Psychological Theories of Crime Causes

I N N O V A T
Malitbog, Bongabong, Oriental Mindoro
CRIMINOLOGY DEPARTMENT
THEORIES AND CAUSES OF CRIMES
CRISMARK NALING MARIANO
CHAPTER IV
PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES
I. OBJECTIVES
The students will able to:
 Understand the genetic or biological factor in the commission of crime.
 Realize how the culture or tradition become a factor of criminality.
 Explain why the society have a great effect in the personal development of an individual.
II. TIME FRAME

Week 5- September 2- 8, 2021
3 hours
III. TOPICS
Why do individuals commit crimes? At the same time, why is crime present in our society? The criminal Justice
system is very concerned with these questions, and criminologists are attempting to answer them. In actuality, the
question of why crime is committed is very difficult to answer. However, for centuries, people have been searching for
answers (Jacoby, 2004). It is important to recognize that there are many different explanations as to why individuals
commit crime (Conklin, 2007). One of the main explanations is based on psychological theories, which focus on the
association among intelligence, personality, learning, and criminal behavior. Thus, in any discussion concerning crime
causation, one must contemplate psychological theories.
When examining psychological theories of crime, one must be cognizant of the three major theories. The first is
psychodynamic theory, which is centered on the notion that an individual's early childhood experience influences his or
her likelihood for committing future crimes. The second is behavioral theory. Behavioral theorists have expanded the
work of Gabriel Tarde through behavior modeling and social learning. The third is cognitive theory, the major premise
of which suggests that an individual's perception and how it is manifested (Jacoby, 2004) affect his or her potential to
commit crime. In other words, behavioral theory focuses on how an individual's perception of the world influences his or
her behavior.
Also germane to psychological theories are personality and intelligence. Combined, these five theories or
characteristics (i.e., psychodynamic, cognitive, behavioral, personality, and intelligence) offer insights into why an
individual may commit a crime (Schmalleger, 2008). However, one should not assume this there is only one reason why
a person commits crime, Researchers looking for a single explanation should be cautious, because there is no panacea for
the problem of crime.
1. PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORY
Jointness is defined as a dynamic process representing an emotional system for attachment and for
communication between separate individuals who jointly approach each other in a third, joint, virtual space. Jointness
represents an encounter between mother and infant, psychotherapist and patient, or any partners experiencing
simultaneously mutual intimacy, while concomitantly safeguarding separateness.
Psychotherapy is the use of psychological methods, particularly when based on regular personal interaction, to
help a person change and overcome problems in desired ways. Psychotherapy aims to improve an individual's well-being
and mental health, to resolve or mitigate troublesome behaviors, beliefs, compulsions, thoughts, or emotions, and to
improve relationships and social skills. Certain psychotherapies are considered evidence-based for treating some
diagnosed mental disorders.
There are over a thousand different psychotherapy techniques, some being minor variations, while others are
based on very different conceptions of psychology, ethics (how to live) or techniques. Most involve one-to-one sessions,
1
between client and therapist, but some are conducted with groups, including families. Psychotherapists may be mental
health professionals such as psychiatrists, psychologists, clinical social workers, marriage and family therapists, or
professional counselors. Psychotherapists may also come from a variety of other backgrounds, and depending on the
jurisdiction may be legally regulated, voluntarily regulated or unregulated (and the term itself may be protected or not).
In general, psychodynamics is the study of the interrelationship of various parts of the mind, personality, or
psyche as they relate to mental, emotional, or motivational forces especially at the unconscious level. The mental forces
involved in psychodynamics are often divided into two parts: (a) the interaction of the emotional and motivational forces
that affect behavior and mental states, especially on a subconscious level; (b) inner forces affecting behavior: the study of
the emotional and motivational forces that affect behavior and states of mind.
2. BEHAVIORAL THEORY
The second major psychological theory is behaviorism. This theory maintains that human behavior is developed
through learning experiences. The hallmark of behavioral theory is the notion that people alter or change their behavior
according to the reactions this behavior elicits in other people (Bandura, 1978). In an ideal situation, behavior is
supported by rewards and extinguished by negative reactions or punishments. Behaviorists view crimes as learned
responses to life's situations. Social learning theory, which is a branch of behavior theory, is the most relevant to
criminology. The most prominent social learning theorist is Albert Bandura (1978). Bandura maintains that individuals
are not born with an innate ability to act violently. He suggested that, in contrast, violence and aggression are learned
through a process of behavior modeling (Bandura, 1977). In other words, children learn violence through the observation
of others. Aggressive acts are modeled after three primary sources:
(1) family interaction,
(2) environmental experiences, and
(3) the mass media. Research on family interaction demonstrates that children who are aggressive are more likely to
have been brought up by parents or caretakers who are aggressive (Jacoby, 2004).
The second source of behavioral problems, environmental experiences, suggests that individuals who reside in
areas that are crime prone are more likely to display aggressive behavior than those who reside in low-crime areas
(She)den, 2006). One could argue that high-crime areas are without norms, rules, and customs (Bohm, 2001).
Furthermore, there is an absence of conventional behavior. Manifestations of unconventional behavior include the
inability to gain employment; drug or alcohol abuse; and failure to obey the local, state, and federal laws. Most
important, individuals who adhere to conventional behavior are invested in society and committed to a goal or belief
system. They are involved in schools or extracurricular activities, such as football, baseball, or Girl Scouts, and often
they have an attachment to family (Kraska, 2004).
The third sources of behavioral problems are the mass media. It is difficult to discern the
ultimate role of the media in regard to crime. Scholars have suggested that films, video games, and television shows that
depict violence are harmful to children. Ultimately, social learning theories beckon us to accept the fact that the mass
media are responsible for a great deal of the violence in our society. They hypothesize that children who play violent
video games and later inflict physical or psychological damage to someone at school did so because of the influence of
the video game. Important to note that in the above-mentioned media outlets (e.g., video aames), violence is often
acceptable and even celebrated. Moreover, there are no consequences for the actions of the major players. Professional
athletes provide an interesting example of misbehavior without significant consequences. Over the last 50 years, there
have been many documented cases of professional athletes who engaged in inappropriate behavior on and off the field.
These cases have important implications for the children who observe this behavior. Thus, when a 10-year-old amateur
athlete imitates behavior that he has learned by observing professional sports figures, whom does society blame or
punish? Substantiating the relationship between the media and violence is the fact that many studies suggest that media
violence enables or allows aggressive children or adolescents to justify or rationalize their behavior. Furthermore,
consistent media violence desensitizes children and adolescents. A person could argue that viewing 10,000 homicides on
television over a 10-year period prevents (i.e., desensitizes) an individual from adjusting to the appropriate psychological
response. 'thus, when the local news reports about a homicide, does the child or adolescent respond with sorrow or
indifference (Jacoby, 2004). When searching for stimuli that foster violent acts, social learning theorists suggest that an
individual is likely to inflict harm when he or she is subject to a mviolent assault, verbal heckling or insults,
disparagement, and the inability to achieve his or her goals and aspirations (Siegal, 2009).
3. COGNITIVE THEORY
A third major psychological theory is cognitive theory. In recent years, significant gains have been made in
explaining criminal behavior within the cognitive theory framework. Here, psychologists focus on the mental processes
Of individuals. More important, cognitive theorists attempt to understand how criminal offenders perceive and mentally
represent the world around them (Knepper, 2001). Germane to cognitive theory is how individuals solve problems.
2
prominent pioneering 19th-century psychologists are and William James. Two sub disciplines of cognitive theory are-
worthy of discussion. The first sub discipline is the moral development branch, the focus of which is understanding how
people morally represent and reason about the world. The second sub discipline is information processing. Here,
researchers focus on the way people acquire, retain, and retrieve information (Siegal, 2009). Ultimately, scholars are
concerned with the process of those three stages (i.e., acquisition, retention, and retrieval), One theory within the
cognitive framework focuses on moral and intellectual development. Jean Piaget (1896-1980) hypothesized that the
individual reasoning process is developed in an orderly fashion. Thus, from birth onward an individual will continue to
develop. Another pioneer of cognitive theory is Lawrence-Kohlberg (1927-1987), who applied the concept of moral
development to criminological theory. Kohlberg ( 1984) believed that individuals pass through stages of moral
development. Most important to his theory is the notion that there are levels, stages, and social orientation.
4. PERSONALITY AND CRIME
Personality can be defined as something that makes us what we are and also that which makes us different from
others (Clark, Boccaccini, Caillouet, & Chaplin, 2007). Ideally, personality is stable over time. Examinations of the
relationship between personality and crime have often yielded inconsistent results. One of the most weltknown theories
of personality used to examine this relationship is the Big Five model ofpersonality. This model provides a vigorous
structure into which most personality characteristics can be categorized. This model suggests that five domains account
for individual differences in personality: (l) Neuroticism, (2) Extraversion, (3) Openness, (4) Agreeableness, and (5)
Conscientiousness (Clark et al., 2007). Neuroticism involves emotional stability. Individuals who score high on this
domain often demonstrate anger and sadness and have irrational ideas, uncontrollable impulses, and anxiety. In contrast,
persons who score low on Neuroticism are often described by others as even tempered, calm, and relaxed.
The second domain, Extraversion, is characterized by sociability, excitement, and stimulation. Individuals who
score high on Extraversion (extraverts) are often very active, talkative, and assertive. They also are more optimistic
toward the future, In contrast, introverts are often characterized by being reserved, independent, and shy (Clark et al.,
2007).
The third domain is Openness, referring to individuals who have an active imagination, find pleasure in beauty,
are attentive to their inner feelings, have a preference for variety, and are intellectually curious. Individuals who score
high on Openness are willing to entertain unique or novel ideas, maintain unconventional values, and experience positive
and negative emotions more so than individuals who are closed-minded. In contrast, persons who score low in Openness
often prefer the familiar, behave in conventional manners, and have a conservative viewpoint (Clark et al., 2007).
The fourth domain is Agreeableness. This domain is related to interpersonal tendencies. Individuals who score
high on this domain are considered warm, altruistic, softhearted, forgiving, sympathetic, and trusting. In contrast, those
who are not agreeable are described as hard-hearted, intolerant, impatient, and argumentative.
Conscientiousness, the fifth domain, focuses on a ability to control impulses and exercise self-control. Individual
who score high on Conscientiousness are described as thorough, efficient, determined, and strong willed. In addition,
who are conscientious are more likely to achieve high academ and occupational desires. In contrast, people who score
low on th domain are thought to be careless, lazy, and more likely assign to others than to accept blame themselves
(Clark et al., 2007).
5. PSYCHOPATHIC PERSONALITY
Antisocial personality, psychopathy, or sociopath is term used interchangeably (Siegal, 2009). Sociopaths are
Often a produc of a destructive home environment. Psychopaths are a product defect or aberration within themselves.
The antisocial personality is characterized by low levels of guilt, superficial charm, above-averag Intelligence, persistent
violations of the rights of others, incapacity to form enduring relationships, impulsivity, risk taking, egocentricity,
manipulativeness, forcefulness and cold-heartedness, and shallow emotions (Jacoby, 2004). The origin may include
traumatic socialization, neurological disorder, and brain abnormality (Siegal, 2008). Interestingly, if an individual suffers
from low levels of arousal as measured by a neurological examination, he or she may engage in thrill seeking or high-
risk behaviors such as crime to offset their la arousal level. Other dynamics that may contribute to the psychopathic
personality is a parent with pathologic tendencies, childhood traumatic events, or inconsistent discipline. It is important
to note that many chronic offenders are sociopaths. Thus, if personality traits can predict crime and violence, then one
could assume that the root cause of crime is found in the forces that influence human development at an early stage of
life (Siegal, 2008).
6. INTELLIGENCE AND CRIME
3
Criminologists have suggested for centuries that there exists a link between intelligence and crime (Dabney,
2004). Some common beliefs are that criminals and delinquents possess low intelligence and that this low intelligence
causes criminality. As criminological research has advanced, scholars have continued to suggest that the Holy Grail is
causality. The ability to predict criminals from noncriminal is the ultimate goal. The ideology or concept of IQ and crime
has crystallized into the nature-versus-nurture debate (Jacoby, 2004).
The nature-versus-nurture debate is a psychological argument that is related to whether the environment or
heredity impacts the psychological development of individuals (Messner & Rosenfield, 2007). Science recognizes that
we share our parents' DNA. To illustrate, some people have short fingers like their mother and brown eyes like their
father. However, the question remains: Where do individuals get their love of sports, literature, and humor? The nature-
versus-nurture debate addresses this issue. With respect to the nature side, research on the prison population has
consistently shown that inmates typically score low on IQ tests (Schmalleger, 2008). In the early decades of the 20th
century, researchers administered IQ tests to delinquent male children. The results indicated that close to 40% had
below-average intelligence (Siegal, 2008). On the basis of these data and other studies, some scholars argue that the role
of nature is prevalent. However, can researchers assume a priori that heredity determines IQ, which in turn influences an
individual's criminal behavior? One criticism of this perspective is the failure to account for free will. Many individuals
in our society believe in the ability to make choices. Last, there are many individuals who have a low IQ but refrain from
committing crime.
With respect to nurture theory, advocates ground themselves on the premise that intelligence is not inherited.
There is some recognition of the role of heredity; however, emphasis is placed on the role of society (i.e., environment).
To demonstrate, parents are a major influence on their children's behavior. At an early age, parents read books; play
music; and engage their children in art, museum, and sporting events. Some parents spend no quality time with their
children, and these children are believed to perform poorly on intelligence test. Other groups important in a child's
nurturing are friends, relatives, and teachers. Ultimately, the child who has no friends or relatives and drops out of school
is destined for difficult times. Research has demonstrated that the more education a person has, the higher his or her IQ.
The nature-versus-nurture debate will continue. The debate has peaks and valleys. For years, the debate subsides,
and this is followed by years of scrutiny and a great deal of attention. One of two major studies that highlighted this
debate was conducted by Travis Hirschi and Michael Hindelang (1977). These scholars suggested that low IQ increases
the likelihood of criminal behavior through its effect on school performance. This argument seems somewhat
elementary. Their argument is that a child with a low IQ will perform poorly in school. In turn, this school failure is
followed by dropping out. Given the poor school performance, a child is left with very few options (Hirschi &
Hindelang, 1977). This ultimately leads to delinquency and adult criminality. Support of this position has been
widespread, Furthermore, it is important to note that U.S. prisons and jails are highly populated with inmates who only
have an average of eighth-grade education. At the same time, these same inmates at the time of their offense were
unemployed.
The second nature-versus-natUre study that warrants attention was conducted by Richard Herrnstein and Charles
Murray ( 1994). In their book The Bell Curve, these scholars suggested individuals with a lower IQ are more likely to
commit crime, get caught, and be sent to prison. Importantly, these authors transport the IQ and crime link to another
level. Specifically, they suggested that prisons and jails are highly populated with inmates with low IQs; however' what
about those criminals who actions go Undetected? Through self-reported data, the researchers diSCovered that these
individualS have a lower IQ than the general public. Thus, research concludes those Criminal offenders who have been
caught and those who have not have an IQ lower than the general population (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994).
7. FREUDAN-PSYCHOANALYUTIC THEORY
Sigmund Freud (6 May 1856 - 23 September 1939) is considered to be the founder of the psychodynamic
approach to psychology which looks closely at the unconscious drives that motivate people to act in certain ways.
The role of the mind is something that Freud repeatedly talked about because he believed that the mind is
responsible for both conscious and unconscious decisions based on drives and forces. Unconscious desires motivate
people to act accordingly. The id, ego, and super ego are three aspects of the mind; Freud believed to make up a person's
personality. Freud believed people are "simply actors in the drama of [their] oyn minds, PJShed by desire, pulled
bxcoincidence. Underneath the surface, our personalities represent the power struggle going on deep within us".
8. PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY
Id
Proponents of psychodynamic theory suggest that an individual's personality is controlled by unconscious mental
processes that are grounded in early childhood. This theory was originated by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), the founder
4
of psychoanalysis. Imperative to this theory are the three elements or structures that make up the human personality: (l)
the id, (2), the ego, and (3) the superego. One can think of the id is as the primitive part ofa person's mental makeup
that is present at birth. Freud (1933) believed the id represents the un£onscious biological drives for food, sex, and other
necessities over the life span.
One can think of the id is as the primitive part of a person's mental makeup that is present at birth. Freud (1933)
believed the id represents the unconscious biological drives for food, sex, and other necessities over the life span.
The id according to Freud is the part of the unconscious that seeks pleasure. His idea ofthe id explains whypeople
act out in certain ways, when it is not in line with the ego or superego. The id is the part of the mind, which holds all of
human's most basic and primal instincts. It the impulsive, unconscious part of the mind that is based on desire to seek
immediate satisfaction. 'Ihe id does not have grasp on any form of reality or consequence. Freud understood that some
people are controlled by the id because it makes people engage in need-satisfying behavior without any accordance to
what is right or wrong. Freud compared the id and the ego to a horse and a rider. The id is compared to the horse, is
directed and controlled, b the ego or the rider. This example goes to show that although the id is supposed to be
controlled by the ego, they often interact with another according to the drives of the id.
Freud defined the id as the part of the mind "cut off from the external world, has a world of perception of its own,
It detects with extraordinary acuteness certain changes in its interior, especially oscillations in the tension of its
instinctual needs, and these changes become conscious as feelings in the pleasure-unpleasure series. It is hard to say, to
be sure, by what means and with the help of what sensory terminal organs these perceptions come about. But it is an
established fact that self-perceptions - coenesthetic feelings and feelings of pleasure-unpleasure - govern the passage of
events in the id with despotic force. The id obeys the inexorable pleasure principle".(Freud,2005)..
Psychoanalysis was founded by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) Freud believed that people could be cured by
making conscious their unconscious thoughts and motivations, thus gaining "insight"
The aim of psychoanalysis therapy is to release repressed emotions and experiences, i.e. make the unconscious
conscious.
Psychoanalysis is commonly used to treat depression and anxiety disorders.
It is only having a cathartic (i.e. healing) experience can the person be helped and "cured".
Ego
In order for people to maintain a realistic sense here on earth, the ego is responsible for creating balance between
pleasure and pain. It is impossible for all desires of the id to be met and the ego realizes this but continues to seek
pleasure and satisfaction. Although the ego does not know the difference between right and wrong, it is aware that not all
drives can be met at a given time. The reality principle is what the ego operates by in order to help satisfy the ids
demands as well as compromising according to reality. The ego is a person's "self" composed of unconscious desires.
The ego takes into account ethical and cultural ideals in order to balance out the desires originating in the id. Although
both the id and the ego are unconscious, the ego has close contact with the perceptual system. The ego has the function
of self-preservation, which is why it has the ability to control the instinctual demands from the id.
"The ego is first and foremost a bodily ego; it is not merely a surface entity, but is itself the projection of a
surface. If we wish to find an anatomical analogy for it we can best identify it with the 'cortical homunculus' of the
anatomists, which stands on its head in the cortex, sticks up its heels, faces backwards and, as we know, has its speech-
area on the left-hand side. The ego is ultimately derived from bodily sensations, chiefly from those springing from the
surface of the body. It may thus be regarded as a mental projection of the surfacc of the body, representing the
superficies of the mental apparatus."
For example, when children learn that their wishes cannot be gratified instantaneously, they often throw a
tantrum. Freud (1.933) suggested that the ego compensates for the demands of the id by guiding an individual's actions
or behaviors to keep him or her within the boundaries of society. The ego is guided by the reality principle.
Superego
The superego, which develops around age four or incorporates the morals of society. Freud believed that the
superego is what allows the mind to control its impulses that are looked upon morally. The superego can be considered to
be the conscience of the mind because It has the ability to distinguish between as well as what is right or wrong. Without
the superego Freud" believed people would act out with aggression and other immoral behaviors because the mind would
have no way of understanding difference between right and wrong. The superego is considered to be the "consciousness"
5
of a person's personality and can override the drives from the id. Freud separates the superego into two separate
categories; the ideal self and the conscious. The conscious ideals and morals that exist within society that prevent people
from acting out based on their internal desires. The ideal self contains images of how people ought to behave according
to societies ideals.
In sum, psychodynamic theory suggests that criminal offenders are frustrated and aggravated. They are
constantly drawn to past events that occurred in their early childhood. Because of a negligent, unhappy, or miserable
childhood, which is most often characterized by a lack of love and/or nurturing, a criminal has a weak (or absent) ego.
Most important, research suggests that having a weak ego is linked with poor or absence of social etiquette, immaturity,
and dependence on others. Research further suggests that individuals with weak egos may be more likely to engage in
drug abuse.
VI. COMPREHENSION CHECK UP

1. Differentiate the three elements or structures that make up the human personality.
2. What is the part of unconcious mind that seeks pleasure.
3. Enumerate the three primary sources of agressive act.
I. OBJECTIVE:
The students will be able to;
 Understand how people rationalized his own act because of the different defense mechanisms.
 Explain why the level of intelligence induce an individual to commit a crime.
 Explain how frustration leads to criminality.
II. TIME FRAME

Week 6 – September 9-15, 2021
3 Hours
III. TOPICS
9. Anxiety and Defense Mechanisms
Sigmund Freud proposed a set of defense mechanisms in one's body. These set of defense mechanisms occur so
one can hold a favorable or preferred view of themselves. For example, a particular situation when an event occurs that
violates ones preferred view ofthemselves, Freud stated that it is necessary for the self to have some mechanism to
defend itself against this unfavorable event; this is known as defense mechanisms. Freud's work on defense mechanisms
focused on how the ego, defends itself against internal events or impulses, which are regarded as unacceptable to one's
ego. These defense mechanisms are used to handle the conflict between the id, the ego, and the super ego.
Freud noted that a major drive for people is the reduction of tension and the major cause of tension was anxiety,
He identified three types of anxiety; reality anxiety, neurotic anxiety, and moral anxiety. Reality anxiety is the most basic
form of anxiety and is based on the ego. It is typically based on the fear of real and possible events, for example being bit
by a dog or falling off of a roof. Neurotic anxiety comes from an unconscious fear that the basic impulses of the id will
take control of the person, leading to eventual punishment from expressing the ids desires. Moral anxiety comes from the
superego. It appears in the form of a fear of violating values or moral codes, and appears as feelings like guilt or shame.
When anxiety occurs, the minds first response is to seek rational ways of escaping the situation by increasing
problem solving efforts and a range of defense mechanisms may be triggered. These are ways that the ego develops to
help deal with the id and the superego. Defense mechanisms often appear unconsciously and tend to distort or falsify
reality. When the distortion ofreality occurs, there is a change in perception which allows for a lessening in anxiety
resulting in a reduction of tension one experiences. Sigmund Freud noted a number of ego defenses which were noted
throughout his work but his daughter, Anna Freud, developed and elaborated on them. The defense mechanisms are as
follows:
1) Denial – believing that what is true is actually false
2) Displacement- taking out impulses on a less threatening target
3) Inlellectualization- avoiding unacceptable emotions by focusing on the intellectual aspects
4) Projectuion- attributing uncomfortable feelings to others
5) Rationalization- creating false but believable justifications
6) Reaction Formation- taking the opposite belief because the true belief causes anxiety
7) Regression- going back to a previous stage of development
8) Repression- pushing uncomfortable thoughts out of conscious
6
9) Suppression- consciously forcing unwanted thoughts out of our awareness
10) Sublimation- redirecting ‘wrong’ urges into socially acceptable actions. These defenses are not under our
conscious control and our unconscious will use one or more to protect one’s self from stressful situations. They
are natural and normal and without these, neurosis develops such as anxiety states, phobias, obessions, or
hysteria.
10. LOW IQ THEORY
Once the IQ-crime correlation is measured, the next task is to explain it. Why IQ and crime are negatively
correlated? Explanations of the IQ-crime correlation typically take one of three approaches, that: (1) IQ and crime are
spuriously, not causally, correlated; (2) low IQ increases criminal behavior; or (3) criminal behavior decreases IQ.
A popular argument against IQ as a cause of crime criticizes IQ tests as only measuring middle-class knowledge
and values rather than innate intelligence. As a result, the observation that some minority groups and the poor score low
on IQ tests simply reflects their diverse cultural backgrounds. These same groups also commit proportionately more
crime because they suffer structural disadvantages such as poverty and discrimination. Consequently, the same people
who score low on IQ tests also tend to commit more crime, and so IQ and crime are empirically correlated, thus this
correlation is not causal but reflects only culturally biased testing of intelligence.
A variation of this argument holds that the structural disadvantages that increase crime rates also reduce
educational opportunities thus lessening individuals' ability and motivation to score well on IQ tests. The IQ-crime
correlation occurs only because they are both rooted in structural disadvantage, which, in statistical terms, represents a
"spurious" correlation.
Although these discrimination hypotheses have wide appeal, they have received fairly little support in empirical
studies, for IQ and crime are sign iticantly correlated within race and class groups as well as when statistically
controlling for race, class, test-taking ability, and test-taking motivation (e.g., Hirschi and Hindelang; Lynam et al.).
Another argument against IQ as a cause of crime holds that school teachers and administrators treat students
differently by perceptions of the students' intelligence-giving negative labels and fewer educational opportunities to less
intelligent students. These labels and constrained opportunities, in turn, produce feelings of alienation and resentment
that lead students to delinquent peers and criminal behavior (Menard and Morse). As such, society's reaction to
intelligence, and not any property of intelligence itself, increases criminal behavior. Unfortunately, few studies have
adequately tested this labeling hypothesis.
A final argument against IQ holds that even if all people commit crime with equal frequency, less intelligent
people would be less able to evade detection and would be arrested more often. This detection hypothesis has received
some empirical support in that IQ scores tend to correlate rnore strongly with officially recorded crime than self-reported
crime. However, most studies still find a significant correlation between IQ and self-reported crime, which is not easily
explained by differential police detection (e.g., Moffitt and Silva).
In contrast to the above spurious arguments, some explanations emphasize IQ as a cause of crime. The earliest
causal explanation, popular during the early 1900s, portrayed criminals as so "feebleminded" and "mentally deficient"
that they could neither distinguish right from wrong nor resist crirninal impulses. This feeblemindedness hypothesis,
however, lost favor long ago as it became clear that few criminals are actually mentally deficient and most recognize,
though may not follow behavioral norms (Moffitt et al.).
A more recent, and more compelling, causal explanation emphasizes the importance of intelligence-especially
verbal intelligence-during childhood socialization. The of children involves constant verbal communication
comprehension of abstract symbols; therefore, children with poor verbal and cognitive skills have greater difficulty
completing th socialization process, which puts them at risk of under controlled antisocial behavior. Empirical studies
overall have supported this developmental hypothesis (Moffitt, p. 116), and it fits with th especially strong correlation
between verbal IQ and crime.
A final causal explanation links IQ to crime through school performance. Less intelìigent students do less well in
school, which results in academic frustration. This frustration, in turn, weakens their attachment and commitment to
schooling, and a weakened bond to school, as per social control theory, allows for more criminal behavior (Hirschi and
Hindelang). This school-performance hypothesis has received strong support from empirical studies, and it is probably
the most widely accepted explanation of the IQ-crime correlation (Moffitt).
One last approach to IQ and crime deserves mention even though few criminological studies have examined it.
Rather than low IQ increasing criminal behavior, criminal behavior might decrease IQ. Many facets of a criminal
lifestyle can impair cognitive abilities, including physical injuries, especially head traumas, drug use, and withdrawing
from school (Moffitt).
7
11. ATTENTION -DEFICIT-HYPERACTIVITY THEORY
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a mental disorder of the neuro developmental type. It is
characterized by problems paying attention, excessive activity, or difficulty controling behavior which is not age. The
symptoms appear before a person is twelve years old, are present for more than six months, and cause problems in at
least two settings (such as school, home, or recreational activities). In children, problems paying attention may result in
poor school performance. Although it causes impairment, particularly in modern society, many children with ADHD
have a good attention span for tasks they find interesting.
Despite being the most commonly studied and diagnosed mental disorder in children and adolescents, the exact
cause is unknown in the majority of cases. It affects about 5-7% of children when diagnosed via the DSM-IV criteria and
1-2% when diagnosed via the criteria. As of 2015 it is estimated to affect about 51.1 million people. Rates are similar
between countries and depend mostly on how it is diagnosed. ADHD is diagnosed approximately three times more often
in boys than in girls, although the disorder is often overlooked in girls due to their symptoms differing from those of
boys. About 30-50% of people diagnosed in childhood continue to have symptoms into adulthood and between 2-5% of
adults have the condition. The condition can be difficult to tell apart from other disorders, as well as to distinguish from
high levels of activity that are still within the normal-range.
ADHD management recommendations vary by country and usually involve some combination of counseling,
lifestyle changes, and medications. The British guideline only recommends medications as a first-line treatment in
children who have severe symptoms and for medication to be considered in those with moderate symptoms who either
refuse or fail to improve with counseling, though for adults medications are a first-line treatment. Canadian and
American guidelines recommend that medications and behavioral therapy be used together as a first-line therapy, except
in preschool-aged children. Stimulant medication therapy is not recommended as a first-line therapy in preschool-aged
children in either guideline. Treatment with stimulants is effective for up to 14 months; however, its long term
effectiveness is unclear. Adolescents and adults tend to develop coping skills which make up for some or all of their
impairments.
The medical literature has described symptoms similar to ADHD since the 19th century. ADHD, its diagnosis,
and its treatmentmhave been considered controversial since the 1970s. The controversies have involved clinicians,
teachers, policymakers parents, and the media. Topics include ADHD's causes and the use of stimulant medications in its
treatment. Most healthcare providers accept ADHD as a genuine disorder in children and adults, and the debate in the
scientific community mainly centers on how it is diagnosed and treated. The condition was officially known as attention
deficit disorder (ADD) from 1980 to 1987 while before this it was known as hyperkinetic reaction of childhood.
12. FRUSTRATION - AGGRESSION THEORY
Frustration-aggression hypothesis, otherwise known the frustration-aggression-displacement theory, is a theory of

aggression proposed by John Dollard, Neal E. Miller et al in 1939 and further developed by Miller et al. in 1941 and
Leonard Berkowitz in 1969. The theory says that aggression is the result of blocking, frustrating, a person's efforts to
attain a goal.
Examples
The frustration-aggression hypothesis attempts to explain why people scapegoat. It attempts to give an
explanation as to the cause of violence. The theory, developed by John Dollard colleagues, says that frustration causes
aggression, but when the source of the frustration cannot be challenged, the aggression displaced onto an innocent target.
There are many examples of this. If a man is disrespected humiliated at his work, but cannot respond to this for
fear of losing his job, he may go home and take his anger and frustration out on family. This theory is also used to
explain riots and revolutions. Both are caused by poorer and more deprived sections of society who express their bottled
up frustration and anger through violence.
According to Yale Group, frustration is the "condition which exists when a goal-response suffers interference,"
while aggression is defined as "an act whose goal-response is injury to an organism (or organism surrogate)." However,
aggression is not always the response to frustration. Rather a substitute response is displayed when aggressive response
is not the strongest on the hierarchy. Furthermore, this theory raises the question if aggression is innate.
However, this theory has some problems. First, there is little empirical support for it, even though researchers
have studied it for more than sixty years. Another issue is that this theory suggests frustrated, prejudiced individuals
should act more aggressively towards out groups they are prejudiced against, but studies have shown that they are more
8
aggressive towards everyone. The theory also has limitations, for example it cannot say why some out groups are chosen
to be scapegoats and why others are not.
Experimentation
The frustration-aggression theory has been studied since 1939, and there have been modifications. Dill and Anderson
present a study that questions whether frustration that is justified or not plays a role in future aggression. The experiment
consisted of three groups of subjects performing a folding origami task that was timed. The participants were split into
the control, justified frustration and unjustified frustration groups. In each condition the experimenter states how they
will only present the instructions one time and then start the timer. At a predetermined fold the confederate in the
condition interrupts the experimenter and asks them to please slow down.
In the unjustified group, the experimenter responds, "I cannot slow down. My girlfriend/boyfriend is picking me
up after this and I do not want to make them wait." In the justified condition the experimenter responds, "I cannot slow
down. My supervisor booked this room for another project afterwards and we must continue. Finally, the experimenter in
the control condition responded, "Oh, okay I did not realize I was going too quickly. I will slow down."
The subjects were then given questionnaires on their levels of aggression as well as questionnaires about the
quality of the research staff. "they were told that these questionnaires would determine whether the research staff would
receive financial aid, or verbal reprimands and a reduction in financial awards. The questions presented on the
questionnaire were designed to reflect the research staff's ability and likeability.
Dill and Anderson found that participants in frustration group rated the research staff to have less ability and
likeability, knowing this would affect their financial situation as graduate students, The justified frustration group rated
the staff as less likeable and having less ability than the control group, but more than that of the unjustified frustration
group. These results support the hypothesis that frustration can lead to aggression. This study presents data concerning
behavioral aggression and frustration level.
Frustration is defined as a state that sets in if a goal-oriented act is delayed or thwarted. The instigation remains
even though the chances of realization are constrained by interfering influences. Under these frustrating conditions
aggressive behavior is stimulated to an extent that corresponds with the intensity of the instigation and the degree of
blockage of goal attainment. Aggression is defined as the deliberate violation of an organism or an organism substitute. It
is primarily directed toward the cause of frustration, but may be redirected toward any other people or objects.
The inhibition of aggressive behavior represents in itself a factor of frustration and can reinforce aggressive
tendencies. In its first general definition the frustration aggression theory (or hypothesis, hence “FA-H”) proposes that
aggression is always the result of frustration (Dollard et al). 1939). This corresponds with the following two postulates:
(l) aggressive behavior requires the existence of frustration, and (2) the existence of frustration leads to some kind of
aggressive behavior. Manifest aggression reduces aggressive tendencies and results in "catharsis." However, this only
applies to that part of aggression caused by inhibition of aggression, not to aggression caused by the original instigation.
The latter lasts as long as the frustrating conditions continue.
Frustration Aggression Theory
The frustration aggression theory states that aggression is caused by frustration. When someone is prevented from
reaching their important goal or satisfying one of their important needs they become frustrated. This frustration can then
turn into aggression when the right trigger is present.
For example, if you failed in your final exam you will definitely become frustrated But what if someone you
barley know told you "You are such a loser not to pass that exam". In this case, your stored frustration will surely turn
into aggression. Note that the frustration aggression theory does not provide explanation to all types of aggression but it
rather focuses on the aggression those results from not being able to reach your goals.
Here is another example to make the theory clearer. Let's suppose that you faced a certain problem in your work
and as a result you got very frustrated. Now in such a case you might find yourself becoming more aggressive towards
other drivers in the street while you are on your way home.
In such a case your suppressed frustration turned into aggression as soon as you got subjected to the stress of
driving.
Definition:
9
The frustration-aggression theory argues that social movements occur when frustration leads to collective, often
aggressive behavior. Frustration has a variety of sources and can take two forms. First, it can be absolute, which happens
when people do not have enough to survive, and second, it can be relative, which happens when people have enough to
survive but have less than those around them
You're hurriedly typing up a research paper in your school library that's due in thirty minutes. You panicked and
stressed that you won't finish it in time. You completed the task 10 minutes before your class starts, a sense of relief
overcomes you. You click 'print' and wait by the printer while giving you a mental high five. yet, printer, the only one in
the library, beeps, signaling a malfunction. It seems there is a major paper jam. A feeling of extreme frustration
overcomes you.
Frustration is the feeling of irritation and annoyance when something blocks you from achieving a goal. In the
scenario, your goal of turning in your research paper on time is hindered by the printer's malfunction. You throw your
backpack down in exasperation and proceed to kick it several times. This an example of frustration turning into
aggression. Aggression is a malicious behavior or attitude towards someone or something; usually triggered by
frustration.
As noted in the definition of aggression, frustration doesn’t have to be a behavior. It can be an attitude. For
example, a dog that is trying to protect its family's home may feel threatened by the mailperson and will bark fiercely
whenever he or she comes around. This is aggression in the form of an attitude or outlook. The dog's bark is malicious in
its desires to hurt the mailperson if he or she comes any closer.
Now that we have the definitions offrustration and aggression down pat, the definition of the frustration-
aggression theory may seem obvious. The frustration-aggression theory largely implies that aggression is often a result of
frustration. This theory was proposed by psychologists Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mower, and Sears in their 1939 book
Frustration and Aggression.
Frustration-Aggression Principle
Let's now return to the example of writing a research paper. You write one page of a 20-page research paper, the
computer crashes and you lose all of your work. Now imagine you write 15 pages of that 20-page research paper and
your computer crashes, and all of your work is gone. In which case would you be more frustrated? after writing 15 pages
of course.
The closer that a person is to a goal that's suddenly blocked, the more frustrated he or she will become. Another
example is waiting in line for a ride. If you wait in line for an hour for a roller coaster and someone skips you in line, you
will be more frustrated than if that same person skipped you when you've only waited a minute or so.
However, not everyone who gets frustrated is aggressive. It's those who feel a lessening of frustration when
they're aggressive that will often be repeat aggressors. Imagine a road rage scenario. Mark was in a hurry and became
very frustrated and angry when the car in front of him failed to accelerate when the light turned green. He veered his car
to the left and passed the car with his window down while shouting obscenities. Although an aggressive manner to
handle things, it made him feel better.
Berkowitz's Revision
Social psychologist Leonardo Berkowitz believed there was more to the frustration-aggression principle. In 1989,
he published an academic journal article titled Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis: Examination and Reformulation.
Berkowitz noted that frustration didn't always lead to aggressive behavior; and aggression was increased in response to
frustration when there were environmental cues that triggered it.
Description
When people perceive that they are being prevented from achieving a goal, their frustration is likely to turn to
aggression.
The closer you get to a goal, the greater the excitement and expectation of the pleasure. Thus the closer you are,
the more frustrated you get by being held back. Unexpected occurrence of the frustration also increases the likelihood of
aggression.
Frustration does not always lead to aggression, particularly when we deliberately suppress it because either we
know that it is wrong or we fear the social consequences of being aggressive (eg. Losing friendship of target, criticism
from others). As a result we often displace aggression into other activity, such as sports, driving fast and so on.
10
Some people are more predisposed to aggression and find it harder to contain it. For such people, frustration is
more likely to that lead dierectly to aggression than for other people with a calmer disposition or greater self-control.
Example
Football crowds can become aggressive when their team starts to lose. People in business can also become aggresive
when others start to frustrate their ambitions.
IV. COMPREHENSION CHECK-UP

1. What is defense mechanism which redirecting ‘wrong’ urges into socially acceptable actions?
2. Who is the criminologist that proposed defense mechanisms?
3. Why IQ and crime negatively correlated?
4. Define “feeblemindedness”.
5. Differentiate Frustration between Aggression.
I. OBJECTIVES
The students will be able to;
 Realize how and why being out of the social class leads to criminal behavior.
 Explain how criminals calculate the consequencies of their act.
II. TIME FRAME

Week 7- September 16- 22, 2021
3 hours
III. TOPICS
13. INFERIORITY COMPLEX AND ALFRED THEORY
According to Alfred Adler, who was the first one to coin the term inferiority complex, every child experiences
the feelings of inferiority as the result of being surrounded by stronger and more capable adults.
As the child grows he becomes obsessed by his original feelings of inferiority he experienced earlier and so he
strives for power and recognition.
If the child failed to meet certain life challenges during his act of compensation then he will develop an
inferiority complex.
So according to Adler every child feels inferior but not everyone develops an inferiority complex which only
affects those who failed to compensate correctly.
An inferiority complex is a lack of self-worth, a doubt and unceratinty about oneself, and feelings of not
measuring up to standards. It is often subconscious, and is thought to drive afflicted
individuals to overcompensate, resulting either in spectacular achievement or extremely asocial behavior. In modern
literature, the preferred terminology is "lack of covert self-esteem". For many, it is developed through a combination of
genetic personality characteristics and personal experiences.
Classical Adlerian psychology makes a distinction between primary and secondary intèriority feelings.
 A primary inferiority feeling is said to be rooted in the young child's original experience of weakness,
helplessness and dependency. It can then be intensified by comparisons to siblings, romantic partners, and adults.
 A secondary inferiority feeling relates to an adult's experience of being unable to reach a subconscious, reassuring
fictional final goal of subjective security and success to compensate for the inferiority feelings. The perceived
distance from that reassuring goal would lead to a negative/depressed feeling that could then prompt the recall of
the original inferiority feeling; this composite of inferiority feelings could be experienced as overwhelming. The
reassuring goal invented to relieve the original, primary feeling of inferiority which actually causes the secondary
feeling of inferiority is the "catch-22" of this dilemma, where the desperate attempt to obtain therapeutic
11
reassurance and delivery from a depressing feeling of inferiority and worthlessness repeatedly fails. This vicious
cycle is common in neurotic lifestyles.
An inferiority complex occurs when the feelings of inferiority are intensified in the individual through
discouragement or failure. Those who are at risk for developing a complex include people who: show signs of low self-
esteem or self-worth, have low socioeconomic status, or have a history of depression symptoms. Children reared in
households where they were constantly criticized or did not live up to parents' expectations may also develop an
inferiority complex. Many times there are warning signs to someone who may be more prone to developing an inferiority
complex. For example, someone who is prone to attention and approval-seeking behaviors may be more susceptible.
According to Classical Adlerian psychology the second inferiority feeling results when
adults feel inadequate from desires to achieve an unobtainable or unrealistic result, “The
need for perfection.” Stresses associated with feelings of failure and inferiority cause a
pessimistic attitude and an inability to overcome difficulties in life.
According to Adler "Everyone (...) has a feeling of inferiority. But the feeling of inferiority is not a disease; it is
rather a stimulant to healthy, normal striving and development. It becomes a pathological condition only when the sense
of inadequacy overwhelms individual and, far from stimulating him to useful activity, him depressed and incapable of
development."
13. DELINQUENT SUBCULTURE THEORY
Walter Miller published an article in a journal called Lower. Class Culture as a Generating Milieu of Gang
Delinquency. In this article he displayed the lower-class focal concerns, which include of the following: trouble,
toughness, smartness, excitement, fate, and autonomy. Trouble, as he states about lower-class communities, is evaluated
by how much a person creates it (Miller, 1958). Getting into trouble, as we all know it, is pretty much breaking the law
such as fighting. What this does is creates an image for that one subject. So if the subject gets into a fight and wins, his
reputation is therefore increased, people will start recognizing and won't try to fight the subject.
On the other spectrum, not being able to fight, our subject will have the appearance of a wimp and therefore be
treated with little or no respect. Toughness can explain itself. It's basically how our subject would want to increase their
physical and spiritual strength so that they would not be labeled as weak. Smartness in this world is called street smart.
What the subject would want is to be able to make money and survive on the street without consequences. The most
important is of course how to outsmart the authorities/ law. Excitement is the next on the list and explains how our
subject needs to find an activity that is "out of the norm" from his day to day activities.
These activities could range anywhere from fighting to sexual adventures. Fate is another one on the list which
depicts that people belonging to the lower class believe that their lives are controlled by a great spiritual force. Last but
not least we have autonomy. This pertains to our subject being independent, which is actually a requirement and usually
leads to gang involvement.
In an article titled The Delinquent Subculture: An Alternative Formulation states that there are many difficulties
associated with reaction formation as stated in the theory. It assumes that the delinquent boy strongly values middle-class
status or that the delinquent boy is not oriented to status in the middle-class system (Kitsuse & Dietrick, 1958). So the
question that comes to mind is how this subject turns to delinquency. Keep in mind that society ay let's adolescents act
like adults but not actually be one in their day to day activities. Kitsuse & Dietrick state that it is because of this
impatience from being an adolescent wanting to be an adult that causes the turn to delinquency.
They also state that it is easier for an adolescent from the working class to be more restrained to this behavior
than working-class adolescents. Compared to a middle-class adolescent, the working-class adolescent is socialized earlier
so they are more eager to reap rewards that adults get. As a result, the delinquent subculture on this view is a response to
the socially structured disjunction between the goal of adult status and the means by which it is to be achieved (Kitsuse
& Dietrick, 1958).
Kitsuse and Dietrick published another article critiquing the book Cohen wrote called Delinquent Boys. In the
article they are three major criticisms to Cohen's Theory on Delinquent Subcultures: the social and cultural bases of the
"working-class boy’s are ambiguous and subject to equally plausible alternative interpretations, the working-class boy’s
ambivalence towards the middle-class system does not provide the psychological conditions which would warrant the
introduction of the concept of reaction-formation, and the reaction-formation thesis raises the question of the
independence between the description of the delinquent subculture and the theory which proposes to explain it (Kitsuse
& Dietrick, 1959).
12
Kitsuse and Dietrick also note that Cohen had missed some important points in his Theory. They are as follows:
Cohen does not present adequate support, either in theory or in fact, for his explanation of the delinquent subculture, the
methodological basis of the theory renders it inherently untestable, the theory is ambiguous concerning the relation
between the emergence of the subculture and its maintenance, and the theory should include an explanation of the
persistence of the subculture if it is to meet an adequate test (Kitsuse & Dietrick, 1959).
As a result of their empirical research, Kitsuse & Dietrick found a very interesting point. They questioned the
existing subculture and when it first came out. Where was it created? Also, among all the males who are in the working-
class, who would fit into this subculture? They also state that when this subculture emerged, there needs to be some sort
of historical data. As they clearly put it:
"It is not that the working class boy is ambivalent about middle-class values; the theory requires only that at some
specified time when the delinquent subculture emerged, the working-class boy was ambivalent about middle-class
values" (Kitsuse & Dietrick 1959).
There are also other problems concerning the research done on Cohen's theory. Methodologically, the historical
method relies upon data concerning the psychological dynamics of a population which are difficult if not impossible to
obtain (Kitsuse & Dietrick, 1959). Next are two points concerning the emergence of delinquent subculture? The
emergence of the delinquent subculture is considered either (a) independent of the motivational dynamics necessary for
the maintenance of the subculture, or (b) dependent upon in some unspecified relationship (Kitsuse & Dietrick, 1959).
In a book called The Delinquent Solution: A Study in Sub cultural Theory, David Downes notices a couple of
flaws with the Theory. One of the more important ones is that there is not one but many subcultures both within and
outside the dominant culture, and in each of these subcultures there are either positive forces or negative ones. When
David compared two different societies such as America and England he notices that England had little organized crime,
the working-class was supported, and that unemployment within youths was very low. 'There was a study made between
two cities known for their working class in England. The conclusion to this study was that there were adolescents that
were part of groups but they did not label themselves as gangs, and although loud, they had no intent of being violent.
This resulted in a finding that there was no criminal subculture. As David puts it:
"Even more striking was the nonexistence of a conflict subculture attributed to London which, when compared to
American Metropolitan communities, had a different ecological density, an absence of significant concentration of
minority-group members, and the high employability of adolescents" (Savitz, 1967). So status frustration had nothing to
do with delinquency. What it did have to do is with dissociation from middle-class-dominated schools, occupations and
recreation.
14. RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

Rational choice theory and its assumptions about human behavior have been integrated into numerous
criminological theories and criminal justice interventions. Rational choice theory originated during the late 18th century
with the work of Cesare Beccaria. Since then, the theory has been expanded upon and extended to include Other
perspectives, such as deterrence, situational crime prevention, and routine activity theory. The rational choice perspective
has been applied to a wide range of crimes, including robbery, drug abuse, vandalism, and white-collar crime. Rational
choice theory purports that a person will commit crime after determining if the pain punishment is worth the pleasure or
reward of the act. This theory comes from the Classical and Neoclassical Schools.
The theory is related to earlier drift theory (David Matza, Delinquency and Drift, 1964) where people use the techniques
of neutralization to drift in and out of delinquent behavior, and the Systematic Crime Theory (an aspect of Social
Disorganization Theory developed by the Chicago School), where Edwin Sutherland proposed that the failure of families
and extended kin groups expands the realm of relationships no longer controlled by the community and undermines
governmental controls. This leads to persistent "systematic" crime and delinquency. He also believed that such
disorganization causes and reinforces the cultural traditions and cultural conflicts that support antisocial activity.
The systematic quality of the behavior was a reference to repetitive, patterned or organized offending as opposed
to random events. He depicted the law-abiding culture as dominant as and more extensive than alternative criminogenic
cultural views and capable of overcoming systematic crime if organized for that purpose. In a similar vein, Cohen and
Felson (1979) developed Routine Activities Theory which focuses on the characteristics of crime rather than the
characteristics of the offender. This is one of the main theories of environmental criminology as an aspect of Crime
Prevention Theory. It states that for a crime to occur three elements must be present, i.e. there must be:
 an available and suitable target;
 a motivated offender; and
 No authority figure to prevent the crime from happening.
13
There are many theories about what causes people to begin to commit, continue to commit, and desist from
committing crimes (Kubrin, Stucky, & Krohn, 2009). Some of these theories assert that crime is due to a collection of
personality traits that incline a person to commit crimes (Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985); some scholars argue that crime
occurs when people are led by their culture to want something, such as monetary success, but are denied access to the
means to achieve these things (Agnew, 1992); and stilt others claim that crime occurs when people get socialized into
cultures, subcultures, or groups that either actively promote or at least openly tolerate criminal behavior (Nisbett &
Cohen, 1996)
Rational choice theory is an approach used by social scientists to understand human behavior. This approach has
long been the dominant paradigm in economics, but in recent decades it has become more widely used in other
disciplines. It is basically about how incentives and constraints affect behavior. Rational choice theory is based on
several assumptions:
One of those is individualism; it focuses on individual behavior.
The second assumption is that individuals have to maximize their goals,
And the Third is the assumption that the individuals are self-interested.
According to Nobel Prize-winning economist Gary Becker's landmark 1968 paper, rational choice theory is used
in both criminal and non-criminal behavior. It involves intentionally committing some act because the reward gained
from that act will be greater than the risk associated with it.
This theory rules out such factors as biological, psychological or environmental factors that might compel
someone to commit a crime. Instead, it asserts that criminals make a choice to commit a crime after weighing the costs.
They also will consider the benefit of not committing the crime, but ultimately determine that the rewards of the crime
are greater than the benefit of not committing the crime.
Support for theory
Many features of rational choice perspective make it particularly suitable to serve as a criminological
"metatheory„ with a broad role in the explanation for a variety of criminological phenomena. Since rational choice can
explain many different components; it is broad enough to be applied not only to crime but everyday life circumstances.
Studies involve offenders being interviewed on motives, methods and target choices Research involves burglars (Walsh,
1980; Maguire 1982; Cromwell et al., 1991) bank and commercial robbers (New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics
and Research, 1987; Nugent et al., 1989) and offenders using violence (Morrison and O' Donnell, 1996). The rational
choice perspective has provided a framework under which to organize such information so that individual studies
produce more general benefits.
Rational Choice Theory insists that crime is calculated and deliberate. All criminals are rational actors who
practice conscious decision making, that simultaneously work towards gaining the maximum benefits of their present
situation. Another aspect of rational choice theory is the fact that many offenders make decisions based on
bounded/limited rationality.
Bounded/limited rationality
Ideas of limited rationality emphasize the extent to which individuals and groups simplify a decision because of
the difficulties of anticipating or considering all alternatives and all information Bounded rationality relates to two
aspects, one part arising from cognitive limitations and the other from extremes in emotional arousal Sometimes
emotional arousal at the moment of a crime can be acute, thereof would be offenders find themselves out of control, and
rational considerations are far less salient.
Crime therefore can be influenced by opportunity. Opportunity of a crime can be related to cost benefits, socio
economic status, risk of detection, dependent on situational context, type of offence and access to external benefits. In
addition, opportunities are dependent on the individual's current surroundings and consequential factors. This theory
better explains instrumental crimes rather than expressive crimes. Instrumental crimes involve planning and weighing the
risks with a rational mind. An example of an instrumental crime can include: tax evasion, traffic violations, drinking and
driving, corporate crime, larceny and sexual assault. On the other hand, expressive crime includes crimes involving
emotion and lack of rational thinking without being concerned of future consequences Expressive crimes can include:
non pre-meditated murder such as manslaughter, and assault. As a result, punishment is only effective in deterring
instrumental crime rather than expressive crime.
14
In 2000, O'Grady et al. performed a study which examined the illegal sale of tobacco products to underage youth.
With the use of a rational mind merchants and clerks weigh out the cost benefits and risk factors which are involved in
selling cigarettes to underage youth. Due to the minimal risk of police patrol after 5pm, merchants and clerks felt a
diminished sense of risk, therefore allowing them to sell their products illegally to underage youth.
According to O'Grady (2011) the three main critiques of Rational Choice Theory include:
 Assumes that all individuals have the capacity to make rational decisions
 The theory does not explain why the burden of responsibility is excused from young offenders as opposed to
adult offenders
 This theory contradicts the Canadian Criminal Justice System. This theory does not support the idea that all
individuals are rational actors because of cognitive inability. Examples of individuals who lack a rational mind
include those who are Not Criminally Responsible on Account Due to Mental Disorder (NCRMD).
In criminology, rational choice theory adopts a utilitarian belief that man is a reasoning actor who weighs means
and ends, costs and benefits, and makes a rational choice. This method was designed by Cornish and Clarke to assist in
thinking about situational crime prevention. It is assumed that crime is purposive behavior designed to meet the
offender's commonplace needs for such things as money, status, sex and excitement, and that meeting these needs
involves the making of (sometimes quite rudimentary) decisions and choices, constrained as these are by limits, ability,
the availability of relevant information
People generally act in their self-interest and make decisions to commit crime after weighing the potential risks
(including getting caught and punished) against the rewards. Rational choice theory is an economic principle that states
that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions. These decisions provide people with the greatest benefit or
satisfaction-given the choices available-and are also in their highest self-interest. Most mainstream academic
assumptions and theories are based on rational choice theory.
Rational choice theory assumes that all people try to actively maximize their advantage in any situation and
therefore consistently try to minimize their losses. The theory is based on the idea that all humans base their decisions on
rational calculations, act with rationality when choosing, and aim to increase either pleasure or profit. Rational choice
theory also stipulates that all complex social phenomena are driven by individual human actions. Therefore, if an
economist wants to explain social change or the actions of social institutions, he needs to look at the rational decisions of
the individuals that make up the whole.

1. Why people choose to commit crime?
2. What is the contribution of Gresham Sykes and David Matza?
3. Why those who experienced rough childhood mostly became a criminal?
4. Who was considered to be the Grandfather of Labeling Theory?
5. What is the pivotal foundation of modern criminology?
I. OBJECTIVES
The students will be able to understand that;
 The only person whose behavior we can control is our own
 All we can give another is information
 All long-lasting psychological problems are relationship problems.
 The problem relationship is always part of our present life.
 What happened in the past has everything to do with what we are today, but we can only satisfy our basic needs
right now and plan to continue satisfying them in the future.
II. TIME FRAME

Week 8- September 23-30, 2021
3 hours
III. TOPICS
15. CHOICE THEORY
Choice theory is the belief that individuals choose to commit a crime, looking at the opportunities before them,
weighing the benefit versus the punishment, and deciding whether to proceed or not. This cost-benefit analysis primarily
15
focuses on the idea that we all have the choice to proceed with our actions. Because of the punishment involved, we are
deterred from committing the crime.
The term choice theory is the work of William Galsser, MD, author of the book so named, and is the culmination
of some 50 years of theory and practice in psychology and counseling.
Choice theory posits behaviors we choose are central to our existence. Our behavior choices are driven by five
genetically driven needs, survival, love and belonging, freedom, fun and power. Survival needs include
 Food
 Clothing
 Shelter
 Personal safety
 Security and sex, having children
And four fundamental psychological needs:

 Belonging/connecting/love
 Power/significance/competence
 Freedom/autonomy
 Fun/learning
Choice theory suggests the existence of a "Quality World". Glasser's idea of a "Quality World" restates the
Jungian idea of archetypes but Glasser never acknowledged this. Nonetheless, Glasser»s «Quality World» and what Jung
would call healthy archetypes are indistinguishable.
Our "Quality World" images are our role models of an individual's "perfect" world of parents, relations,
possessions, beliefs, etc. How each person's "Quality World" is somewhat unusual, even in the same family of origin, is
taken for granted.
Starting from birth and continuing throughout our lives, each person places significant role models, significant
possessions and significant systems of belief (religion, cultural values, and icons, etc.) into a mostly unconscious
framework Glasser called our “Quality World". Glasser mostly ignores the issues of negative role stereotypes in choice
theory.
Glasser also posits a "Comparing Place" where we compare-contrast our perception of people, places, and things
immediately in front of us against our ideal images (archetypes) of these in our Quality World framework. Our
subconscious pushes us towards calibrating-as best we can-our real world experience with Quality World (archetypes).
Behavior ("Total Behavior" in Glasser's terms) is made up of these four components: acting, thinking, feeling,
and physiology. Glasser suggests we have considerable control or choice over the first two of these; yet, little ability to
directly choose the latter two as they are more deeply sub- and unconscious. These four components remain closely
intertwined; the choices we make in our thinking and acting greatly affect our feeling and physiology.
A big conclusion for Glasser, one he repeats often, is the source of much personal unhappiness is failing or failed
relationships with people important to us: spouses, parents, children, friends and colleagues.
The symptoms of unhappiness are widely variable and are often seen as mental illness. Glasser believed that
"pleasure" and "happiness" is related but is far from synonymous. Sex, for example, is a "pleasure" but may well be
divorced from a "satisfactory relationship" which is a precondition for lasting "happiness" in life. Hence the intense focus
on the improvement of relationships in counseling with choice theory-the "new reality therapy'. Those familiar with both
are likely to prefer choice theory, the more modern formulation.
Choice theory posits most mental illness is, in fact, an expression of unhappiness. Glasser champions how we are
able to learn and choose alternate behaviors resulting in greater personal satisfaction. Reality therapy is the choice
theory-based counseling process focused on helping clients to learn to make those self-optimizing choices.
The Ten Axioms
1. The only person whose behavior we can control is our own.
2. All we can give another person is information.
16
3. All long-lasting psychological problems are relationship problems.
4. The problem relationship is always part of our present life.
5. What happened in the past has everything to do with what we are today, but we can only satisfy our basic needs
right now and plan to continue satisfying them in the future.
6. We can only satisfy our needs by satisfying the pictures in our Quality World.
7. All we do is behaving.
8. All behavior is Total Behavior and is made up of four components: acting, thinking, feeling and physiology
9. All Total Behavior is chosen, but we only have direct control over the acting and thinking components. We can
only control our feeling and physiology indirectly through how we choose to act and think.
10. All Total Behavior is designated by verbs and named by the part that is the most recognize
16. DRIFT THEORY (NEUTRALIZATION THEORY)
The theory of Neutralization and Drift was first introduced by Gresham Sykes and David Matza. Sykes and
Matza got together and first theorized about Neutralization during their time working on Differential Association by
Sutherland in the 1960's. While working on juvenile delinquency, they thought the same ideas could be used in society
and published their theories in "Delinquency and Drift in 1964. Neutralization theory is the idea that people who violate
the law learn to neutralize the orthodox attitudes and values of society, allowing them to drift between outlaw and
orthodox behavior. Drift is the motion in and out of delinquency, moving from orthodox and criminal values.
Neutralization techniques allow the person to occasionally 'drift' out of orthodox behavior and get into criminal
behaviors, such as stealing or shooting someone. The theory based off four observations. Delinquents sometimes express
quilt and remorse over their act. If they were truly of a criminal mind and really embodied criminal values they would
not express guilt remorse unless just over the fact that they got caught.
1. Delinquents usually show respect to lawful citizens. People they admire will include celebrities, sports figures,
clergymen, teachers, family members, or neighbors.
2. There is a line they don't cross on who they victimize. Members of their own class or ethnicity are off limits.
Maybe even people from their neighborhood or school. Members of their church can also be off limits. This
suggests that they are aware that what they are doing is wrong.
3. Delinquents are affected by their environment and are prone to conformity. Interestingly enough, many
delinquents are often involved in their community and attend the same social functions as law abiding citizens.
For example, many will still attend church even though they rob drug stores or deal drugs.
Sykes and Matza believed that people have a set of justifications they use to explain and justify their criminal
behavior. They realized that delinquents must neutralize contemporary social values if they want to be free to commit
their crimes. They do this by learning the techniques that offset the moral predicaments introduced with criminal
behavior. They were able to create these methods from the four observations.
1. Denial of responsibility: Many delinquents try to argue that their illegal actions are not their fault. Maybe they
had a rough childhood, they were framed, or that it was an accident.
2. Denial of Injury: Delinquents try to neutralize their behavior downplaying the injuries inflicted on the victim.
They might try and say that they weren't stealing, they were merely 'borrowing'. Often family and friends will
agree with their denials. By saying that their child was merely joking around when another child got hurt, they are
enabling the criminal behavior to continue.
3. Denial of Victim: Many delinquents try to downplay their crimes by insisting that their victim 'had it coming.
Most common crime that this is used under is rape. By claiming the girl was dressed too provocatively or getting
drunk at a party, they feel she had it coming for putting herself in that position.
4. Condemnation of Condemners: Many criminals see the world as a dog eat dog place. Because many judges and
policemen are all on the take and many parents show favoritism between children or vent their frustrations on
17
those children, they feel these people have no room to point any fingers at them. By placing blame elsewhere,
delinquents can neutralize their feelings that their actions were wrong.
5. Appeal to higher loyalties: Young delinquents often feel the strain of who to place their loyalties to. They are
often torn between social groups and abiding the law. The group loyalties most often win out because their
demands are immediate. The five methods of neutralization can manifest themselves in the form of arguments. (p
2 Wikipedia) Some arguments can be: “It wasn't my fault, it wasn't a big deal, they had it coming, you were just
as bad in your day, and my friends needed me, what was going to do?" (p 2 Wikipedia).
Sykes and Matza blame a lot of the delinquency on a deviant sub culture. By being exposed to deviant behavior at
a young age, in peer group and such, they learn to neutralize contemporary behavior and drift away from society norms.
There are several observed values that they call subterranean values. First, criminals seek an adrenaline rush. This kind
of rush they can't seem to find doing law abiding activities. Second, would rather do illegal activities to earn money than
legal. They view the legal jobs as not worth their time. The illegal jobs may not even be just for money; but for status
and respect from other criminals. Finally, the criminal feels alienated and lashes out at society. This seems to be the
reason why there is violence in gangs rivalries. They have to show how tough they are by beating up or killing anyone
who comes into their 'turf'.
Matza himself even developed his theory even more when he studied juveniles and how they become delinquent.
He thought that people change from one extreme to the next. He also theorized that juveniles drift from orthodox and
delinquent behavior. Drift molds a person personality and is a gradual process. Drift has also been considered soft
determinism, and sees delinquency as sometimes picked and other times resolute. When either desperation or preparation
is present, the will to commit crimes can occur. Preparation happens when a crime is repeated once the individual
understands that the crime can happen and is possible.
Desperation jumpstarts the will to first commit the crime due to certain extraordinary circumstance. Matza also
went on to describe the underlying condition of drift. He insisted that there were several ways that a delinquent can sense
injustice. They use competence, comparison, commensurability, consistency, and cognizance. Competence depends on
the condemners of the criminals, Comparison occurs when juveniles look at the judicial system, observe the laws, and
see that the laws are for them and not adults. Many don't want to think that they are different from adults and resent the
system that separates them. "Commensurability refers to the relation between infraction and sanction." (Matza, 1964:
159). Basically, juveniles believe that when they commit a crime they should be punished, but the punishment should fit
the crime. Consistency relates to whether the criminal feels like h e's getting the same treatment as anyone else who
committed the same crime. Cognizance reties on whether or not the delinquent realized that he committed a crime. Even
when they are caught or confess they still may not think they have done anything wrong there have been some studies
that have branched off from Sykes and Matza's Neutralization Theory. Glen Elder provided specific terms such as
trajectories and transitions that helped the study on the concept of Drift. By comparing and contrasting the transitions
(sequence of events based on age) of juveniles with trajectories (pathways of life), he thought that specific juvenile
subcultures reflect transitional cultural experiences that effect long term trajectories for drifting juveniles.
Dick Hebdige work on British delinquency was influenced by Matza's ideas on subcultures. He studied a group of
juveniles completely obsessed with a British rock star. He thought that delinquents are torn between criminal behavior
and conventional behavior and that most of their beliefs are that of law abiding citizens. This theory does have some
credence to it and can be applied in certain situations to explain certain behaviors. Neutralization theory is one of the best
theories to explain white color crime. When people in the corporate world have the opportunity to commit a white collar
crime, whether its fraud, embezzlement, or tax evasion, they have to neutralize their conventional values that would stop
them.
They were raised with the orthodox view of no stealing or cheating etc. They have to neutralize these values so
they can drift toward a criminal frame of mind. Even though there have been many studies made on this theory,
empirical testing results have proven inconclusive. There have been several criticisms made also. Travis Herschi didn't
believe that neutralization techniques have anything to do with explaining juvenile delinquency. Herschi believed that
deviant behavior was a result of conformity towards societal norms. Michael Hindelang found no support for
neutralization and concluded that juveniles who have committed a crime were more likely to accept the behavior as
opposed to those not involved in delinquency. Also, considering this theory is pretty much a learning theory, it has some
of the same criticisms as Sutherland's Differential Association theory. Basically that drift is difficult to test and measure.
Also, even though the theory explains the drift, it doesn't explain why some offenders drift into a criminal life
while others remain there permanently. Finally, like every other learning theory,
the question of who did the first criminal learn his deviant behavior from one study that was performed using the
Neutralization theory was done by Henry Mannle from Florida State University. His study was based on neutralization
techniques and how they were relevant to Florida juveniles. His samples were girls from the McPherson School for girls
18
in Ocala and boys from the Dozier School of Boys in Marianna. His study examined techniques of neutralization as they
apply to boys and girls and delinquency. His hypothesis was that boys would use the techniques less than the girls. He
found there was a definite relevancy between neutralization and socialization for delinquents. He also realized that
females and males used the same amount of neutralization. However, females scored lower the deviance scale. Finally,
he found that white males and females used these techniques less than black males and females. I found this theory to be
very interesting. While I thought it did a pretty good job of explaining white color crime, I do agree with some of the
theorists when they claim it doesn't explain why some people drift back and forth and some stay in a criminal lifestyle
permanently. Even though there isn't any proven empirical evidence, it has been a basis for which other theorists have
branched off of. The fact it is still around today, being taught in classrooms, says a lot for its relevancy and longevity.
17. LABELING THEORY
Had its origins in Suicide, a book by French sociologist Émile Durkheim. He argued that crime is not so much a
violation of a penal code as it is an act that outrages society. He was the first to suggest that deviant labeling satisfies that
function and satisfies society's need to control the behavior. George Herbert Mead posited that the self is socially
constructed and reconstructed through the interactions which each person has with the community. The labeling theory
suggests that people are given labels based on how others view their tendencies or behaviors. Each individual is aware of
how they are judged by others because he or she has adopted many different roles and functions in social interactions and
has been able to gauge the reactions of those present.
Labeling theory, in criminology, a theory stemming out of a sociological perspective known as “symbolic
interactionism," a school of thought based on the ideas of George Herbert Mead, John Dewey, W.I. Thomas, Charles
Horton Cooley, and Herbert Blumer among others. The first as well as one of the most prominent labeling theorists was
Howard Becker, who published his groundbreaking work Outsiders in 1963. A question became popular with
criminologists during the mid-1960s: What makes some acts and some people deviant or criminal? During this time,
scholars tried to shift the focus of criminology toward the effects of individuals in power responding to behavior in
society in a negative
According to sociologists like Emile Durkheim, George Herbert Mead, and Kai T. Erikson, deviance is functional
to society and keeps stability by defining boundaries. In 1966, Erikson expanded labeling theory to include the functions
of deviance, illustrating how societal reactions to deviance stigmatize the offender and separate him or her from the rest
of society. The results of this stigmatization are a self-fulfilling in which the offender comes to view him- or she in the
same ways society does.
Since the advent of the "positive school" of criminology, beginning with the work of Cesare
Lombroso in the late 1800s, scholars of crime have been primarily interested in studying what factors cause
individuals to commit acts of crime and deviance. Whether the causal factors are biological (e.g., atavism), psychological
(e.g., impulsivity), or sociological (e.g., bad peers or neighborhoods), the scientific study of crime and deviance has, for
the most part, focused on those factors that produce it, and on the essential differences between the "normal" and the
"deviant." Labeling theory brought a fresh, new perspective to this point of view. Labeling theorists are generally
uninterested in the causes of crime, and are more interested in the reactions to crime.
Frank Tannenbaum is considered the grandfather of labeling theory. His Crime and Community (1938),
describing the social interaction involved in crime, is considered a pivotal foundation of modern criminology. While the
criminal differs little or not at all from others in the original impulse to first commit a crime, social interaction accounts
for continued acts that develop a pattern of interest to sociologists.
Tannenbaum first introduced the idea of ‘tagging'. While conducting his studies with delinquent youth, he found
that a negative tag or label often contributed to further involvement in delinquent activities. This initial tagging may
cause the individual to adopt it as part of their identity. The crux of Tannenbaum's argument is that the greater the
attention placed on this label, the more likely the person is to identify them as the label.
In 1969 Blumer emphasized the way that meaning arises in social interaction through
communication, using language and symbols. The focus of this perspective is the interaction between individuals in
society, which is the basis for meanings within that society. These theorists suggested that powerful individuals and the
state create crime by labeling some behaviors as inappropriate. The focus of these theorists is on the as deviant, reactions
of members in society to crime and deviance, a focus that separated them from other scholars of the time.
These theorists shaped their argument around the notion that, even though some criminological efforts to reduce
crime are meant to help the offender (such as rehabilitation efforts), they may move offenders closer to lives of crime
because of the label they assign the individuals engaging in the behavior. As members in society begin to treat these
individuals on the basis of their labels, the individual begins to accept this label him- or herself. In other words, an
19
individual engages in a behavior that is deemed by others as inappropriate, others label that person to be deviant, and
eventually the individual internalizes and accepts this label.
This notion of social reaction, reaction or response by others to the behavior or individual is central to labeling
theory. Critical to this theory is the understanding that the negative reaction of others to a particular behavior is what
causes that behavior to be labeled as 'criminal" or "deviant." Furthermore, it is the negative reaction of others to an
individual engaged in a particular behavior that causes that individual to be labeled as "criminal," "deviant," or "not
normal." According to the literature, several reactions to deviance have been identified, including collective rule making,
organizational processing, and interpersonal reaction.
Becker defined deviance as a social creation in which "social groups create deviance by making the rules whose
infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders." Becker
grouped behavior into four categories: falsely accused, conforming, pure deviant, and secret deviant. Falsely accused
represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behavior but have been perceived as deviant; therefore, they
would be falsely labeled as deviant. Conforming represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behavior
that has been viewed as obedient behavior (not been perceived as deviant). Pure deviant represents those individuals who
have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behavior that has been recognized as such; therefore, they would be labeled as
deviant by society. Secret deviant represents those Individuals that have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behavior but
have not been perceived as deviant by society; therefore, they have not been labeled Labeling theory is closely related to
social construction and symbolic-interaction analysis. Labeling theory was developed by sociologists during1960s.
Howard Saul Becker’s book Outsiders was extremely influential in the development of this theory and its rise to
popularity. Also the teenagers who are labeled tend to behave like a gang member the behavior changes after label.
In sociology, labeling theory is the view of deviance according to which being labeled as a "deviant" leads a
person to engage in deviant behavior. Originating in Howard Becker's work in the 1960s, labeling theory explains why
people's behavior clashes with social norms. For example, a teenager who lives in an urban area frequented by gangs
might be labeled as a gang member. Accordingly, the teenager might begin to behave like a gang member or become
one. Sometimes the person labeled incorporates the label into that person's self-concept (as when a teenager labeled as a
gang member begins to think of himself or herself as a gang member). Some researchers believe people of lower social
status are more likely to be labeled deviant.
Beginning in the 1950s with the work of people like Becker and Lemert (and continuing down to the present day
in the pages of the journal, Social Problems), the symbolic integrationist approach to deviance began to focus on the way
in which negative labels get applied and on the consequences of the labeling process. Edwin Lemert, for example, made
a distinction between primary deviance and secondary deviance. Primary deviance is rule-breaking behavior that is
carried out by people who see themselves and are seen by others as basically conformist. People break rules in all kinds
of circumstances and for all kinds of reasons, such that Lemert thought sociology can't possibly develop any general
theories about primary deviance. But when a negative label gets applied so publicly and so powerfully that it becomes
part of that individual's identity, this is what Lemert calls secondary deviance. These dramatic negative labeling become
turning points in that individual's identity; henceforth s/he is apt "to employ his or her deviant behavior or a role based
upon it as a means of defense, attack, or adjustment to the problems created the subsequent societal reaction." (Lemert)
Having been processed by the juvenile justice system and labeled a delinquent, or harassed by the police as a gang
member, the individual takes on that label as a key aspect of his/her identity.
Labeling theory is the theory of how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or
influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. It is associated with the concepts of self-fulfilling prophecy
and stereotyping. Labeling theory holds that deviance is not inherent to an act, but instead focuses on the tendency of
majorities to negatively label minorities or those seen as deviant from standard cultural norms. The theory was prominent
during the 1960s and 1970s, and some modified versions of the theory have developed and are still currently popular. A
stigma is defined as a powerfully negative label that changes a person's self-concept and social-identity.
Labeling theory posits that people come to identify and behave in ways that reflect how others label them. It is
most commonly associated with the sociology of crime and deviance, where it is used to point out how social processes
of labeling and treating someone as criminally deviant actually fosters deviant behavior? and has negative repercussions
for that person because others are likely to be biased against them because of the label.
Labeling theory is closely related to social-construction and symbolic-interaction analysis. It holds that deviance
is not an inherent tendency of an individual, but instead focuses on the tendency of majorities to negatively label
minorities or those seen as deviant from standard cultural norms. The theory is concerned with how the self-identity and
the behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. The theory
was prominent during the 1960s and 1970s, and some modified versions of the theory are still popular today.
20
Hard Labeling and Soft Labeling
There are two distinctions in labeling: hard labeling and soft labeling. People who believe in hard labeling believe
that mental illness does not exist. It is merely deviance from the norms of society that people attribute to mental illness.
Thus, mental illnesses are socially constructed illnesses and psychotic disorders do not exist. People who believe in soft
labeling believe that mental illnesses do, in fact, exist. Unlike the supporters of hard labeling, soft labeling supporters
believe that mental illnesses are not socially constructed but are objective problems.
People in power decide what acts are crimes, and the act of labeling someone a criminal is what makes him a
criminal. Once a person is labeled a criminal, society takes away his opportunities, which may ultimately lead to more
criminal behavior. Those who follow the labeling theory of criminology ascribe to the fact that an individual will become
what he is labeled or what others expect him to become; the danger comes from calling a crime a crime and a criminal a
criminal. way; they became known as "labeling theorists" or "social reaction theorists
Labeling theory holds that deviance is not inherent to an act, but instead focuses on the tendency of majorities to
negatively label minorities or those seen as deviant from standard cultural norms The theory was prominent during the
1960s and 1970s, and some modified versions of the theory have developed and are still currently popular. Unwanted
descriptors or categorizations-including terms related to deviance, disability or diagnosis of a mental disorder may be
rejected on the basis that they are merely "labels", often with attempts to adopt a more constructive language in its place.
A stigma is defined as a powerfully negative label that changes a person's self-concept and social identity.
(Wikipedia.org)

ESSAY:
1. Is personality an innate quality or socially developed phenomenon? Regardless of your answer, how would you go
about changing another person’s personality? Can you change your own personality?
Support your answer.
2. If juveniles conform to norms of the culture and are still labeled delinquent, is there an explanation or excuse for their
behavior? Support your answer.
Checked by:
MRS. MELODY COMIA DIMAPILIS

Department Head, Criminology
21

Psychological Theories of Crime Causes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Theories of Crime Causes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

I N N O V A T

Malitbog, Bongabong, Oriental Mindoro

II. TIME FRAME

4. PERSONALITY AND CRIME

6. INTELLIGENCE AND CRIME

Psychoanalysis is commonly used to treat depression and anxiety disorders.

VI. COMPREHENSION CHECK UP

II. TIME FRAME

9. Anxiety and Defense Mechanisms

10. LOW IQ THEORY

12. FRUSTRATION - AGGRESSION THEORY

Frustration-aggression hypothesis, otherwise known the frustration-aggression-displacement theory, is a theory of

Frustration Aggression Theory

IV. COMPREHENSION CHECK-UP

II. TIME FRAME

13. INFERIORITY COMPLEX AND ALFRED THEORY

13. DELINQUENT SUBCULTURE THEORY

14. RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

One of those is individualism; it focuses on individual behavior.

The second assumption is that individuals have to maximize their goals,

Support for theory

IV. COMPREHENSION CHECK-UP

II. TIME FRAME

15. CHOICE THEORY

And four fundamental psychological needs:

The Ten Axioms

1. The only person whose behavior we can control is our own.

2. All we can give another person is information.

4. The problem relationship is always part of our present life.

16. DRIFT THEORY (NEUTRALIZATION THEORY)

17. LABELING THEORY

IV. COMPREHENSION CHECK-UP

MRS. MELODY COMIA DIMAPILIS

You might also like