search' began when model, IQ may be indirectly related to we dropped these excuses and bowed to the delinquency. Other elements of the model overwhelming evidence that the criminals I might include frustration and redefinition were not mentally ill." Psychology alone of goals. The research is clear but the cannot provide the answers to the issue of meaning is not. This is supported by James delinquency. I Q. Wilson and Richard Hernstein who said, I 18 I ------.;.---- I I Vim Sociological Causes of Delinquency I common sense approaches. The fact that I Perspectives orTheories some of the perspectives are consistent with Discussed in This Section: common sense, however, should increase their respectability because, as Benjamin Franklin once said, "Nothing is as ll!l.com­ I Criminology as a Social Science mon as common sense."

Crime as a "Normal" Reaction Most criminologists today recognize I that the biological or psychological perspectives may help explain an I individual's delinquency, but they feel that the social perspectives help explain a wider If you do not blame yourself, blame range of delinquent behavior. I others. This sort of truism may sound trivial, but for the past 60 years the theories If a "high crime" area of any city can be most popular in criminology have been identified, it gives validity to the social I those that look to elements of the social perspectives. 0 bviously there is not a system for the causes of delinquency. crime "epidemic" in the medical sense in Parents teach proper (or improper) be­ those areas, so there JIlust be some social or I havior, friends represent models of be­ sociological influence. havior, television shows and billboards depict the goals we seek (regardless of our I means to attain them) and our com­ munities, school and churches try (or fail) I to control behavior. If we agree that these "social institutions" influence the behavior of youth, then we must attach some of the I responsibility of misbehavior to them either directly or indirectly.

I Why all the interest in the social system? Criminology is a social science, every part of the criminal justice system collects his­ I torical information on offenders' social be­ Delinquency is often viewed as a "nor­ havior and, further, the social information mal" reaction to one's particular situation. criminologists can gather lends itself to While this may seem to be an oxymoronic I analysis. Remember though, the concepts statement, examples help to support it. used are imprecise and loosely defined, and Certain subcultures condone and even the entire sociological perspective appears, prefer, it would seem, violence as a means I at times, to be a confused mishmash of of establishing dominance and of handling I 19 I I conflict. In these subcultures, violence is delinquent's home life, subculture and so­ ''norma1.'' Similarly, it is normal for youth cial setting, his or her acts are consistent I to pursue certain goals such as a nice car, with those of others in similar situations. nice clothes and an identity as a "special" person. Some learn quickly that rhere are The social theories have been well ac­ I innovative ways of accomplishing these cepted in criminology because their ex­ goals such as dealing drugs, theft, burglary planatory power is reasonably strong and or robbery. If these means are reasonably they apply to a wide range of behavior. I accepted within the delinquent's social set­ These perspectives also give us specific in­ ting, they are the "normal" ways of ac­ formation on how to correct the social cir­ complishing goals. "Normal" is not cumstances that caused or influenced the I synonymous with "acceptable" but simply delinquency. means that, knowing what we know about a I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I VII. Controlling Juveniles by I Sociological Means

I Travis Hirschi, the leading proponent of Perspectives and Theories control theory. A basic assumption of this Discussed in This Section: perspective is that all youth would fmd cer­ I tain delinquent acts attractive and even preferred. This behavior might be sup­ Social Bond 'fheory ported by television, movies or an impres­ I sion that this type of behavior is "tough" or Self Conc(~pt represents maturity. Further, the control theories assume that people are "pleasure I Neutralization "rheory seeking," and delinquent acts are often more pleasurable and result in greater peer I support than non-delinquency. Why, then, aren't all youth delinquent? Predictably, control theorists say that conforming youth I are "controlled." Are Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and a church's youth choir memlbers likely to be Social Bond Theory I delinquent? Are youth whose names con­ sistently appear on their schools' honor Control theory tries to account not only I . rolls likely to be delinquent? Will boys and for delinquency but also for the absence of girls who are members of a close and caring delinquent acts. In answering the question, family seek the support of a youth gang? "why aren't all kids delinquent?" control I "Probably not" is the answer to all these theorist Travis Hirschi says that a youth' s questions but the next question becomes bond to conventional (non-delinquent) "why?" values is the basis for stemming bad be­ I havior. This bond is the sociological equivalent of the conscience. The elements I of this bond are: o Attachment - sensitivity to and caring I for others. o Commitment - acceptance of conven- tional values such as saving for the fu­ I ture, getting a good education and "Control theories assume that delin­ shunning risk-taking. quent acts result when an individual's bond I to society is weak or broken," according to I 21 I I

• . Involyement - activities that bring the Attachment to parents and peers has youth closer to the family, church, com­ been measured with questions such as I munity and schools help to insulate him "Would you like to be the kind of person from delinquent acts. This is similar to your father is?" and "Would you like to be the old adage "an idle mind is the devil's the kind of person your friends are?" Com­ I workshop." mitment is measured by asking the youth questions about educational aspirations, • Belief - the moral doctrine and value smoking and drinking behavior and con­ I system that goes beyond simple accep­ duct on dates. Involvement was measured tance and represents a dedication to by asking about the amount of time spent conventional society. on homework and spent riding around with I peers. Hirschi's major findings include:

• "The child with little stake in conformity I is susceptible to pro-delinquent in­ fluences in his environment; the child I with a large stake in conformity is rela­ tively immune to these influences." I • Rarely do gangs recruit "good" boys and The bond is supposed to be between the turn them into "bad" boys; rather "birds youth and the accepted moral and value of a feather flock together." system of our society. This may be a little I vague and far fetched. Youth, and most • Delinquents' peer relationships are adults, would have trouble bonding them­ poor, even with other delinquents; they selves to a value system. Hirschi recog­ I have not simply found themselves nized this difficulty and identified several among a bad group. elements of the social system to which the I child should be bonded. These elements • Adherence to middle-class values insu­ include the family (the primary means of lates youth from the influence of socialization), school (our society's iden­ friends, even if the friends are delin­ I tified means to success) and peers (an ele­ quent. ment that can influence the youth in a good or bad ~irection). I The research of the past two decades has shown moderate to strong support of I Hirschi's social bond theory. Hirschi him­ self found that youth with strained family relations, lack of interest in school activities I and inadequate or inappropriate peer group relations tended to be delinquents. Regardless of race or social class, if there I was a strong attachment to parents, school One of the most interesting aspects of and peers, the youth were unlikely to be recent research testing the social bond delinquent. I I 22 I Neutralization Theory

Control theorists are quick to recognize that even children who develop the social bonding or the controlling mechanisms are not immune to delinquency. Control is not like a small pox vaccination which is needed only once in a lifetime. Even if the controls are in place, they can be neutralized.

A comedian popular a few years ago quipped "the devil made me do it!" when he behaved inappropriately. The audience in­ variably laughed, probably because each of them had used similar rationalizations. Two criminologists, Gresham Sykes and David Matza, decided that delinquents are often law-abiding citizens who have suc­ cessfully neutralized the bonds or controls and they have used something we all use often--rationalizations.

How can a juvenile justify delinquency to himself or herself? Easy. He or she uses the same procedures we do when we lie to our spouse, friends or boss. The techniques of neutralization allow delinquents to "drift" away from nonnal law-abiding be­ havior. The offenders experience some guilt and have personal rules that deter­ mine how far they will go in victimizing whom. The techniques offenders use in justifying their behavior are:

• Denial of responsibility The delinquent views himself as a victim of circumstances and claims the offense was not really his fault I

• Denial of injury society. This is especially true of youth The delinquent maintains that often gangs. I nobody is harmed by the act. Stealing a car, for example is called "borrowing" or, worse, "joyriding" rather than auto I theft. This makes the offense more ac­ ceptable. I • penial of victim Sometimes the delinquent believes that the injury was not wrong, given the I situation. They may feel that the victim ''had it coming" or "asked for it." The Neutralization theory has generally I delinquent sometimes justifies offenses been supported by research and seems to by ignoring or refusing to recognize the help explain gang related offenses as well as victim. For example, a delinquent may drug usage. Juvenile justice officials often I justify shoplifting from major depart­ hear comments such as "everybody is doing ment stores by asking, 'Who's hurt? it," "it doesn't hurt anyone," "everybody is They have plenty of money." picking on me" or "ifs not my fault." I • Condemnation of the condemners The delinquent may displace guilt by Conclusion I claiming that justice is biased, parents are uncaring, businesses do not sub­ Social control theories have been well scribe to a moral code and the like. accepted by criminologists as partial ex­ I Everyone and everything is to blame planations of delinquency. The research except the offender. has generally supported the control propositions and, equally important, the I • Appeal to higher loyalties perspective makes sense. Those who have The offender may claim that it is more a stake in respectability or who are bonded important to be loyal to his peer group to the appropriate values are less likely to I than to the norms and values of the deviate. I I I I I I 24 I -----~- -~~~---~ I I VIII. Strain Causing Delinquency I our society, just as we expect to own Perspectives and Theories televisions and stereos. What if we cannot I afford these "necessities"? We adapt. Discussed in This Section: Everyone wants to be successful, but not everyone can meet our culture's definition I Modes of Adaptation of success--attaining at least a moderate degree of wealth. The culture also defines Opportunity Theory the means for achieving this success--hard I work, education, honesty, deferred Middle-Class Measuring Rod gratification. These means lead presumab­ I ly to success, acceptance (by the middle­ and upper-class) and financial security. Is this how a seventeen-year-old buys a car or I a thirteen-year-old a television? Strain theorists maintain that those who live in We all have goals, aspirations and ideals for which we strive. We define our "suc­ poverty are hindered because they lack the means to attain middle-class goals, but the I cess" by our ability to attain those goals. middle class goals are still the dominant Sometimes, however, we lack the means to attain our goals and we become frustrated. ones. The resulting strain is called anomie, a term used by Emile Durkheim in explain­ I The ability to attain our goals may be block­ ing suicide. Anomie means normlessness, ed because of social or financial reasons. lawlessness or a social state in which con­ The blockage or absence of means to attain trols, limits or boundaries--rules--thought I the goals has been called a strain. to be in place are removed or absent. When there are financial upheavals in a society, Strain theorists maintain that everyone I such as a stock market crash or high infla­ is innately good and prefers not to deviate. tion, or the death of a national leader, the It is the "strain" that pushes youth into society would be anomic. I criminal behavior. Robert Merton, the most prominent strain theorist, said "social structures exert a defmite pressure upon I certain persons in the society to engage in nonconforming rather than conforming conduct." This theory is not intended to I "explain" all crime but useful in explaining high rates of delinquency in certain groups.

I It has been said that today's youth do not Lower class cultures suffer from anomie know where they are going but they know because they are in a reasonably constant they need a car to get there. Owning an state of economic depression. Yet at the I automobile has become an expectation in same time, the goals prescribed by the mid- I I 25 I dIe class are still present. The image of the the world--the Jaguar." Do we settle carrot dangling from a stick tied to the head (compromise) for a vacation in Slippery I of a mule is appropriate. The goals are Rock and buy a motor scooter? Some going to stay out of reach of the poor unless youth adapt to the difficulty of attaining something extraordinary occurs. This ap­ the goal (success and recognition) by I proach was the basis for President Lyndon innovating. Most delinquency, accord­ Johnson's "War on Poverty" in the 1960's. ing to strain theorists, takes this form. The youth figures out other means to I Modes of Adaptation attain the goals. These may include gambling, prostitution, drug dealing, or stealing. The person is pursuing accept­ I How do people adapt to or adjust to able goals but using unacceptable culturally defmed goals and the means to means. attain the goals? Robert Merton identified I five "modes of adaptation." • Ritualism Merton labeled people who recognize I o Conformity their inability to attain the goals but Conformity is the acceptance of the continue to use acceptable means goals and the means (hard work, educa­ 'Ritualists." There is little chance of I tion, deferred gratification) to attain the success so the goals are not that impor­ goals. In middle- and upper-class cul­ tant, but there is a rigid adherence to tures, conformity is rewarded by success means. Ritualists may feel that their I (acceptance, material wealth, recogni­ reward will come later, or they refuse to tion). In the lower-class cultures, con­ innovate because of moral reasons. formity to middle- and upper-class I "rules" is not as likely to produce suc­ o Retreatism cess. Quite the opposite, the goals will If both goals and means are rejected, the still be unattainable, and the lower-class person is labeled a retreatist. Merton I cultures will be anomic. included "psychotics, psychoneurotics, chronic autists, pariahs, outcasts, If a strain exists between the attainment vagrants, tramps, chronic drunkards, I of the goals in our society and the and drug addicts" in this category. Since availability or acceptability of the the goals may not be available or at­ means, people tend to replace the goals tainable, instead of ritualistic ad­ I or the means, or both, with ones that are herence to the means, the retreatist more appropriate to them. The strain rejects both. or anomie is then resolved. I

o Rebellion o Innovation The frustration of not being able to ac­ I It is difficult to ignore or discard the complish the goals of the culture using goals of success through wealth be­ the acceptable means is remedied by cause, no matter what our economic replacing both the goals and the means I situation, we still see billboards be­ with those that are attainable and avail­ seeching us to "vacation in the able. While this sounds like a worthy Bahamas" or ads suggesting we buy "the and reasonable alternative, youth will I most exquisitely crafted automobile in often choose recognition within their I 26 I I

neighborhoods or gangs as the goal and Merton's theory such as "culturally dermed II criminal behavior as the means. In ef­ goals." Despite the difficulty in supporting fect, they develop a counterculture with the theory through research, the theory of its own goals and means. anomie has strong support. As one criminologist said, "It might not be true but In discussing Merton's theory, Larry it's a good story." Siegel and Joseph Senna said, "The ines­ I capable demand to succeed that pervades Opportu nity Theory American culture places such an enormous burden on those lacking economic oppor­ I tunity that delinquent modes of adaptation In an attempt to explain the creation and are not a surprising result. This condition continuation of delinquent gangs, Richard accounts for the high rate of delinquency in Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin adopted I poverty areas, where access to legitimate Merton's strain theory and applied it to means is severely limited." Merton said gangs. They saw gangs as the result of dif­ more simply: "Ambition, the cardinal ficulties that lower class (working class) I American virtue, produces deviance, the youth face in attaining cultural goals by ac­ cardinal American vice." ceptable means. These youth have limited I opportunity to succeed, and gang member­ Although strain theorists maintain that ship is the result of their anomic situation. most delinquent behavior is of the "innova­ While these youth have limited oppor­ I tive" variety, innovators are not necessarily tunities for success, in their neighborhoods, delinquents. Lower class youth who use there are many illegitimate opportunity sports or athletics to escape poverty or who structures. These illegitimate oppor­ I hold the Horatio Alger dream of "poor boy tunities provide upward mobility, chances makes good" are placed on high pedestals of recognition and "success" which, al­ in our culture. though contrary to the rest of society, rep­ I resent attainable goals for the youth. Opportunity theory identifies three I types of illegal juvenile subcultures or gangs: the criminal, conflict and retreatist. The criminal gang is the "traditional" I materialistic gang with a stable hierarchy. The means of success include theft, extor­ tion and property offenses. Stable slums or I lower class neighborhoods would have this Merton's "Modes of Adaption" or strain type of "opportunity" structure in which theory has been well accepted but seldom youth can succeed and excel. I tested. Although some of his contentions seem apparent (most crime is committed by Conflict gangs or subcultures are char­ those in the lower class), many researchers acterized by disorganized slums undergo­ I have found that delinquent behavior is by ing racial or ethnic change. Gang status, and no means (no pun intended) restricted to individual status, results from violent crime the lower class. Further, it is difficult to as well as property crime. The worse the I derme and test some of the elements of reputation, the higher the status. I 27 I I

The retreatist subculture is made up of goals and criteria. These develop into a those who have failed to succeed in either middle-class measuring. rod. The most im­ I conflict or criminal gangs. These youth portant institutions in our society-- chur­ seek the social networking of the gang but, ches, schools, justice system, business--are as a group, seek status through drug abuse. dominated by the middle class, so it is I Outlandish dress and appearance, defini­ natural that such a standard develop. tion as "dopers" and general recognition are Lower class youth cannot satisfy this stand­ the substitutes for success even in crime. ard, so they adopt a set of norms, principles, I goals and means in opposition to middle­ class society. I The development of the subcultures, ac­ cording to Cohen, is due to the strain of I lower-class youth being subjected to a mid­ dle-class measuring rod. This represents a relatively unattainable goal. The subcul­ I tures that develop were later expanded to include other than lower-class youth. According to the opportunity theory, These subcultures are: some youths who lack the means or oppor­ I tunity to achieve legitimate success find • Parent-male subculture (negative) other means, quite easily in some neighbor­ hoods. Through illegitimate opportunities, I o Drug addict subculture delinquents achieve self-esteem, recogni­ tion and even wealth. They develop their • Semi-professional theft (monetary I own microculture. gain) As many researchers point out, delin­ • Middle-class subculture I quent subcultures are not restricted to the (developed because of pressure of lower class, the group upon which oppor­ living in middle class) tunity theory focuses. Additionally, many I more categories of subcultures or gangs come together for similar reasons--to fmd self-esteem and recognition. I Middle-Class Measuring Rod I Albert Cohen, a noted criminologist, used a variation of strain theory to explain I crime in slums or ghettos. He did not feel The common theme, consistent with that crime was a result of any class in­ strain theory, is that the materialistic focus feriority but was due to social and economic of the society is forced upon a group ill­ I limitations or strain. He observed that the prepared to accept it and accomplish the lower class, and every other class, is com­ goals with legitimate means. pared to the middle class regarding values, I I 28 I I Conclusion Does society have an obligation to provide I untalented as well as talented people with legitimate opportunities to obtain these George VoId said, "Strain theories argue that certain social structural arrange­ things? I ments generate forces that drive individuals toward crime and delinquency." Empirical research seems to support this view but with I the criticism that not all crime is lower-class crime. Opportunity theory has been the I one most supported by research looking at the differences between aspirations and ex­ I pectations. The conclusion is that certain types of Talent is no more restricted to certain delinquency are structurally induced, but groups than is crime. Talented people will I the policy implications are less clear. Im­ succeed, regardless of their social cir­ proving educational opportunities, affirm­ cumstances, but it will be more difficult for ative employment practices, and the War some than others. Ours is a classed society. I on Poverty are intuitively worthwhile, but There exists a lower class and an upper there must be real, not perceived changes. class; the middle class may be slowly ab­ Even then, there is no evidence of the ~ sorbed into one of the other two. In 1984 I tent of change in delinquency that would there were over 500,000 millionaires in the occur. George VoId asked the probing United States, while 10 percent of the questions: population lived in poverty. Urban areas I where the poor congregate produce the Do untalented people have the same most crime. Strain theory helps explain this rights as talented people to want material variance, but other theories propose that I goods, the respect of their peers, and power the culture, not the society, perpetuates I and control over their own lives? delinquency. I

I I I I 29 I I I IX. Social and Cultural Causes I of Delinquency

I indeed commit acts deviant by standards of, Perspectives and Theories say, middle-class society, but he cannot Discussed in This Section: commit acts deviant by his own standards." I If this position is correct, it means that neighborhoods, communities and portions Ecology and Delinquency of our cities have subcultures of deviance I where adults have abandoned their respon­ Lower-Class Culture sibilityin teaching values and norms. Is this I Generating Delinquency possible? I Subculture of Violence

I "Stealing in the neighborhood was a common practice among the children and approved by the parents," said Stanley. "I I hardly knew any boys who did not go rob­ bing." Stanley was writing of his childhood Criminologists Larry Siegel and Joseph in the stockyards area of Chicago in the Senna reported that in 1985: I early 1900's. Stanley's story, collected by criminologist Clifford Shaw, is a classic ex­ o 20 percent of white children were born ample of a case study, written by the delin­ out of wedlock. I quent himself, vividly showing the impact of the culture on delinquency. As Shaw said, o 75 percent of black children were born I "It is always important to study the delin­ out of wedlock quent behavior of the child in its relation to the social and cultural setting in which it • 25 percent of all American families are I occurs." If crime and delinquency are "nor­ single-parent households, with the vast mal" in a community or neighborhood, can majority headed by the single mother. we expect a youth to ignore those influences I and be law abiding? In that community, • 2 million children are left unattended conforming behavior is "deviant." after school each day.

I Travis Hirschi, in describing cultural o 7.2 percent of all youth between the theories of delinquency, said this perspec­ ages of 5 and 14 are latchkey children tive assumes "that men are incapable of fending for themselves with no adult I committing 'deviant' acts. A person may supervision after school.

I 30 I I

Standards of acceptable and respon­ undergo racial change, delinquency in­ sible behavior (by adults .and youth) seem creases. I to vary throughout our social system. It is very possible that deviant pockets of the If youth are exposed to "The Good Life" population exist. Somehow these people but, because of relative deprivation , are un­ I are socialized to socially unacceptable able to participate in it, they tend to resort standards and values. to delinquency. I Ecology and Delinquency Unemployment has often been linked with delinquency and crime. Research by I Richard McGahey has shown that delin­ In the early 1920's, Clifford Shaw and quency is high in neighborhoods where Henry McKay made the earliest attempts to employment opportunities are low. The I explain delinquency in certain areas of a link may result partly from by-products of city. They saw the city in a constant state of unemployment, however. When employ­ change, where some areas were experienc­ ment opportunities are low or decline, I ing increases in the income of their citizens households become unstable, frustration while other areas were becoming more increases and youth give different defini­ poverty prone. Delinquency abom. .. ded in tions to "success" than the work ethic would I the decaying areas of the city. There were require. clear differences in the social values of the slums versus those of the suburbs. Interest­ Econometric studies in the 1960's and I ingly, even as the population of the transi­ 1970's showed that as unemployment rose, tional neighborhoods changed from so did delinquency. Researchers found generation to generation, they were still that for each 1 percent increase in un­ I delinquency prone. The standards and employment, delinquency rose .IS percent values seemed to be transmitted to each More recent studies have found little or no new generation of delinquents. relationship between unemployment and I delinquency. I lower-Class Culture Generating Delinquency I In an effort to explain lower-class gang activity, Walter Miller found that slum areas have a "cultural climate" which I creates and perpetuates focal concerns. Transitional neighborhoods, by defini­ These focal concerns fit the conditions of tion, are zones between the relatively weal­ the slums and, in some cases, take tradition­ I thy and the poor. Recent research by al (middle-class) values and redefme them. Richard Block in Chicago supports the no­ The focal concerns include: tion that crime rates are highest in those I areas where the wealthy and the poor live o Trouble close to one another. Similarly, other re­ Miller observed that "getting into" and I search has shown that as neighborhoods "staying out of"trouble were major focal I 31 I I

concerns. Trouble was a way of obtain- • Autonomy I ing attention. Actual or perceived in- Being in control of oneself is a valued volvement in trouble-making activities freedom in the lower class and, conver­ such as fighting or drinking and one's sely, being controlled by others is a sign I ability to escape the dangers of trouble- of weakness. Institutions of control-­ -arrest, injury and the like--were impor- family, schools, church--are in conflict I tant. Prestige came from being able to with this value. Miller felt this con­ handle oneself in a fight, but staying out tributed to the difficulties youth had I of trouble could show cunning. with those institutions. 0 Tou~hnyss Lower-class youth prize physical tough- I ness as well as a tough or 'macho" at- titude. Athletic ability, tolerance for pain, fighting skill and even one's ability I to withstand the trials and tribulations of the justice system afford lower-class youth a positive (by their definition) I image. The undesirable characteristics would be weakness and ineptness. If Miller's contention is correct that these are the focal concerns of the 'lower I Smartness " class, it is easy to see how its youth come Unlike middle-class youth who attempt into conflict with the traditional culture. to prove their "smartness" in the class- From a policy standpoint, it would be very I room, Miller saw lower-class youth as difficult to reshape the focal concerns and striving for streetwise savvy. Lower- defme them in a way more consistent with class youth value the ability to "con" or those of the middle-class culture. It is evi­ I "outsmart" others along with the quick- dent, however, that these defmitions are ness of wit to insult or put down others learned in the subculture, and the subcul­ as in "playin' the dozens." This repre- ture perpetuates the focal concerns. John I sents success in a street-wise way. Kitsuse and David Dietrick said, 'The delinquent subculture persists because, Excitement I " once established, it creates for those who Lower-class youth consider the con- participate in it, the very problems which stant quest for danger and taking risks were the basis for its emergence." I as "fun." To be held in high esteem, a youth must be active rather than pas- I sive regarding excitement Subculture of Violence 0 Fate Marvin Wolfgang and Franco Ferracut­ Luck and good fortune are integral ti explored the existence of a subculture of I parts of ghetto youths' lives. Winning at violence. This approach combines psychol­ gambling and playing the numbers or a ogy and sociology to explain the existence big score are just around the corner. and perpetuation of violence in certain sub­ I The future is predestined so there is cultures. Violence is seen as the ''normal'' little use in planning for it way of reacting to an act of aggression such I 32 I I as a nudge or a push. The violent reaction learning theories focus on the individual in is not innate but learned. The researchers the environment I said, 'The development of favorable at­ titudes toward, and the use of, violence in a Cultural deviance theories maintain subculture usually involve learned be­ that the culture, usually the lower class cul­ I havior, and a process of differential learn­ ture, produces an eirVironment with norms ing, association or identification." The in conflict with the dominant (middle-class) I norms produced in certain subcultures are culture. Conventional rules are not as im­ counter to those of the dominant culture. portant or rewarded so the youth subscribes to the rules, norms and values of the subcul­ I Since violence is viewed as a normal ture. Unfortunately, these are often in con­ reaction to certain situations, the users es­ flict with legitimate rules, norms and cape feelings of guilt. The cohort studies by values. I Wolfgang support the idea that a small group of offenders contribute dispropor­ There am. differences between cultures. tionatelyto the violent crime in cities. This Two million "latchkey" children being unsu­ I violence is especially evident among males. pervised after school each day represent a sizable amount of this society'S future. Conclusion Their lives will be lived according to the I rules of the neighborhood. Redefinitions are needed so concerns such as "smartness" Actually, it is inappropriate to conclude and "excitement" will have wholesome, ac­ I the discussion of cultural and subcultural ceptable meanings. For this to occur, we theories since "Learned Delinquency" (dis­ must consider delinquency (and conform­ cussed in the next section) is tied so closely ity) as learned behavior. I to this perspective. The cultural theories, however, focus on the environment while I I I I I I I I 33 I :1 I x. Learning Delinquency Through Social Interaction ~I

I origin), we learn how to eat, how to ride a Perspectives and Theories bicycle and how to view politics and religion. We learn all of these "behaviors" ~I'~ Discussed in This Section: ~ from others. None are inherited. It is just as plausible that we learn to adopt criminal [',I SymboEb~c Interaction behavior in the same way. " > Differential Association Learning and cultural deviance theories ,? "I~ are similar in this regard. Both view delin­ Social Learning Theory quency and criminality as the result of com­ munity or family value systems and

I standards. The difference in the two ap­ II" ~ proaches is one of focus: learning theory r,:1 focuses on the individual and his or her " 'Why do they do it?" This is a question social (learning) processes, while cultural deviance focuses on the social system or every juvenile justice professional asks him­ self or herself scores of times. Just under­ subculture and its influence on others. Said standing the motivation --frustration , strain' , another way, according to learning theory, delinquents adopt deviant behavior; ac­ lack of control, biological or psychological abnormality--is not enough. 'Why did the cording to cultural deviance, delinquents youth do that crime in that way?" are the adapt to a deviant culture. Not all delin­ quency is restricted to certain cultures or questions we must answer to understand subcultures, and not all youth within certain delinquents.

"People ~ to do crime just as they learn to like peanut butter," said one criminologist. According to the "crime as learned behavior" perspective, people do not become involved in delinquent or Climinal behavior because of innate drives, uncontrolled human nature, or frustrations. .cultures are delinquent so the cultural They become i,ocialized to the behavior just deviance theory offers an incomplete ex­ as others are socialized to conforming be­ planation. Learning theory, on the other havior. Socialization is a learning process. hand" is not restricted to a particular social We learn to talk (a child fIrst speaks the or economic strata and may have broader language that is dominant in his or her application. home, regardless of the parents' r.;ountry of

34 I

Symbolic Interaction cuddly kitten scratches us or our best friend becomes a communist, we can change our I The basis for the learning theories in "definitions" of those things. Similarly, we criminology is found in social psychology revise our acceptance or rejection of be- haviors based on the deflnitions shared by I and specifIcally in a perspective called ~ .b.Qli£ interactionism. Symbolic interac­ others, especially those who are most tionism is a way of looking at the world. respected or liked. How does all of this flt I Herbert Blumer, a social psychologist who into deviant behavior? Symbolic interac- pioneered symbolic interaction, described tion forms the basis for one of the most its premises: 'The first premise is that accepted theories of criminal behavior-- I human beings act toward things on the basis differential association. of the meanings that the things have for them." We define things, philosophies and Differential Association I behaviors as good or bad. Kittens are good, communism is bad and it is inappropriate Edwin H. Sutherland, the originator of to eat with your flngers. Based on these differential association, has been called the I defInitions, regardless of their validity, we single most important contributor to act or react toward things and people. 'The American criminology. His theory of dif- I second premise is that the meaning of such ferential association includes nine proposi- things is derived from, or arises out of, the tions: social interaction one has with one's fel­ I lows," according to Blumer. The meaning 1. Criminal behavior is learned. or "defmition" of things and situations is learned from others. "SignifIcant others" 2. Criminal behavior is learned in inter- I are those people who are held in high es­ action with other persons in a process of teem by someone and those from whom the communication. person seeks praise. Parents are usually I "signiflcant others" as are teachers, older 3. The principal part of the learning of brothers and sisters and friends. These criminal behavior occurs within intimate people have more influence in establishing personal groups. I a person's "meanings" or deflnitions of situations and behavior. 4. When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (a) techniques of I committing the crime, which are sometimes very complicated, sometimes very simple, and (b) the specifIc direction of motives, I drives, rationalizations and attitudes.

5. The specifIc direction of motives and I drives is learned from defInitions of the legal codes as favorable or unfavorable. The third premise of symbolic interac­ I tionism is that the meanings and defInitions 6. A person becomes delinquent be- can be modilled through the same interac­ cause of an excess of definitions favorable tion process that gave birth to them. If the I I 35 I I

to violation of law over defmitions un­ motives learned from others. A youth I favorable to violation of law. comes to defme law-breaking situations as favorable if his or her close associates 7. Differential associations may vary in define them similarly. This is the result of I frequency, duration, priority, and intensity. the learning of the motivation for delin­ quency. The associates are not simply 8. The process of learning criminal be­ casual acquaintances even though there I havior by association with criminal and an­ may be more or longer association with ticriminal patterns involves all of the non-influencing others such as co-workers mechanisms that are involved in any other or casual schoolmates. If simple associa­ I learning. tion were the key, prison guards, police and defense attorneys would be most criminal I 9. While criminal behavior is an expres­ in the society. It is association with "sig­ sion of general ne~s and values, it is not nificant others" that produces the defini­ explained by these general needs and tions. I values, since noncriminal behavior is an ex­ pression of the same needs and values. The picture painted by differential as­ sociation shows good kids influenced by I bad associates and adopting the values, norms and definitions of bad kids. A good apple thrown in a bad barrel will go bad. A I number of studies have shown that youth are more likely to commit delinquent acts in groups (often as many as 70 percent of I offenders) rather than alone. This seems to support the theory. Other studies have shown that association with other delin­ Differential association says as much I quents was related to law-breaking. It is about what does not cause criminal be­ havior as it does about the causes. Criminal I behavior and delinquency .mtnru. caused by biological deficiencies, psychological deficiencies, low IQ, family problems or I other environmental variables. It is the result of learning how to behave, just as law-abiding behavior is learned. The learn­ I ing occurs in interaction with others, the close social companions of the criminal or just as reasonable, however, to propose that delinquent. Techniques and skills as­ "birds of a feather flock together" and that I sociated with the crimes are learned and a youth already held definitions favorable imitated as are the attitudes and to delinquency so he or she sought as­ rationalizations. A law-breaking youth is sociates with similar definitions. I not "right" in learning criminal behavior, so he or she understands that the behavior is Differential association is a difficult I wrong. They are able, however, to ration­ theory to test. It is hard to measure "excess alize it based on the rationalization and of defmitions," "intensity," "duration" and I 36 I I other broad terms. There is, however, pleasurable physiological effects such as general research support as well as com­ those of drugs or alcohol. Most reinfor­ I mon sense support for the theory. One of cers, however, come from group associa­ the strongest of the criminological theories tions such as family and peers. In this developed from differential association is regard, social learning theory is very similar I social learning theory. to the bonding theory of social control. At­ tachment, commitment, involvement and I Social learning Theory belief are rewarded intrinsically by the group. In the mid-1960's, Ronald Akers and I Robert Burgess reformulated differential association into a "differential association­ reinforcement" theory. This approach I looked not just at the concept that crime was learned but ~ crime and delinquent behavior were learned. Emphasis was I placed on the reinforcement of acts or be­ havior. Akers, through his own research in the past two decades, has accumulated impres­ I This social learning theory begins with sive support for this theory. He has used the premise that "deviant behavior is social learning to help "explain" drug use, I learned according to the principles of drinking, white-collar crime, seemingly operant conditioning." Reinforcement of "compulsive" violent crimes, suicide and behavior is the key to learning. The rein­ mental illness. Regarding violent crime, I forcing influences may proceed or follow Akers turned to \Volfgang and Ferracutti' s the behavior. Reinforcement may be posi­ statement in Subculture Qf Violence: tive (pleasing, desirable or enjoyable) or I negative (withdrawal of something un­ The development of favorable attitudes pleasant or good to avoid). Similarly, toward and the use ofviolence in a subculture punishment reinforces behavior by adding usually involves learned behavior and a I punishment as consequences of behavior process of differential learning, association, (positive) or taking away privileges or or identification. pleasantries (negative). I The culture perpetuated violence The theory is both psychological and through principles of learning. The social--it considers the psychological ele­ violence was learned and "practiced" prior I ments of learning theory but focuses on the to the violent act. It becomes part of a social environment for the rewards and pattern of violence rather than an isolated punishments. Akers said, 'We recognize act. I that learning can occur in connection with nonsocial rewards and punishment, but it is In considering the social learning of I the power and centrality of the direct and suicide, Akers states the obvious: 'The act symbolic social rewards in society which of taking one's own life, as such, cannot lead to labelling this theory ~.learning ." have been reinforced in the past." Accord- I The nonsocial reinforcers can be I 37 I I

ing to Akers, the suicide process of learning Conclusion I includes: Learning theories of delinquency build • Learning and applying cultural defini­ upon the principles of symbolic interaction I tions of suicide as attention-getting be­ by considering the social and psychological havior processes by which delinquent behavior is I adopted. These approaches have been o The existence, real or perceived, of life among the most popular and accepted crises and problems theories of criminology. In addition to their I explanatory appeal, learning theories, and o Loss of hope for the solution of the especially social learning theories, present problems or crises viable ways to redefine acceptable behavior I and the reference groups necessary to rein­ o Reinforcing or punishing reactions of force appropriate behavior. others to the person's suicidal behavior I Obviously, these approaches to redefm­ ing behavior must extend beyond the criminal or juvenile justice system. The I family, church, neighborhoods and schools must exercise more reinforcement and punishment and do so in a consistent way, I in order to effect change. Police, courts, corrections and juvenile justice workers do I By including the principles of operant not necessarily consist of "significant learning and reinforcement, Akers has others" who can influence the behavior of developed a much stronger, more complete youth. That responsibility lies with parents, I theory than that of differential association. neighbors, teachers and friends. I I I I I I I 38 I I I XI. Labelling Theory I labelled, the youth is believed to develop a Perspectives and Theories delinquent self image which pemetuates delinquency. He becomes the thing he is I Discussed in This Section: described as being. Is this possible?

I Symbolic Interaction Symbolic Interaction labelling I Symbolic Interactionism forms the Selfalmage theoretical basis for labelling. Charles H. Cooley, a founder of the symbolic interac­ I tion perspective, maintained that we see ourselves through the eyes of others. The "looking-glass self' implies that others be­ I come the looking-glass that we use to judge In the turbulent, traumatic decade of our self-worth and self-esteem. If others the 1960's, a theory of delinquency see us as bright, happy, witty, handsome, I developed that appealed to those who felt pretty or studious, we perpetuate the the justice system was inherently evil. This opinions--the labels. If asked to evaluate theory, sometimes called labelling theo:ry ourselves, we mentally look into the mirror I but later called social-reaction theory formed by others and give a generalized (what's in a name?), gained immediate ap­ other's impression of us. peal and acceptance, not based on research I support but because it just seemed to feel right. These were times when the federal government was blamed for Vietnam, and I it seemed appropriate to blame state government for crime.

I Frank Tannenbaum, a respected criminologist writing in the late 1930's, con­ I demned the juvenile justice system for stig­ matizing delinquents as "evil people." He This process is supported by the writing said, "The process of makin~ the criminal . of another symbolic interactionist, George I .. is a process of tagging, defming, identify­ Herbert Mead. He maintained that we can ing, segregating, describing, emphasizing, view the "self' as a social object. Just as we making conscious and self-conscious; it be­ glance in the mirror to check (critically I comes a way of stimulating, suggesting, em­ evaluate) our clothes, hair and general ap­ phasizing, and evoking the very traits pearance, we evaluate our social self based complained of . . . the person becomes the on others' impressions of us. We even say I thing he is described as being." Once things based on the anticipated reaction of

I 39 I ------I others. At parties we talk about things we Labelling have in common with others, not necessari­ I ly the things we prefer talking about, be­ The key to the labelling perspective is cause we perceive that tactic to be the most the self-concept of youth. If a youth sees acceptable. "Acceptability" becomes I himself as a delinquent, he will associate defmed as that which is preferred or ex­ with other delinquents and act consistently pected by others. Politicians have been with his self-image. The youth goes from I criticized as "saying what each constituency social-labe11in~ to self-labe1lin~ . wants to hear" in order to be accepted by those people. Actually, we all do that to Research in schools, developed in op- I some degree. position to educational '1evels," formed some of the early support for labelling. It was believed that labelling a child as an I "underachiever" or ''basic'' level student created a self-fulfilling prophecy and the child would use the label as a measure of I "self." Recent research fails to support that premise. I The third leg of the stool that forms the Labelling theorists maintain that basis for labelling is the proposition by W.I. juvenile justice is most often distributed to I Thomas, a social psychologist, that "If men the poor or socially disadvantaged and that defme situations as real, they become real the label placed on the delinquent will be in their consequences." Ifwe believe we are accepted and perpetuate a life of crime. I something socially, we act as if we are that thing. Ifwe define ourselves as witty, we act witty. If we define ourselves as bright, we I try to impress others with our intellect. In effect, we accept the label we have applied to ourselves. I

The labelling process, according to sym­ bolic interaction, involve';: Justice systems, juvenile and adult, have I been criticized as discriminatory and o seeing oneself through the eyes of biased. The juvenile justice movement has others been described as an effort by the middle I and upper classes to remove lower-class o looking at the image objectively and urchins from the street because they clutter defming it in social terms neighborhoods. There is, however, little I evidence that the juvenile justice system o accepting the social definition as fact. discriminates against classes of youth. T. Society or "others" assign the labels Edwin Black and Charles P. Smith, writing I which youth then accept and per­ in 1981, said there was little or no evidence petuate. of racial or sexual discrimination in deten- I tion, juvenile court process or corrections. I 40 I Another recent study by Merry Morash mitment did not significantly increase showed that police actions reflect little or delinquent self-image. Other studies have no racial or economic bias in dealing with supported their findings. youth. There is little research support for I this major element oflabelling theory. The An extensive study in Virginia, con­ type and level of offense remains the major ducted by Charles Thomas and Donna variable in official actions regarding an of­ Bishop and involving surveys of 2,147 I fender. youth, showed that formal actions by the juvenile justice system had little effect on a I Self.. lmage youth's self-image.

Some studies have shown that youth Conclusion I who have been arrested are more likely to have a negative self-image. Gary Jensen Despite the appeal of labelling theory in found this to be true, but he also found that the 1960's and 1970's, research fails to sup­ I the delinquent 'self-image did not increase port its major propositions. It is still an after arrest. According to labelling attractive, common sense theory but has no theorists, arrest begins the stigmatizing empirical or objective support. I process. Jensen's research does not sup­ port that proposition. Labelling condemns the social system I and the justice system. As Ronald' Akers said, I One sometimes gets the impression from reading this literature that people go about minding their own business, and then-­ I "wham"--bad society comes along and slaps Labelling holds that while arrest begins them with a stigmatized label. Forced into the labelling process, the rest of the juvenile the role of deviant the individual has little I justice system cements the delinquent self­ choice but to be deviant. image. Richard Anson and Carol Eason recently studied male delinquents com­ The evidence does not support labelling I mitted to the Georgia Department of theory. Human Resources. They found that com- I I I I I 41 I I I Xlt. Political and Conflict Explanations I of Delinquency

I insightful propositions within this perspec­ Perspectives and Theories tive which help us understand delinquency. I Discussed in This Section: Conflict Theory Conflict Theory I The basis of the new criminology or so­ Conflict and Delinquency cial conflict school is conflict theory. This perspective maintains that members of the I Instrumental Theory social system can be divided into the "have's" and the "have not's," with the two Power Control Theory groups constantly fighting over scarce I resources. These "resources" may be Power Authority Approach economic, . as in the Marxist view, or they I may be power and authority. I "To think critically and radically today is to be revolutionary. To do otherwise is to I concede to oppression," said Richard Quin­ ney, a conflict criminologist. The ''new I criminology" is a perspective that emerged in 1969, therefore is not so new. It is based Marx maintained that those who control on the belief that there is evidence of ~ the economy control every aspect of the I conflict. Criminals and delinquents are social system, including the working class. sometimes considered frustrated members Marxist theory sees the law and the justice of an "underclass" striking out at oppression system as an instrumenl of domination, I and at other times are considered "good used by the ruling class to control the work­ soldiers fighting for a cause." There are ing class. The ruling class would prefer that many subsets of the social conflict perspec­ laws concerning "street crime" which is I tive. The more radical belief that criminals more often committed by working class are modern Robin Hoods who steal from delinquents be enforced rather than those the rich so the poor can survive is not highly laws covering white collar crimes or "upper­ I regarded by criminologists today. It does world" crime. Further, those who control not take us long to recognize that more the economy, the rich, control the judges as televisions are stolen than loaves of bread well as the police. If the rich are caught, or I or cans of beans. There are, however, some if their children are arrested, the presump- I 1...-______.. ______--1 42 I I tion is that they will be "slapped on the ment was born in class-consciousness. He hand" and released while the poor will suf­ said: I fer the full impact of the law. The child-saving movement tried to do for the criminaljustice system what industrialists The non-Marxist conflict perspective is and corporate leaders were trying to do for the I similar except the basis of power is not economy--that is, achieve order, stability and necessarily the economy. Power is a func­ control while preserving the existing class sys­ tion of authority which mayor may not be tem and distribution of the wealth. I based on money. A gang leader may be in the same social class but he is a person with The rich were ostensibly trying to "save I power.. Ifhe uses that power to llominate" the children" but actually were trying to get others, the non-Marxist conflict approach is the little urchins off the streets and control useful in explaining that relationship. their behavior. The authority of the courts I to "control" implies the conflict approach, according to its supporters. I Some conflict theorists see other indica­ tions of bias and discrimination based on class. Youth who are characterized as I "debs," "frats," "socialites," and "elites" are just as surely "gang" members as "greasers," "hoods," and "bloods." One set maybe con­ I In sum, conflict theory proposes that the sidered superior while another is inferior. weak and the poor suffer at the hands of the justice system. The law is constructed to I benefit the powerful and oppress the weak. The poor may not commit more crimes than the rich but, they are arrested more often I and receive harsher convictions. The poor may, on the other hand, commit more crimes than the rich but that is because they I are frustrated with their lot in life and be­ William Chambliss did extensive research cause the laws and law enforcement are in a high school and found that there were biased against the types of crimes com­ two identifiable groups of young men--the I mitted by the working class. Local police "saints" and the "roughnecks." No matter never investigate price fixing among major what the saints did, and much of it was oil companies or monopolies among major delinquent (drinking, truancy, vandalism, I industries. Those investigations are "con­ threats, extortion), they were considered trolled" by agencies "influenced" by "good boys, sowing wild oats" and were I politicians who are "supported" by major never arrested or thOUght to be bad. The donors. roughnecks, however, were those boys from socially or financially deprived homes, and I Conflict and Delinquency whatever they did, even though minor, was considered bad. More recent research fails According to one conflict criminologist, to support a finding of economic or class I Anthony Platt, the juvenile justice move- bias in treatment by police and courts. I 43 I I

Instrumental Theory youth are members of these groups. Some I are given derogatory labels such as "nerds," It has generally been held that most but that serves to distinguish the youth fmm. delinquent acts are purposeless and groups rather than include them in groups. I without direction. Herman and Julia According to instrumental theory, youth Schwendinger have recently proposed an who are members of stratum formations are approach that tries to make sense of the engaged in delinquent behavior more often I than those who are not members of th~~ ~evels and types of delinquency while point­ mg out that much of this behavior is in­ groups. The group not only influences the strumental and has a purpose. - amount of delinquency, it also determines I its purpose or direction. To understand this approach, one must I fIrst understand the types of groups in­ There are several stages or levels of volved. Adolescents group together in delinquency in the stratum formations. what the Schwendingers call stratum fur:. Often, the type of delinquency 1.S based on I mations. These are social groups distin­ the maturity of the members. The Schwin­ guished by language, interests, dress or dingers call the fIrst type of delinquency some crusading issue. Adolescent groups ethnocentric delinquency where the youth I appear as early as the sixth grade but are are concerned with the dominance of their well formed by high school. The stratum group. Group rivalries including vandalism formations are primarily based on of p~operty or territory of other groups, I economic class but that relationship is fIghtmg and the like are evidence of this fuzzy. level. Finally, delinquency comes to the informal economic~. These delin­ I quent acts are committed primarily by economically deprived youth whose acts are intended to enhance their economic I position. These acts are the most in­ strumental and directed. The offenses in­ clude burglary, robbery, auto theft, drug I sales and larceny. The group supports violence to maintain its dominance.

I Group members are more likely to engage in delinquency than non-group Middle-class youth may be considered members, and certain mature and members of stratum formations or groups I economically deprived groups are likely to known as "elites," "socialites," "frats" or "col­ engage in the most serious delinquencies. leges". These middle-class youth are seek­ Instrumental theory seems plausible, but it ing to imitate upper-class, more affluent I would be difficult to construct a rigorous youth. Lower-class youth or "street­ test of this theory because many of its as­ corner" youth group together and call them­ sumptions and labels are difficult to defme selves "greasers," ''hoods,'' ''homeboys,'' I in a research sense. This approach is help­ ''hod ads" or other similar names. Between ful though in understanding motivations these two strata are groups such as "hot and development of groups as well as delin­ I rodders," "surfers" and "gremmies." Not all quency. I 44 I I

Power-Control Theory dynamics of the family structure that in­ fluence delinquency. I A rather recent explanation of delin­ quency, power-control theory. considers Power-Authority Approach I two variables as most important: social class and family structure. These two vari­ One of the earliest and still most ables are both influenced by the economic respected of the social conflict theories was I status of the person or family. proposed by George VoId. He said, "Groups come into conflict with one The family life of an adolescent is in­ another as the interests and purposes they I fluenced directly by the person who serve tend to overlap, encroach on one manages the family. This, in turn, is deter­ another and become competitive." We see mined by social class. If the father assumes this reflected in everything from legislative I the role of breadwinner and the mother has lobbyists' activities to husband/wife rela­ menial jobs or stays home to supervise the tions. home, the control will be greatest over the I daughters and least over the sons. At the grand level, this approach has Daughters will be socialized into a "cult of been used to "explain" the structure of law domesticity" while sons will be granted and policy as definite typical behaviors of I more freedom. Daughters will be less like­ the powerless as criminal therefore control­ ly than sons to engage in delinquency. ling the powerless and perpetuating power­ lessness. I In another application, the power­ I authority approach can be used to explain violence within the family. Most spousal violence and parental violence is com­ I mitted by the male. The power-authority approach views the behavior as an indica­ tion of the desire for power and domination I In homes where the mothers and fathers by the male. Violence becomes a means of share in the managerial roles, daughters are control, just as the law is a control in the not over-controlled and their violent be­ social system. The powerful use violence to I havior is similar to that of their brothers. maintain or establish authority over the less The researchers, John Hagan, John powerful. Simpson and A.R. Gillis, found a strong I similarity in the behavior of sons and Combining this approach with ~ daughters in families where both parents learning th~ we see that youth who are manage the household. This relationship exposed to or experience violence used to I was also true in households where the control and establish power/authority, if the mother was the breadwinner and manager violence succeeds in its goal, will view this and the father was absent. as an appropriate way to deal with others. I This perspective helps us understand many This theoretical approach, supported by violent offenses such as sex crimes, includ­ research, helps us understand some of the ing date-rape, and others intended to estab- I I 45 I I

!ish dominance, show authority or use help us understand behayior, not just the I power to gain submission. system.

Conclusion This perspective is very difficult to test I because its concepts are difficult to defme and some are inflammatory. Attempts to Conflict theories, both Marxist and non­ test parts of the theory have been success­ I Marxist, include propositions that are use­ ful, but the major propositions that the sys­ ful in the explanation of delinquency and tem is economically and class-biased have some that are questionable. The goal of the generally failed to find research support. I conflict theorist and especially the Marxist On a smaller scale--social group conflict is to demystify the criminal law and the and within-family conflict--the research justice system. This involves exposing the supports some of the contentions. I system and those who control it.

Generally, conflict theory is a condem­ I nation of the system which is controlled by the rich and powerful. The offender some­ times becomes a "good soldier, fighting for I a cause" against the powerful and coercive system. This is not a theory of delinquency but an explanation of why some are labelled I delinquent.

I Some of the perspectives, however, do In sum, parts of this approach are in­ focus on the family or the social network as tended to explain the system's behavior, a microcosm of society and explain the and parts are helpful in explaining the power-control-authority relationships, individual's behavior. I based on conflict theory. These approaches I I I I I I I 46 I I I XIII. Conclusion I It would be very difficult to synopsize an a more in-depth discussion of the perspec­ already condensed version of this discus­ tives presented here. The purpose of this I sion of the causes of delinquency. A more booklet was to provide a general overview productive approach is to capsulize each of the theories of delinquency and to whet theory or perspective and comment on the the interest of readers so they will delve i influence of some of the major social in­ deeper into those theories that seem to fit. stitutions--the individual, the family, the In Alice in Wonderland. when Alice ap­ school, the community, the social system proached a fork in the road, she asked the I and the criminal justice system--on delin­ Cheshire Cat which route she should take. quency, according to each perspective. 'Where are you going?" the cat asked. ''I Remember the example at the beginning of don't know," replied Alice. 'Then it doesn't I the booklet? Various people were trying to much matter," said the cat. This brief treat­ understand how they could have under­ ment of the causes of delinquency should stood or prevented a youth's delinquency. give the reader some ideas as to where they I Each of these people represented an "in­ are going. stitution" that might have influenced the youth--positively or negatively. The matrix following the selected bibli­ I ography should be considered a summary of the major criminological perspectives. The I matrix also includes comments on the ~ ~ofeachperspective. The explanatory "power" of the perspectives varies from case I to case. No one perspective or theor~ can be considered ~ explanation of delin­ quency. Some theories have withstood the tests of research better than others. The I We hope that this brief overview has more modern biological theories and so­ been interesting and helpful in better un­ cial-learning theories are examples. This is derstanding the causes of delinquency. A what is meant by "adequacy." I bibliography is included for those who want I I I I I 47 I I I XIV. Explanations of Delinquency: I Fact and Fiction I Selected BiblioaraDhv ~ • II I II I GENERAL REFERENCES ON CAUSES OF DELINQUENCY *Brundage, J.M. "Predicting Recidivism: One Court's Experience." Juvenile I and Family Court Journal, 35:15-21 (1984). *Carbonell, J.L. and E.I. Megaree. Early Identification of Future Career Criminals: Final Report. Nationallnstitute of Justice, Washington, D.C., I 1984.

*Farrington, D.T. Prediction in Criminology. Institute of Criminology, I Cambridge, 1985.

*Feinberg, K., Editor. Violent Crime in America. National Policy Exchange, I Washington, D.C., 1983. I *Fisher, R.B. "Predicting Adolescent Violence," in Aggressive Adolescent, edited by Charles Keith. Free Press, New York, 1984. I *Gable, R.J. "Juvenile Delinquency Research: Truths, Myths, and Hopes." Today's DelinQllent 1: 39-56 (1982).

I Gibbons, D.C. Delinquent Behayior, Third Edition. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1981.

I *Greenwood, T.W. and F.E. Zimring. One More Chance: The Pursuit of Promising Intervention Strategies for Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Rand I Corporation, Santa Monica, 1985. *Hanson, C., S. Henggeler, W. Haefele, and J. Rodick. 'Demographic, Individual, and Family Relationship Correlates of Serious and Repeated I Crime Among Adolescents and Their Siblings." Journal of Consulting and I Clinical Psychology 52: 528-538 (1984). I 48 I I

Hindelang, M., T. Hirschi, and J. Weiss. Measurin~ DeUnQllem~y. Sage, Beverly Hills, 1981. I

*Isralowitz~ R.E. "Juvenile Violence--A Threat To Our Communities' Welfare." Journal of Ap,plied Sciences 4: 57-76 (1979-80). I

Jeffery, C.R., "The Historical Development of Criminology," edited by H. Manheim. Patterson Smith, fioneers in Criminolo~, Montclair, N.J., 1972. I

*MathIas, R.A., Editor. Violent Juvenile Offenders: an Anthology. National Council on Crime and Delinquency, San Francisco, 1984. I

National Advisory Committee for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Serious Juvenile Crime. A Redirected Federal Effort. U.S. I Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1984. I Ohlin, L. 'The Future of Juvenile Justice Policy and Research." Crime and Delinquency 29: 463-72 (1983). I Pelfrey, W.V. The Evolution of Criminology. Anderson Publishing Co., Cincinnati, 1980. I *Petersilia, J. Focusing Attention on Career Criminals--An Idea Whose Time Has Come. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, 1978. I Shannon, L. "Longitudinal Study of Delinquency and Crime," in Quantitative Studies in Criminology, edited by Charles Wellford. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1978. I

Siegel, LJ. and J.J. Senna. Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Practice, and Law, 3rd Edition. West Publishing Company, St. Paul, 1988. I

Steffensmeier, D. and M. Harrer. ''Is the Crime Rate ReallyFalling? An 'Aging' U.S. Population and Its Impact on the Nation's Crime Rate, 1980- I 1984." Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 24: 23-48 (1987).

*Thornberry, T., M. Moore, and R. Christenson. 'The Effect of Dropping I Out of High School on Subsequent Criminal Behavior." Criminology 23: 3-18 (1985). I *Tonry, M. and N. Morris. Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Volume 6. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1985. I VoId, G.B. and T.J. Bernard. Theoretical Criminology, 3rd Edition. Oxford University Press, New York, 1986. I I 49 I I

Whitaker, C. Teena~ Victims. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, I D.C., 1986. I I CLASSICAL SCHOOL Beccaria, C. On Crimes and Punishments, 6th edition, trans. H. Paolucci. I Bobbs Merrill, Indianapolis, 1977. Blumstein, A., J. Cohen, and D. Nagin, editors. Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimatin~ the Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Crime Rates. I National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978.

Jenkins, P. "Varieties of Enlightenment Criminology: Beccaria, Godwin, I de Sade." British Journal of Criminologx 24: 2, 112-30 (1984).

Mannheim, H., editor. Pioneers in Criminology. Patterson Smith, Montclair, I N.J., 1972. I I POSITIVE SCHOOL Ferri, E. Criminal Sociology. Little, Brown, Boston, 1917.

I Ferri, E. The Positive School of Criminolo~. edited by S.E. Grupp. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1968.

I Lombroso, C. Crime: Its Causes and Remedies, 1912. Reprinted by Patterson I Smith, Montclair, N.J., 1968.

I BIOLOGICAL THEORIES

Beckwith, L. and A. Parmelee. IEEG Patterns of Pre-term Infants, Home I Environment and Later IQ." Child Development 57: 777-89 (1986). I Christiansen, K.O. "Threshold of Tolerance in Various Population Cortes, J.B. and F.M. Gatti. Delinquency and Crime: A Biopsychosocial I A.ru>roach. Seminar Press, New York, 197.2. I 50 I I I Dugdale, R.L. "The Jukes: A Study in Crime, Pauperism and Heredity." Putnam, New York, 1877 (reprinted by Arno, New York, 1977). I Ellis, L. "Genetics and Criminal Behavior." Criminolo~, 20: 1, 43-66 (1982). I Eysenck, H.J. The Biolo~cal Basis of Personality. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, ill. 1967. I Eysenck, H.J. Crime and Personality. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1964.

Eysenck, H.J. Crime and Personality, 2nd edition. Routledge and Kegan I Paul, London, 1977.

Eysenck, H.I. A Model for Personality. Springer, New York, 1981. I Ferri, E. Criminal Sociolo&¥. Little, Brown, Boston, 1917. I Fishbein, D. and R. Thatcher. "New Diagnostic Methods in Criminology: Assessing Organic Sources of Behavior Disorder." Journal of Research in I Crime and Delinquency 23: 240-67 (1986). Garofalo, R. Criminology. Little, Brown, Boston, 1914. I Glueck, S. and E. Glueck. Physique and Delinquency. Harper, New York, 1956. I

Goddard, H.H. Feeblemindedness: Its Causes and Consequences. MacMillan, New York, 1914 (reprinted by Arno, New York, 1972). I

Goddard, H.H. The Kallikak Family, A Study of the Heredity of Feeble­ mindedness. MacMillan, New York, 1912. I

Goring, C. The En~ish Convict: A Statistical Stud~ 1913. Reprinted by Patterson Smith, Montclair, N.J., 1972. I

Groups illustrated by Results by the Danish Criminologic Twin Study" in The Mentally Abnormal Offender, edited by A.V.S. de Reuck and R. Porter. I Little, Brown, Boston, 1968. I Jeffrey, C.R., Editor. Biology and Crime. Sage, Beverly Hills, 1979. Johnson, R.N. Aggression in Man and Animals, W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, I 1972. Kershner, J. and W. Hawke. ''Megavitamins and Learning Disorders: A I Controlled - Blind Experiment." Journal of Nutrition 109: 819-26 (1979). I 51 I I

Lewis, D.O., et aI. "Psychiatric, Neurological, and PsychoeducationaI Charac­ I teristics of 15 Death Row Inmates in the United States." American Journal of F,sychiatry 143: 838-45 (1986).

I Lombroso-Ferrero, G. Lombroso's Criminal Man. Paterson Smith, Montclair, N.J., 1972.

I Lykken, D.T. and P.H. Venables. 'Direct Measurement of Skin Conductance: I A Proposal for Standardization." Psychophysiolo~ 8: 856-872 (1971). Lykken, D.T. "The Psychopath and the Lie Detector." Psychophysiolo~ 15: 137-142 (1978).

I Marsh, F.H. and J. Katz. Biology, Crime and Ethics. Anderson, Cincinnati, 1985.

I Mednick, S. and J. Volvka "Biology and Crime," in Crime and Justice. Volume 2, edited byN. Morris and M. Tonry. University of Chicago Press, I Chicago, 1980. Mednick, S.A. and K.O. Christiansen. The Biosocial Bases of Criminal I Behavior. Gardner Press, New York, 1977.

Mednick, S.A., J. Voladka, W.F. Gabrielli, Jr., and T.M. Iti!. "EEG as a I Predictor of Anti-Social Behavior." Criminology 19: 2, 219-229 (1981).

Milich, R. and W. Pelham. ''Effects of Sugar Ingestion on the Classroom and I Play group Behavior of Attention Deficit Disordered Boys." Journal of Counseling an~ Clinical Psychology 54: 714-18 (1986).

I Monroe, R.R. Brain Dysfunction in Aggressive Criminals. D.C. Heath, Lexington, Mass., 1978.

I Murray, C.A. The Link Between Learning Disabilities and Juvenile Delinquency. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1976.

I Pasternak, R. Lyon. "Clinical and Empirical Identification of Learning Disabled Juvenile Delinquents." Journal of Correctional Education 33: 7-13 I (1982). Schauss, A. and C. Simonsen. "A Critical Analysis of the Diets of Chronic I Juvenile Offenders, Part I." Journal of Orthomolecular Psychiatry 8: 149-57 (1979). I Sheldon, W. Varieties of Delinquent Youth, Harper, New York, 1949. I 52 I I Taylor, L. Born to Crime. Greenwood Press, Westport, 1984. I Timnick, L. "Violence: Its Key May Lie in the Brain." Los An&eles Times, June 26, 1981. I Williams, D. "Neural Factors Related to Habitual Aggression--Consideration of Differences Between Habitual Aggressives and Others Who Have Com­ mitted Crimes of Violence." Brain. 92: 503-20 (1969). I

Wilson, E.O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1975. I

Wilson, J.Q. and R. Herrnstein. Crime and Human Nature, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1985. I Zimmerman, 1., W. Rich, I. Keilitz, and P. Broder. "Some Observations on I the Link Between Learning Disabilities and Juvenile Delinquency." Journal of Criminal Justice 9: 9-17 (1981). I

PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES I

Abrahamsen, D. The Psychology of Crime. Columbia University Press, New I York,196O. Adler, F, Sisters in Crime, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975. I Baron, RA. and V.M. Ransburger. "Ambient Temperature and the Occurrence of Collective Violence: The 'long hot summer' Revisited." The I Journal of Personality and Social PsycholoiY 36: 361-366 (1978).

Baron, R.A. Human A&w

Bartol, C.R. and A.M. Bartol. Criminal Behavior: A Psychosocial Approach, 2nd Edition, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1986. I Crime: Conflict or Consensus." Criminology 23: 711 w 41 (1985). I Denno, D. "Sociological and Human Developmental Explanations of Crime: Conflict or Consensus." Criminology 23: 711-41 (1985). I Freud, S. An Outline in Psychoanalysis, trans. J. Strachy. Norton, New York, 1963. I I 53 I I

Henn, F.A., M. Herjanic, and R.H. Vanderpearl. "Forensic Psychiatry: I Diagnosis of Criminal Responsibility." The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 162: 423-429 (1976).

I Hirschi, T. and M.J. Hindelang. "Intelligence and Delinquency." American Sociological Review 42: 571-587 (1977).

I Huesmann, L.R. and N. Malamuth. "Media Violence and Anti-social I Behavior." Journal of Social Issues, 42 No.3 (1986). *Keith, C., Editor. A~mssiye Adolescent. Free Press, New York, 1984. I McCord, W. The Psycho.patb and Milieu Theramr. Academic Press, New York, 1982. I Messner, S. 'Television Violence and Violent Crime: An Aggregate Analysis." Social Problems, 33: 218-35 (1986).

I Monahan, J. PredictinG" Violent Behavior. Sage, Beverly Hills, 1981.

Mueller, C.W. "Environmental Stressors and Aggressive Behavior" in I Aggression: Theoretical and Impirical Reviews (Vol. 2) edited by R.G. Geen and E.!. Donnerstein. Academic Press, New York, 1983.

I Scarr, S. and R. Weinberg. "IQ Test Performance of Black Children Adopted by White Families." American Psychologist 31: 726-39 (1976).

I Siegel, L.J. and J.J. Senna, Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Practice, and Law, 3rd Edition. West Publishing Co., St. Paul, 1988.

I Toch, H. Violent Men: An Inquiry Into the Psychology of Violence. Aldine, Chicago, 1969.

I White, H.R., E. Labouvie, M. Bates. "The Relationship Between Sensation Seeking and Delinquency: A Longitudinal Analysis." Journal of Research in I Qime and Delinqyency 22: 197-211 (1985). Yochelson, S. and S.E. Samenow. The Criminal Personality. Jason Aronson, I New York, 1976. I I I 54 I I SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES I

Anson, R. and C. Eason "The Effects of Confmemcnt on Delinquent Self­ Image." Juyenile and Family Court J0UIllal37: 39-47 (1986). I

Bandura, A. A~~ssion: A Social Leamin~ Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1973. I

Bernard, T.J. "Control Criticisms of Strain Theories: An Assessment of Theoretical and Empirical Adequacy." Journal of Research in Crime and I Delinquency 21:4,353-72 (1984).

Black, T.E. and C.T. Smith. Reports o( the National Juvenile Justice I Assessment Centers. A PreUminar,y National Assessment of the Numbers of Characteristics of Juveniles Processed in the Juyenile Justice System. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1981. I

Blau, J. and P. Blau. "The Cost of Inequality: Metropolitan Structure and Violent Crime." American Sociological Review 147: 114-29 (1982). I

Block, R "Community Environment and Violent Crime," Criminology 17: 46- 57 (1979). I Blumer, H. SymhQlic InteractiQnism. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., I 1969. Brantingham, PJ. and P.L. Brantingham, Editors. Environmental I Criminology. Sage, Beverly Hills, 1981.

Briar, S. and 1. Piliavia.."l. "Delinquency, Situational Inducements, and I Commitment to Conformity." Social Problems 13: 35-45 (1965).

Burgess, RL. and RL. Akers. "A Differential Association- Reinforcement I Theory of Criminal Behavior." Social Problems 14: 128-47 (1968).

Byme, J. and R. Sampson. The Social Ecology of Crime. Springer- Verlag, I New York, 1985.

Canter, RJ. "Family Correlates of Male and Female Delinquency." I Criminolo~20:2, 149-168 (1982).

Chambliss, W.J. and R.B. Seidman. Law, Order and Powers. Addison­ I Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1971. I I 55 I I

Chambliss, W.J., Editor. Whose Law? What Order? Wiley & Sons, New I York, 1976.

Clelland, D. and T.J. Carter~ "The New Myth of Class in Crime." Criminolo~ I 18:2,319-36 (1980).

Clinard, M.B. Anomie and Deyiant Behavior. The Free Press, New York, I 1964.

Cloward, R.A. and L.E. Ohlin. Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of I DelinQuent Gangs. The Free Press, New York, 1960.

Cohen, A.K. and J.F. Short. "Crime and Juvenile Delinquency" in I Contempormy Social Problems. edited by R.K. Merton and R. Nesbet. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, 1971.

I Cohen, A.K. Delinqyent Boys: The Culture of the Gang Free Press, New I York, 1955. Cressey, D.R. Other Peo.ple's Money. The Free Press, Glencoe, m., 1953. I Davis, N.J. Sociological Constructions of Deviance. W.C. Brown, Dubuque, 1975.

I Durkheim, :ij. The Division of Labor in Society. Free Press, New York, 1964. I Durkheim, E. Suicide, Free Press, New York, 1951. Gibbs, J.P. Norms. Deviance. and Social Control: Conceptual Matters. I Elsevier, New York, 1981. Glueck, S. 'Theory and Fact in Criminology: A Criticism of Differential I Association." British Journal of DelinQuency 7: 92-109 (1956). Gove, W.R., Editor. The Labeling of Deviance, 2nd Edition. Sage I Publications, Beverly Hills, 1980. Hagan, J., J. Simpson, and A.R. Gillis. "Class in Household: A Power-Control Theory of Gender and Delinquency." American Journal of Sociology 92: 788- I 816 (1978).

Hagan, J., A.R. Gillis, and J. Simpson. 'The Ciass Structure and Delinquency: I Toward a Power-Control Theory of Common Delinquent Behavior." I American Journal of Sociology 90: 1151-1178 (1985). I 56 I I

Harries, K.D. Crime and the Enyironment. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, m.,1980. I

Hawkins, R. and O. Tiedeman. The Creation of Deyiance. Charles E. Merrill Co., Columbus Ohio, 1975. I

Hepburn, J. "Subcultures, Violence, and the Subculture of Violence: Old Rut or New Road?" CriminoloiY 9: 87-97 (1971). I Hirschi, T. Causes of Delinguenc}!: .. University of California Press, Berkeley, I 1969. Inciardi, J.A., Editor. Radical CriminoloiY. Sage, Beverly Hills, 1980. I Jaquith, S.M. "Adolescent Marijuana and Alcohol Use: An Empirical Test of Differential Association Theory," CriminoloiY, 19: 2, 271-280 (1981). I Jeffery, C.R. "Criminal Behavior and Learning Theory." Journal of Criminal Law. Criminology and Police Science 56: 294-300 (1965). I

Jensen, O.E. and D.O. Rojek. Delinquenc}!:: A Sociological View, D.C. Heath, Lexington, Mass., 1980. I Jensen, O. "Labelling and Identity." Criminology, 18: 121-29 (1980). I Johnson, C. and W. Pelham. "Teacher Ratings Predict Peer Ratings of Aggression at 3-year Follow-up in Boys With Attention Deficit Disorder With Hyperactivity." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 54: 571- I 572 (1987).

Kitsuse, J.I. and D.C. Dietrick. "Delinquent Boys: A Critique." American I SociololUcal Reyiew 24: 208-215 (1959).

Lyerly, R.R. and J.K. Skipper. "Differential Rates of Rural-Urban I Delinquency: A Social Control Approach." Criminology 19:3, 385-399 (1981). I Matza, D. Delinquency and Drift. John Wiley, New York, 1964. I Meier, R.F. "The New Criminology: Continuity in Criminological Theory." The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 67: 4, 461-469 (1976). I Meier, R.F. Theories in Criminology. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1977.

Merton, R.K. "Social Structure and Anomie." American Sociological Review I 3: 672-682 (1938). I 57 I I

Merton, RK. Social Theory and Social Structure The Free Press, Glencoe, I m.,1980.

Miller, W.B. "Lower Class Culture as a Generating Milieu of Gang I Delinquency." Journal of Social Issues 14:3,5-19 (1958).

Morash, M. "Establishment of a Juvenile Police Record." Criminolo~ 22: 97- I 111 (1984).

Pfuhl, E.H. The Deviance Process, 2nd Edition. Wadsworth, Belmont, Calif., I 1986. I Platt, A. The Child Savers. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1969. Poole, E.D. and RM. Regoli. "Parental Support, Delinquent Friends and I Delinquency" Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 70:2, 188-93 (1979). I Quinney, R. Class, State and Crime, 2nd Edition. Longman, New York, 1980. Quinney, R "The Production of a Marxist Criminology." Contemporary Crisis I 2:3, 277-92 (1978). Quinney, R. The Social Reality of Crime. Little, Brown, Boston, 1970.

I Reckless, W.C. The Crime Problem, 3rd Edition. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1961.

I Reckless, W.C. and S. Dinitz. "Pioneering with Self-Concept as a Vulnerability Factor in Delinquency" Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology I and Police Science. 58: 515-23 (1967). Reinman, J.H. The Rich Get Rieber and the Poor Get PrlS,QD., 2nd Edition. I John Wiley, New York, 1983. Schwendinger, H. and J. Schwendinger. Adolescent Subcultures and I Delin9J,lency. Praeger, New York, 1985. I Shaw, C.R The Jack-Roller. Chicago Press, Chicago, 1966. Shaw, C.R and H.D. McKay. Juvenile Delinquency in Urban Areas. I University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1969. Short, J.F., Editor. Delinquency, Crime and Society, University of Chicago I Press, Chicago, 1976. I 58 I ----- I

Short, J.F. "Differential Association and Delinquency." Social Problems 4: 233-39 (1957). I

Sutherland, E.H. and D.R. Cressey. Criminolo~ ,10th Edition. Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1978. I Sutherland, E.H. White Collar Crime, Dryden, New York, 1949. I Sykes, O.M. and D. Matza. "Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency." American Sociological Review 22: 667-670 (1957). I Tannenbaum, F. Crime in the Community. Ginn, Boston, 1938. I Taylor, 1, T. WaltoD, and J. Young. The New Criminology. Harper and Rowe, New York, 1973. I Thomas, C. and D. Bishop. liThe Effect of Formal and Informal Sanctions on Delinquency: A Longitudinal Comparison of Labelling and Deterrence Theory." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 75: 1222-1245 (1984). I Thomas, W.I. The Child America. Knopf, New York, 1928. I Toby, J. "Social Disorganization and Stake in Conformity: Complementary Factors in the Predatory Behavior of Hoodlums." Journal of Criminal Law. Criminology and Police Science 48: 12-17 (1957). I

Turk, A.T. "Conflict and Criminality. II American Sociological Review, Vol. 31, June 1966. I Turk, A.T. Criminality and Legal Order, Rand McNally, Chicago, 1969. I Wilkinson, K., B.O. Stitt and ML. Erickson. "Siblings and Delinquent Behavior: An Exploratory Study of a Neglected Family Variable." Criminology 20:2,223-240 (1982). I

Wolfgang, M.E. Patterns in Criminal Homicide. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1958. I Wolfgang, M.E. and F. Ferracutti. The Subculture of Violence. Sage I Publications, Beverly rOOs, 1982. Zimring, F.E. and O.J. Hawkins. Deterrence. University of Chicago Press, I Chicago, 1973.

"'These Citations are annotated in "Serious Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Program (SHOCAP) Annotated Bibliography," prepared/or the Office 0/ Juvenile Justice and Delinquency I Prevention, by Public Administration Service, 1987. I 59 I I I I I Influence of Certain I Institutions on Delinquency I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A I I

I 60 I ".~

------INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY I Perspective Causes of Delinquency Individual Family Community School Social System C.J. System Adequacy

Classital People possess the ability to Sole factor in No influence No influence No influence No influence Purpose of A philosophy schoolof' choose freely to do right or considering punishment is rather lhan a criminology wrong Free Will. They choose to delinquency deterrem;~. theory so cannot do delinquent acts because the and crime is Makes pain of be detennined to pleasure of the act outweighs the free will. punishment be adequate. pain of punishment. stronger than pleasure of act.

£OSitiB A variety of factors influence or Biological Control and Learning and Bonding and Culture sets goals System See individual school of ~ one to be delinquent. Since and some learning theories cultural deviance other control and means of represents perspectives. criminology these factors ~ delinquency, psychological recognize the theories include or theories view attaining the outer control. there is no free will. In most theories view positive influence focus on the school as one goals. SUi1in System is at cases, the person has little or no the individual of family on community, of the occurs if the fault because control over the influence of as the focal definitions of neighborhood or elements means are not it labels these factors. point. delinquency. gang. They defme binding the available. delinquent who Causes of the subculture person to the lives up to the delinquency ~va1ue label. are within the system. individual or the environ- mentacting on the person. - BiokWcal • Early Criminals are atavists or Sole factor in "Criminal No influence No influence No influence Delinquents Inadequate Theories biologicallhrowbacks to a causing families" are should be primitive state. Criminals are delinquency. evidence of quarantined. born, not developed. Individual is inherited criminal biQiQItica1ly behavior. def~ti~.

• Inherited Children inherit a predisposition Genetic pre- Chromosomal No influence No influence No influence No influence Moderareto Crime to violence or a central nervous disposition of complement is weak system that predisposes the individual inherited. person to crime. causes delinquency. - I P~tivel Ca~:~:~~EI ~~~~RT~~y INS~:~~~~S s~~ ~s~~I~:~~~~yM_ Ad~_y II IBi()logical • Neuro- Central nervow> system is Failure of Central nervous No influence No influence I No influence No influence Moderate to logical defective. Delinquents, as a result. brain system traits may strong dysfunction are callous, hostile. destructive, functions to be inherited. hyperactive and have poor impulse nmature." conlrol. Cortical arousal level may Arousal be low caw>in2 the person to levels, head stimulate the environment injuries, through over-activity. epilepsy, or tumors drive the individual to delinquent behavior.

• Chemistry Chemical imbalances, generally Absence of Diet and other I No influence No influence No influence No influence Moderate and Crime in the brain, result in the person newutrans­ ingested materials being agitated. aggressive, mitters, high may be influenced hyperactive or unable to learn concentra­ by family and life from mistakes and avoid punish­ tions of style. menL Similar to a1I~c reaction sweets, car­ to cmain chemicals. bohydrates andcerrain vitamins came an individual to be uncaring or over­ active.

PsycbolOJicall The offender is menraIly ill or the Individual is Many of the Criminal Justice I Weak emotional development of the not the cause psychological system seems child has been faulty. of deficiency. difficulties obJjpted to Influences m experienced by attribute the individual the child are a difficulties to cause the result of family psychological defects which and parenting problems. came the problems. delinquency.

-~ --~.------. ------~ ~ - - - INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY

Perspective Causes of Delinquency Individual Family Community School Social System C.J. System Adequacy I PS)'CooJoP;al • Psycho- Delinquents act out inner conflicts Child did Causes feelings of FaUsto Weak which result from pressure caused not develop insecurity, rigidity. recognize and analytical I by failing to find appropriate properly hostililty or deal with I releases. The psychic pressure is through the rebellion due to problems and caused by poor or faulty child infantile, defICiencies in to develop rearing. latency and love, a«ention, and appropriate puberty child -rearing. releases of periods. pressure.

I • Frustration Certain stimulli-weapons, pain, Influenced or Failed to establish Stimuli may be Economic status Weak to Aggression noise, temperature, odors--may acted upon tolerance or a function of of child/family inadequate , cause aggression. by outside controls to community-- may require that forces. counterbalance overcrowding. they live in frusttations. certain areas where stimuli are I more plentiful.

o Learning Based on models for the youth's The person is Serves asa Serves as a Provides Strong. Theory behavior, he learns "appropriate" a blank slate strong model for stronger model for environment especially when ways of reacting to situations. dIen learns bebavior--bad behavior during for modeling social factors are Delinquents learn that aggressive, the means of and good. adolescence. and considered. violent, hostile reactions are dealing with reinforcing successful. therefore appropriate. difficult, of bad hostile, and behavior. frustrating situations.

• Psycho- Urban crowding and ambient Individuai is Population density Social class Weak to logical/En- temperature cause irritability, unwittingly is a function of restricts one's inadequate vironmental frustration and violence. acted upon community. ability to live in Factors by environ- less populated, (similar to mental more comfortable frustratioo- factors. environments. aggression) II

-- INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY

Perspective Causes or Delin...... Individual Family /" Scbool Social System C.J. System Adequacy

_L _._~ Feeblemindedness and low IQ IQ is an un­ May stress goals Fails to establish IQJ Established Equates poor Weak direct link. I~~~and inconsistent with standards IQ wilh strong --. cause frustration with system or controllable alternate means of delinquency cause one fD seek successes factor which. ability of child. success other than relationship implying that troublemaker in indirect link. elsewhere. This results in an if low, impels school performance. may be above-average IQ deviant association with deviant groups. the person indirect with is good while often delinquenL IOward school below-average is delinquency perfonnance bad. Few because of an opportunities for the1ackof intennediate success. alternative step. rouleSto success.

1~~U:iical Social institutions influence the IIndividual The family either Community or One of May label Serves as an I Moderate behavior-good and bad--of youth. behavior is controls deviant subculture value the major behavior as outer control determined tendencies or fails system may vary institutions in deviant even mechanism. by social 10 do so. Family from that of the bondinglhe though it is a Also may label factors. also serves to social sYstem child to the reasonable and deIinqu~t teach child ways thereby causing its value system conforming to behave. members to be and providing behavior within sometimes deviants. means to ls~e community. inappropriately. success.

Delinquency occurs when the Ifallowed. One of the A strong agent of A strong agent IEstablishes the A conhOlling Generally shOog youth·s behavior is not controlled willseek - strongest agents control. of control norms and values. faelOr. ~ properly. pleasures of controL without considering others.

--- 1&. ------_.- .. INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY

Perspective Causes of Delinquency Individual Family Community School Social System C.J. System Adequacy Control Pe[SP"tb:!i: • Social Delinquency occurs when the Bonded to Strong family Appropriate peer Attachment, Defines Strong Bond youth's bond to society is weak society relations bond group strong commitment, "conformity." Theory or broken. through: youth to bonding factor. involvement -attachment appropriate and belief in -commitment others. school as -involvement means of -belief. success a strong . consideration.

! • Self- Concept Delinquents are deficient in their Strong Helps establish a Helps establish Helps Defines An external Weak inner or psychological restraints self-concept. strong self-concept inner control or establish inner "conformity." controlling when faced with pushes and pulls controls and. through containment Also control or factor. toward delinquency. against consistent reward may pull youth containment. falling into and punishment, toward delinquency. also may pull delinquent esiablishes inner youth toward behavior. containment delinquency.

• Neutral- Delinquents are able to neutralize Delinquents Denial of Motivation and Insulates Allows Moderate ization their guilt or rationalize their "drift" from responsibility may techniques of delinquent neutralization Theory behavior by denying responsibility, law-abiding be learned within neutralization from if there is injury or victim, condemning the behavior the family. come from peers. responsibility- inconsistent system or appealing to the higher because they inducing enforcement loyalties of the gang, group or tan neutralize behaviors. neighlxxhoood. ucir guilt or responsibility.

StDIiIl The culture prescribes the People are Families stress Alternate means to Represents the Makes no Applies the Moderately IbmDes standards for success and the innately good goals and success success are defined legitimate differentiation standards, strong means to attain those goals. The but the but may not in and supported by means to between those regardless of delinquent lacks the means but inability to provide the the community. success for who have and social strata. still aspires to the goals. He adapts attain the acceptable means middle-class those who do by finding other, illegitimate goals using to attain them. but a not have means means to attain the goals. acceptable frustration for to succeed in means creates lower class. social system. a "strain." INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY

Perspective Causes of Delinquency Individual Family Community School Social System C.J. System Adequacy SlI:aiD... ITbmty , Individuals Teaches the Limits the means Represents Makes youth Moderately • Modes 01 '1' People accept the goals and adapt Adaptation 10 the means by confonning, take the "appropriate" or available, legitimate class-conscious. shOog innovating, ritualistically accepting "acceptable" acceptable means, especially 10 youth. means, but Defmes goals the means, retreating from goals alremative to rurematives and "success" in and means. and means or rebelling. Some of means they goals. school is not the adaptations produce do not or available to or delinquency. cannot valued by possess. many youth.

goals but Ignores Moderate • Opportunit; Slrives to Fails 10 provide Strong mfluence on FaUsto Defmes Theory Because of limited opportunities, succeed but support and development of combat the means are not differences in gangs develop to provide lower­ lacks bonding. gangs because of creation of consisrently opportunities. class youth with upward mobiliiy, legitimate few alrematives or gangs and provided. recognition and "success." means. opportunities. fails 10 provide alremative means for success.

Imposes Weak--difficult • Middle­ Desires to Fails 10 instill Supports norms Imposes Pespetuates class Lower-class crime is due to. succceed but middle-class opposed 10 middle- materialistic, middle-class middle-class to test. Measuring mjddJe-cIa&, standards being lacks middl~ values in Iower­ class values. middle-class standards because standards on Rod applied to other youth. class means class youth. focus on institutions, lower-class Lower-class youth cannot satisfy so finds it lower-class schools, justice, youth. this standard so they adopt a set difficult 10 youth. businesses, are of norms, goals and means in attain conhOlled by opposition to middle class. middle-class middle-class. goals.

___ I- __ _ ------.. _- ...... - ---- .. _------INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY

Perspective Causes of Delinquency Individual Family Community School Social System C.J. System Adequacy

Cultural Each cuIUJre and subculture A person is Perpetuates and Reinforces its own Fails to Establishes Moderate but Deriagg: creates a set of noons and not capable instills the nonns, values and count.er- autonomous, may be indirect :IbtQries expectations. Sometimes these of violating community's goals which balance the identifIable are contrary to those of the his standards value system, but become the subculUJre's in culUJres and dominant culture and are labelled but some- this system is individual's fluence. subcultures but delinquent times the wrong according to standards. Neighborhood builds in culture the larger society. schools may inconsistent requires that reinforce this norms he violate the influence. standards of the~ ~

• : • Ecology Decaying areas of cities produce "Relative Perpetuates or Develops a Perpetuates or Fails to Moderate but and social values consistent with deprivation fails to mitigate counter-culture fails to incorporate direct Delinquency crime and delinquency. ",provokes the influence of which continues mitigate certain segments person to neighborhood. toexisl influence of into the whole. delinquency. neighborhood.

• Lower- Slum areas have a cultural climate Acceptance RedefInes and Redefines and sup- Fails to Fails to Moderate class that creates focal concerns of lower- supports lower- ports lower-class counter incorporate Culture contrary to those of middle class. class focal class definitions of defInitions of definitions certain segments Generates concerns fate, excitement trouble, toughness, conttaryto of the population Delinquency places youth and smartness. excitement and those of into the whole. in conflict autonomy. middle-class with the society. larger culture.

• Subculture Certain subcultures define violence Through Fails to mitigate Supports the Perpetuates Fails to Moderate or Violence as acceptable and "nonnaL n learning, the the acceptability of normalcy of or fails to incorporate individual violence. violence. mitigate the certain segments develops a acceptability of the population favorable of violence. into the whole. ,

definition of I violence. INFLUENCE OF CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS ON DELINQUENCY

Perspective I Causes of Delinquency I Individual Family Community School Social System C.J. System Adequacy Learning ICrime is learned in interaction Withl A ~rson is One of the Peers represent Fails to Strong Theories others. neIther good primary social strong "significant reinforce nor bad but units where others" from whom definitions learns learning occurs. the person learns unfavorable to Jx>..havior delinquency during the violation which then adolescence and of the law. directs him to young adulthood. certain acts or associates.

• Differentiall Criminal behavior is learned in Leamsbe­ One of the Fails to counter the Fails to Defines the needs Moderate Association interaction with those with haviorfrom intimate personal delinquent counter the and values that whom delinquents associate others with groups in which associations and definitions give rise to and from whom they define law whom he delinquent definitions. Also, and criminal (and) as favorable or unfavorable. differentially definitions are peers represent associations. non-criminaI associates. fonned. community. behavior.

• Social Deviant behavior is learned and Influenced Provides rewards Provides rewards Helps or fails Strong Learning reinfl.'I'Ced through social and non­ through and punishments and punishments to reinforce Theory social reinforcers. operant for behavior; for behavior; there­ conventional conditioning. therefore may fore may reinforce behavior. reinforce delinquency. delinquency.

• Labelling A youth is viewed as delinquent Unwittingly May influence May influence the May influence Acts toward the Justice system I Inadequate Theory therefore he sees himself as a labelled the labelling labelling process. the labelling youth based on discriminates delinquent and acts according to and then process. process. the label. and labels this social- and self-concept petpetuates underprivileged the label. youth as "delinquent"

ConDid Social conflict, based on authority, Everyone con No influence No influence No influence A classed societ:y Pawns of the A philosophy powerful and Theory power and ~my results in the forms and except as an with the poor rather than a weak suffering at the hands of the everyone example of the discriminated tools of the behavioral justice system, while the rich and deviates so it power/authority against in every state. theory. poweIful can violate the law with is unfair to dynamic. way. impunity. categorize as good and bad. Categories based on status, not ~or. ------~