Comparison and Contrast: Social Control and Social Learning Theories
Introduction
People often think that what motivates criminals to commit crimes is brought about by a need to steal money from others, a mental or drug problem that leads to perpetration of rape or heinous crimes, or even masked fear and anger. Some commit crimes due to repeated exposure to situations that support a negative behavior. Some do it due to inferiority complex in childhood, thus, they strive for superiority in adulthood. There are various other reasons for committing crimes and these can be explained by criminological theories. For the purpose of the presentation, the criminological theories that will be the focus of this paper are social control and social learning theories.
Defining Social Control Theory
Social control theory has often been associated with Travis Hirschi, a "notable control theorist" (Paternoster, R. & Bachman, R., 2001, p. 73) whose theory revolves around the presumption of conformity. According to Hirschi's stand on the control theory, "The question 'Why do they do it?' is simply not the question the [control] theory is designed to answer. The question is 'Why don’t we do it'? There is much evidence that we would if we dared." (Paternoster, R. & Bachman, R., 2001, p. 73). Society places controls on individuals through attachment to their family, lessons learned in school, workplace behavior, and moral teachings of the church. When these controls are weak, individuals are predisposed to committing crimes instead of becoming deviant towards it. Thus, the strength of individuals' personal relationships and affinity to the community and institutions they are a member of leads to patterns of aberration towards committing crimes.
Defining Social Learning Theory
Social learning theory is the belief that criminal actions can be learned and that upon observation of how other people commit crimes, others learn to conform and commit the same crimes as well. Thus, it is not merely due to a need to steal or kill, but rather through exposure to symbols, cultural, environmental, or behavioral factors.
As Ronald L. Akers developed a restructured social learning theory, he identified four central concepts of the theory, namely, "(1) differential association, (2) differential reinforcement, (3) definitions, and (4) imitation" (Paternoster, R. & Bachman, R., 2001, p. 194). Differential association is the theory that espouses constant interaction with individuals engaged in criminal activities and behaviors is what moves one to learn, think, behave, and act like a criminal. In addition, environment plays a huge role in molding one's minds into doing criminal activities although one may not question one's self as to why he is doing the specific criminal activity. Differential reinforcement refers to the "balance of anticipated or actual rewards or punishments that follow or are consequences of behavior" (Paternoster, R. & Bachman, R., 2001, p. 195). These consequences may be social or nonsocial reinforcements that are deemed important for potential criminals as they think about what gains or punishments they would get after carrying out the crime. Definitions are the individual's own rationalizations and beliefs as to what pushed him to commit a crime. The more averse a person is when it comes to crimes, the less likely he is to engage in any form of crimes. However, if an individual sees anything positive about the execution of the crime, then it becomes morally appealing. Thus, it results to a criminal's justification of the committed crime (Masters Degree Online). Imitation is the "engagement in behavior after the observation of similar behavior in others" (Paternoster, R. & Bachman, R., 2001, p. 196). Therefore, whether or not the potential criminal carries out the crime is dependent on the behavior and perceived outcome of the crime as executed by the "role model" criminal.
Social Contract and Social Learning: The Comparison
The two theories both place high importance on society as a whole when it comes to execution of a crime. The social contract theory considers the role of society and an individual's relations with other members of society whether to carry out a crime or not. Therefore, if an individual has strong ties with his family and the community he lives in, then most likely, he will find committing a crime a repulsive behavior (Krohn & Massey, 1980, p 533). On the other hand, the social learning theory claims that prospective criminals are not born with the intent or motivation to hurt anyone (Akers, 2009, p. 50). However, through constant exposure to stimulus, an individual slowly imbibes the thinking, ways, and behaviors of criminals in the society he lives in. Thus, indirectly, an individual allows society and environment to dictate whether to commit a crime or not. This is further enhanced by rewards an individual will receive after committing a crime.
In terms of behavior, social control theory states that "crime is merely the result of unsupervised anti social behavior which can be reduced with some sort of control" (Masters Degree Online). Again, the role of society is further emphasized as it is deemed to be of primary importance in reducing incidences of crime. As for social learning theory, behavior is "largely influenced by observation and imitation of people who are close to the subject, mainly parents and friends" (Masters Degree Online). If an individual grows in an environment where crimes are rampant, through observation, he will soon develop the same thinking and attitude as those living in the same environment.
Another thing that makes a striking difference between the two theories is how one theory is driven by conscience, while the other one is not. In social contract theory, an individual's drive to commit a crime is dependent on how he views a situation. If the individual evaluates that executing a particular task is morally wrong, then the likelihood of the individual carrying out the plan is reduced. This is hugely tied up to an individual's relationship and standing in society. On the other hand, social learning theory is not driven by the conscience, thus, if a crime is something that an individual grew up with, then it becomes a norm and more so, if the individual sees more positive outcome than negative results after the act is committed.
When it comes to punishment, the two theories again vary on its approach. With social contract theory, punishment is regarded as more than enough to dissuade one from committing a crime. Regardless of the type of punishment, whether it is a huge or swift one, actions are mostly guided by the conscience. However, for social learning theory, it is the other way around wherein the type of punishment can either prohibit or even encourage an individual to commit a crime.
Conclusion
Man is not born with the instinct to kill or hurt anyone else. The motivation to hurt or commit a crime is largely dependent on society, his relationship with close family members and friends, his peers, and personal satisfaction. Mostly, it is conscience-driven, which is also one reason that inhibits man from committing a crime. An individual develops the character of a criminal through observation and applying what he learned to gain personal satisfaction. Thus, if an individual does not find fault in an unlawful activity, the person will most likely exhibit the same attitude and behavior towards the wrongdoing.
References
Akers, R. Social Learning and Social Structure. Transaction Publishers, 2009. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=zjBDZ-T0WMgC&pg=PR3&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false
Hirschi, T. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press,1969
Krohn, M., & Massey, J. 1980. Social Control and Delinquent Behavior: An Examination of the Elements of the Social Bond. The Sociological Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.colorado.edu/ibs/pb/thornberry/socy7004/pdfs/Social Control and Delinquent Behavior.pdf
Masters Degree Online. Criminology Online: An In-Depth Look At the Various Crime Theories. Retrieved from http://www.mastersdegreeonline.org/resources/criminology-online-an-in-depth-look-at-the-various-crime-theories/
Paternoster, R. & Bachman, R. 2001. Explaining Criminals and Crime. New York: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://www2.jura.uni-hamburg.de/instkrim/kriminologie/Lehre/WS 2012_13/WB_Master_Kriminologie/Explaining criminals and crime
