CMY3701 Study Guide

© 2021 University of South Africa
All rights reserved
Printed and published by the

University of South Africa
Muckleneuk, Pretoria
CMY3701/1/2023–2027
10019863
InDesign
HSY_Style
CONTENTS
Page
Part 1: The rational actor model of crime and criminal behaviour 1

Theme 1: The rational actor model 2
Study unit 1.1: The official school: the offender as calculator 4
1.1.1 Introduction5
1.1.2 Assumptions of the classical school of criminology 6
1.1.3 Limitations of the classical school or criminology:
neoclassical school of thought 8
1.1.4 Summary and conclusion 10
1.1.5 Self-assessment10
1.1.6 Answers to self-assessment questions 12
1.1.7 References13
Study unit 1.2: C ontemporary rational choice theories14
1.2.1 Introduction 14
1.2.2 Routine activities theory 15
1.2.2.1 Evaluation of the routine activities theory 18
1.2.2.2 Concose summation of the routine activities theory 18
1.2.3 Classification of data and sampling methods 19
1.2.3.1 Propositions of the rational choice perspective theory 19
1.2.3.2 Bounded rationality of the rational choice perspective theory 20
1.2.3.3 The choice process of the rational choice perspective theory 20
1.2.3.4 Evaluation of the rational choice perspective theory 21
1.2.5 Self-assessment 23
References 25
Theme 2: The positivist school: the offender as predestined actor26
Study unit 2.1: Th
e positivist school: the offender as predistined actor27
2.1.2 Definitions of key concepts 28
2.1.3 The positivist school of thought 29
2.1.4 Assumptions of the positivist school of thought 30
2.1.5 Evaluation of the positivist school 32
2.1.6 Conclusion 33
2.1.7 Self-assessment questions 33
2.1.8 Selfassessment answers 34
2.1.9 Paragraph question answers 34
2.1.10 References 35
Study unit 2.2: Biological positivism36
2.2.3 Early theories of biological positivism 39
CMY3701/1(iii)
2.2.4 Lombroso and the positivists 39
2.2.4.1 Physique and crime 41
2.2.5 Biosocial theories 41
2.2.5.1 Eysenck’s biosocial theory of crime 42
2.2.5.1.1 Recent interest in biological theories 42
2.2.5.1.2 Biosocial theory 43
2.2.5.2 Genetics factors 43
2.2.5.2.1 Studies of families 44
2.2.5.2.2 Studies of twins 45
2.2.5.2.3 Studies of adoptees 45
2.2.5.3 Biochemical influences on behaviour 46
2.2.5.3.1 Dietary factors 47
2.2.5.4 Neurophysiological factors 49
2.2.5.4.1 Hyperactivity and attention deficit disorders 50
2.2.5.4.2 IQ and criminal behaviour 51
2.2.5.4.3 Environmental exposure to chemicals 52
2.2.5.4.4 Hormonal levels 53
2.2.5.4.5 Personality and criminal behaviour 54
2.2.6 Conclusion 57
2.2.7 Self-evaluation questions 58
2.2.8 References 60
Study unit 2.3: Psychological positivism62
2.3.3 Psychodynamic or psychoanalytic prerspective 64
2.3.3.1 Freud’s personality theory 64
2.3.3.2 Explanation of criminal behaviour 66
2.3.3.3 Evaluation of the psychoanalytic perspective on criminal
behaviour67
2.3.4 Behavioural perspective 68
2.3.4.1 Classical conditioning 69
2.3.4.2 Operant conditioning 69
2.3.4.3 Social learning theory 70
2.3.5 Cognitive theories and crime 73
2.3.5.1 Kohlberg’s moral stages of development 74
2.3.5.2 Evaluation of cognitive theories and crime 75
2.3.6 Conclusion 76
2.3.7 Self-evaluation questions 76
2.3.9 References 78
Study unit 3.1: Structure theories79
3.1.3 Structure theories: premises 81
3.1.4 Structure theories: branches 82
3.1.4.1 Ecological theory 82
3.1.4.2 Strain theories 84
3.1.4.3 Cultural deviance theory 85
3.1.8 References 89
(iv)
Contents
Study unit 3.2: Social disorganisation theory90

3.2.2.1 Social organisaiton 91
3.2.2.2 Social disorganisation 92
3.2.3 The Chicago School of Sociology 92
3.2.4 Social disorganisation theory 94
3.2.5 Impact of the Chicago School 95
3.2.6 Evaluation of the Chicago School 96
Study unit 3.3: Anomie and strain102
3.3.3 Durkheim’s view of crime 103
3.3.3.1 The concept of anomie 105
3.3.3.2 Merton’s theory of anomie 106
3.3.4 Assumptions of Merton’s theory 107
3.3.4.1 Crime as a lower-class phenomenon 108
3.3.4.2 Reactions to anomie 108
3.3.4.3 Evaluation of Merton’s theory 110
Study unit 3.4: Gender and crime115
3.4.3 The development of feminist criminology 117
3.4.4 Schools of feminists’ criminology 117
3.4.4.1 Radical feminism 118
3.4.4.2 Liberal feminism 118
3.4.4.3 African feminism 118
3.4.4.4 Critical feminism 119
3.4.5 The nature of female criminality 121
3.4.6 Myth about feminism 122
3.4.7 Conclusion 125
Theme 4: Social positivism: process theories129
Study unit 4.1: Process theories131
4.1.3 Assumptions of process theories 133
4.1.4 Branches of process theories 134
4.1.4.1 Learning theories 134
4.1.4.2 Control theories 135
CMY3701/1(v)
PAGE

4.2.3 The fundamental principles of differential association 142
4.2.4 Evaluation of differential association 152
4.2.5 Ongoing research and policy implications 152
4.2.6 Reformulation of diffential association: Akers’ social
learning theory 153
4.2.6.1 Key elements in terms of behaviour 153
4.2.9 Multiple-choice questions 156
4.2.10 Paragraph-type questions 156
Study unit 4.3: Hirschi’s social bonding theory161
4.3.3 Assumptions of Hirschi’s social bonding theory (1967) 162
4.3.4 Elements of the social bond 163
4.3.5 Evaluation and policy implications of Hirschi’s theory 168
4.3.8 Answers to self-assessment 171
Theme 5: The victimised actor model174
5.1.3 Interactionist approach 177
5.1.3.1 Edwin M Lemert (1912–1996) 177
5.1.4 Social response approach 178
5.1.4.1 Labelling as a cause of crime 179
5.1.4.2 The process of labelling 179
5.1.4.3 A typology of deviants 179
5.1.5 Evaluation of the labelling perspective 181
Study unit 5.2: The conflict perspective187
5.2.3 Assumptions of conflict theory 189
5.2.4 The radical (Marxist) conflict perspective 191
5.2.4.1 Introduction 191
5.2.4.2 The legacy of Marx and Bonger 191
(vi)
Page
5.2.5 Exponents of the radical conflict perspective 193

5.2.5.1 William Chambliss 193
5.2.5.2 Richard Quinney 194
5.2.6 Radical criminology and policy implications 194
CMY3701/1(vii)
(viii)

PART 1
The rational actor model of crime and criminal
behaviour
CMY3701/11
1 THEME 1
The rational actor model
INTRODUCTION TO THEME 1
In Theme 1 the focus will be the rational actor model which has as its foundation
the classical and neo-classical schools of thought. We will list the main attributes of
this model as well as those of the contemporary theories.
FOUNDATION: Classical and neoclassical schools of thought
ATTRIBUTES:
• Legal definition of crime

• Punishment should fit the crime
• Doctrine of free will
• Non-scientific methodology
CONTEMPORARY THEORIES
• Rational theories, also known as opportunity theories

• Routine activities (Cohen & Felson)
• Rational choice (Cornish & Clarke)
We will look at some of the key concepts found in this theme of the rational actor
model.
KEY CONCEPTS AND TERMS

Make sure you understand the following key concepts and terms:
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES are those circumstances that cause the

offender to be punished more severely than they would normally be for a specific
crime. For example, conviction for the rape of a child would warrant a more serious
punishment than rape of an adult, because society views a child as more vulnerable
and helpless (Stevens, 2014:189).
CLASSICAL CRIMINOLOGY as an approach to studying crime emphasises the

importance of free will and views a criminal act as one that had been consciously
carried out by its perpetrator; the perpetrator has rationally weighed up the advantages
and disadvantages of undertaking the action. The main focus of classicist criminology
is on the operation of the criminal justice system. Classicists believe that, if this
system operated in a consistent and predictable fashion, it would eliminate crime
because those who committed crime knew that they would not get away with it
(Burke, 2018:27–28).
2
THEME 1: THE RATIONAL ACTOR MODEL
CRIMINAL EVENT DECISIONS are shorter processes that use more limited
information that relates mainly to the immediate circumstances and situations
(Pedneault et al., 2017:1).
CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT refers to the processes through which individuals

initially choose to become involved in particular forms of crime, to continue on this
path, and then, later to desist from crime (Pedneault et al., 2017:9).
LIMITED OR BOUNDED RATIONALITY is a term used to indicate that even

though individuals may make poor decisions, often based on incomplete or simply
inadequate information, they are nonetheless rational actors (Pedneault et al., 2017:2).
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES are those circumstances that would result in

a more lenient sentence that would normally be imposed for a similar crime. A first
offender would normally receive a lighter sentence than someone with a long criminal
history (Lynch, 2014:1675).
NEOCLASSICAL SCHOOL is a body of theory that contends that scientific

criminology (positivism), with its belief in rehabilitation, is invalid. According to
this school of thought, society should return to the principles of classical criminology
and should deal with crime by concentrating on the administration of justice and
the punishment of offenders (Burke, 2018:32).
ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY is theory (associated primarily with Marcus

Felson), which suggests that for crime to occur three factors must be present, namely
a motivated offender; a suitable victim; and the absence of capable guardians (Burke,
2018:53).
RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY is a theory which emphasises the importance

of rationality in human action, even if this is limited (bounded). It emphasises the
decision-making processes involved in the choices made by offenders (Burke, 2018:49).
SOCIAL CONTRACT is when an individual is bound to society only by his or her

own consent, and society is therefore responsible to him or her (Matsueda, 2013:386).
CMY3701/13
1 STUDY UNIT 1.1
1 The classical school: the offender as
calculator
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After working through this study unit, you should be able to:
• describe the following assumptions, listed below, of the classical school of

criminology:
– human nature
– conceptions of society or social order
– causes of crime
– implications of policy
• explain the limitations of the classical school of criminology
• describe the attributes of the classical and neoclassical schools of criminology as
foundations of the rational actor model
TIME REQUIRED FOR STUDY UNIT 1.1

This study unit will require approximately five hours.
VISUAL OVERVIEW OF STUDY UNIT 1.1
FIGURE 1.1.1
Visual overview of Study Unit 1.1
4
STUDY UNIT 1.1: The classical school: the offender as calculator
1.1.1 INTRODUCTION
The classical school of criminology grew out of the Age of Enlightenment in the 17th
and 18th centuries. Among the thinkers of the time, was Cesare Bonesana Marchese
di Beccaria (1738–1794) (from Italy), commonly referred to as Cesare Beccaria, who
is often credited as the father of the classical school of criminology (Lilly, Cullen &
Ball, 2018:16). The notion of the classical school was that “it is better to prevent crimes
than to punish them” (Beccaria, 1963:93). The classical school of thought is therefore
based on the tenet that human problems should be addressed by the application of
reason, rather than tradition, religion or superstition. At the time (in Western Europe)
traditional explanations of crime (as being the work of sin and demons) were being
replaced by explanations that focused on rationality, individual responsibility and
free choice (Bartollas, 2006:77).
Some of these Enlightenment thinkers turned their attention to the nature of criminal
law and punishment, and put forward radical ideas for its reform. In short, they
opposed the unpredictable, discriminatory, inhumane and ineffective criminal justice
systems of their day. The programme for changing this state of affairs was to produce a
system in which law and punishment were predictable, non-discriminatory (treating all
who had broken a particular law alike), humane and effective. Therefore, punishment
should avoid unnecessary suffering, should be proportionate to the crime committed,
follow as certainly and quickly as possible after the offence, and be just sufficient to
act as a deterrent to the crime (Coleman & Norris, 2000:8). The three principles of
punishment are therefore (Eassey & Boman, 2015:1–2).
• Certainty – people must be certain that there will be punishment for any and all
illegal behaviour;
• Swiftness – the punishment must be meted out as quickly as possible so that the
association between the punishment and the crime will be preserved;
• Severity – the punishment must be proportionate to the illegal act. This is to
say that the punishment must be severe enough to outweigh the rewards of the
illegal action.
Another key classical school theorist was Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) from Britain,
known to admire Beccaria’s work. As a reformer of the classical school of thought, he
posited that people make decisions based on the pleasure-pain principle (hedonistic
calculus) (Mill, 2013:103). The assertion of this principle is that people would rather
pursue pleasure and avoid pain. Like Beccaria, Bentham viewed punishment as a
deterrent and not an act of retribution for a crime. These two thinkers established
the essential components of the rational actor model. However, this model was based
on a number of assumptions.
Think of another part of the world: Does the rational actor model apply effectively
in South Africa?
Compare your thoughts with the following article on Sri Lanka and the application
of the classical school of thought: You can find it on the following link in Lesson 1.1
of the myUnisa module site:
• http://www.davidpublisher.org/Public/uploads/Contribute/5e0170d57f664.pdf
The assumptions of the classical school of the rational actor model will be listed and
explored in the following section.
CMY3701/15
1.1.2 ASSUMPTIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF
CRIMINOLOGY
The assumptions of the classical school of the rational actor model are summarised
in Figure 1.1.2 below.
FIGURE 1.1.2
The assumptions of the classical school of the rational actor model
The assumptions of the classical school of the rational actor model are each explored
below starting with Human nature: Rationality.
• Human nature: Rationality

According to the classical school, people are self-interested, rational creatures (able to
weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of competing courses of action), who are
able to make and act in accordance with personal choices (often described as ‘‘free
will’’). The emphasis on the individual offender as being a person who is capable of
calculating what he or she wants to do is the most important feature of the classical
school of thought (Lilly et al, 2018:16–17). Those who fail to make rational choices,
therefore, and who commit crime, are sent to prison with a view to reform. The idea is
to encourage them to not commit crimes in future by developing their rational thought
processes. Conformity was associated with rewards and rebellion was associated with
sanctions (in the form of harsh prison conditions (Winfree & Abadinsky, 2016:22).
• Conception of society or social order

Left to their own devices, people will follow their own selfish interests and since these
will often conflict, this will result in chaos. Therefore, criminal laws are instituted
to form an exchange between the state and individual. Because people are rational,
individuals much rather opt to receive protection of their rights to welfare and private
property in exchange for their freedom to not comply with state laws or act at their
own discretion. The state uses laws to protect individuals, and this is in effect a social
contract, and it forms the basis for social order. A violation of law is a violation of this
contract and justifies the state’s right to punish the offender (Matsueda, 2013:286).
6
READ
Read pages 285–287 of The Handbook of Rational Choice: Social Research by
Wittek, Snijder and Nee to further understand the concept of social contract. You
can find it on the following link in Lesson 1.1 of the myUnisa module site:
• http://faculty.washington.edu/matsueda/Papers/Rational%20Ch
• Causes of crime
Since people are normally rational creatures, it seems to follow that either the pleasure
or gain from the crime outweighs the pain of punishment associated with it, or that
some people make irrational decisions for some reason. One example, these reasons
could include the institutions of law or education possibly sending out ‘‘wrong’’
or confusing messages, so that people do not have the appropriate information to
make rational decisions. Furthermore, crimes are caused by the lack of appropriate
punishments. (Coleman & Norris, 2000:8).
Again, according to this school of thought, behaviour is guided by the hedonistic

calculus (pleasure-pain principle) by which potential offenders calculate the risks
and rewards involved in their actions. Therefore, the decision to commit crime was
viewed as the consequence of a logical thought process.
• Implications for policy

Criminal justice should be subject to a strict rule of law (due process) and punishments
should be known, fixed and just severe enough to deter. Judges’ discretion should be
minimised as far as possible in sentencing (Coleman & Norris, 2000:9). Classicists
argued that the most appropriate solution to crime was a clearly defined and consistently
applied legal code and a criminal justice system that was predictable (and also swift) in
its operations. This would ensure that potential offenders were aware of the inevitable
personal cost of committing crime (Joyce, 2006:2).
Watch the following videos on YouTube that will give you further clarity on the
classical school of criminology: You can find it on the following link in Lesson 1.1
of the myUnisa module site
• Classical School of Criminology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwH1KioDtkA

• Classical Crime Theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HbO5k9fwTw&t=66s
READ
Read from the following link to further understand the classical school (download
the PDF file): You can find it on the following link in Lesson 1.1 of the myUnisa
module site
• http://www.academicjournal.in/archives/2018/vol3/issue1/2-6-460
CMY3701/17
Activity 1.1
Classicists refer to a criminal justice system that is predictable in its operations.
Why, then, do not all murderers get life sentences? List your reasons.
Time for activity: 15 minutes.
1 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 1.1

Refer to: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/criminology/the-classical-
school-of-criminological.php
Follow the link in Lesson 1.1 of the myUnisa module site.
TAKE NOTE
After sentencing, the bereaved family and friends are not always satisfied with the
offender’s punishment. The social and physical characteristics of the offender play
a decisive role in his or her sentencing. However, according to the classical school,
punishment should be suited to the offence, and not influenced by the social or
physical characteristics of the offender. Therefore, intent was deemed irrelevant.
The harm which a particular criminal action did to society was the yardstick by
which the classicists judged the appropriateness of punishment.
Next, we examine the limitations of the classical school of criminology starting with
the neoclassical school of thought.
1.1.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF

CRIMINOLOGY: NEOCLASSICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT
The application of the classical school of criminology during the eighth century
quickly revealed flaws in the idea of identical punishment for identical crimes.
Furthermore, its foundational concepts of free will and rationality, also showed flaws.
Social theorists discovered that aggravating or mitigating circumstances sometimes
meant that similar crimes differed in significant ways. Also, while the concept of free
will was not abandoned, people recognised that there were sometimes circumstances
in which freedom of choice was limited. Likewise, under certain conditions, people
did not always act rationally. Rationality might be constrained by factors such as
poverty, insanity or immaturity. In fact, the classical theorists had completely ignored
differences between individuals. First offenders and repeat offenders were treated
exactly alike, solely on the basis of the particular act that had been committed.
Children, those with mental illnesses and intellectual challenges were all treated as
if they were completely rational and competent (Hagan & Daigle, 2018:124).
All this quickly led classical criminologists to revise their ideas. The changes in classical
criminology resulting from these realisations developed into what became known as
neoclassical criminology (Netterville, 2014:1).
According to neoclassical thinkers, a person is still accountable for his or her actions,
but with certain minor reservations. It is acknowledged that the offender’s past
history and present situation both influence the likelihood of reform (Joyce, 2006:4).
8
Ordinary rational adults were still considered fully responsible for their actions, and
all equally capable of either criminal or law-abiding behaviour. It was now recognised,
however, that children (and in some circumstances the elderly) were less capable of
exercising free choice and were therefore less responsible for their actions. Those
with mental illnesses and intellectual challenges might be even less responsible. It
was these revisions to the penal code that admitted into the courts for the first time
non-legal ‘‘experts’’ including doctors, psychiatrists and, later, social workers. They
were gradually introduced into the criminal justice system in order to identify the
impact of individuals’ biological, psychological and social differences. The purpose of
this intervention was to determine the extent to which offenders were responsible for
their actions. The outcome was that sentences became more individualised, depending
on the perceived degree of responsibility on the part of the offender and on whether
there were mitigating circumstances (Burke, 2017:40–41).
Burke (2017:43–44) identifies the following central attributes of the classical and
neoclassical schools, which laid down the foundations of the rational actor model:
• A fundamental concentration on the criminal law and the legal definition of crime.
• The central concept that the punishment should fit the crime rather than the
offender.
• The doctrine of free will, according to which all people are free to choose their
actions. From this perspective, it is assumed that there is nothing ‘‘different’’ or
‘‘special’’ about offenders that differentiate them from other people.
• The use of non-scientific methodology coupled with a lack of empirical research.
In other words, the classical and neoclassical schools created an administrative and legal
criminology that was more concerned with the uniformity of laws and punishment
– neither school really tried to explain criminal behaviour.
READ
Read pages 31–33 of An Introduction to Criminological Theory (Third Edition) by
RH Burke to further understand the neoclassical school. You can find it on the
following link in Lesson 1.1 of the myUnisa module site.
• https://themcqtest.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/An_Introduction_to_
Criminological_Theory.pdf
Activity 1.2
Visit a news aggregator site (e.g. News24, IOL News, News360, etc.) online and
identify three non-legal experts (e.g. ballistics, psychologists, forensic pathologists,
etc.) in the Oscar Pretorius murder trial (2014 in South Africa). Then further identify
how these experts explained the extent to which Oscar was responsible for his
actions.
CMY3701/19
Refer to these few online news aggregators: Find the link in Lesson 1.1 of the
myUnisa module site:
• https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/16/oscar-pistorius-expert-
witness-irresponsible-roger-dixon-layman
• https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-26417240
• https://mg.co.za/article/2014-03-10-pathologist-shares-autopsy-report-at-
pistorius-trial/
1.1.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Classical theorists view criminal behaviour as deliberate activity resulting from rational
decisions in which offenders weigh the advantages and disadvantages and perform
the illegal acts that promise the greatest potential gain. Those who commit serious
crimes or continue to break the law deserve punishment because they possess free
will and know what they are doing. People are influenced by their fear of punishment
associated with being caught and convicted for law violations. The more severe,
certain and swift the punishment, the more likely it is to control crime. The classical
school of criminology is therefore founded on rationality, hedonism, punishment
and human rights.
The neoclassical school represented no major break with the basic premises of the
classical school. The neoclassical school of thought continued to state that people have
free will and that people are rational creatures guided by reason. They also claimed
that people are controlled by, and crime is deterred by, fear of punishment. Hence,
the pain of punishment must exceed the pleasure obtained from the act. However,
the neoclassical school made some modifications to the administration of law based
on the classical school. Neoclassical thinkers modified the doctrine of free will by
stating that the freedom to choose could be influenced by incompetence (either of age
or mental state). They also introduced the concepts of premeditation and mitigating
circumstances (Vito & Maahs, 2015:44).
The classical thinkers initiated a period of lasting debate and controversy over how
we should understand crime and criminal behaviour. Although the focus is on the
offence rather than the offender, the very process of raising issues concerning law and
offending leads to closer scrutiny of the reasons for offending. It is the reasons for
offending that form the basis of the theories in Theme 2 (the positivist perspective).
1.1.5 SELF-ASSESSMENT
To test and evaluate your knowledge of this study unit, complete the following:
1.1.5.1 Make sure you have mastered the key concepts that were listed at the start
of the study unit by making brief notes so that the meaning of each term is
clear.
10
1.1.5.2 Make a summary of this study unit. Ensure you have achieved the outcomes
listed at the start of the study unit.
1.1.5.3 Answer the following multiple-choice questions followed by paragraph-type

and longer-type questions:
1.1.5.3.1 Multiple-choice questions
(1) Who are the two key contributors to the classical school of thought?
1. Jeremy Beccaria and Cesare Bentham
2. Robert Lilly and Francis Cullen
3. Thomas Winfree and Howard Abadinsky
4. Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham (1)
(2) The thinkers or philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment turned

their attention to the nature and punishment of people. In short,
they ........... the efforts of the ........... of their day.
1. supported; judges
2. opposed; criminal justice system
3. supported, police
4. opposed, courts (1)
(3) Identify the central attributes of the classical and neoclassical schools
of thought.
(i) A fundamental concentration on criminal law and the legal
definition of crime.
(ii) Punishment must be severe enough to outweigh the rewards
of the illegal action.
(iii) The central concept that the punishment should fit the crime
rather than the offender.
(iv) People must be certain that there will be punishment for any
and all illegal behaviour.
1. (ii) and (iv)
2. (i) and (ii)
3. (iii) and (iv)
4. (i) and (iii) (1)
(4) A judge in the court of law presided over two similar cases of murder.
The first case was a woman who killed her husband in self-defence,
and the second case was that of a woman who killed her husband
so that she can claim on his life insurance. The judge imposed both
women with the same sentence of life imprisonment, despite the
mitigating factors. Which school of thought influenced the judge?
1. Classical
2. Positivist
3. Neoclassical
4. Pre-classical (1)
CMY3701/111
(5) An elderly man who often drinks at a pub in town, always intentionally
leaves his car at the pub after getting drunk. He has the right to drive
his own car even if he is drunk, but he would much rather take an
Uber back home so that he does not get into trouble with the law.
By doing this, what has the elderly man taken note of?
1. His rationality
2. His personal safety
3. The social contract
4. The severity of punishment (1)
1.1.5.3.2 Long questions
1) Briefly discuss the development of the neoclassical school. (15)

2) What are the assumptions of the classical school of criminology?
(10)
1.1.6 ANSWERS TO SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1.1.6.1 Multiple-choice questions
1. 4
2. 2
3. 4
4. 1
5. 3
1.1.6.2 Long questions
1) Refer to section 1.1.3

2) Refer to section 1.1.2
12
1.1.7 REFERENCES
Amerasinghe, K. 2020. Pure-Classical Schools of Criminology: Applicability Into-
Present Context of Criminal Law in Sri-Lanks. US-China Law Review, Vol.
17, No 8, 348–355.
Beccaria, C. 1963. On crimes and punishments (H. Paolucci, Trans.). Indianapolis,
IN: Bobbs-Merrill. (Original work published 1764).
Burke, R.H. 2017. An introduction to criminological theory. New York: Routledge.
Burke, R.H. 2018. An introduction to criminological theory. Routledge.
Eassey, J.M. and Boman IV, J.H. 2015. Deterrence Theory. The Encyclopedia of Crime
and Punishment, pp.1–6.
Hagan, F.E. and Daigle, L.E. 2018. Introduction to criminology: Theories, methods,
and criminal behavior. USA: Sage Publications.
Lilly, J.R., Cullen, F.T. & Ball, R.A. 2018. Criminological theory: Context and
consequences. USA: Sage Publications.
Lynch, G.E. 2014. Our administrative system of criminal justice. Fordham L. Rev., 83,
p.1673.
Matsueda, R.L. 2013. ‘Rational choice research in criminology: A multi-level
framework’. In: Wittek, R., Snijjder, T. & Nee, V. Handbook of rational choice
social research. California: Stanford Press. 283–321.
Netterville, A.E. 2014. Criminology, History of. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and
Criminal Justice, pp.1–7.
Pedneault, A., Beauregard, E., Harris, D.A. and Knight, R.A. 2017. Myopic decision
making: An examination of crime decisions and their outcomes in sexual
crimes. Journal of criminal justice, 50, pp.1–11.
Stevens, P. 2014. Robbery with Aggravating Circumstances Revisited: Minister of
Justice and Constitutional Development and Another v. Masingili and Another
2014 (1) SACR 437 (CC). S. Afr. J. Crim. Just., 27, p.188–198
Vito, G.F. and Maahs, J.R. 2015. Criminology. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Winfree Jr, L.T. and Abadinsky, H.,2016. Essentials of criminological theory. 4th ed.
Long Grove: Waveland Press.
CMY3701/113
2 STUDY UNIT 1.2
2 Contemporary rational choice theories
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After you have studied this study unit, you should be able to:
• describe the basic elements of routine activities theory

• explain the contributions and shortcomings of this theory
• interpret the propositions of the rational choice theory
• describe the choice process
• discuss the positive and negative aspects of rational choice theory

This study unit will require approximately three hours.
FIGURE 1.2.1
1.2.1 INTRODUCTION
Classical thinking has had a significant impact on criminological theory. Classical
ideas can be seen in those theoretical approaches that view offenders as rational
actors. In fact, classical criminology became the basis for all modern criminal justice
systems, but the expected reduction in crime did not occur. Beginning in the 1870s,
14
STUDY UNIT 1.2: Contemporary rational choice theories
criminologists abandoned classicism (although criminal justice systems did not) and
embarked on a positivist search for the causes of crime. After another one hundred
years, positivism, too, was found to have failed to reduce crime and the classical
school re-emerged as the dominant viewpoint in criminology. Beginning in 1968,
the contemporary classical approach started to focus on theory and research into
the deterrent effect of criminal justice policies. Then, in 1978, Cohen and Felson
proposed the ‘‘routine activities’’ approach, which led to policy recommendations
to limit criminal opportunities rather than increase the deterrent effect of criminal
justice policies. In 1985, Clarke and Cornish proposed the ‘‘rational choice’’ approach
(Vold, Bernard & Snipes, 2002:196). Both theories assert that offenders are active,
thinking participants in their criminal ventures. Offenders make decisions, they make
choices, and why they choose to commit a crime in one situation and not another is a
challenging question to anybody working in the field of criminology. These theories
are sometimes called opportunity theories, because they contend that no crime can be
committed unless there is an opportunity to complete the act (Lilly et al, 2018:345).
DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS

ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY is theory which suggests that for crime to
occur three factors must be present, namely a motivated offender; a suitable victim;
and the absence of capable guardians (Newburn, 2007:952).
RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY is a theory which emphasizes the importance

of rationality in human action even, if this is limited (bounded). It emphasizes the
decision-making processes involved in the choices made by offenders (Newburn,
2007:29).
We will first look at the routine activities approach and how it was conceptualised.
1.2.2 ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY

The routine activities theory was developed by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson.
Cohen and Felson (Vold et al, 2002:205) argue that certain changes in the modern
world have provided motivated offenders with a far greater number of opportunities
to commit crime. These theorists contend that there has been a marked increase in
the availability of crime targets (coupled with the absence of capable guardians) in the
modern world as a result of an overall change in our ‘‘routine activities’’, that is, how
normal people live their lives in terms of work, home life, child rearing, education, and
leisure. When people are at home they function as guardians of their own property.
But the routine activities of modern life have led to the dispersion of activities away
from the family and household and homes are increasingly left unattended during
the day. This means that many households no longer have capable guardians for
extended and fairly predictable periods of time; as a result, they have become targets
for burglary. In addition, there has been a large increase in portable goods, goods
which are therefore attractive targets to thieves (e.g. electronic goods).
CMY3701/115
Activity 1.3
During a normal working day most households are left without guardians as people
exercise their daily routine activities such as going to work. The lack of guardians
creates opportunities for criminals to act upon. Make a list of things that could be
suitable guardians of the property while you are at work.

Police patrols, dogs, alarms, burglar proofing, security gates, fencing, electrical
fencing, private security, domestic servants and pensioners living on the property.
This list in by no means exhaustive, can you add any more guardians to the list?
As people spent more time at large in society – going to and from work, school and
leisure activities – they were likely to come into contact with motivated offenders in
circumstances where there was inadequate guardianship. The opportunity for robbery
and assault therefore increased. The focus on opportunity suggests a pragmatic
approach to preventing crime: decrease opportunities for offending, and crime will
be reduced. Advice to reduce crime opportunities often leads to a focus on aspects of
the environment that are most easily altered, such as whether a house has a burglar
alarm and whether a shop minimises the amount of money in its cash registers (Lilly
et al, 2018:354).
Cohen and Felson (Vold et al, 2002:205) believe that most violent and property
crimes involve direct contact between the offender and the target. They propose that,
for a personal or property crime to occur, there must be at the same time and place a
perpetrator, victim, and/or an object of property. The crime event is also more likely
to occur if there are other persons or circumstances in the locality that encourage it
to happen. Cohen and Felson (Burke, 2005:46) have taken these basic elements of
time, place, objects and persons to develop a routine activities theory. These elements
that increase or decrease the likelihood that persons will be victims of personal (direct
contact) or property crime are:
• The availability of suitable targets in the form of a person or property, such as homes
containing easily saleable goods. Suitability of target is dependent on four criteria
which Felson (Newburn, 2007:289) summarises by using the acronym VIVA:
– Value: Calculated from the subjective rational perspective of the offender,
what is the target worth?
– Inertia: The extent to which the article or target can be realistically removed,
taken, robbed or moved.
– Visibility: How visible the target is to the offender?
– Accessibility: How easy it is to gain access to the target?
• The absence of capable guardians, such as police, homeowners, private security,
neighbours, friends, and relatives.
• The presence of motivated offenders, a person with the intent to commit a crime.
16
TAKE NOTE
According to the routine activities approach, crime needs three converging elements
in order to occur. These being:
• a motivated offender,
• a suitable target, and
• the absence of a capable guardian.
Therefore, the likelihood of a crime taking place increases when there is one or more
persons who are motivated to commit a crime; a suitable target or potential victim;
and an absence of formal or informal guardians who might deter the potential offender
(Burke, 2005:46). For example, young women who drink excessively in bars may
elevate their risk of date rape because they are perceived as easy targets; furthermore,
their attackers can rationalise the attack because they view intoxication as a sign of
immorality.
The routine activities theory can often be used as a justification for rape. Do you think
if potential rape victims isolated themselves in their houses they would not get raped?
READ
Read the following short article from the World Economic Forum, titled: Rape
can never be justified, yet an alarming number of Europeans think it can. After
reading, share your thoughts on the myUnisa discussion forum. You can find it on
the following link in Lesson 1.2 of the myUnisa module site
• https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/02/rape-sexual-assault-european-union/
Activity 1.4
A four-year old boy is repeatedly sodomised by the husband of a nursery school
owner. The victim eventually informs his parents that ‘‘the man at school hurts
him’’ and that his wife knows about it. Examine this information from the offender’s
perspective and list the reasons why the target is suitable.

Students should think critically using the four criteria (VIVA) for a suitable target.
Watch the following video on YouTube that will give you further clarity on the
routine activities theory. You can find it on the following link in Lesson 1.2 of the
myUnisa module site
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiIBv26WcM0&t=15s
CMY3701/117
READ
Read from the following link to further understand the routine activities theory. You
can find it on the following link in Lesson 1.2 of the myUnisa module site
• https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/criminology/theories/routine-activities-
Delving deeper into the routine activities theory we will now focus on the evaluation
aspect of this theory.
1.2.2.1 Evaluation of the routine activities theory

A primary goal of routine activities theory is to identify the environmental triggers
that facilitate crime (Cote, 2002:297). The emphasis in this theory is therefore on a
crime of place rather than a crime of person. Critics, however, argue that the theory
ignores the offender and cannot answer the question why some individuals are more
motivated to commit criminal acts than others. It also carries with it a tendency to
blame the victim, because the victim is identified as playing a significant role in the
circumstances surrounding the criminal act (McLaughlin, 2006:366).
Notwithstanding these criticisms, the routine activities theory has a great deal of
promise for the study of all types of crimes in any urban, suburban and rural area.
The theory provides valuable insight into the issue of crime prevention and should
be a meaningful source of information for city planners, criminal justice officials and
policy makers. Felson (Cote, 2002:298) suggests that managers and city planners can
implement a variety of strategies in order to prevent crime. Some of these strategies
include increased surveillance (informal supervision); limiting pedestrian access to
certain streets; keeping schools visible from buildings where there are adults; and
encouraging the presence of resident caretakers in schools.
Next we will look at a concise summation of the routine activities theory.
1.2.2.2 Concise summation of the routine activities theory

The routine activities theory focuses on opportunity and lifestyle issues. A person’s
living arrangements can influence victim risk; people who live in unguarded areas
are at the mercy of motivated offenders. A person’s lifestyle definitely influences the
opportunity for crime because it controls a person’s:
(i) proximity to criminals

(ii) the time he or she is exposed to criminals
(iii) attractiveness as a target
(iv) ability to be protected (Siegel, 2004:94)
For Felson and Cohen, the key to stopping crime is to prevent the intersection in time
and space of offenders and targets that lack guardianship. Because the fundamental
cause of crime events is opportunity, criminal opportunities need to be reduced. This
means making targets less attractive and supplying targets with capable guardianship.
We have looked at the routine activities theory and next we will examine the rational
choice perspective theory.
18
1.2.3 RATIONAL CHOICE PERSPECTIVE

Cornish and Clarke (Wortley, 2013:3) have attempted to construct a more sophisticated
approach to the decision to offend, which they have termed ‘‘rational choice’’ theory.
In their 1986 model, Cornish and Clarke assume that people are not ‘‘empty vessels’’
when they approach a situation in which a crime might be committed. They bring
with them background factors that include many of the influences articulated by
other theories of crime, such as temperament, intelligence, cognitive style, family
upbringing, class origin, neighbourhood context, and gender. These factors create
criminal motivations – deep-rooted inclinations or dispositions to commit crime
(Lilly et al, 2018:361).
From a rational choice perspective, the problem with other theories is that it is at this
point that their analysis of crime ceases. However, in the end, crime is not simply due
to underlying motivations or predispositions, it also involves a sequence of choices
that must be made if these motivations are to result in an actual criminal act (Lilly
et al, 2018:361).
1.2.3.1 Propositions of the rational choice perspective theory

Cornish and Clarke (2014:7) summarise the basis of their rational choice perspective
in the following six basic propositions:
(i) Crimes are deliberate acts, committed with the intention of benefitting the
offender.
(ii) Offenders try to make the best decisions they can, given the risks and uncer-
tainty involved.
(iii) Offender decision-making varies considerably according to the nature of the
crime.
(iv) Decisions about becoming involved in particular kinds of crimes (‘‘involve-
ment decisions’’) are quite different from those relating to the commission of
a specific criminal act (‘‘event decisions’’).
(v) Involvement decisions comprise the following three stages (Cornish & Clarke,
2014:8–9):
• Initiation: Whether the person is ready to begin committing crime in order
to obtain what he or she wants.
• Habituation: Whether, having started offending, he or she should continue
to do so.
• Desistance: Whether, at some stage, he or she ought to stop.
These stages must be studied separately, because they are influenced by quite
different sets of variables. Background factors are likely to be the most important
at the initiation stage and current life circumstances at the habituation stage
and desistance stage.
(vi) Event decisions involve a sequence of choices made at each stage of the criminal
act. For example, preparation (when to do the crime, i.e. reduce risks), target
selection (which house to burgle), commission of the act, escape, and aftermath.
CMY3701/119
Activity 1.5
Find an incident of criminality in the media then identify if the offender(s) had
moments of initiation, habituation and desistance which were willfully chosen or
forced.

Students can find any incident from any media source and discuss and justify
their arguments.
Further exploration of the rational choice perspective leads us to the following:
1.2.3.2 Bounded rationality of the rational choice perspective theory

Even in cases which, on the surface, may seem irrational (e.g. those where there is
some pathological compulsion), there is still some degree of rationality involved,
although it may be limited. Therefore, for Cornish and Clarke (Newburn, 2007:280)
behaviour is rational, but bounded. It is limited in its understanding of possibilities,
potentials and consequences. Offenders are generally doing the best they can within
the limits of time, resources, and information available to them. In other words, all
offenders think before they act, even if this is only momentary and is based on some
immediate assumptions and hoped-for benefits rather than any longer-term strategic
thinking (Wortley, 2013:239–240).
This process of choice making will be explained next.
1.2.3.3 The choice process of the rational choice perspective theory

Offenders seek to benefit themselves by their criminal behaviour and this process
involves the making of decisions and choices, however elementary these may be. This
process exhibits a measure of rationality, although the process may be constrained by
limitations of time and ability and the availability of relevant information. Cornish
and Clarke (Cote, 2002:291) argue that the choice process occurs in two major stages.
• Firstly, offenders must decide whether they are willing to become involved in
crime to satisfy their needs (initial involvement stage). Whether or not they decide
to become involved in crime is influenced mainly by their previous learning
experiences, including any experiences with crime, contact with law enforcement,
moral attitudes, self-perception, and the degree to which they can plan ahead.
These learning factors are shaped by various background factors.
• Secondly, once individuals decide to become involved in crime, they need to adopt
a crime-specific focus. In other words, they need to decide what offence they will
probably commit. This decision is heavily influenced by the individual’s current
situation. For example, the individual may badly need money and may be out
with friends who suggest that they commit a crime. The individual must then
select a target for the offence, such as a house to burgle and weigh the costs and
benefits (e.g. is someone at home?).
20
Crime, according to this perspective, is regarded as ‘‘deliberate’’; it is never ‘‘senseless’’.

In other words, the crime always has some anticipated or intended benefit for the
offender. While, in the most obvious cases, the benefit may be some material reward,
benefits may also include excitement, prestige, fun, sexual gratification, and defying
or dominating others. A man might brutally beat his wife, not just because he is a
violent thug, but also because this is the easiest way of making her do what he wants
(Newburn, 2007:282).
Decisions about committing an offence can be summarised as follows (Newburn,

2007:282; Lilly et al, 2018:360):
• Offenders are rarely in possession of all the necessary facts about the risks, efforts
and rewards of crime.
• Criminal choices usually have to be made quickly – and revised hastily.
• Instead of planning their crimes down to the last detail, offenders might rely on
a general approach that has worked before, and then improvise when they are
confronted by unforeseen circumstances.
• Once they have embarked on a crime, offenders tend to focus on the rewards of
the crime rather than its risks; and, when considering risks, they focus on the
immediate possibilities of being caught, rather than on the punishments they
might receive.
Activity 1.6
Search online for incidents of cash in transit (CIT) heists. CIT heists have certain
characteristics, such as the element of surprise, the use of a weapon, working in
groups, and so forth. List incidences where the robbers deviated from their modus
operandi owing to unforeseen circumstances.

Students can search on any online news aggregator such as News24 and TimesLive.
For example: Money Heist Gone Wrong
(https://www.dailysun.co.za/News/money-heist-gone-wrong-in-soweto-20200520).
In this incident, police were tipped beforehand about the CIT heist. The criminals
had to abandon their plans as they fled from the scene and they threw away their
weapons during the escape.
Delving deeper into the rational choice perspective theory we will now focus on the
evaluation aspect of this theory.
1.2.3.4 Evaluation of the rational choice perspective theory

Rational choice theory seems to hold a promising approach to reducing crime, that
of situational crime prevention. By studying how offenders make decisions to, say,
commit burglaries, steps can be taken to reduce opportunities that make these
CMY3701/121
offences possible. According to this approach, crime is prevented not by changing the
offenders themselves in some way, but by changing certain aspects of the situations
in which offences occur (e.g. installing burglar alarms, guard dogs, avoiding going
to places where risk of victimisation is high). In short, the focus is on making crime
more difficult to commit or less profitable, so that it becomes a less attractive choice
(Lilly et al, 2018:364).
The danger in rational choice theory, however, is that offenders will be treated as
though they were only rational decision makers. When this occurs, the context that
influences their decision to break the law is ignored, and commentators begin to
recommend harsh criminal justice policies that focus solely on making crime a costly
decision. In other words, they ignore the offender’s social context (Wortley, 2013:259).
We will summarise and conclude this study unit as follows:

Routine activities theory focuses on the necessary conditions for crime to occur, namely,
the convergence in time and place of a motivated offender and a suitable victim in
the absence of a capable guardian. The theory suggests that the social context within
which crime occurs is critical to understanding how victims become susceptible to
the risks of crime and the factors that motivate the offender to commit crime.
The underlying assumption of rational choice theory suggests that rational, selfish and
pleasure-seeking individuals make personal choices and decisions about their future
behaviour by weighing both the consequences of punishment (should they get caught)
and the costs in specific situations of criminal opportunity. Cornish and Clarke (Cote,
2002:285–286) assume that there will always be people who will commit crime if
given the opportunity. However, the notion of deterrence is prominent: individuals
will be deterred from committing crime if they think that the cost (i.e. punishment)
outweighs the benefits of committing the crime.
Rational choice theory has many similarities with routine activities theory. The two
perspectives hold in common a focus on the crime event. They are both concerned
with how the combination of circumstances shapes individual acts (rational choice)
or acts of a particular class (routine activities).
READ
Read from following link to further understand the rational choice theory: You can
find it on the following link in Lesson 1.2 of the myUnisa module site
• https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=
6670&context=jclc
22
clear.
1.2.5.3 Answer the following paragraph-type and longer-type questions:
(1) Who are the proponents of the routine activities theory?

1. Cornish and Cohen
2. Felson and Clarke
3. Cohen and Felson
4. Cornish and Clarke (1)
(2) Rational choice theory seems to hold a promising approach to

reducing ........... that of situational crime ...........
1. preventing, control.
2. controlling, prevention.
3. preventing, reduction.
4. reducing, prevention. (1)
(3) Identify one of the propositions by Cornish and Clarke for the basis
of their rational choice perspective.
1. Offender decision-making varies considerably according to the
nature of the crime.
2. Offenders try to make the best decisions they can, given the
risks and certainty involved.
3. Crimes are opportunistic acts, committed with the intention of
benefitting the offender.
4. Event decisions involve random choices made at each stage of
the criminal act. (1)
(4) What is the primary goal of the routine activities theory?

1. To place the responsibility of crime avoidance on the victim.
2. To place an emphasis on offenders and ignore the victim.
3. To deter criminals from committing crimes by increasing
awareness.
4. To identify the environmental triggers that facilitate crime.
(5) A transgender female was raped in the early hours of the morning
while walking home alone from a nightclub. Considering the three
elements that need to exist in order for crime to occur, how can this
crime have been prevented?
CMY3701/123
1. By carrying a concealed weapon.
2. By walking in a large group with friends.
3. By only leaving the club at sunrise.
4. By being more vigilant of her surroundings. (1)
1) Briefly outline and discuss the choice process. (15)

2) Give an evaluation of the routine activities theory. (10)

1. 3
2. 4
3. 1
4. 4
5. 2
1) Refer to section 1.2.3.

2) Refer to section 1.2.2.1
24
REFERENCES
Akers, R.L. 2013. Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation. Routledge.
Burke, R.H. 2013. “Routine activities theory” in An Introduction to Criminological
Theory, Willan, pp. 65–67.
Burke, R.H. 2005. An introduction to criminological theory. 2nd ed. Cullompton,
Devon: Willan.
Cornish, D. & Clarke, R. 1985.
Cornish, D.B. & Clarke, R.V. 2013. “ The rational choice perspective” in Environmental
criminology and crime analysis, Willan, pp. 43–69.
Cornish, D.B., & Clarke, R.V. eds. 2014. The reasoning criminal: Rational choice
perspectives on offending. Transaction Publishers.
Cote, S. 2002. Criminological theories: Bridging the past to the future. London: Sage.
Felson, M. & Cohen, L.E. 1978, “Criminal Acts and Community Structure-Routine
Activity Approach”. Office Population Research. Woodrow Wilson School
Public..., pp. 432
Felson, M. 2000. “The routine activity approach as a general crime theory”.
Criminological perspective; essential readings, vol. 2, pp. 160–167.
Franklin, C.A., Franklin, T.W., Nobles, M.R. and Kercher, G.A. 2012. Assessing the
effect of routine activity theory and self-control on property, personal, and sexual
assault victimization. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(10), pp. 1296–1315.
Lily, J.R., Cullen, F.T., & Ball, R.A. 2018. Criminological theory: Context and
consequences. USA: Sage Publications.
McLaughing, E. 2006. Routine activity theory in the Sage Dictionary of criminology,
edited by E. McLaughing & J. Muncie. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Newburn, T. 2007. Criminology. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Siegel, L. 2004. Criminology, Wadsworth/Thomson, Belmont, CA.
Tillyer, M.S. & Eck, J.E. 2011. “Getting a handle on crime: A further extension of
routine activities theory”, Security Journal, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 179–193.
Vold, G., Bernard, T., & Snipes, J. 2002. Theoretical Criminology. 5th ed. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Wortley, R., 2013. 13 Rational choice and offender decision making. Cognition and
crime: Offender decision making and script analyses, p. 237.
CMY3701/125
2 THEME 2
The positivist school: the offender as predestined
actor
26
3 STUDY UNIT 2.1
3 The positivist school: the offender as
predestined actor
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After working through this study unit, you should be able to demonstrate an in-depth
knowledge and insight of the positivist school of thought by:
• defining key concepts

• discussing the positivist school of thought in detail
• discussing the assumptions of the positivist school
• critically evaluating the positivist school of thought

FIGURE 2.1.1
Visual Overview of Study Unit 2.1
CMY3701/127
2.1.1 INTRODUCTION
Criminologists use theoretical perspectives as frameworks for the scientific study and
analysis of crime and criminal behaviour. An extensive diversity of criminological
perspectives exist that provide both a foundation for criminal analysis and insight into
the nature of crime. These perspectives are complex in nature and no one perspective
is “accurate”. However, each of these perspectives assists us in illustrating various
dimensions of reality (Glick, 2005:10). Since crime is comparative, what is mainly
considered unlawful differs according to societal norms, culture, geographic location
and time period. Crime scholars have called for the integration of theories that will
bring different perspectives on the continuum from classical to positivist criminology.
The important question is: “What variables are related to crime and in what ways –
with the focus being on variables and relationships among variables, rather than on
theories themselves” (Vold, et al., 2002:313–314).
Theme 2 consists of three study units, namely the positivist school, biological positivism,
and psychological positivism. This theme discusses the three perspectives and each
perspective provides insight into the nature of crime and helps us to focus on different
aspects or dimensions of reality. Further, biological factors in explaining criminal
behaviour are explored. Biological theories of crime stress that criminal behaviour is
a product of a person’s physical or biological characteristics. The approach used by
the positivists (positivism is also known as the predestined actor model) is supposed
to individualise justice and reject criminal behaviour by identifying and dealing with
its causes through deterrence and rehabilitation (Burke 2005:53).
Now that we have had a brief introduction to Theme 2 you next need to become
acquainted with some key concepts and terms that are relevant to this theme.
2.1.2 DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS

Make sure you understand the following key concepts and terms. Refer to the glossary
loaded under Additional Resources on myUnisa.
Positivist criminology is an approach to the study of crime that adopts a deterministic

approach; in other words, offenders are regarded as being propelled into committing
criminal acts by forces (biological, psychological, or sociological) over which they have
no control. Common to all forms of positivist criminology is the belief that society is
based on consensual values and offenders should be treated rather than punished for
their actions. Positivists also insist that theories that purport to explain the ‘‘why?’’
of crime should be based on scientific analysis (Joyce, 2006:562).
Psychological positivism focuses on the mind of the criminal. These theorists view
crime as an action that is symptomatic of internal neurological disorders or deeply
hidden personality disturbances within an individual. Psychological positivism
includes the study of individual characteristics, which include personality, reasoning,
thought, intelligence, learning, perception, imagination, memory and creativity
(Joyce, 2006:10).
Now that you have grasped the foundational concepts and terms, we will explore the
positivist school of thought.
28
STUDY UNIT 2.1: The positivist school: the offender as predestined actor
2.1.3 THE POSITIVIST SCHOOL OF THOUGHT

During the late nineteenth century the positivist school of criminology was composed
mainly of Italian scientists. According to these researchers, social processes are a
consequence of the measurable interaction that show a link between events and
relationships. They further put emphasis on the scientific treatment of the offender
rather than the punishment imposed when an offender sentenced for the crime
committed (Reid, 2018:49; Siegel, 2018:140–141). The major contributors to the
positivist school were Cesare Lombroso (1835–1909, Raffaele Garofalo (1852–1934).
The positivist school of thought is believed to have emerged in opposition to the harsh
views of the classical school and as a response to society’s lack of concern about what
caused criminal behaviour (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:34). The classical perspective
on crime and criminal behaviour dominated the thinking and understanding of crime,
and justice for almost a century. However, many of the proposals that the classical
theorists made had little effect on the crime problem. In the decades that followed,
statistical improvements in crime measurement began to reflect the existence of
certain patterns in the manifestation of crime. With the development of the Industrial
Revolution, the world began to change radically. Old patterns of social relationships
and daily routines changed. People also began to question previously relied-on sources
of knowledge that answered such questions. No longer could traditional authority
and speculative philosophy explain people’s present and future life circumstances
(Glick 2005:69).
The classical school, defining crime in legal terms, emphasised the concept of free
will and the position that punishment gauged to fit the crime would deter criminal
acts. The positivists rejected the harsh legalism of the classical school and substituted
the doctrine of determinism for that of free will. Their main focus was mainly on the
constitutional approach of crime which emphasised that the physical structure of an
individual play a role in determining their behaviour (Reid, 2018:49). Against this
background and appreciating that the characteristics are not uniform, the positivists
emphasised a philosophy of individualised, scientific treatment of offenders based
on the findings of physical and social sciences (Reid 2018:45). The criminological
approach and attempts in understanding crime and the use the scientific method in
its investigation is a sign of advancement in the criminological field (Glick, 2005:8).
Theoretical social philosophies gave way to the knowledge that society and social
change could be studied factually, objectively and scientifically. Answers to ancient
questions about human nature and human behaviour, including deviant and criminal
behaviour, began to be offered in terms of objective science and not in terms of religion
or philosophy. One of the earliest thinkers was the French sociologist Auguste Comte
(Glick, 2005:69).
Auguste Comte was the founder of sociology and positivism, he believed that both
external and internal forces are important. Auguste Comte (1798–1857), advocated
that human behaviour and society should be studied using methods like those used
in the physical sciences. The primary object of the positivist criminology or “criminal
anthropology” as its leading exponents dubbed their new science was the systematic
and empirical study of the origins of crime (Frampton, 2013:117).
Comte encouraged social scientists to use the perspective of positivism, which

emphasised techniques of observation, the comparative method, and experimentation
in the development of knowledge concerning human behaviour and the nature of
CMY3701/129
society. This approach was different from more traditional speculative systems of
social philosophy (Glick, 2005:69). The positivist perspective stressed the idea that
behaviour is a function of external social forces beyond individual control, as well as
internal forces such as our mental capabilities and biological make-up. The advent of
positivism meant that human behaviour was perceived and understood as organisms
that are part of the “animal kingdom” whose behaviour is very much influenced by
social, cultural and biological antecedents, rather than as self-determined beings who
are free to do what they want (Glick 2005:70). Positivist criminology therefore viewed
attempts to dispense justice commensurate with criminals’ levels of moral culpability
as quixotic and they lampooned classical jurisprudence’s commitment to notions of
“guilt” and “responsibility as “metaphysical pedantry”. Instead the imperative and
social defence required a new approach, one that tailored individual punishments
to the dangerousness of the offender. Positivism undertook “a precise and scientific
method of the study of crime, a technical means of resolving a serious social problem,
and a genuinely humane hope of preventing the harm of crime and improving the
character of offenders” (Frampton, 2013:118).
The assumptions of the positivist school of thought are listed and explored in the
following section.
2.1.4 ASSUMPTIONS OF THE POSITIVIST SCHOOL OF THOUGHT

The basic assumptions are highlighted by Bartollas (2006:78) and White and Haines
(2004:40–42):
The assumptions of the positivist school of thought are summarised in Figure 2.1.2
below.
FIGURE 2.1.2
The assumptions of the positivist school of thought
30
The assumptions of the positivist school of thought are each explored below starting
with the character and personal background of the offender.
• It is the character and personal backgrounds of individuals that explain criminal

behaviour. The focus of analysis is therefore on the nature and characteristics of
the offender, rather than on the criminal act.
• A crucial assumption of positivism is the existence of scientific determinism. Crime,
like any other phenomenon, is seen as determined by prior causes; it does not “just
happen”. Because of this deterministic position, positivists reject the view that
the individual is reasonable, exercises free will, and is capable of choice. Instead
the individual’s behaviour is primarily shaped by factors and forces outside their
immediate control.
• The offender is seen as fundamentally different from the non-offender. The task,
then, is to identify the factors that have made the offender a different kind of person.
In attempting to explain that difference, positivists concluded that offenders are
driven into crime by something in their physical make-up, by their psychological
impulses, or by the meanness of their criminality that can be diagnosed, classified,
and ultimately treated or dealt with in some way. It is the job of the “expert”
(psychologist, a social worker or a criminologist) to identify the specific conditions
leading to criminality in any case.
• Individualised treatment of offenders. Since there are differences between individual
offenders, treatment itself must be individualised. At an institutional level, this
translates into arguments in favour of indeterminate sentences. The length of
time in incarceration should not depend solely on the nature of the criminal
act committed but must consider the diagnosis and classification of the offender
(e.g. is the person dangerous or not?), as well as the type of treatment appropriate
to the specific individual.
Activity 2.1.1
One of the basic assumptions in the study of criminal behaviour is that behaviour
in violation of criminal law also represents deviation from other norms. In your
opinion how does internal and external factors affect deviancy? Do you think the
positivist school of thought is relevant in the African context? Discuss. To answer
this question, consider looking at the assumptions.
7 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 2.1.1

What is deviance? Is there any relationship between crime and deviance? The
answers to these questions are complex. Firstly, deviance or deviant behaviour
refers to a wide-ranging activity that society deems abnormal or outside the norm.
The norms themselves determine which acts are defined as deviant or not. These
classifications are influenced by the political climate, culture and societal values
and are continuously evolving and redefined. Deviance is a violation of traditional
appropriate or acceptable, cultural or social norms. On the other hand, a crime is
an act of deviance that breaks not only a norm but a law.
CMY3701/131
2.1.5 EVALUATION OF THE POSITIVIST SCHOOL
The positivist school made an extensive contribution to the development of a scientific
approach to the study of criminal behaviour and the reform of criminal law. The
positivists emphasised the importance of empirical research and, in effect, developed
the doctrine of determinism. Positivists suggested that individuals were not responsible
for their actions. This, according to Joyce (2006:5), implied a total absence of free will
and the ability to control one’s actions. The positivist school’s emphasis on deterministic
causes of crime suggests that people are passive and controlled. It further indicates
that criminal behaviour is, in fact, imposed on people by biological and environmental
conditions (Moyer, 2001:30). The problem with this viewpoint, according to Newburn
(2007:128), is that it fails to consider human decision-making, rationality and choice.
In policy terms, it tends to lead to an emphasis on treatment and to avoid the whole
issue of individual responsibility. Further, the research undertaken by positivists
contained serious errors in its methodology. Their samples were not scientifically
selected, and their subjects usually came from institutionalised populations. They
made little use of follow-up studies and the concepts they measured were not clearly
defined (Reid, 2006:65). They argued that criminal behaviour could be explained in
terms of factors, either internal or external to the human being that caused people to
act in a way over which they had little or no control (Burke, 2005:52–53).
Despite these criticisms, the positivist school had a significant impact on the emergence
and development of criminology, as indicated by its substantive theoretical development.
The positivists concluded that there was a good reason to treat attempted and completed
crimes differently but argued that the classical school was “lost in a most dangerous
tangle” (Frampton, 2013:145). Certain elements of biological, psychological, and
sociological positivism have assisted to shape contemporary criminology. The goal
of positivism was to study the causes of crime at the individual and societal level
(Cote 2002:35).
Activity 2.1.2
Consider the scenario in the below and share your answers to the activity on
myUnisa under Study Unit 2.1.
2.2.1 ho would be the appropriate person or persons to assess the offender

W
before sentencing and why? This may be a psychologist, a social worker
or a criminologist.
2.2.2 A criminologist when conducting an offender risk and needs assessment
will include some of these elements in their reports such as the offenders’
family background, mindset and motivations for committing the crime,
identify patterns as well as demographics and locations. What information
should be contained in the report (after the assessment) regarding the
offender?
32

2.2.1 The author is of the opinion that the most appropriate professional to
assess an offender before sentencing is a criminologist. This is because
criminologists bring the expertise in understanding the nature and
causes of criminal behaviour, offender profiling, the offender risk and
needs assessment and are in a better position to recommend the most
appropriate individualised treatment to modify their criminal behaviour.
This exercise will assist in curbing recidivism.
2.2.2 The information gathered by a criminologist in their offender risk and
needs assessment must include the offenders’ family background, mindset
and motivations for committing the crime, identify patterns as well as
demographics and locations. The information gathered will assist in
formulating policy and devising strategies to assist in the reduction of
criminal behaviour in the correctional facilities and prepare offenders
when released either on parole or after serving their full sentences.
2.1.6 CONCLUSION
In response to the inability of the classical policy to control crime, a new approach
to studying crime, the positivist criminology emerged. Although positivism centred
mainly on individuals that caused them to commit crime, it also emphasised certain
social factors, since these led to criminality. Proponents of the positivist school rejected
the rational actor model’s emphasis on free will and replaced it with the doctrine of
determinism. The fact that there are no conclusive answers to the question of causes
of crime does not mean that criminology is unscientific. Lombroso had included in
his theory many societal-level factors that seemed more appropriate for explaining
rates of crime rather than the individual’s propensity to engage in it. There are three
basic formulations of the predestined actor model, namely biological, sociological
positivism and psychological positivism. Each will be addressed separately in the
following study units.
2.1.7 SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

clear.

CMY3701/133
(1) Who was the founder of sociology and positivism?
1. Augusta Comte
2. Cesare Lombroso
3. Raffaela Garafalo
4. Cesare Beccaria (1)
(2) The ........... emphasised the concept of free will and the position that
punishment gauged to fit the crime would deter criminal acts.
1. positivist school
2. classical school
3. sociological positivism
4. social philosophers
(3) The positivist school focuses on the nature and characteristics of the/
an ...........
1. criminal behaviour.
2. individual offender.
3. situational factor.
4. criminal event.
(4) The ........... on crime and criminal behaviour dominated the thinking
and understanding of crime, and justice for almost a century.
1. classical perspective
2. scientific determinism
3. religion perspective
4. criminal analysis
(5) How many basic formulations are there for the predestines actor
model?
1. One
2. Two
3. Three
4. Four
(6) Outline the assumptions of the positivist school. (10)

(7) Discuss and evaluate the positivist school of thought. (15)
2.1.8 SELF-ASSESSMENT ANSWERS

1. (a)
2. (b)
3. (b)
4. (a)
5. (c)
2.1.9 PARAGRAPH QUESTION ANSWERS

For the purpose of question 6 and 7 respectively see paragraph 2.1.4, 2.1.3 and 2.1.5.
34
2.1.10 REFERENCES
These references were used in compiling this study unit. You do NOT have to read
these references.
Anderson, JF, Dyson, L, Langsam, A & Brooks, W. 2007. Criminal justice and
criminology: terms, concepts, and cases. Lanham, Md: University Press of America.
Bartollas, C. 2006. Juvenile delinquency. 7th edition. Boston, Ma: Pearson.
Burke, R.H. 2005. An introduction to criminological theory. 2nd edition. Cullompton,
Devon: Willan.
Cassel, E & Bernstein, DA. 2007. Criminal behaviour. 2nd edition. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Coleman, C & Norris, C. 2000. Introducing criminology. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Cote, S. 2002. Criminological theories: bridging the past to the future. London: Sage.
Frampton 2013.
Glick, L. 2005. Criminology. Pearson.
Howitt, D. 2002. Forensic and criminal psychology. London: Prentice Hall.
Hunter, R.D. & Dantzker, M.L. 2002. Crime and criminality: causes and consequences.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Joyce, P. 2006. Criminal justice: an introduction to crime and the criminal justice system.
Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Moyer, IL. 2001. Criminological theories: traditional and non-traditional voices and
themes. London: Sage.
Reid, S.T. 2003. Crime and criminology. 10th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reid, S.T. 2006. Crime and criminology. 10th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reid, S.T. Crime and criminology. (2018). 15th edition. Wolters Kluwer: New York.
Siegel, L J. 2004. Theories, patterns & typologies. 8th edition. Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth.
Tierney, J. 2006. Criminology: theory and context. 2nd edition. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
White, R & Haines, F. 2004. Crime and criminology: an introduction. 3rd edition.
New York: Oxford University Press.
CMY3701/135
4 STUDY UNIT 2.2
4 Biological positivism
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After working through this study unit, you should be able to
• explain the foundation of the biological positivist theory

• discuss Eysenck’s biosocial theory of crime
• discuss the biochemical causes of abnormal behaviour
• explain the relationship between genetics and criminal behaviour
• explain biochemical causes of abnormal behaviour
• identify and explain critical factors relating to biosocial theory of criminality

36
STUDY UNIT 2.2: Biological positivism
FIGURE 2.2.1
Visual Overview of Study Unit 2.2
2.2.1 INTRODUCTION
We are covering Theme 2 which is divided into three study units. We have explored
the positivist school in Study Unit 2.1. In this Study Unit 2.2 we are focusing on the
area of biological positivism.
The belief that criminality has a biological basis is by no means new. In recent
years, there has been a resurgence of interest in studying the relationship of biology
and psychology to criminal behaviour. This theme presents some of the classic and
modern research on how the body and mind may affect behaviour. Taken together,
studies of the impact of biology and psychology on criminal behaviour leave no doubt
CMY3701/137
that these fields of knowledge are important to our understanding of the origins of
antisocial behaviour. The foundations of biological positivism can be located primarily
in the work of Lombroso, Ferri and Garofalo. These early and influential biological
criminologists argued that criminology should focus primarily on the scientific study
of criminals and criminal behaviour (Burke 2005: np). Although the major biological
theories of criminal behaviour were developed in the 19th century, their origins can
be found much earlier. For instance, the belief that personality is determined by the
shape of the skull has been traced back to Aristotle. Belief in a relationship between
criminal behaviour and body type can be traced back to the 1500s, and the study
of facial features and their relationship to crime goes back to the 1700s. In modern
times, biologist David C. Rowe looked at biology and crime from two perspectives,
that of socio-biology and behaviour genetics, which he described as “the study of
genetic and environmental influences in traits in humans and non-human animals”
(Reid 2018:66).
We next examine the early theories of biological positivism
2.2.2 DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS AND TERMS

Make sure you understand the following key concepts and terms. Refer to the glossary
of terms loaded under Additional Resources on myUnisa.
Adoption studies: this refers to studies that have been conducted with children reared
by biological parents in comparison to siblings or twins reared by adoptive parents to
determine a genetic connection to criminal behaviour. Results of such studies remain
inconclusive (Akers, 2013:11).
Biological positivism: claims that human beings commit crime because of factors
to the physical body over which they have little or no control (Burke, 2005:281).
According to the biological school, which is also referred to as biological positivism,
its argument is based on the premises that criminal behaviour is a consequence of
individuals’ biological or inborn shortcomings or abnormalities. This interpretation
is in direct conflict with classical criminology which posit that criminal activity is
the outcome of free will. Further, biological perspective is of view that deterrence
plays a minor role (Akers & Sellers, 2013:11).
Biosocial theories: refers to theories that observe shared effects of biology, behaviour
and the environment or unlawful behaviour (Akers & Sellers, 2013:11). Biological
theories assert that criminal behaviour is a result of an individual’s biological or physical
characteristics (Glick, 2005:87). Further, these theories posit that the outcome of
human behaviour is generally influenced by the interaction of biochemical, neurological
and genetic factors including environment stimuli (Akers & Sellers, 2017:11).
IQ (The intelligence quotient): refers to an individuals’ mental age divided by

sequential age, tested by assessing verbal and non-verbal activities (Hagens, 2007:297).
Meaning, intelligence is tested against an individual’s intelligence in comparison
to his or her peers of a similar age. In the end it is the capacity to rationalise and
comprehend in a logical manner.
Genetic factors: genetics is the study of heritability, it is embedded in the notion

that some traits, characteristics, including behaviour can be biologically transmitted
from one generation to the other. (Winfree, Jr & Abadinsky, 2017:42).
38
Personality: is a term used to describe an individual’s temperamental and emotional

attributes that are relatively consistent and that will influence his or her behaviour
(Jones, 2001:398).
2.2.3 EARLY THEORIES OF BIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM

The belief that criminality has a biological basis is by no means new. Bartollas
(2006:78–80) identifies two periods during which biological positivism became
prominent in criminological studies:
• The first period was dominated by the debate about whether human behaviour
was a product of nature (inborn traits such as genes) or nurture (acquired traits
such as environmental factors). Behaviour was primarily attributed to inherited
predispositions and genetic influences were given as the reason for a variety
of complex human behaviours.
• The second period is referred to as ‘‘contemporary biological positivism’’ or
‘‘sociobiology’’. Sociobiology stresses the interaction between biological factors
within an individual and the influence of the environment.
Early biological theories of criminality focused on physical attributes and appearance.

Criminality was associated with abnormality or defectiveness, the assumption being
that it was people who were somehow biologically inferior who were most likely to
become involved in criminal activities. Franz Joseph explored the view that physical
traits were related to behaviour. He popularised phrenology, which sought to equate
the shape of a person’s skull with the structure of their brain which, in turn, was
deemed to influence their behaviour. Cesare Lombroso (Joyce, 2006:6; Cote, 2002:36)
developed the belief that it was possible to identify offenders by their biology. He
studied the cadavers of executed criminals to determine whether law violators were
physically different from conventional people (Siegel, 2004:7).
We have examined the early theories of biological positivism and will now focus on
Lombroso and the positivists.
2.2.4 LOMBROSO AND THE POSITIVISTS

Lombroso advanced a theory that advocated that certain individuals who engage
in criminal behaviour are “born criminals”. He believed that criminals could be
distinguished from non-criminals by diverse physical stigmata, such as long lower
jaw, flattened nose, and long ape-like hands. Lombroso stressed that the stigmata
did not have a causal effect on criminal behaviour, but they were noticeable gauges
of a personality type that was probable to commit crime. This approach “suggested
that criminals are distinguished from non-criminals by the manifestation of multiple
physical anomalies, which are of atavistic or degenerative origin” (Glick, 2005:70).
Some of the evolution theorists argued that, as humans evolved, their physical
constitutions changed, becoming more complex as they developed to higher stages.
Lombroso used these theories to support “his belief that individuals involved in
criminal behaviour and deviancy were not merely physically different from non-
criminals but also physically inferior to them meaning, criminals had not evolved as
far as non-criminals had” (Reid, 2018:67). Further, besides the biological criminal,
Lombroso recognised two other types. He defined the criminaloid as a person
motivated by passion or some other emotional characteristic including various factors
CMY3701/139
that led to criminal behaviour. Lombroso did not only focus on the “born criminal”,
atavism and degeneracy as a positivist, he continued to express concern where social and
environmental factors were concerned. Lombroso together with other positivists laid
a theoretical basis for a systematic and biological investigation of criminal behaviour
(Reid, 2018:68). Nevertheless, Lombroso’s research methods would not be accepted
today as scientific (Glic, 205:71). Lombroso came to two main conclusions:
• Criminals were genetic throwbacks or atavistic. They were primitive people in a

modern era.
• Criminals could be identified by their physical features. Lombroso’s studies of
executed criminals led him to assert that the ‘‘criminal type’’ could be identified
by distinguishing physical features (such as the shape of the skull or facial
characteristics, for example, large jaws and cheekbones, fleshy lips or a receding
chin) which he referred to as ‘‘stigmata’’. Many of these characteristics were
inherited, and reflected a biological inferiority which, in turn, meant that the
person had a propensity for committing crime. These physical traits were frequently
reinforced by other non-hereditary features such as tattoos (Joyce, 2006:6).
Lombroso’s conclusions were compatible with the view that criminals were ‘born
bad’. In his later writings Lombroso modified his ‘‘born bad’’ stance by including
factors outside the individual (e.g. climate or education) as explanations of criminal
behaviour (Joyce, 2006:6). Even during his own lifetime, Lombroso’s ideas declined
substantially in influence, although he has been referred to as ‘‘the father of modern
criminology’’ (Newburn, 2007:122). Although Lombroso’s theory of the atavistic
criminal has not stood the test of scientific investigation, Bartollas (2006:79) points
out that Lombroso made two significant contributions to the study of criminal
behaviour, namely:
• Lombroso provided the impetus for criminologists to study the individual offender
rather than the crimes committed by the person.
• His manner of studying the offender by involving control groups and his desire
to have his theories tested impartially influenced the development of the scientific
method. Lombroso established the basis for a positivistic school of criminological
study and, with it, the requirements for a scientific foundation of our knowledge
of criminal behaviour.
Lombroso’s work was continued and elaborated by two fellow Italians, the scholars
Ferri and Garofalo. Ferri asserted that there were three categories of criminals –
those who were born bad, those who were insane and those whose actions were
the consequence of a set of circumstances in which they found themselves (Joyce,
2006:6). In Ferri’s work greater attention is paid to, and influence attributed to,
social and environmental factors in the explanation of criminality (i.e. compared
with Lombroso). Ferri was not simply a biological positivist but, significantly, argued
that criminal behaviour could be explained by studying the interaction of a range of
factors. Firstly, he observed physical factors such as race, geography and temperature;
secondly, individual factors such as age, sex and psychological variables; and thirdly,
social factors such as population, religion and culture (Burke, 2005:6). Like Ferri,
Garofalo was convinced of the importance of scientific methodology in the study
of crime. The criminal, in Garofalo’s terms, was someone who lacked a concern for
others and in this, and possibly in other ways, may be considered developmentally
deficient (Newburn, 2007:126).
40
Some of the aspects described above will now be explored further.
2.2.4.1 Physique and crime

The first significant development of this approach began in the 1940s with the work
of William H. Sheldon which focused on the physique of individuals and compared
body type with temperament. Sheldon defined three body types as follows: ectomorph,
endomorph and mesomorph. According to his philosophy when describing the
body types, an ectomorph has a tall, skinny body; an endomorph has a short, fat
body; and a mesomorph has an athletic body. His purpose was to lay a foundation
that aligns a systematic study of human behaviour and human personality (Reid,
2018:68). Sheldon’s notion has been criticised because of his choice or method of
selecting sample was questionable because he only selected persons who supported
his theory. Two other researchers who focused on body type were Sheldon and
Eleanor Glueck. They led studies that were mainly focused on the association of
body type, criminal behaviour and juvenile delinquency. The Gluecks claimed that
their research was of high value, skillfully utilising information collected from the
accuracy control of samples. Their study sample comprised of 500 delinquents and
500 non-delinquents matched on age, general intelligence, ethnic/racial origins and
residence in underprivileged neighbourhoods. Critiques of their school of thought
pointed out that the Glueck’s findings were not astounding as many delinquent
activities entail a strong body build. After examining the researchers’ data, some
researchers have resolved that the evidence was complex because there was no specific
combination of character, physique and temperament that would predict whether a
young person would become delinquent (Reid, 2018:68). Opponents claimed that
since the delinquent sample was taken from “persistently delinquent” boys, the data
could not be generalised to the total population of delinquents. Another criticism
is that the Glueck’s concepts and measuring techniques were vague. Criticisms of
the body type studies of Sheldon and the Gluecks led many to discredit the entire
approach of explaining crime in terms of the physique.
Activity 2.2.1
Explain the foundation of the biological positivist theory.

This leads us to investigate the biosocial theories next.
2.2.5 BIOSOCIAL THEORIES

There are four (4) biosocial theories and these are outlined in Figure 2.2.2 below.
CMY3701/141
FIGURE 2.2.2
The Biosocial Theories
2.2.5.1 Eysenck’s biosocial theory of crime

As a multidisciplinary perspective allows for a cohesive and well-informed approach
that aims to identify the cause of criminal behaviour and determine the best methods
for prevention and management (Healey, 2012:6). Hans Eysenck’s (1916–1997)
(Howitt, 2002:66–67) theory is regarded as a biosocial theory, since he believed
that genetic factors contributed significantly to human behaviour, but only showed
themselves under the influence of environmental or social factors. Biosocial theories
claim that certain biological factors increase the likelihood that a person will act
criminally, however, these factors do not necessarily determine behaviour (Glick,
2005:88).
We will now look at the development of the biological theories.
2.2.5.1.1 Recent interest in biological theories

New approaches distinguish themselves from earlier approaches in several ways:
• Firstly, the most recent biological theorists, known as biosocial theorists, focus on
a vast spectrum of biological factors, including genetic inheritance, environmental
factors (i.e. head injuries and toxins such as lead poisoning), and reproductive
factors.
• Secondly, biosocial theorists do not claim that biology leads to crime. Instead,
they assert that biological factors influence crime by shaping the development of
traits that are more conducive to crime than others.
42
• Finally, biosocial theorists recognise the importance of the social environment in

relation to individual development. They maintain that the social environment
shapes the development of certain traits and determines whether these traits
will lead to crime (Cote, 2002:36). In short, biosocial theorists believe that
physical, environmental, and social conditions work ‘‘in concert’’ to produce
human behaviour. Biosocial perspective suggests targeting individuals early in the
development process plays a vital role in mitigating subsequent criminal activity.
In addition, it is crucial to remember that biosocial theory assumes that there is
no single biological approach better suited for criminological study than others
(Healey, 2012:5–6).
2.2.5.1.2 Biosocial theory

As indicated by Siegel (2004:141) biosocial theory has many principles, namely:
• It assumes that genetic makeup contributes significantly to human behaviour.

• It contends that not all humans are born with an equal potential to learn and
achieve.
• It argues that no two people are alike (with rare exceptions, such as identical twins).
• It postulates that the combination of human genetic traits and the environment
produces individual behaviour patterns.
Biosocial perspectives on criminality can be categorised as follows:
• Genetic
• Biochemical
• Neurophysiological
A comprehensive understanding of genetics and criminal behaviour is important
where risk assessment or factors are concerned. Numerous studies have uncovered a
link between genetic factors and criminal behaviour (Glick, 2005:88). Therefore, it
is fundamental to investigate the role that hereditary, genetic factors play in human
behaviour (Reid, 2018:68). As Rowe (1994:10) puts it “biosocial research controls for
the effects of genes while estimating environmental effects”.
Genetic factors will be investigated next.
2.2.5.2 Genetics factors

An idea arose at the end of the 19th century that criminality is inherited in the same
way as physical characteristics. Evidence to support this belief has been gained from
three sources: criminal family studies, twin studies and adopted children studies
(Burke, 2005:8). Early criminologists who “did not have the benefit of contemporary
knowledge about genetics, tried to study the physical characteristics of offenders in
order to identify distinct features that signified the “criminal type” of person” (Glick,
2005:88).
The criminal was viewed as one who was predisposed or predetermined by biological
factors to commit crimes. The subsequent step was to look at family background to
understand whether there was any history of family criminal behaviour. If so, it was
presumed that criminality must be hereditary (Reid, 2018:69).
CMY3701/143
An evolution is eminent in the criminal justice field, where criminologists, lawyers
and policy makers need to be well informed on the evidence of how genetics play a
role in criminal behaviour, although this must be handled with caution as there are
limitations. Essentially, before the policy implications of genetic research are addressed,
it is important to critically examine the current state of research on this topic. Such
an examination requires the assessment of the “validity and ethical acceptability” of
such argument and the preventative use of genetic information about individual risks
that engage in criminal behaviour (Morley & Hall, 2003:2). Research on antisocial
behaviour, including criminal offending aims to specify the nature of both genetic
and environmental influences, and how they may interact with one another to lead
to criminal outcomes. A fascinating feature of literature on genetics and crime is
that the is a solid and reliable genetic effect perceived for property offences which do
not hold true for aggressive and unlawful acts (Baker, Tuvblad and Raine, 2010:23).
There may be genetic risk for violent crimes such as murder and rape which may stem
from more recessive genes, or specific combinations of alleles that do not appear in
studies of vertical transmission across generations (Baker, Tuvblad & Raine, 2010:23).
Age of onset is often reasoned as “a moderator of genetic effects in criminal behaviour”
(Baker, et al. 2010:24). The complex interplay between genes and environment must
also be considered, in addition to their main effects in criminal behaviour. Equally,
some environments may serve as protective factors, such that the genetic effects on
criminal consequences are reduced or eliminated for some individuals. The dependence
of genetic effects on diverse milieus is referred to as “gene–environment interaction”.
Despite the strong indication that genes hold in the influence of criminal and other
antisocial behaviours, research attempting to classify specific genes that intensify the
risk for criminal offending and the biochemical pathways between genes and behaviour
is still rather rare. Further, some behaviours and disorders are linked with antisocial
and criminal behaviour and these include, for instance, “attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder, (ADHD) and drug and alcohol abuse” (Baker, et al. 2010:30–34).
We will now focus on the studies of families.
2.2.5.2.1 Studies of families

Research reveals that antisocial behaviour often clusters within families, signifying
that inherited genetic factors and the family environment are risk factors for this
behaviour. Early studies of family histories were conducted to illustrate the relationship
between heredity and crime as well as other forms of deviant behaviour. However,
these studies were discredited because it was believed that they lacked methodological
complexity to document significant conclusions (Reid, 2018:69). Some of the most
important data on parental criminality were obtained by West and Farrington (in
Siegel 2004:148) as part of long-term youth survey. This research followed a group
of about 1 000 males from the time they were eight years old until they were in their
thirties. The boys in the study were repeatedly interviewed and their school and
police records evaluated. The data indicated that a significant number of offending
youths had criminal fathers. However, there is no certainty about the nature and
causal relationship between parental and child offending, but evidence indicates that
at least part of the association is genetic (Siegel, 2004:148). Although early studies
of families have been criticised harshly, they played a critical role where some policy
decisions were concerned. The belief that criminality was inherited led to the adoption
of laws that required “sterilisation of persons believed to be capable of passing” the
44
‘bad’ gene to their children that would potentially result in criminal or other forms of
undesirable behaviour (Reid, 2018:69). Currently researchers look to more secondary
connections that link genetic make-up and criminal behaviour.
We will now learn more about the studies of twins.
2.2.5.2.2 Studies of twins

Some explanations for delinquency and crime put emphasis on the genetic or hereditary
factors based on research data comparing identical and fraternal twins and adoptees.
These studies propose that genetic variables are involved in delinquent and criminal
behaviour. One method of determining the influence of genetic factors on criminal
behaviour is to examine relationships between the criminal behavioural patterns of
identical twins and those of fraternal twins (Glick, 2005:90). A distinction must be
made between identical and non-identical twins. Identical twins are the result of a
single egg and single sperm and are therefore genetically identical, while non-identical
twins are born from two eggs simultaneously fertilised by two sperm. Non-identical
twins share only 50 per cent of their genes and are no more similar than ordinary
brothers and sisters (Bartollas, 2006:81). Researchers argued that, if identical twins
act in identical ways, their behaviours could be the result of identical inheritance, but
any difference in behaviour would have to be the result of environment.
Christiansen (1968) (Newburn, 2007:13) examined official registers to discover how

many of 6 000 pairs of twins born in Denmark between 1881 and 1910 had acquired
a criminal record. He found if one male identical twin was convicted of a criminal
offence, the likelihood that the other twin would also be convicted was 3, 8 per
cent. The principal difficulty with this research method is that the similar behaviour
on the part of the identical twins may be due to the similarity of environmental
experience just as much as their identical heredity make up. There is no established
connection or method that can distinguish environment or heredity as contributing
factors to crime (Vold et al 2002:41). However, studies of twins who were reared apart
indicated that antisocial behaviour can be inherited. Walters (Vold et al, 2002:41–42)
analysed 14 twin studies published from 1930 to 1984 and concluded that these
studies show evidence of a hereditary basis of criminality. “Quantitative twin studies
have documented that environmental causes generate at least half of population
variation in antisocial behaviours and crime” (Reid, 2018:70). Early studies of twins
led researchers to conclude that heredity plays a major role in explaining behaviour,
but most of these studies were based on small samples. In addition, it was conclusive
that if behaviour is inherited, we would expect to find the same behaviour among
people with identical genes (Reid, 2018:69).
Next we investigate the studies of adoptees.
2.2.5.2.3 Studies of adoptees

Adoption studies are normally targeting individuals with a family history of antisocial
behaviour but are adopted out to families without such a history. Rhee and Waldman
(cited in Morley & Hall 2003:3) conducted an analysis of the majority of twin and
adoption studies on antisocial behaviour that have been carried out. They found that
although genetic background has a stronger influence on whether an individual will
engage in antisocial behaviour, the influence of environmental factors is even stronger.
CMY3701/145
These conclusions highlight the fact that even if individuals have a stronger genetic
predisposition, they may never participate in any antisocial behaviour if they are not
exposed to the necessary environmental factors. If most adoptees in future engage in
antisocial behaviour, the finding suggests that genetic background has more influence
on accountability than family environment. In the case of adopted children where
contact with a criminal parent has obviously been limited – any association between
criminal behaviour can be attributed to inherited characteristics with a greater degree
of certainty. Although the evidence from adoption studies appears to suggest a genetic
involvement in criminal behaviour, environmental factors also have an influence.
Jones (2001:350) points out that efforts are made to place adopted children in settings
where no real change in environment may occur. Interest on the issue of isolating
the influence of environment and of heredity, even in the study of twins has directed
researchers to study adoptees, who are placed at birth (Reid, 2018:70).
Rhee and Waldman (Jones, 2001:351) conducted an analysis of twin and adoption
studies. They concluded that there is moderate evidence of both genetic and
environmental influences in antisocial behaviour. Whatever the influence of genes,
therefore, it appears that the environment cannot be ignored. It is possible that genetic
make-up provides individuals with predispositions, but that these only become
realities under social/environmental circumstances. Therefore, what is inherited is not
a tendency to commit criminal acts as such, but rather a predisposition to develop
certain aspects of the personality, some of which may be linked to criminal behaviour.
Activity 2.2.2
Explain the relationship between genetics and criminal behaviour.

Now that we have looked at the genetics factors we will investigate the biochemical
influences on behaviour.
2.2.5.3 Biochemical influences on behaviour

In addition to studying genetics, bio-criminologists have studied the importance
of biochemical factors in criminality. There are various identifiable categories of
biochemical explanations for criminal behaviour. This section examines the possible
effects that diet, allergies and environmental conditions may have on a body chemistry
associated with criminal behaviour, of these the focus will be on nutrition (diet),
hormones and environmental contaminants that are most prominent.
Figure 2.2.3 illustrates how the biochemical factors are interlinked towards contributing
to criminal behaviour.
46
FIGURE: 2.2.3
Concept model
The main biochemical factors illustrated in Figure 2.2.3 are explored below.
2.2.5.3.1 Dietary factors

The link between diet and violence is not new. `Since the 19th century, there have
been suggestions that a tendency to antisocial behaviour can result from a biochemical
imbalance arising from nutrition. Research studying the relationship between the
human body chemistry and human behaviour has heightened in recent years.
Preliminary evidence suggests that chemical imbalances in the body might play a
role that is equally as important as an influence on behaviour as are poverty, abuse
and other environmental factors that usually have been accepted as the root causes
of abnormal behaviour. Commonly, most people underestimate the importance of
nutritional dietary factors on human behaviour. However, studies in nutrition and
diet have increased in popularity to examine these internal workings. The existing
literature on aggression and crime is reviewed in order to provide a background on how
aggressive behaviour has been shown to predict criminal activity (Healey, 2012:1–2).
Bio-criminologists maintain that minimum levels of vitamins and minerals are

needed for normal brain functioning and growth, especially in the early years of life.
If people with normal needs do not receive appropriate nutrition, they will inevitably
suffer from vitamin deficiency. People with vitamin deficiency tend to manifest
several physical, mental, and behavioural problems, including lower intelligence test
scores. More recent studies have revealed that an insufficiency of certain chemicals
and minerals, including sodium, potassium, and calcium, can lead to depression,
cognitive problems, memory loss and abnormal sexual activity (Hunter & Dantzker,
2002:6). Recent years have seen increasing interest in nutrition, and its potential
impact on crime. In particular, prisons (where it is possible, within limits, to both
control and change diet, and to observe behaviour) provide an interesting location for
research in this area. Various studies have found correlations between nutrition and
antisocial or aggressive behaviour; the most commonly studied substances are sugar
and cholesterol consumption and lead toxicity (Vold et al, 2002:1). Certain dietary
features such as sugar level and food additives have been found to alter behaviour by
CMY3701/147
affecting individual physiology. The regulation of glucose can be attained by following
proper diet and nutrition (Healey, 2012:13). Research showed that low blood sugar
levels (hypoglycaemia), which is partly caused by an excessive sugar intake, to be
common in habitually violent offenders. The main symptoms of hypoglycaemia are
emotional instability, nervousness, mental confusion, general physical weakness,
delirium and violence (Williams, 2004:14). Virkkunen (1987) (Burke, 2005:67) has
linked hypoglycemia with antisocial activities such as truancy, low verbal IQ, tattooing
and stealing from home during childhood. As a group highly aggressive, troublesome
children demonstrate social and interpersonal skills that are below average for their
age (Bartol & Bartol, 2005:60).
Research has also indicated that there is a link between blood cholesterol and violent
behaviour. However, the methodological shortcomings of these studies on sugar
and cholesterol make it difficult to conclude that causal relationships exist. Food
allergies and food additives have been associated with attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder while a deficiency of vitamin B complex is linked with aggression and erratic
behaviour (Newburn, 2007:143). High lead ingestion is related to lower IQ scores, a
factor also linked to aggressive behaviour (Siegel, 2004:144). Lead has received most
of the scholarly attention regarding the relationship between minerals and subsequent
behavioural problems. Exposure to ecological toxins, like lead, is one form in which
exterior components may affect the body’s proper functioning and increases aggression
(Healey, 2012:18). While numerous attempts have tried to link neurophysiological
factors with crime, many of these theories remain unsubstantiated.
Activity 2.2.3
Discuss biochemical causes of abnormal behaviour.

A body of literature is available to explain and examine the onset of criminal
behavior. At the same time, it is important to highlight that deviant behaviour cannot
be explained by attributing it to a single risk factor. There are several disciplines that
contribute to our understanding of crime and deviant behaviour, these disciplines
include, psychology, sociology, philosophy, biological sciences, criminology and law.
However, the specific criminological theories and methodologies allow it to make
a substantial contribution to the critical questions, why some individuals commit
crime.
48
Activity 2.2.4
Read the following and answer the questions that follow:
Interesting read
Impact of healthy eating on human behaviour
Please read this article and use information from 2.2.3 and the article to answer the
below activity: You may be what you eat, so can you be violent due to your food?
(Yu Du 2019, Vol. 6, Issue 7, 20–28, available at: https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/334171599)
You can find the link above in Lesson 2.2 of the myUnisa module site.
2.2.4.1 In your opinion do you think the African Criminal Justice System can
accommodate such an argument?
2.2.4.2 D oes the influence of diet even feature in our justice system? If not,
what changes can be brought as an awareness of the impact of diet on
behaviour in your respective countries?
2.2.4.3 Share your answers to the activity on the myUnisa discussion forum under
section 2.2.

Having looked at the impact of dietary factors we next examine neurophysiological
factors.
2.2.5.4 Neurophysiological factors

Biological tendencies inclined to crime may be the result of a disruption of normal
neural mechanisms that control and mediate behaviour. Neurophysiological theories
of crime suggest that the dysfunction or damage to areas of the brain contribute to
aggression, violence and antisocial behaviour. Neurophysiology is the study of brain
activity and the brain can be divided into two parts, the cortex and subcortex as seen
in Figure 2.2.4 below. The cerebral cortex is made up of four regions or lobes: frontal,
temporal, parietal and occipital. Most neurophysiological research focus mainly on
the left hemisphere of the brain, specifically on the anterior region made up of frontal
and temporal lobes. Some unreliable evidence links frontal lobe and left hemisphere
dysfunction to aggression violence and antisocial behaviour (Helfgott, 2008:58).
CMY3701/149
FIGURE 2.2.4
Parts of the Human Brain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cerebrum_lobes.svg
Minimum brain dysfunction (MBD) is a neurological impairment that should be noted

in any criminological study. MBD is said to cause an imbalance in the urge-control
mechanism, dyslexia (reading problems), visual perception problems, hyperactivity,
poor attention span, and/or explosive behaviour. Some studies have found that up to
60 per cent of offenders exhibit some brain dysfunction when subject to psychological
tests (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:8).
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) will be focused on next.
2.2.5.4.1 Hyperactivity and attention deficit disorders

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has also been linked to neurological
factors. ADHD is most often found in children who exhibit poor school performance,
bullying, stubbornness, and lack of response to discipline (Hunter & Dantzker,
2002:8). An interesting study by Farrington and others was completed in 1990;
Farrington and his colleagues analysed a longitudinal study of males who were tested
at fixed intervals between the ages of eight and 21. The data included information not
only on their ADHD, but also on their conduct problems at home and school, their
home background, and official and self-reports of delinquency. Farrington and his
associates (Williams, 2004:159) concluded that, although attention deficit problems
and conduct problems are linked to criminality, the causal relationship between these
problems and criminality differ, and are not necessarily wholly biological. There may be
a link, but its causal relationship is not understood, since it is very heavily influenced
by social and environmental conditions. Attention deficit disorder or attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is charactised by three main symptoms, among others
(1) inattention (easily distracted), (2) impulsivity and (3) excessive motor activity (Bartol
and Bartol 2005:64). Satterfield (1987:146), observed that most childhood disorders
are temporary and are not predictive of psychopathology in later life, hyperactivity
syndrome presents a different story. “The hyperactive child presents a remarkably
immutable syndrome that forecasts an ominous picture of the future. The clinical
picture often worsens as the child grows older, with resulting adolescent problems of
50
academic failure and serious antisocial behaviour”. ADHD is a puzzling problem, the
cause of which is largely unknown. Some scientists contend that ADHD children are
born with a biological predisposition toward hyperactivity while others maintain that
some children are exposed to environmental factors that damage the nervous system.
Experts argue that the most common problem associated with ADHD is delinquency
and substance abuse (Bartol & Bartol, 2005:65). It has been found that exposure to
lead in diet and the environment has been shown to negatively affect brain functioning,
bring about learning disabilities and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
in children, and may increase the risk of antisocial behaviour (Vold et al, 2002:1).
A rather diverse group of researchers have recently suggested that impulsivity is key
personality feature associated with antisocial behaviour.
Generally, these researchers assume that impulsivity is manifested in high levels of

activity, a tendency to become impatient and to seek immediate gratification and a
tendency to become distracted. In the Mauritius Child Health Project, Raine and
associates (2003) (Jones, 2006:360) found that children who were assigned to an
‘‘enrichment programme’’ between the ages of three and five were less likely to have
behaved antisocially and committed an offence at twenty-three than members of
a control group who had not been part of the programme. In addition to physical
exercise and special educational activities, the children on the programme were given
a particularly nutritious diet.
Next we look at IQ and criminal behaviour.
2.2.5.4.2 IQ and criminal behaviour

The term IQ is an acronym of the intelligence quotient derived from a numerical
score on a so-called “intelligence” test and originated out of what is now called
the psychometric approach. Low intelligence probably has been the psychological
characteristic most often used to explain criminal and delinquent behaviour. It was
an important theory in the early years of the 20th century but fell out of favour when
research using IQ tests showed little or no difference in intelligence between criminals
and non-criminals (Vold et al 2002:62). Since the 1970s however, there has been
transformation with regard to support for this hypothesis, particularly with respect
to juvenile delinquents. Other factors such as poor nutrition, inadequate prenatal
care, lack of adequate child-care facilities play critical but largely unknown roles in
psychometric intelligence (Bartol & Bartol, 2005:68–69). Later studies revealed that
offenders who committed serious crimes have lower IQ scores than minor offenders,
and that low IQ scores among small children are associated with the probability of
offending when they reached adolescent stage and adulthood. Based on the analogy,
it appears that low IQ scores are associated with crime and delinquency. However, it
is necessary to explain why people with low IQ scores commit crime more frequently
than those with high scores. The explanation that one accepts will depend to a large
degree on one’s view of what IQ measures (Vold et al 2002:66).
There are numerous ways to measure neurological functioning, including memorisation

and visual awareness tests, and verbal IQ tests. These tests have been found to distinguish
offenders from noncriminal control groups (Siegel, 2004:144). Traditionally, the most
important measure of neurophysiological function is the electroencephalograph
(EEG). An EEG records the electric impulses given off by the brain and can detect
abnormalities in brain wave patterns. Howitt (2002:7) indicates that EEG readings
CMY3701/151
tend to show higher rates of abnormal electrical activity in the brains of aggressive/
violent offenders than other offenders and non-offender control groups. There appears
to be some definite link between crime, particularly theft and persistent violence,
and EEG ratings. The exact relationship is not yet fully understood, but because
testing for EEG ratings is generally taken after crime has been committed, it is always
possible that slow EEG activity may be the consequence of criminal activity or a
consequence of the operation of the criminal justice system, rather than the cause of
crime (Williams, 2004:158). Finally, it is important to remember that intelligence
itself cannot be directly measured and the principle measure of intelligence (IQ)
may instead measure reading ability or the motivation to succeed at academic tasks.
If this is the case, then the overall difference in IQ scores between delinquents and
non-delinquents probably reflects environmental rather than genetic factors (Vold
et al 2002:69).
It must be clearly stated that any person who has a low IQ is not in any way labelled
a criminal or potential criminal.
We will next examine environmental exposure to chemicals.
2.2.5.4.3 Environmental exposure to chemicals

Theoretical assumption of the biosocial perspective is that criminal behaviour is
entrenched in both nature (biology) and nurture (environment). According to the
theory, it is the interactions of these different forces that ultimately determine the
individual’s vulnerability to antisocial, violent and criminal behaviour (Ellis, Walsh
& Beave, cited in Healey, 2012:5). Biosocial theory distinguishes the importance
of the environment in influencing human behaviour and proclaims that the same
environment will have varying affects due to individual differences. Biosocial theory
postulates that individuals are not inherently criminal, but precursors to criminal
activity that exists (Healey, 2012:5). Fishbein (1990:33) defines these precursors as
“manifestations of a problem frequently observed in childhood are compounded
by suboptimal environment and social conditions”. Pollution or environmental
contaminants are believed to contribute to criminal behaviour. Substances such as
lead, copper and inorganic gases such as chlorine have been linked to emotional
and behavioural disorders. Lead poisoning has also been found to contribute to
hyperactivity in children and to antisocial behaviour (Siegel, 2004:144). Deborah
Denno (1993) (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:7) investigated the behaviour of more than
900 African American youths and found that lead poisoning was one of the most
significant predictors of male delinquency and persistent adult criminality.
Interesting read
A study by the Justice Crime Prevention and Security Cluster (CJCPS), has shown
that violence is widespread in South African schools. “One in five secondary learners
a total of 22.2% had experienced any violence while at school in the 12 months
between August 2011 and August 2012. This translates to just over a million learners
(1 020 597) across the country.”
52
Activity 2.2.5
Read the following and answer the questions that follow:
Kreifels and Warton (2018), titled: Addressing Violence in South African Schools.
Article is available at:
ht tps:// w w w w.safer spac es.org. z a /under st and /entr y/sc hool -violenc e -
violence-in-south-africa.
Click on the link in Lesson 2.2 on myUnisa.
2.2.5.1 D
iscuss the ‘missing link’ in the contributory factors mentioned to violence
in schools.
2.2.5.2 In your opinion do you think the lack of integration of the biosocial influences
on criminality is the cause of not finding the solution to the surge of school
violence? Explain fully.

Several theoretical perspectives have been used to explain youth violence. To
explain and understand youth offending calls for investigating biosocial influences
in the deviant behaviour. One noticeable absence of South Africa’s Department
of Education lack of integration of biosocial influences on behaviour of school
learners as part of risk factors might be one of the most sought-after solution to
the spike of school violence.
We will investigate hormonal levels next.
2.2.5.4.4 Hormonal levels

Another area of focus in the study of biology and crime is neuroendocrinology.
Neuroendocrinology has credited criminal behaviour to a disparity of the body’s
chemicals. Much of the research that differentiates between deviancy of men and
women is focused on hormones. Although most research on hormones and crime
has focused on males, some work has examined the role hormones play in female
crime, for example a few studies were conducted to test the relationship of hormones,
crime and behavioural problems. Most of these studies were mainly concentrated
on the connection of crime with the menstrual cycle. This connection is referred to
as premenstrual menstrual syndrome (PMS) (Reid, 2018:74). In addition, female
hormones after ovulation have also been associated with irritability, antisocial and
aggressive behaviour. According to Reid (2018:74) PMS is linked with the imbalance
of the two female hormones, estrogen and progesterone. More than 150 symptoms of
PMS have been identified and most of these symptoms are associated with criminal
behaviour and they include depression, irritability, temporary psychosis (Reid, 2018:74).
Research reveal that more than 150 of identified PMS symptoms are not associated
with criminal behaviour, however, of those that might be associated with criminal
behaviour, might include depression, irritability and temporary psychosis.
CMY3701/153
The strength of this linkage has not been established, but it has proven that a small
percentage of women are susceptible to cyclical hormone changes that result in an
increase in hostility (Vold et al, 2002:46). A few studies support the hypothesis that
a higher percentage of crimes of convicted women are committed four days before
and four days after their menstrual cycle. This research has led to the use of the
“PMS defence”. However, research on the links between hormones and criminal
behaviour in women is scarce and no causal relationship has been established (Helfgott,
2005:59–60). Vold (et al 2002:46) asserts that research is varied on the strength
of this linkage, therefore the results are not conclusive. Another hormone-related
diagnosis among women is postpartum depression (PPD). (Reid, 2018:75) further
asserts that the number of new mothers with a mental problem following childbirth
is higher among teens and low-income women, where it approaches one in four.
Depressed mothers’ destructive behaviour affect their infants’ “brain growth and
subsequent social and emotional health as a result of inadequate prenatal care, poor
birth outcomes and impaired parenting practices” (Reid, 2018:75).
On the other hand, studies on the relationship between hormones and crime have
focused on testosterone and other male hormones called androgens. Male sex hormones
operating on the human brain appear to increase the probability of “competitive/
victimising behaviour”. Furthermore, some other studies reveal that testosterone is
associated with juvenile delinquency, but the association between testosterone and
antisocial behaviour diminishes in adulthood. Some criminologists link criminal
behaviour to hormonal imbalances in the body, arguing that the male sex hormone,
testosterone, accounts for aggressive behaviour. Several studies, such as that by Dabbs
and Morris (1990), have found that male adolescents and adults with records of violent
and other crimes have higher testosterone levels than males without criminal records
(Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:8). One study of the relationship between testosterone
and aggression concluded that there is “convincing evidence from a wide number
of behavioural studies for a link between high testosterone and increased aggressive
behaviour, but it was found that the relationship might be weak or even absent
with respect to the aggression levels of children”. These studies point to the effect of
socialisation and other environmental factors on testosterone levels (Reid, 2018:75).
The relevance of these findings, however, is uncertain because a causal link between
hormones and male criminal behaviour has not been established (Cassel & Bernstein,
2007:69).
A critical question to ask is whether the relationship between testosterone and aggression
and violence is causal.
Next we will look at personality and criminal behaviour.
2.2.5.4.5 Personality and criminal behaviour

Personality theory examines behavioural characteristics that are entrenched in a
person’s being and individuality (Reid, 2018:76). The term personality refers to the
complex set of emotional and behavioural attributes that tend to remain relatively
constant as the individual moves from situation to situation. The earlier studies
highlighted the incidence of association between personality characteristics and
crime. The general view is that individual characteristics have an effect of triggering
criminal behaviour and in some cases contributed to the incarceration of offenders
with mental problems. Modern criminologists take the position that personality and
54
crime may be related in that some individuals may be crime prone, because of those
factors that predispose them to do deviancy (Reid, 2018:75–77).
Eysenck (cited in Bartol & Bartol, 2008:96) proposed that criminal behaviour is the
result of an interaction between certain environmental conditions and features of the
nervous system. Eysenck held that a wide-ranging theory of criminality must allow for
an investigation of the neurophysiological make up and the unique socialisation history
of each individual. He further argued that the explanation of crime and deviancy is
complex, and it cannot be understood in terms of heredity or environmental factors
only, but other predisposing factors must also be considered (Eysenck, 1973:171).
Eysenck and Gudjonsson (1989:7) assert that “It is not crime itself or criminality that
is innate, it is certain peculiarities of the central and autonomic nervous system that
react with the environment factors to increase the probability that a given person
would act in a certain antisocial manner”. Characteristics of neuroticism are anxious,
depressed, emotional, guilt feelings, irrational, low self-esteem, moody, shy and tense
(Howitt, 2002:68). Other characteristics of psychoticism are antisocial, creative,
egocentric, impulsive, tough-minded and lacking empathy. The individual who is
high on the psychoticism scale will tend to be solitary, uncaring, and cruel and will
not fit in with others. Eysenck associates extremes of this dimension with criminality
and the higher level of offending. (Williams, 2004:176).
Based on a series of empirical studies and antisocial analyses, Eysenck argued that
there are four higher order factors of personality, one higher order factor for ability
called “g” (general intelligence) and three higher order factors for temperament
called extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. According to Bartol and Bartol
(2008:97), a substantial body of knowledge on crime and personality mainly focused
on extraversion and neuroticism, which are fundamentally the core concepts of
Eysenck’s theory. Eysenck did not identify psychoticism until he found a need to
account for behaviour not fully explained by extraversion or neuroticism.
Eysenck visualised each of the three temperament or personality factors on continuum,

with the neuroticism and extraversion lines at right angles and intersecting psychoticism
is on a separate continuum as shown in Figure 2.2.5.
CMY3701/155
FIGURE 2.2.5
Eysenck’s visualisation of the three temperament or personality factors on
continuum
According to this argument, the majority of people fall in the intermediate or

midpoint area of each and people are rarely at either extreme (see Figure 2.2.5).
The extraversion dimension runs from the extreme pole extraversion to the extreme
pole introversion, with the middle range called ambiversion. Thus, depending on
where a person falls on this dimension, that person may be an extravert, introvert,
or ambivert. The neuroticism continuum runs from the polar ends of neuroticism
to stability, with no middle label. Psychoticism runs from tough-mindedness (high
psychoticism) to tender mindedness (low psychoticism) also with no label for the
middle majority. The extraversion dimension is believed to reflect basis functions of
the central nervous system (CNS), which consists of the brain and spinal cord, while
neuroticism represents functions of the peripheral nervous system.
Given the wide range of ideas that has been briefly explored in this study unit, it
is arguably difficult to reach anything approaching a solid conclusion about our
understanding of criminal conduct. That said, most reviews of evidence in this area
tend to conclude by making three general points, as indicated by Newburn (2007:143):
Biological factors almost certainly play some role in criminal conduct.
The extent of this role is generally small.
Such effects are heavily mediated by, or only occur in, interaction with broader social or
environmental factors.
56
Activity 2.2.6
Discuss Eysenck’s biosocial theory of crime.

Psychological and criminological explanations of human behaviour undertake
that behaviour arises from contact between the individual and the environment.
The emphasis is on the assumption that behaviour is learned and the modeling
or observation of such behaviour is reinforced if it is rewarded. It is assumed that
this behavioural consistency depends primarily on the persistence of underlying
tendencies to behave in particular ways in certain situations. These inclinations are
termed ‘personality traits’, such as impulsiveness, assertiveness and excitement.
Eysenck proposed that the conscience was built up from childhood. The hypothesis
was that people who committed crime were those who did not build up a strong
conscience because they have innately poor condition-ability (Farrington & Ttofi,
2012).
Activity 2.2.7
Identify and explain critical factors relating to biosocial theory of criminality.

Social phenomena are multifaceted and multi-dimensional and are demonstrated
by the associations and connections among individuals living in groups and within
social context. A biosocial perspective draws on models and methods from the
biological, medical, behavioural and social sciences. It theorises the biological
and social as commonly establishing forces, and shapes limitations between
phenomena inside and outside the body. Please analyse this statement based on
the discussion on the biosocial theory of criminality.
2.2.6 CONCLUSION
The link between biology and crime begins with determinism, the theory that
claims it is factors beyond a person’s control that determine his or her behaviour.
Determinism was the basis of the first biological theory of criminality offered by
Lombroso: Lombroso argued that criminality was linked to physical characteristics.
Following in the footsteps of Lombroso were Goring and Dugdale, who believed
that heredity was linked to criminal behaviour and who looked at family history as
a possible factor in criminality. Later on, Sheldon examined the link between body
types and criminal behaviour, and his findings were reinforced by Glueck’s research.
More recent research has included theories involving twins and adoption studies.
Eysenck’s biosocial theory of crime includes certain aspects of genetics, constitution,
CMY3701/157
personality and environment. Contemporary biological research has examined
nutrition, hormones, environment and neurophysiological factors.
These conclusions are somewhat removed from the biological positivist model adopted
by Lombroso and his successors, which sought to find a direct link between physical
characteristics and criminality. Contemporary approaches are much more likely to talk
of the possibility of heritable characteristics, or biochemical influences, as predisposing
factors that potentially influence the likelihood of subsequent behaviour.

clear.

(1) Research reveals that ........... cause an imbalance in the urge-control

mechanism, dyslexia, visual problems, hyperactivity, poor attention
span and/or explosive behaviour.
(a) hormones
(b) environmental contaminants
(c) minimal brain dysfunctions (MBD)
(d) poor diets
(2) The characteristics of neuroticism include:

(a) low self-esteem
(b) lack of empathy
(c) antisocial behaviour
(d) the display of cruelty
(3) Who postulated that certain persons who engage in criminal

behaviour are “born criminal”?
(a) Beccaria
(b) Hirschi
(c) Lombroso
(d) Sutherland
(4) Research found that although genetic background has a strong

influence on whether an individual will engage in antisocial
behaviour, the ........... has proven to have an even stronger influence.
58
(a) twin studies

(b) neurological effects
(c) environmental factors
(d) adoptees studies
(5) Eysenck’s theory places heavy emphasis on ........... predisposition

toward antisocial and criminal behaviour.
(a) temporal psychosis
(b) neuroendocrinology
(c) intelligence quotient
(d) genetic disposition
(6) Discuss Lombro’s belief that it is possible to identify offenders by their

biology. (10)
(7) Biochemical factors can be used to explain criminal behaviour. Write

short notes on the role of diet, hormones and the environment in
criminal behaviour. (15)
2.2.7.3.2 Answers to self-assessment questions
1. (c)
2. (a)
3. (c)
4. (c)
5. (d)
2.2.7.3.3 Paragraph-type question answer
For the purpose of question 6 and 7 respectively see paragraph 2.1.4,

2.1.3 and 2.1.5.
CMY3701/159
2.2.8 REFERENCES
these references.
Akers, R. L., & Sellers, C. S. 2013. Student Guide for Criminological Theories:
Introduction, Evaluation, Application. (6th edition). Oxford University Press.
New York.
Barker, L.A., Tuvblad, C., & Raine, A. 2010. Genetics and Crime. Available at:
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upmbinaries/54473_McLaughlin_
paperback_handbook_ch_1.pdf. (accessed on 18 April 2021)
Bartollas, C. 2006. Juvenile delinquency. (7th edition) Boston, MA: Pearson.
Bartol, C. ., & Bartol, A M. 2005. Criminal Behaviour: A Psychosocial Approach. (7th
edition). Pearson: Prentice Hall.
Burke, R.H. 2005. An introduction to criminological theory. (2nd edition). Cullompton,
Devon: Willan.
Cassel, E., & D.A., Bernstein. 2007. Criminal behaviour. (2nd edition). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cote, S. 2002. Criminological theories: bridging the past to the future. London: Sage.
Ellis, L. 2005. A theory explaining biological correlates of criminality. European
Journal of Criminology, 2(3): 287–315.
Eysenck, H.J., & Gudjonsson, G.H. 1989. The causes and cures of criminality. New
York: Plenum.
Fishbein, D. 1990. Biological perspectives in criminology. Criminology, 28(1): 27–72.
Glick, L. 2005. Criminology. Pearson Education, Inc.
Hagens, O. 2007. Intelligence quotient: definition, evaluation and problems as a
measure of ‘intelligence’. Available at: https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/bitstream/
handle/fub188/7016/15_AppendixA.pdf?sequence=16&isAllowed=y (accessed
on 19 April 2021)
Healey, L.E. 2012. The relationship between diet and aggression in adolescents.
Unpublished Masters degree. Michigan State University.
Hollin, C. 2001. Conditioning, in the Sage Dictionary of Criminology, edited by
E McLaughlin & J. Muncie. London: Sage.
Hunter, R.D., & M.L. Dantzker. 2002. Crime and criminality: causes and consequences.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Jones, S. 2001. Criminology. (3rd edition). New York: Oxford University Press.
Joyce, P. 2006. Criminal justice: a introduction to crime and the criminal justice system.
Morley, K., & Hall. W. 2003. Is there a genetic susceptibility to engage in criminal
acts? Australian Institute of Criminology. Available at: https://www.aic.gov.
au/sites/default/files/2020-05/tandi263_0.pdf (accessed on 18 April 2021).
Reid, S.T. 2003. Crime and criminology. (10th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reid, S.T. 2006. Crime and criminology. (10th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reid, S.T. 2018. Crime and Criminology. (15th edition). Criminal Justice Series.
Wolters Kluwer: New York.
Rhee, S.H., & Waldman, I. 2002. “Genetic and environmental influences on antisocial
behavior: a meta-analysis of twin and adoption studies”, Psychological Bulletin,
vol. 128. No.3, pp. 490–529.
Siegel, L.J. 2004. Theories, patterns & typologies. (8th edition). Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth.
60
Vold, GB., Bernard, T.J., & Snipes, J B. 2002. Theoretical criminology. (5th edition).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Walsh, A., & Beaver, K.M. (eds). 2008. Biological criminology: New direction in theory
and research. New York: Routledge.
Williams, F.P., & McShane, M.D. 2004. Criminological theory. (4th edition). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Williams, K.S. 2004. Textbook on Criminology. (5th edition). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Winfree, Jr, L.T., & Abadisky, H. 2017. Essential of Criminological Theory. (4th
edition). Waveland Press, Inc.
CMY3701/161
5 STUDY UNIT 2.3
5 Psychological explanations for criminal
behaviour (Psychological positivism)
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• explain the psychodynamic perspective

• explain the behavioural perspective
• explain the cognitive perspective
• list and discuss the critical factors relating to the three perspectives

FIGURE 2.3.1
62
STUDY UNIT 2.3: Psychological explanations for criminal behaviour (psychological positivism)
2.3.1 INTRODUCTION
This study unit examines theories that explain criminal behaviour primarily based on
psychological theories in terms of the offender’s personality attributes. Psychological
theorists argue that criminal behaviour originates in the personality of the offender
rather than their biology or their situational environmental factors. Psychological
explanations of crime and criminal behaviour have their basis in the predestined
actor model of crime and criminal behaviour. The causes of crime are dysfunctional,
abnormal emotional adjustment or deviant personality traits formed during the period
of childhood development and early socialisation. As a result of these factors, the
individual is, to all intents and purposes, ‘‘destined’’ to become a criminal (Burke,
2005:89). The only way to avoid that ‘‘destiny’’ is to identify the predisposing
conditions and provide some form of psychiatric intervention that will remove these
factors and enable the individual to become a normal, law-abiding citizen.
Psychological theories have been generally classified as falling into one of three
categories:
• Psychodynamic or psychoanalytic perspective

• Behavioural perspective
• Cognitive perspective

BEHAVIOURAL PERSPECTIVE focuses primarily on overt behaviour, its
observable antecedents and consequences, rather than upon internal processes.
Behaviourists stress social learning and behaviour modelling as the key to criminality
(Coleman & Norris, 2002:52; Siegel, 2004:154).
COGNITIVE APPROACH cognitions refer to the attitudes, beliefs, values, and

thoughts that people maintain regarding the social environment, human nature, and
the themselves (Bartol & Bartol, 2017:8). Cognitive bahavioural approaches emphasis
on the role that cognitive appraisal and other internal processes contribute in violent
acts (Palmer, 2012:20).
PLEASURE PRINCIPLE according to Freud, a theory in which id- dominated

people are generally motivated to increase their personal pleasure with the lack of
appreciating the consequence of their actions (Siegel, 2012:664). Cognitive perspective
is concerned with mental processes such as perception, memory, decision-making
and problem-solving (Coleman & Norris, 2000:32).
PSYCHODYNAMIC OR PSYCHOANALYTIC PERSPECTIVE takes the view

that people have a complex inner mental life, much of which takes place at an
unconscious level, and which holds the key to understanding behaviour (Coleman
& Norris, 2000:32). This perspective is viewed as branch of psychology and asserts
that an individuals’ personality is controlled by one’s unconscious mental processes
that developed early in the early years of childhood (Siegel, 2012:665). Psychoanalysis
focus on early childhood experience and its effect on personality (Siegel, 2004:154).
SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY maintains that people learn behaviour from one
another, either through observation, imitation or reinforcement of an act that goes
unpunished. The theory has been defined as a bridge between behaviourist and
CMY3701/163
cognitive learning theories because it incorporates attention, memory and motivation
(Farrington & Ttofi, 2012:38).
Behavioural theories examine the learning processes that led to criminal behaviour.
2.3.3 PSYCHODYNAMIC OR PSYCHOANALYTIC PERSPECTIVE

Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), the Austrian psychiatrist, was the founder of
psychodynamic or psychoanalytic psychology and this has since remained a
prominent school within psychological theory (Siegel, 2004:154). The focus of the
psychodynamic theories of criminal behaviour is mainly on the development of the
inner self (psyche) in infancy. The assumption of this perspective is that motivation
for criminal behaviour is entrenched in an individual’s psychodynamic structure and
development (Helfgott, 2008:61). Freud contributed immensely to the theories of the
development of personality and emphasised that it is the result of social experience
(Glick, 2005:110). Although Freud wrote little on crime as such, his theories about
the development of the personality have been used by some of his followers to explain
how and why individuals engage in antisocial or criminal acts.
According to the psychodynamic theorists humans will continuously be disposed to

aggressive impulses and the likelihood of the commission of violent crimes if these
impulses are not properly managed (Bartol & Bartol, 2005:241). The psychoanalytic
theories of Freud and his colleagues introduced the concept of the unconscious, and
emphasised the fact that all human behaviour is motivated and deliberate (Reid,
2006:102). Psychodynamic theories examine unconscious behaviours that are believed
to cause criminal behaviour. Behavioural theories examine the learning processes
that led to criminal behaviour. Cognitive theories look at how thought processes
(e.g. thinking and moral judgment) influence one’s behaviour (Hunter & Dantzker,
2002:67). The psychodynamic perspective is based on the belief that thought and
emotions are significant causes of behaviour. In other words, the basic cause of
criminal behaviour is ‘‘seated within’’ the individual. Considerable emphasis is placed
on early childhood because early life experiences have a significant influence on the
child’s future behaviour.
We focus on Freud’s personality theory next.
2.3.3.1 Freud’s personality theory

Freud’s best-known contribution to psychology is his emphasis on the unconscious
and the part the unconscious plays in people’s mental functioning (Jones, 2001:400).
According to Freud, the personality is divided into three parts that are always in
conflict with one another: id, ego and superego (Glick, 2005:111) as summarised in
Figure 2.3.2 below:
64
FIGURE 2.3.2
Freud’s Id, Ego, and Superego (Glick 2005:111)
Each component of Freud’s Id, Ego, and Superego is expanded on as follows:
• At birth, we are all id: that is our personality consists of primitive impulses and
unconscious drives. It has no sense of time, order or morals. The id continually seeks
pleasure, is extremely charged with energy, and remains unconscious throughout
life. Freud holds that the human personality contains a three-part structure.
Freud started from the position that individuals are biologically provided with
specific pleasure-seeking and destructive tendencies (Siegel, 2004:154). These
basic drives or instincts, such as to eat, to avoid pain and obtain sexual pleasure
derive from the unconscious part of the mind and are expressed in an energy
which Freud referred to as the identity (Jones, 2006:400). The identity requires
instant gratification without concern for the rights of others and is only drive.
An uncontrolled libido will result in rape and other deviant behaviours (Brown,
Esbensen & Geis, 2001:269).
• The ego is that segment of the personality which is conscious and rational. It
progresses as the child starts to understand that he or she is separate from other
individuals and objects in the environment. The ego acts as a mediator between
the unconscious impulses stemming from the id and the demands of the superego.
The second structure is the ego, which develops early in life, when a child begins to
learn that his or her wishes cannot be instantly gratified. The ego is the conscious
state of the personality, and operates on the reality principle, which orientates the
person toward the real world in which he or she lives (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:69).
The ego considers the practical and the conventional according to prevailing social
norms. The ego has the task of balancing the demands of the identity against the
inhibitions imposed by the third structure of the personality, the superego in the
individual’s response to external influences (Burke, 2005:74–75).
• The superego is a “social conscience” that represents society’s social restrictions
and morality. As individuals interact with others, they are automatically subject to
external parental authority. The child identifies with parent figures and internalises
parental and societal values into their own personality. Therefore, the superego
emerges.
CMY3701/165
The superego is the force of self-criticism and conscience. It is the moral aspect of our
personalities and we use the superego to judge our own and other people’s behaviour
(Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:69). The superego is divided into two parts: conscience
and ego ideal. Conscience tells us what is right and wrong. It forces the ego to control
the identity and directs the individual towards morally acceptable behaviour ego-
ideal, which may not be pleasurable (Siegel, 2004:154). Freud, Cassel and Bernstein
(2007:81) believed the identity, the ego and the superego are constantly at odds
with one another, and therefore create struggles known as intra-psychic conflict. In
addition, Freud believed the following:
Freud believed that as people we all carry with us a need that play a major role to our
emotional attachments of our childhood, which ultimately guides us on how we view
our interpersonal relationships in future (Siegel, 2018:159). Further, Siegel, maintains
that the superego develops as a result of incorporating personality, moral standards
and values of the significant others. The superego is mostly responsible for the moral
aspect of individual’s personality. meaning, The superego is divided into two parts,
that is, the conscience and ego ideal. The superego is responsible for conscientising
a person on differentiating between what is right or wrong. This process indirectly
forces the ego to control the id and directs the individual into adopting acceptable
values, norms and behaviour(Siegel, 2018:158).
2.3.3.2 Explanation of criminal behaviour

Brown et al (2001:270) contended that conflict, particularly during childhood, needs
to be resolved appropriately. Unresolved conflicts will increase the likelihood of
problem behaviour in later years. Because many of these conflicts involve a person’s
most threatening memories, thoughts, and impulses, they are usually kept out of
consciousness by what Freud called defence mechanisms. Defence mechanisms can
be adaptive in that they help people to function in society, but if people rely too
heavily on them, they may lead to certain problems. These problems can range from
seemingly irrational symptoms of anxiety, worry, and guilt to substance abuse and
interpersonal conflict, physical dysfunctions, and even severe mental disorders. Indeed,
Freud believed that the type, number and intensity of intra-psychic conflicts and the
defence mechanism required to deal with shaped the personality and, in extreme
cases, led to mental disorders (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:81). Displacement is another
defence mechanism that can help to explain some instances of child or spouse abuse.
The abuser may be too afraid to direct anger toward a boss or other authority figure
and may instead turn on a helpless child or submissive spouse. An abused spouse,
in turn, may not be able to respond appropriately to abuser’s aggression and may
“take it out” on the child (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:83). Although Freud did not
actually address the psychodynamic roots of criminal behaviour, he believed that
many criminals are driven by the unconscious desire to be punished by society for
behaviours that preceded their crimes, so that guilt comes not as the result of criminal
behaviour, but as its unconscious cause ( Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:83). According to
Freud (Brown et al., 2001:269–270), sublimation is healthy response to guilt. In such
instances, the individual channels his or her drives into socially approved activities.
Sigmund Freud believed that offenders have overdeveloped superegos that lead to “guilt,
anxiety, and consequent desire for punishment” (Glick, 2005:110). Freud suggests
that violence in all its forms is a display of the discharge of aggressive energy. The
psychoanalytical perspective is of the view that, if violent crime is to be controlled,
66
the human animal must be provided with multiple and appropriate channels for
catharsis (Bartol & Bartol, 2005:242).
Freud believed that the majority of criminals have a sense of guilt before they commit a
crime. Therefore, wrongdoing is not the result of guilt but of motive. That is, criminal
behaviour may be the result of an overdeveloped superego that causes a powerful sense
of guilt in the individual (Glick, 2005:111). In contrast to Freud, August, Aichorn
believed that criminality is the result of an underdeveloped superego.
August Aichorn’s research on delinquent boys (1935) in Lilly et al (2007:241)

supported the view that the criminal has a weak ego, a weak or absent superego and
a strong identity. Aichorn was a psychoanalyst who administered an institution for
juvenile delinquents. He observed that many incarcerated youths had underdeveloped
superegos, and he attributed their criminality to expressions of an unregulated id.
Aichorn (cited in Joyce, 2006:11) suggested that a lack of parental love or supervision
resulted in the underdevelopment of the child’s superego and this in turn led to his or
her subsequent delinquency. According to Aichorn, “The parents of these children were
either absent or unloving, so that the children failed to form the intimate attachments
necessary for the proper development of their superegos”. He argued that repeat young
offenders had a predisposition for criminal behaviour because of their inability to
control the identity’s demands for instant gratification. This was exacerbated by the
failure of the superego to develop sufficient strength to generate respect for others
and a sense of right and wrong. Having little or no superego development, criminals
are said to lack a conscience and to have no empathy for others. A weak ego can
easily be influenced by peer pressure and other social forces and this too, increases
the likelihood of criminal behaviour (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:83).
These insights lead us to evaluate the psychoanalytic perspective on criminal behaviour.
2.3.3.3 Evaluation of the psychoanalytic perspective on criminal behaviour

Critics of psychoanalytic perspectives on criminal behaviour are of the view that
the theories are untestable and that the psychoanalytic explanations of behaviour
are “made after the behaviour has occurred and rely heavily on interpretations
of unconscious motivations” (Glick, 2005:111). Conklin (1995:155) asserts that
psychoanalytic work on crime often takes the form of case studies of offenders. In
these studies, psychiatrists are generally aware that a crime has been committed
before they commence with examining the patient. The examination is done through
a process that is referred as a “biographic reconstruction”. This process allows them
to demonstrate that certain traits and aspects of the patient’s background led to the
crime. Rettig, Torres and Garret (cited in Conklin, 1995:155) concluded that these
case studies do not constitute an indication of the psychoanalytic explanation of
crime, because the evidence found might be an indication of a “dormant capacity
for delinquency in any normal individual”. In essence, psychoanalytic explanations
claim that, to be fully socialised, young children must internalise society’s rules,
psychoanalysis also claims that problems in the parent-child relationship can lead
to criminal behaviour in later life, and that some crimes result from earlier conflicts
which are stored in the unconscious mind (Jones, 2001:409). However, few modern
psychologists make direct use of Freudian concepts simply because, when subjected to
research, these concepts have been found to be without firm basis. However, some of
the ideas put forward by psychoanalysis have been highly influential in directing the
CMY3701/167
attention of researchers to the impact of early life experiences, especially parenting,
on later delinquency and criminality (Howitt, 2002:63). This leads us to examine
the behavioural explanations for crime.
2.3.4 BEHAVIOURAL PERSPECTIVE

Originating in the late 1800s, behaviour theory gained attention in the 20th century
through the works of psychologist B.F. Skinner. Behaviour theory is the basis for
behaviour modification, a treatment approach used in institutionalised and non-
institutionalised settings for behaviour modification. The approach is mainly focused
on observable behaviour, which contrasts with the traditional psychoanalytic emphasis
on deep, underlying personality problems that must be uncovered and treated.
Behaviour theory is based on the belief that what is significant is not the unconscious
but, rather, behaviour that can be observed and manipulated (Reid, 2018:79).
Glick (2005:113) claims that behavioural theories take a diverse approach to

psychoanalytic explanations. Behavioural theories do not focus on basic biological
drives, child-parent relationships, or unconscious thought drives.
Behavioural theorists maintain that human behaviour is developed through learning

experiences. Psychologists define learning as a change of pre-existing behaviour or
mental processes that occurs as a result of experience (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:85).
Behavioural theorists argue that our behaviours are shaped by other people’s reactions
to us. Behaviours are constantly being shaped by life experiences and can be reinforced
by rewards or eradicated through punishment (Hunter & Dantzker, 2002:71). In
addition, they believe that what is important is not the unconscious, but behaviour
that can be observed and manipulated. Behavioural theorists argue that behaviour is
controlled by its consequences in dealing directly with behaviours that are undesirable.
As such, behavioural therapy attempts to change a person’s long-established patterns of
response to him- or herself and to others (Reid, 2006:105). According to behavioural
theorists, people learn to become violent because their life experiences have taught
them to be aggressive. These experiences include personally observing others acting
aggressively, achieving some personal goal through aggression, and watching people
being rewarded for violent acts, either on television or in films (Siegel, 2004:156).
Reid (2018:80) postulates that collectively the learning theories and biological
approaches attempt to explain criminal behaviour. Eysenck highlighted the
interrelationship that exists between psychology and biology in explaining how
people learn to behave (see previous unit). This approach advocates that individuals
learn both appropriate and inappropriate behaviour through a process of training
that involves rewards (for appropriate behaviour), punishment (for inappropriate)
behaviour and this conditioning is based on the work of early behavioural theorists
Skinner (operant conditioning) and Pavlov (classical conditioning).
There are three main explanations as to how individuals learn by association:
• Classical conditioning
• Operant conditioning
• Social learning
Each of the three main explanations of how individuals learn by association will be
unpacked starting with classical conditioning.
68
2.3.4.1 Classical conditioning

Classical (Pavlovian) conditioning involves the increase or decrease of behaviours
through pairing and removal of stimuli. Classical conditioning is a learned response
to a stimulus and describes the process by which a learnt reaction becomes automatic
and internalised. Pavlov’s experiment found that dogs began to salivate when a bell
rang because they knew from conditioning that the bell symbolised that they would
be fed (Reid, 2018:80). Pavlov found that after feeding his dogs following the ringing
of a bell, the dogs began to salivate when they heard the bell even if food was not
presented. The dog’s primary or unconditioned stimulus was the food, which caused
a primary physiological response. The secondary or conditioned stimulus was the
ringing of the bell, which itself was not the root cause of the salivation. This meant
the dogs learned to salivate at the sound of the bell with or without the presentation of
food (Helfgott, 2008:67). Pavlov concluded that the dog’s salivation was an automatic
response and that they could, therefore, be conditioned to respond to other stimuli.
According to the classical conditioning theory, the subject is passive and learns what
to expect from the environment (Jones, 2001:412). The feeling of fear is an example
of a response which often results from conditioned responses to pain felt early in
life. As far as crime and punishment are concerned, classical conditioning is of little
significance, since punishment by the criminal justice system does not immediately
follow the criminal act.
The main explanations of how individuals learn by association, namely operant

conditioning are looked at next.
2.3.4.2 Operant conditioning

Operant conditioning involves behaviour that is increased either through reinforcements
or decreased through punishment (Helfgott, 2008:67). Operant conditioning is based
on a reaction that results from an action taken. It is argued that this is the most
influential form of training. Generally, behaviour is influenced or reinforced by
rewards. The way behaviour is accepted whether rewarded or reinforced automatically
influences appropriate behaviour or inappropriate (misbehaviour) behaviour.
People learn by models. This means social learning occurs through either observation
of how others behave or from the media. “In many languages, the verb to teach is
synonymous with the verb to show” (Reid, 2018:80). Bartol and Bartol (2008:118–119)
emphasised three elements in operant learning:
• Antecedent conditions (the things that precede or trigger behaviours)

• The behaviour itself
• The consequences of the behaviour
Bartol and Bartol (2008:119) emphasised that there may be many triggers for a given
behaviour and for a behaviour to change, one may have to change the antecedent
conditions that trigger the behaviour. A behaviour that produces consequences that
the individual finds rewarding and increases the frequency of that behaviour is said
to be reinforced. A behaviour that produces consequences that the individual finds
unpleasant and that therefore decreases the frequency of this behaviour is said to be
punished. The process of learning through consequences is referred to as operant (or
instrumental) conditioning (Hollin, 2001:47). In operant conditioning, behaviour is
understood in terms of an interaction between the person and the environment. The
CMY3701/169
environment and the person influence each other. Environmental forces are many and
diverse, for example, educational, economic, the media and legal systems. In other
words, operant conditioning is another method of learning by association. Operant
learning uses rewards and punishment to reinforce or curtail certain unconventional
behaviours. Therefore, criminal behaviour is largely determined by an absence of
aversive consequences (Jones, 2001:413).
The principles of classical conditioning, operant conditioning and social learning

can help people to understand the role that parents, peers, and other environmental
forces play in the development of childhood and adolescent behaviour that may be
disruptive, deviant, and eventually criminal. For example, some children may learn
criminal skills by watching admired criminal role models, by being rewarded for
criminal behaviour and by associating excitement and peer acceptance with criminal
activity (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:88).
The last of the main explanations of how individuals learn by association, namely
social learning is explored next.
2.3.4.3 Social learning theory

There are several variations on learning theory including expectancy theory, imitation
or modelling, and differential association (a sociological theory discussed in Theme 4).
Social psychologists have framed philosophies that describe how children learn violence
through socialisation and how to behave in society. These socialisation-based theories
are collectively referred as social learning theory. Albert Bandura asserted that children
learn violent or aggressive behaviour as they observe role models, imitate these models
and act out the roles. According to Bandura people are not born with the capability
of acting aggressively, but such behaviour is learned through observation and life
experiences. Although the social learning theorists maintain that physical or mental
characteristics contribute towards certain individuals being more susceptible towards
violence, the activation of such beahviour is also influenced by environmental factors
(Siegel, 2018:163).
The table below illustrates the proponents of the psychoanalytic and behavioural
theories of crime including their premises.
70
Table 2.2
Psychoanalytic vs. Behavioural theories of Crime
THEORIST THEORY
Sigmund Freud Crime is the result of an overdeveloped ego.
August Aichorn Crime is the result of an underdeveloped

superego.
Albert Bandura People learn aggressiveness and violent

behaviour through their life experiences and
socialisation.
Adapted (from Glick, 2005:114).
Social learning theory claims that behaviour is reinforced not only by rewards and
punishments as in operant learning, but also by observing the behaviour of others by
using others as models (Jones, 2001:413). Psychological learning theory recognises that
individuals have physiological mechanisms that permit them to behave aggressively,
but whether they will behave violently will depend on what was learned, as is the
nature of their aggressive behaviour. Learning theorists view consequences as factors
that influence behaviour. The three types of consequences are
(1) external reinforcement (including social status and punishment);

(2) vicarious reinforcement (such as noting the status of others whom one observes
being reinforced for their behaviour); and
(3) self-regulatory mechanisms (such as how one responds to own actions in ways
that bring self-rewards or self-punishment).
Learning theorists focus on the importance of the family, the subculture and the
media (Reid, 2018:80). Social learning theorists argue that people are not actually
born with an inclination to act violently, but that they learn to be aggressive through
their life experiences. People learn to act aggressively when, as children, they model
their behaviour on the violent acts of adults. Later in life, these violent behaviour
patterns persist in social relationships. The nature of this learning, together with the
physical attributes of the offender, determines the type of crime that is carried out.
As offenders become more skilled, they are better able to select more appropriate
targets (i.e. where they are likely to be successful and avoid detection). For example,
physically slightly individuals learn that the best way to commit robberies successfully
is to arm themselves.
Bandura asserts that children learn violent and aggressive responses from the behavioural
models (Glick, 2005:115). It is important to note that aggression and violence are
learned not only through interaction with others but also in other social settings
that act as learning experiences, such as the presentation of violence and aggression
in films and on television. Modelling theory attempts to explain that children learn
by observing others and the outcomes of behaviour acquired. This perspective posits
that criminal behaviour is acquired through learning. Children exposed to violent
models tend to imitate the exact behaviour. This modelling includes environmental
factors that contribute to one’s behavioural change from the ‘normal norm’. It has
been observed that people who live in areas in which violence is a daily occurrence
CMY3701/171
are more likely to act violently than those who live in low-crime areas where exposure
to normlessness is minimal.
Social theorists maintain that the following three factors may contribute to violent
and/or aggressive behaviour:
• Social theorists maintain that the four factors that may contribute to the display
of violent and /or aggressive behaviour are as follows (Siegel, 2018:166):
• An event that heightens arousal: an aggressive response is likely to occur if person
is provoked or frustrated.
• Aggressive skills: learned aggressive response is expected if a person has been
exposed to such behaviour through observing other.
• Expected outcomes: the belief that an aggressive behaviour is rewarded through
reduction of tension or boosting one’s self-esteem.
• Consistency of behaviour with values: the belief that aggressive behaviour is
justified by observing such behaviour being reinforced.
The importance of social learning theory lies in the fact that it views the learning
of complex forms of behaviour holistically rather than as a process of slow, linear
conditioning. Social learning theory stresses the importance of normal processes in
the acquisition of behaviour. This means that there is no need to assume some sort
of pathology in people who eventually become criminals. (Howitt, 2002:71–72). We
need to bear in mind that learning theories have not produced an individual theory
of criminality. There is little consideration of differences between individuals and
no real attention is paid to the variables of gender and age. Social learning’s weak
ability to explain under what circumstances criminal behaviour will or will not be
learnt means that it has limited explanatory power (Howitt, 2002:71–72). Learning
theories can also be criticised for failing to account for the fact that large numbers of
offenders abandon criminal activities in early adulthood (Jones, 2001:427).
Interesting read
Impact of violence against children: WHO. Available at: https://www.who.int/

news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-children
The effects of crime and violence on the school-aged child. Available: https://healthfully.
com/158824-the-effect-of-crime-violence-on-the-school-child.html
The links to the above end in Lesson 2.3 of the myUnisa module site.
Please read these articles and use information from 2.3.3.3 to answer the following
activity.
Activity 2.3.1
2.3.2.1 A childhood history of exposure to violence increases the risk for what
type of behaviour in an individual?
2.3.2.2 Is there a single criminological profile to explain this statement? Discuss
fully.
72
2.3.3.2 Explanations of criminal behaviour

Theories vary in terms of how well they predict a phenomenon. They play a vital
role to understand and predict human behaviour. To decide whether a theory has a
merit or still applies in a changing society it is imperative to evaluate it and verify if
its argument is still supported.
16 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 2.3.1.

Exposure to violence is linked with an increased risk of emotional, psychological,
social and behavioural problems. Also, such children’s behaviour is moulded by
their experiences growing up and are more likely to respond to their own problems
with violence. Research has proven that exposure to a violent role model or
environment may function as a trigger of pre-existing psychological and biological
factors that dispose the individual to behave and respond aggressively because
they do not have the skills to respond to a different situation.
Now that we have completed exploring the behavioural explanations for crime we
will examine the cognitive theories and crime.
2.3.5 COGNITIVE THEORIES AND CRIME

Another type of psychological theory that has been used to explain criminal behaviour
is cognitive development theory. This approach is based on the belief that the way
people organise their thoughts about rules and laws results in earlier criminal or
noncriminal behaviour. Psychologists refer to this organisation of thoughts as moral
reasoning. When that reasoning is applied to law, it is termed legal reasoning, although
that term has a different meaning to persons trained in law. The approach stems
from the early works of Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget (1896–1980) who believed
that there are two stages in the development of moral reasoning: (1) the belief that
rules are sacred and unchallengeable, and (2) the belief that rules are the products
of humans (Reid, 2018:79). According to cognitive theorists, people learn not only
as a result of operant and classical conditioning and observation, but also through
the way in which they interpret information about the world (Hunter & Dantzker,
2002:72). These interpretations are guided, in turn, by what they attend to, perceive,
think about, and remember: in short, cognitive theories suggest that how people take
in, process and decide what to do with information is crucial in whether they act in
a law-abiding or criminal manner (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:92).
An influential cognitive theory that is particularly relevant to our understanding

of criminal behaviour is Lawrence Kohlberg’s moral development theory. Siegel
(2004:157) found that all people, from the time that they are children and continuing
throughout their lifespan go through various stages of moral development; it is during
these various stages that their decisions and judgments about what is right and wrong
are made, albeit for different reasons. According to Kohlberg, serious offenders may
have a moral orientation that differs significantly from that of law-abiding citizens.
CMY3701/173
2.3.5.1 Kohlberg’s stages of moral development
Lawrence Kohlberg focused on the importance of moral and ethical reasoning.
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development proposes a series of stages linked to child
development in which moral judgments become part of a more multifaceted system
of personal ethics (Glick, 2005:117). According to Kohlberg between the ages of
10 and 13, most people move from preconventional to conventional reasoning or
thinking and those who do not make this transition may be considered “arrested in
their development of moral reasoning and they may become delinquent”. Kohlberg
contended that there are three stages in the development of moral thinking and
decision-making, namely (Reid, 2018:79):
• preconventional
• conventional, and
• postconventional reasoning
These stages were based on the children’s response and explained as follows, (Glick,
2005:117–118):
(1) Preconventional level

During this stage, a child’s moral judgment is based on the desire to avoid
punishment, meaning, decisions about right and wrong are based on the threat
of punishment. For instance, a child may refrain from taking money from or
his or her mother’s purse because if the child is caught, the behaviour will be
punished. Similarly, an adult may resist the temptation to exceed the speed
limit for fear of being caught or fined.
(2) Conventional level

At this level the child’s moral view is based on what other people will think
of him or her. The child’s world develops to include factors such as liking or
disliking approval or disapproval. At mid-adolescence there is “a shift toward
considering such abstract social virtues as being a good citizen, doing one’s
duty, respecting authority and maintaining the social order”. Compliance to
the significant others and those in authority plays a critical role.
(3) Postconventional stage

This stage is also referred to as the principled level. People observe and judge
the appropriateness or wrongfulness of certain acts not according to their
consequences but according to ethical principles. At first, acceptable principles
defined by what is the norm or acceptable in a community and at a later stage
the person forms his or her personal judgment and acts according to own
personal principles.
The development of moral reasoning does not take place in a vacuum. It depends
on what is learnt at home, from peers, and from society. To develop law-abiding
tendencies, children need to see patterns of moral behaviour in parents and peers
that is at least at the conventional stage. Research indicates that the decision not to
commit crime may be influenced by one’s stage of moral development. People at the
lowest levels report that they are deterred from crime simply because of their fear of
punishment. Those in the middle consider the reactions of family and friends. Those
74
at the highest stages refrain from crime because they believe in the concept of a duty
to others and universal rights (Siegel, 2004:160).
Moral development theory suggests that people who obey the law simply to avoid
punishment or have outlooks mainly characterised by self-interest are more likely to
commit crimes than those who view the law as something that benefits everybody.
Those at higher stages of moral reasoning tend to sympathise with rights of others
and are associated with conventional behaviours such as honesty, generosity and
nonviolence (Siegel, 2004:160).
2.3.5.2 Evaluation of cognitive theories and crime

Research on the moral reasoning of juveniles who are not offenders has supported
the relevance of Kohlberg’s theory to our understanding of crime. Most studies
have shown that young offenders operate at lower stages of moral development than
non-offenders. Juveniles who commit crimes ranging from burglary to murder tend
to see obedience to laws as a way of avoiding incarceration, whereas non-offending
youths tend to believe that one should obey laws because they prevent society from
deteriorating into chaos. Studies of adult offenders have found that they too, tend to
operate at a significantly lower level of moral development than non-offenders with
the same background (Cassel & Bernstein, 27:91).
Activity 2.3.2
2.3.2 iscuss how behaviour theories differ from psychoanalytic theory of

D
criminal behaviour.
2.3.2.2 Compare your arguments for the above-mentioned question under the
discussion tool on myUnisa.

Both the behaviourism and psychoanalysis theories developed from the social
and intellectual framework. Behavioural theories are developed from the utilitarian
school of thought and planned in such a way that it can foresee and control
behaviour, whereas psychoanalysis claims that everything we do is in one way or
another controlled by our subconscious mind.
According to the behaviourist theory our responses to environmental stimuli

shape our behaviour. The behavioural theories are employed by methods that
evaluate the stimulus responses relationship and its effects on behaviour. While
the psychoanalysis theory is divided into three parts, namely the id, the ego
and the superego with the id generally being viewed as the deepest level of the
unconscious that is dominated by the pleasure principal. The behavioural theories
are employed by methods to evaluate the stimulus responses relationship and its
effects on behaviour.
CMY3701/175
2.3.6 CONCLUSION
This theme examined the psychological theories of crime. In psychoanalytic theories,
Sigmund Freud believed that criminal behaviour may be the result of an overactive
superego that causes a powerful sense of guilt in the individual. August Aichorn, on
the other hand, believed that criminality is the result of an underdeveloped superego.
Behavioural theorists, unlike psychanalytic theories, assume that criminal behaviours
are learned responses to social conditions and life situations. Albert Bandura’s social
learning theory stresses that violent behaviour is learned. Conditioning theories describe
crime in terms of the ways in which behaviours are shaped through stimulus pairing
(classical conditioning) and reinforcement and punishment (operant conditioning).
Skinner believed that behaviour could be changed by altering environmental stimuli
(i.e. reinforcers, punishments), whereas Pavlov found that behaviour could be
conditioned by pairing primary and secondary stimuli based on his famous salivating
dog experiment. Kohlberg examined how moral reasoning fluctuates as we grow older.
We need to bear in mind that each stage offers a new perspective.

clear.

(1) Freud believed that some people are criminal because of ...........
(1) an overdeveloped superego
(2) an undeveloped superego
(3) a situated superego
(4) a faulty genetic structure
(2) Kohlberg’s three levels of moral development are ...........

(1) preconscious, conscious, and subconscious
(2) precognitive, cognitive, and postcognitive
(3) preconventional, conventional, and postconventional
(4) preconscious, precognitive, and preconventional
76
(3) The ........... theories of criminal behaviour focus on development of

the psyche in infancy.
(1) psychodynamic
(2) learning
(3) differential association
(4) modelling
(4) Which one of the following proponents asserts that people learn
aggressiveness and violent behaviour through their life experiences
and socialisation?
(1) August Aichorn
(2) Albert Bandura
(3) Lawrence Kohlberg
(4) Hans Eysenck
(5) Which theory suggests that people who obey the law simply to avoid
punishment are more likely to commit crimes than those who view
the law as something that benefits everybody?
(1) Cognitive perspective
(2) Ecological theory
(3) Moral development
(4) Structure theory
(6) Explain the difference between classical and operant conditioning.

(15)
(7) Describe Freud’s psychoanalytic approach to crime. (10)

(1) (1)
(2) (3)
(3) (1)
(4) (4)
(5) (3)
2.3.8.1 Paragraph question answer
For the purpose of question 6 and 7 respectively, see paragraph and 2.3.3;
2.3.3.1 and 2.3.3.3.
CMY3701/177
2.3.9 LIST OF REFERENCES
these references.
Bartol, C.R., & Bartol, A.M. 2008. Criminal Behaviour: A Psychosocial Approach.
8th edition. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Bartol, C.R., & Bartol, A.M. 2005. Criminal Behavior: A psychosocial Approach.
7th edition. Pearson: Prentice-Hall.
Brown, S.E, Esbensen, F & Geis, G. 2001. Criminology. Explaining crime and its
context. 4th edition. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Burke, R.H. 2005. An introduction to criminological theory. 2nd edition. Cullompton,
Devon: Willan.
Cassel, E & Bernstein, D.A. 2007. Criminal behaviour. 2nd edition. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum
Conklin, J.E. 1995. Criminology. 5th edition. Allyn and Bacon
Davies, G., & Beech, A. 2017. Forensic Psychology: Crime, Justice, Law, Interventions.
2nd edition. BPS Backwell.
Farrington, D.P., & Ttofi, M.M. 2017. Developmental and Psychological Theories of
Offending. In Davies, G., & Beech, A. Forensic Psychology: Crime, Justice,
Law, Interventions. 2nd edition. BPS Blackwell.
Glick, L. 2005. Criminology. Pearson Education, Inc.
Helfgott, J.B. 2008. Criminal behaviour: Theories, Typologies and Criminal justice.
SAGE.
Hollin, C. 2001. Conditioning, in the Sage Dictionary of Criminology, edited by
E McLaughlin & J Muncie. London : Sage.
Hunter, R.D & Dantzker, M.L. 2002. Crime and criminality: causes and consequences.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Jones, S. 2001. Criminology. 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lilly, J.R. Cullen, F.T. & Ball, R.A. 2007. Criminological theory: context and consequences.
4th edition. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
Palmer, E.J. 2017. Psychological Approaches to Understanding Crime. In Forensic
Psychology: Crime, Justice, Law, Interventions. 2nd edition. BPS Blackwell.
Reid, S.T. 2006. Crime ad criminology. 10th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reid, S.T. Reid. Crime and Criminology. 15th edition. Wulters Kluwer.
Siegel, L.J. 2012. Criminology. 11th edition. Wadsworth: Cengage.
Siegel, L.J. 2004. Theories, patterns & typologies. 8th edition. Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth.
Skinner, Cassel, Berstein 2007.
78
6 STUDY UNIT 3.1
6 Structure theories
LEARNING OUTCOMES
state the premises and assumptions of structure theories
• explain the social ecology theory

• explain the strain theory
• explain the cultural deviance theory

FIGURE 3.1.1
CMY3701/179
KEY CONCEPTS/TERMS
You will need to master the following key concepts/terms in order to achieve the
learning outcomes for this study unit. Refer to the Multilingual Glossary to obtain
the meanings of the concepts/terms
3.1.1 INTRODUCTION
Sociological positivists recognise that crime is a socially-constructed entity but at the
same time, acknowledge that it poses a real threat to the continuance of that society
and thus needs to be controlled (Burke, 2018). A basic theme central to the social
structure theories is the belief that a person is the product of his or her environment
(Siegal, 2019:177). Social problems such as poverty and income inequality are viewed
as causes of crime, hence social structure theorists postulate that crime is the social
consequence of being disadvantaged. Social and economic forces present in lower
socioeconomic areas act as causal push factors for criminal behaviour. Hence crime
rates are higher in lower socioeconomic areas in comparison to middle and upper
socioeconomic areas (Siegel, 2019:177). These beliefs led to the development of theories
based on social structure, which links misconduct and crime to social conditions.
By ‘‘social structure’’ we mean how society is organised by social institutions (the

family, as well as educational, religious, economic, and political institutions) and
stratified on the basis of various roles. Social structure is society’s framework and,
as the term implies, structures the patterns of relationships that its members have
with each other. The social framework also governs the extent to which members
are successful in engaging in such relationships which, in turn, will depend on how
organised or disorganised the structure is (Walsh & Ellis, 2007:80).
Structural theories view crime as a product of the structure of society due to differences
in opportunities and discrimination towards disadvantaged and marginalised groups
(Helfgott, 2008:70). Structural theorists are more interested in seeking the causes of
group crime rates rather than why particular individuals commit crimes. This is because
they believe that society actually prepares the way for crime – individuals are merely
the instruments that give crime ‘‘life’’. If we wish to reduce crime, we must change
society, not the individual (Walsh & Ellis, 2007:80). According to social structure
theorists, misconduct and crime are a means of adapting to conditions which occur
predominantly in a lower-class or disadvantaged environment. Areas where large-
scale poverty is found and areas characterised by social disorganisation will have a
higher level of crime. The residents of such areas are sceptical about prevailing social
values. They are frustrated about their lower-class or disadvantaged position and their
inability to be part of the more affluent sections of society.
Although members of the middle and upper classes also engage in crime, social
structure theorists view middle-class, or white-collar, crime as being of relatively
lower frequency, seriousness, and danger to the general public (Siegel, 2019:177).

SOCIAL STRUCTURE refers to how society is organized by social institutions – the
family and educational, religious, economic, and political institutions and stratified
on the basis of various roles and statuses (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:23).
80
STUDY UNIT 3.1: Structure theories
SOCIAL STRUCTURE THEORY refers to the view that disadvantaged economic

class position is a primary cause of crime (Siegel, 2004:482).
STRAIN is the emotional turmoil and conflict caused when people believe they
cannot achieve their desires and goals through legitimate means. Members of the
lower-class will feel strain because they are denied access to adequate educational
opportunities and social support (Siegel, 2004:482).
STRAIN THEORISTS refer to criminologists who view as a direct result of lower-

class frustration and anger (Siegel, 2004:482).
STRAIN THEORY is a branch of social structure theory that claims that the pressure
that the social structure exerts on people who cannot attain the cultural goal of success
will encourage them to engage in nonconforming behaviour (Bartollas, 2006:544).
Following the introduction to structure theories we now examine the premises of

these theories.
3.1.3 STRUCTURE THEORIES: PREMISES

Structure theories represent the purest form of sociological explanation.
According to Brown, Esbensen and Geis (2015:259) structure theories, crime is a

product of defects in the social structure.
• Social structure theories are macro-theories. These theories have been designed to
account, in particular, for the higher incidence of crime among the less advantaged
or lower class members of society. The assumption is that areas in which large-
scale poverty and social disorganisation occur will have a higher incidence of
misconduct and crime.
• Crime is regarded as being largely a lower-class phenomenon which breeds criminal
behaviour that begins in youth and continues into young adulthood (Siegel,
2019:177). Shortcomings in the social structure increase the likelihood of people
in the lower social strata resorting to illegal actions. The assumption here is that
there is a link between a person’s socioeconomic situation and the likelihood of
him or her resorting to misconduct and crime. Consequently, a person who is low
on the social scale, and who has fewer economic resources at his or her disposal
and more cultural barriers to overcome, will engage in misconduct and crime.
• Structural issues contribute to poverty, unemployment, poor education and racism,
all of which are regarded as the root causes of high crime rates among members
of socially deprived groups.
• Structure theorists are not concerned to find out why an individual commits crime.
The argument is that misconduct and crime are functions of a person’s position in
the socioeconomic structure of that particular society. The focus, therefore, is on
certain ecological areas that experience a high incidence of misconduct and crime.
• Social structure theories reflect a fundamental trust in the social system and
assume that there is consensus among all people in society about the validity of
laws, but that shortcomings in society must be pointed out and rectified (Brown
et al, 2015:259).
Now that we have listed and described the premises of the structure theories you
will see that there are other branches to this theory and we will examine them next.
CMY3701/181
3.1.4 STRUCTURE THEORIES: BRANCHES
Structure theories can be divided into three independent yet overlapping branches,
namely the
• Social disorganisation (also known as ecological theory)

• Strain (also known as anomie theory)
• Cultural deviance theory
The three branches of the structure theory are depicted in Figure 3.1.2 below.
FIGURE 3.1.2
Structure Theories divided into three branches.
Although these three subgroups of theories are closely related there are also differences
between them, which will be discussed in more detail below. We will examine each
of the three branches of the structure theory starting with the social disorganisation
(also known as the ecological) theory.
3.1.4.1 Social disorganisation (ecological theory)

The social disorganisation theory aims to explore the ecological conditions, such as
poverty, disorganisation, instability and economy as factors that cause high crime rates
in order to formulate strategies to lower the crime rate (Siegel, 2019:180). Ecology
studies the relationship between the organism and its environment. Social ecology
is the study of peoples and institutions in relation to the environment (Williams,
2004:270). This branch of the social structure theory focuses on “the breakdown in
inner-city neighbourhoods of institutions such as family, school, and employment”
(Siegel, 2019:177).
The social disorganisation theory links crime rates to the socio-ecological characteristics
of a neighbourhood. Social ecology examines the influence that a community or
neighbourhood has on criminal behaviour. It proposes that a person’s neighbourhood
may cause him or her to become involved in criminal behaviour (Anderson, 2015:254).
82
The three variables that are central to ecological theory are poverty, mobility of residents
and racial heterogeneity. Crime rates are higher in “transient, mixed-use (where
residential and commercial properties exist side by side), and changing neighbourhoods
in which the fabric of social life has become frayed” (Siegal, 2019:178). People staying
in such communities tend to feel helpless and hopeless. These independent variables
(poverty, mobility of residents and racial heterogeneity) generate social disorganisation
which, in turn, contributes to crime and misconduct.
According to the social disorganisation theory crime rates are high in areas characterised
by urban decay. In such environments, there is a high turnover of residents, resulting
in residents not investing in the maintenance and development of the community
(Siegel, 2019:178). Large-scale unemployment and a large number of broken and
troubled families (who frequently require welfare intervention) cause additional strain
and social disorganisation. Such a socially disorganised environment obviously does
not provide essential services such as proper education, healthcare and housing. In
addition, key social control agents, such as law enforcement in society can no longer
function properly (Siegel, 2019:178).
It is important that the community have formal and informal means to control crime
itself. Social organisation is maintained when a group is committed to certain social
rules, but when this commitment diminishes and breaks down (e.g. when a significant
number of people leave the community and/or the community’s composition changes
frequently), social control declines. Formal crime control generally consists of law
enforcement while informal control includes social structures, such as the family
(Siegel, 2019:183).
The popularity of the theory of social ecology waned as support for strain and
control theories increased. At present there has been a revival of interest in social
ecology theory as part of a fresh attempt to understand the causes of misconduct and
crime. Today greater use is made of more complex statistical models to determine
the influence of urban ecological conditions on crime patterns. Criminologists now
include new techniques, such as data from self-reports and victimisation studies.
Research has shown that the social context of an environment has a significant
influence on the incidence of misconduct and crime. Densely populated urban
environments that show signs of decay perpetuate social disorder which, in turn,
weakens residents’ ties with both their primary groups (family and peer groups) and
the community. There is a lack of social support, and it is social support that integrates
and involves the community in conventional social institutions such as the school,
religious activities and family. Instead of a sense of community, there is a feeling of
alienation, which means that residents become psychologically distanced from the
surrounding community. Furthermore, the general sense of anonymity makes people
more susceptible to criminal behaviour.
Activity 3.1.1
South Africa is one of the most unequal countries with the gap between rich and
poor being wider than in any other country in the world. Referring to what you
have learned from the social disorganisation theory discuss why the gap between
rich and poor can cause criminal behaviour.
CMY3701/183
We next look at another branch of the structure theory, namely the Strain (or Anomie)
theory)
3.1.4.2 Strain theory

This branch of the social structure theory views crime as “a function of the conflict
between people’s goals and the means available to obtain them” (Siegal, 2019:177).
Strain theory supports the view that members of the lower socioeconomic class become
angry and frustrated because of their inability to achieve success through conventional
means. This failure to achieve success puts strain on them. Within this context strain
can be defined as the feelings of anger, frustration and resentment people experience
when they are unable to achieve goals through legitimate means (Siegel, 2019:177).
This strain results in some people being pushed to find alternative means which
might include criminal activities to achieve their goals. It is proposed that blockages
of legitimate means to obtain goals encourages anti-social and criminal behaviour
(Brown et al, 2015:259). According to this theory, the societal structure exerts the
greatest pressure on the socioeconomic lower class, which is why these theorists
explain crime as a lower-class phenomenon. They concentrate on those elements
within lower-class structures from which antisocial patterns of behaviour emerge.
Strain is also associated with distorted aspirations, unrealistic objectives and materialism
(Brown et al, 2015: 272). According to these theorists, crime is the consequence of the
frustration and anger that people experience as a result of their inability to achieve
social and financial success by legal means. Stress, frustration or strain caused by
unfulfilled aspirations increase the likelihood that norms will be contravened. In
short, certain groups commit crime to relieve the strain associated with failure (Siegel,
2019:185). The key objectives of strain theory are therefore to identify the sources
that cause strain and the way in which people adapt to this strain.
It is assumed that most people share similar values and goals, but that a person’s
ability to achieve these goals is determined by his or her socioeconomic position.
In middle- and upper-class communities, strain does not occur because educational
opportunities and status careers are readily accessible. In lower-class areas, strain
occurs because young people do not have access to any legitimate means of success.
As a result of these obstacles, people may resort to deviant (illegal) means to achieve
their goals, or they may reject socially accepted objectives and replace them with
objectives of their own (Siegel, 2019:186). Although its emphasis on crime as a lower-
class phenomenon has been widely criticised, the strain perspective does contribute
to our search for an explanation of crime.
Activity 3.1.2
One of the causes of xenophobic violence in South Africa is the competition for
resources and access to services. Discuss how the strain theory contributes to
violence in low socioeconomic communities.
84
3.1.4.3 Cultural deviance theory

The third branch of the social structure theory combines elements of the social
disorganisation and strain theory. The cultural deviance theory proposes that a
society consists of groups or sub-cultures that have multiple value systems ranging
from conventional moral belief systems to unconventional deviant systems (Olsen &
Costello, 2019:10). Sub-cultures can be defined as secondary groups that are found
within a dominant group that has its own set of values, customs and rules (Anderson,
2015:14). According to the cultural deviance theory people who are living in low
social-economic neighbourhoods create a separate independent subculture within
society. This sub-culture has its own set of rules and values in reaction to the social
isolation and economic deprivation they experience (Siegel, 2019:192).
Siegel (2019:192) postulates that norms associated with middle-class communities

support formal education, hard work, delayed gratification and being cautious. In
contrast, norms found in low socioeconomic groups are stressed excitement, risk-taking,
toughness, fearlessness, immediate gratification and street smart. People coming from
low socioeconomic communities are confronted with the status difference between
themselves and middle-class communities (Anderson, 2015:144). Miller refers to norms
found in low socioeconomic communities as focal concerns. These norms are focused
on survival within difficult and challenging physical and economic environments and
promote illegal and violent behaviour. Low socioeconomic sub-cultural norms are
attractive alternatives when people are unable to achieve the behavioural demands of
middle-class communities. These norms are also transmitted from one generation to the
next in a process known as cultural transmission. The influence of low socioeconomic
focal concerns and culture are still relevant today in research focusing on the formation
of deviant sub-cultures, such as gangs (Siegel, 2019:192).

Social structure theories emphasise the social forces that cause people to commit
criminal acts. Ecological studies applied the study of plants and the environment
to the study of human beings and the environment. Ecological theory emphasises
the fact that there are deviant places that lead to criminal behaviour (regardless of
the personal characteristics of the individuals who live in these areas). The concept
of social disorganisation is one of the primary contributions of this perspective. A
disorganised community does not have the stability or resources to formulate or
realise collective objectives, and this contributes to an increased incidence of crime.
People commit crimes in reaction to the disorganised condition of the community.

Increasing urbanisation, industrialisation and immigration problems (which occur
primarily in urban areas) also add to the sense of disorganisation. This sense of
disorganisation gives rise to values and traditions that encourage criminal activity.
Strain theories focus on the frustration generated by society’s emphasis on success

and its simultaneous denial, to some people, of legitimate opportunities to achieve
this success (Siegel, 2019:178). The key argument of strain theory is that most people
share similar values and aspirations (to live in a good residential area, to own a car
and to have a steady job). However, relatively few people have the ability or means to
achieve socioeconomic success. These disproportional opportunities for success give
rise to feelings of resentment and anger, which in turn, lead to crime. Unprivileged
individuals may well be prepared to work hard and to be productive members of
CMY3701/185
society, but large-scale unemployment or a lack of opportunity to learn certain skills
may well result in such individuals rather choosing to turn to crime. (For example,
they may commit theft through sheer economic desperation.)
The social ecology and strain theory are similar in so far as the lower class or a
minority group is singled out as the social class or group within which serious social
and criminal problems occur. The perspectives of the two theories differ, however,
regarding the views, values, attitudes and objectives of offenders and the role of
personal sentiment in criminal behaviour.
Social disorganisation, strain and cultural deviance theory share the following
common assumptions:
• Crime is caused primarily by social factors such as poverty and economic inequality.
This does not mean that individual factors should be ignored, but that social
factors are dominant.
• The structure and institutions of society are regarded as a condition of disorder
and disorganisation. The social disorganisation theory emphasises group processes
and the way in which this influences the occurrence of crime in a specific area.
Strain theory focuses on how feelings of alienation, anger and frustration lead
to criminal behaviour. While the cultural deviance theory focuses on how an
inability to reach middle socioeconomic class values result in the formulation
of low socioeconomic focal concerns. These focal concern norms are focused on
survival within difficult and challenging physical and economic environments
and promote illegal and violent behaviour.
Time for self-assessment: 30 minutes.
of the study unit by making brief notes so that the meaning of each term
is clear.
3.1.5.3 Answer the paragraph-type and longer essay-type questions:
3.1.5.3.1 ‘‘Social disorganisation theory studies the incidence of crime in terms of the
ecological features of the environment.’’ Explain this statement. [5]
3.1.5.3.2 ‘‘The focus of strain theory is on the feelings of anger and frustration as a result
of blocked objectives.’’ Explain this statement. [5]
3.1.5.3.3 Social disorganisation, strain and cultural deviance theory, as branches of

structural theory, regard crime as a lower-class phenomenon. Describe this
viewpoint in full. [25]
86

3.1.5.3.1 Here you need to emphasise the three independent variables: poverty,
mobility and heterogeneity, all of which lead to social disorganisation and
contribute to crime. You also need to describe the environment, which
includes lack of essential services, unemployment and the failure of the
social agents of control.
3.1.5.3.2 Start by explaining the assumptions of the strain theory. Strain arises
from people’s failure to achieve aspirations, and therefore the lower class
is identified as the source of frustration because this is the group of people
whose goals have been blocked.
3.1.5.3.3 You should give a complete outline of the social disorganisation, strain
and cultural deviance theories, with the emphasis on crime as a lower-class
phenomenon. Social disorganisation depicts an environment conducive to
crime, whereas strain theory focuses on the negative feelings that result
from a disorganised environment. Lastly, cultural deviance focuses on
how inequality in society contributes to the formulation of sub-cultures
that adhere to anti-social and criminal norms.
(1) How do structural theories view crime?

(a) Crime is viewed as a product of the structure of society due to differences
in education and socioeconomic status of disadvantaged and marginalised
groups.
(b) Crime is viewed as a product of the structure of society due to differences in
opportunities and discrimination towards disadvantaged and marginalised
groups.
(c) Crime is viewed as a product of society due to differences in socioeconomic
opportunities and discrimination towards disadvantaged and marginalised
groups.
(d) Crime is viewed as a product of the organisation of society due to differences
in opportunities and marginalisation of disadvantaged groups.
(2) Choose the correct premise of social structural theories.

(a) Social structure theories are micro-theories. These theories have been
designed to account, in particular, for the higher incidence of crime among
the less advantaged or lower class members of society.
(b) Social structure theories are meso-theories. These theories have been
the more advantaged or lower class members of society.
(c) Social structure theories are macro-theories. These theories have been
designed to account, in particular, for the lower incidence of crime among
(d) Social structure theories are macro-theories. These theories have been
CMY3701/187
(3) Choose the options which describe the social disorganisation theory.
(a) The social disorganisation theory aims to explore the ecological conditions
that cause high crime rates in order to formulate strategies to lower the
crime rate.
(b) The social disorganisation theory links crime rates to the socio-ecological
characteristics of a neighbourhood.
(c) The social disorganisation theory aims to explore the crime rate in
conventional social institutions such as the school, religious activities
and family.
(d) The social disorganisation theory views crime rates as being high in areas
characterised by urban decay where residents are not investing in the
maintenance and development of the community.
Choose the most correct option.
(a) a b c
(b) b c d
(c) a b d
(d) a c d
(4) With which elements is the strain theory associated?

(a) Distorted inspirations, realistic objectives and materialism
(b) Distorted aspirations, unrealistic objectives and materialism
(c) Distorted aspirations, unrealistic objectives and capitalism
(d) Distorted inspirations, unrealistic objectives and socialism
(5) According to the cultural deviance theory norms in low socioeconomic

communities are viewed as ...........
(a) supporting formal education.
(b) supporting being cautious.
(c) focal concerns.
(d) survival mechanisms.
88
3.1.8 REFERENCES
these references.
Anderson, J.F. 2015. Criminological Theories: Understanding crime in America.

Burlington, Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Brown, S.E., Esbensen, F. & Geis, G. 2015. Criminology: Explaining crime and context.
New York: Routledge.
Hellfgot, J.B. 2008. Criminal behavior: Theories, Typologies and Criminal Justice.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Olsen, J.C. & Costello, B.J. (ed). 2019. Fifty years of causes of delinquency: The
criminology of Travis Hirschi. New York: Routledge.
Siegel, L.J. 2019. Criminology: The core. (7th ed.). Boston: Cengage.
Tierney, J. 2013. Criminology theory and context. New York: Routledge.
Walsh, A & Ellis, L. 2007. Criminology: an interdisciplinary approach. London: Sage.
Williams, KS. 2004. Textbook on Criminology. 5th edition. New York: Oxford
University Press.
CMY3701/189
7 STUDY UNIT 3.2
7 Social disorganisation theory
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After studying this study unit, you should be able to:
• define what is meant by ‘‘social organisation’’ and ‘‘social disorganisation”

• explain the assumptions of the Chicago School
• explain Shaw and McKay’s theory of social disorganisation

FIGURE 3.2.1
Refer to Section 3.2.2 below for some definitions of the key concepts.
90
STUDY UNIT 3.2: Social disorganisation theory
3.2.1 INTRODUCTION
Cartographic schools of criminology were established in various European countries
during the 19th century, most notably by Adolphe Quetelet (1797–1874) and in
France by AM Guerry (1833). Maps were drawn to plot regional patterns of crime,
compare rural and urban differences and survey the relationship between crime and
other socioeconomic conditions (McLaughlin, 2006:185). Many of these early surveys
were undertaken with a view to bringing about social and moral reform.
REMEMBER
Go back to the definitions in the previous study unit (Theme 3) to refresh your
memory of the definition of ‘‘cartographic’’.
In the first half of the 20th century, a group of sociologists at the University of
Chicago undertook research into the structure of the city of Chicago and the social
and cultural forms that had developed in this city (Coleman & Norris, 2000:56). The
social disorganisation theory developed as a result of their findings; if you remember,
social disorganisation theory focuses on the wide variety of environments and urban
conditions that influence crime rates. The theory concentrates on the development of
high-crime areas associated with the disintegration of conventional norms and values
as a result of migration, industrialisation, and urbanisation. Social disorganisation
theory originated in the process of social change and relates to the fact that certain
groups of people live in communities characterised by heterogeneity, a variety of
subcultures and value conflicts.
the meanings of the key concepts/terms.
3.2.2 DEFINITION OF KEY CONCEPTS

Social disorganisation is the central concept of the Chicago School of Social
Ecology. The term refers to the breakdown or serious dilution of the power of informal
community rules to regulate conduct in poor neighbourhoods (Walsh & Hemmens,
2008:23).
Social disorganisation theory is a branch of social structure theory developed by

Shaw and McKay that focuses the breakdown of institutions such as the family and
the school, coupled with high unemployment in inner-city neighbourhoods (Siegel,
2004:42; Bartollas, 2006:543).
3.2.2.1 Social organisation

To understand social disorganisation, one should first have a clear understanding
of social organisation. Social organisation occurs when people’s behaviour is guided
by uniform norms and expectations. The social disorganisation theory refers to
this phenomenon as collective efficacy, which defines the trust that exists among
community members and their preparedness to cooperate with each other for the
common good (Lamb, 2019:369). Social organisation is therefore associated with
social cohesion. Social cohesion is characterised by mutual moral support and sharing
of resources to achieve communal goals (Lamb, 2019:369).
CMY3701/191
People also develop social organisation to regulate their own behaviour and the
behaviour of others. This gives rise to reciprocal expectations between people as
they become increasingly dependent on one another. In other words, in societies
characterised by social organisation, people learn what to expect from themselves,
what to expect from others and what others can expect from them. Cultural traditions,
customs and a system of rules and regulations are therefore developed, and these guide
people in their various actions and activities. Community bodies that traditionally
impose informal social control typically include families, schools, community,
cultural and religious organisations (Lamb, 2019:369). Society’s laws, which are
codified rules of culture, determine which forms of social behaviour are desirable
and which are not. In short, a society is organised according to behavioural patterns
that contribute to human survival and that encourage compliance with socially and
culturally prescribed values.
Now that you have a basis of the definitions of some of the key terms we will explore
the concept of social disorganisation next.
3.2.2.2 Social disorganisation

Social disorganisation can be defined as the inability of a community structure to
realise the common values of its residents and maintain effective social control or solve
commonly experienced problems (Krohn, Hendrix, Hall & Lizotte, 2019:199). Social
disorganisation theory suggests that macro-social forces (e.g. migration, segregation,
structural transformation of the economy and housing discrimination) interact with
community-level factors (concentrated poverty, family disruption, residential turnover)
to impede social organisation. The concept of social disorganisation is based on three
variables: poverty, residential mobility, and racial heterogeneity (Jones, 2001:129).
Poor communities result in social disorganisation because they do not have adequate
resources to deal with their problems. The high level of mobility among residents causes
anonymity and makes it all but impossible to engender any sense of community. The
decline of social control through the absence of common values allows a pattern of
delinquent behaviour to develop, which tends to be handed down from one generation
to the next through the process of cultural transmission. Urban crime, therefore, is
portrayed as resulting from the failure of the inner city environment to encourage
true integration and a sense of community for its different cultures (Jones, 2001:129).
Not only does social disorganisation lead to the breakdown of informal social control
in communities and families, but it also weakens the capacity of a community to
protect itself from crime. Survey findings suggest that poor and socially disorganised
communities are increasingly resorting to social isolation as a means of protecting
themselves against crime. Evidence is accumulating both in South Africa and abroad
that social disorganisation is not only strongly associated with high rates of crime
and violence, but also has a major impact on the effectiveness of crime prevention at
community level (Lamb, 2019).
3.2.3 THE CHICAGO SCHOOL OF SOCIOLOGY

The Chicago School focused on the development of a sociological explanation of crime.
In its attempts to explain why crime seemed endemic to certain neighbourhoods or
localities, the Chicago School of Sociology focused on the environment and how the
area where people grow up and associate with each other are linked to a propensity
for involvement in criminal activities (Bellaire, 2017:4; Burke, 2014). Starting from
92
the assumption that the environment influences the way that the poor in society
behave, the Chicago School focused on the urban situation and social context of
crime. Tierney (2013:96) highlights the assumptions of the Chicago School as follows:
• Crime and crime rates were viewed as social phenomena and could not be explained
in terms of the individual’s biology or psychology.
• Crime was linked to social disorganisation, by which they meant that family
and community-based bonds had been weakened. Low levels of social integration
were associated with high levels of crime.
• It was the social life of certain neighbourhoods that was seen as pathological, and
not the people living in these neighbourhoods. Criminal behaviour was regarded
as a normal response to an abnormal situation.
• There should be government intervention to improve the basis of social organisation
in the city’s criminal neighbourhoods.
The starting point for the Chicago School was Robert Park’s theory of human ecology
(1921). Park argued that the development of urban areas was shaped by certain patterns
of social process. Different kinds of human beings share the same environment and
are dependent on each other. The urban environment can therefore be examined in a
scientific way, through the careful and detailed observation of social life in different
parts of the city (in this case, the city of Chicago). By comparing the results of such
observations, one can establish causal explanations for crime (Bellaire, 2017:4; Tierney,
2013:97). It was a research agenda that a number of researchers were to pursue.
Ernest Burgess (1928) produced a model of the city that provided a framework for
understanding the social roots of crime. He argued that, as cities expand in size,
the development is patterned socially; cities grow in a series of concentric zones or
rings. Burgess (cited in Burke, 2005:97) outlined five different zones and claimed
that a competitive process decided how people were distributed spatially among
these: commercial enterprises were located in the central business district in close
proximity to the transport systems; the most expensive residential areas were in the
outer zones, away from the bustle of the city centre, the pollution of the factories
and the homes of the poor.
It was the ‘‘zone in transition’’ – containing rows of deteriorating houses and often
built in the shadow of ageing factories – that was the particular focus of Burgess’s
study. The outward expansion of the business district led to the constant displacement
of residents. As the least desirable living area, this zone of transition was the focus for
the influx of immigrants who were too poor to reside elsewhere. Burgess (in Burke,
2005:97) observed that these social patterns weakened family and communal ties
and resulted in social disorganisation. Social disorganisation was therefore presented
as the primary explanation of criminal behaviour.
READ
Read more about the use of crime mapping based on the work of Park and Burgess
at: Dağlar, M. & Argun, 2016. Crime mapping and geographical information systems
in crime analysis. International Journal of Human Sciences. Available at: https://j-
humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/3736/1784 [Accessed on
28 September 2020].
You can find the link above in Lesson 3.1 in the module site of myUnisa.
CMY3701/193
3.2.4 SOCIAL DISORGANISATION THEORY
Building on Park and Burgess’s Concentric Zone Theory, Clifford Shaw and Henry
McKay (1942) set about statistically testing the assumption that crime was greater in
disorganised areas than elsewhere in the city (Krohn et al, 2019:198). They used spatial
maps to identify and plot the residential areas where juveniles who were referred to
Chicago courts to determine the “extent to which differences in economic and social
characteristics of local areas paralleled differences in rates of delinquency” (Krohn et al,
2019:198). Findings from their study indicated that incidences of criminal behaviour
were not evenly dispensed. Shaw and McKay discovered that criminal activity tended
to be concentrated in specific areas of the city. They plotted data on where juvenile
delinquents lived on a map of Chicago that had been divided into concentric zones,
radiating from the city centre to the outer commuter zone. They focused, in particular,
on one zone, the zone in transition, which is an area of a city characterised by low
rents and deteriorating buildings adjacent to the city centre; in this zone there was
a concentration of delinquents. This diverse and rapidly changing population, Shaw
and McKay (cited in Tibbetts, 2019:294) argued, led to social disorganisation – an
absence of stable or common standards and a breakdown in community institutions
– and a resulting failure to effectively socialise or control children.
Interestingly, this trend whereby criminal behaviour is localised tended to remain

relatively stable notwithstanding continual changes in the populations who lived in
each of the identified areas. In other words, their research found that crime rates
remained consistently high in neighbourhoods with historically high crime rates,
regardless of which racial or ethnic group happened to reside there at any given
time. Shaw and McKay concluded from this study that crime was likely caused by,
and resultant of, neighbourhood dynamics, and not necessarily a function of the
individuals within neighbourhoods (cited in Tibbetts, 2019:294).
READ
Read more about Shaw and McKay’s research in: Piscitelli, A. 2019. Spatial
regression of juvenile delinquency: Revisiting Shaw and McKay. International
Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 14(2) 132–147.
Shaw and McKay’s findings (cited in Krohn et al, 2019:198–200) were as follows:
• Communities can be categorised according to levels of organisation, with

socially organised communities being on one side of the spectrum and socially
disorganised communities on the opposite side of the spectrum.
• Socially organised communities are characterised by high levels of solidarity (shared
norm and value system), cohesion (strong communal bonds) and integration
(community interaction). These characteristics aid crime prevention and lower
crime rates.
• Socially disorganised communities have weak communal bonds and do not
have common values, are unable to solve commonly experienced problems and
therefore have higher crime rates.
• Delinquency rates were the highest in run-down communities with a high
residential mobility. High residential mobility (frequency of people moving in and
out of a specific area) disrupts social community networks, reduces mutual trust
and mechanisms of social control needed to prevent crime. Residential mobility
94
with coinciding weak social ties and a lack of informal control are causal risks
associated with high crime rates in a community.
• The concentration of delinquents was found to persist over long periods of time,
despite the fact that the composition of the population living in the area changed
frequently over time (because it was the area where the various new immigrant
groups tended to live until they could afford to move elsewhere).
• Social disorganisation is linked to the neighbourhood and not to the residents
staying in the neighbourhood. Hence, neighbourhoods are disorganised and not
the residents.
• Community characteristics, such as poverty, mobility and diversity are indirect
causes of criminal behaviour because these characteristics increase levels of social
disorganisation. In essence, social disorganisation is therefore the primary cause
of crime in neighbourhoods.
In summary, Shaw and McKay concluded that delinquency was the product of
sociological factors within the transition zone rather than individual pathology
or any inherent ethnic characteristics. Their conclusion did much to dispel earlier
criminological theories, which located the root cause of crime as being within the
individual (Krohn et al, 2019:199). Shaw and McKay (in Hayward, 2006:39) went on
to claim that socially disorganised neighbourhoods perpetuate a situation in which
delinquent behaviour patterns are culturally transmitted. Delinquent traditions are
established and passed on in play groups and gangs.
Activity 3.2.1
Do you agree with Shaw and McKay’s view that delinquency is a product of
sociological factors rather than individual pathology? What is your opinion? Try
to illustrate your point of view with a case study. You could use the below article
about Khayelitsha as an example.
Pijper, L. Breetzke, G.D. & Edelstein, I. 2020. Building neighbourhood-level resilience

to crime: the case of Khayelitsha, South Africa. South African Geographical Journal.
Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03736245.2020.18073
98?needAccess=true [Accessed on 28 September 2020].
3.2.5 IMPACT OF THE CHICAGO SCHOOL

Versions of the ecological model developed by the Chicago School dominated studies of
urban crime undertaken between the 1920s and 1960s in cities across the United States
and Europe (McLaughlin, 2006:185). As a result of theoretical and methodological
developments in the 1980s and 1990s, environmental criminology has given way to
research on how crime is spatialised. A new generation of criminologists from a variety
of disciplinary backgrounds became interested in theorising the complex human
public interactions and relationships associated with living in the city.
Contemporary spatial approaches to the study of crime can be grouped into four
broad research areas, as set out by McLaughlin (2006:186):
CMY3701/195
• Studies concerned with identifying the spatial distribution of crime, criminogenic
localities, vulnerable areas and defended spaces.
• Studies of how and why the risk of crime victimisation is distributed over space
and the differential risks within and between different localities and various
sections of the population.
• Studies of how and why the fear of crime is spatialised. This involves analysing the
public’s perception of where the crime problem is located and working through
their mental mappings of safe and dangerous places.
• Studies of the flow and movement of specific crimes such as drugs and prostitution
between different localities and countries.
Now that we have a basic understanding of the Chicago School, we can move on to
take a critical look at their approach.
3.2.6 EVALUATION OF THE CHICAGO SCHOOL

There are several problems with the work of the Chicago School. Their reliance on
crime statistics to provide information on the distribution of crime within a city meant
that they focused their attention on the lower social classes and therefore ignored
criminal activities committed by persons in the higher social categories. In addition,
crimes reported to the police are not necessarily a true reflection of crime levels from
which high crime zones can be identified (Joyce, 2013:15).
The ecological approach utilised by the Chicago School discussed the relationship of
people and the urban environment. The study of rural crime was neglected. Instead,
certain assumptions were (and continue to be) made regarding the problem, which
include the assertion that stronger social bonds exist in rural areas and that the
opportunities to commit crime in these places are relatively limited (Joyce, 2013:16).
The Chicago School also assumes that the growth of cities is a natural social process
and ignores the role that power and class domination (social inequality) can play in the
creation and perpetuation of slums (Lawson & Heaton, 1999:53; Burke, 2005:98). In
addition the fact that cities are artificially created due to decisions by local authorities
and housing market trends were also not taken into consideration (Joyce, 2013:16).
Another pressing concern regarding the development of the social disorganisation

approach was the inconsistency of measurement across studies since a common
set of measures was not used. For example, the variables used to determine social
cohesion and informal control (Bellaire, 2017:13). Bellaire (2017:14) proposes that
these discrepancies can be addressed by utilising a research design that will measure
a broad spectrum of community processes.
However, the fact remains that the Chicago School had a significant influence on the
development of sociological explanations of crime and criminal behaviour. Because
they recognised the importance of environmental influences on crime, they provided a
more plausible explanation of crime than individualistic explanations (Joyce, 2013:15;
Burke, 2005:99). Williams (2004:275) contends that the link between crime and
areas of social disorganisation is more or less accepted. He indicates the broad signs
of disintegration as being:
96
• a move towards rented and multiple occupancy dwellings

• an increase in the number of households, creating communities of individuals
who are unrelated and unknown to each other
• an increase in the turnover of residents
• an increase in the number of empty properties
• more unskilled or unemployed occupants
These broad signs have also been linked with visual signs of disorder, such as broken
windows, graffiti, litter, visible signs of drug use and prostitution.
The ideas of the Chicago School have helped to shape social policies on crime. A
number of community projects directed to combating crime and delinquency were
based on the theory of social disorganisation. The Chicago School called for efforts to
reorganise communities: the emphasis on cultural learning suggested that treatment
programmes that attempt to reverse offenders’ criminal learning could counter crime.
Young offenders should be placed in settings where they would receive pro-social
reinforcement (e.g. through positive peer counselling) (Lamb, 2019:376; Burke,
2005:99; Lawson & Heaton, 1999:53).
Shaw and McKay’s insights certainly helped to explain gang formation. They saw
the delinquent gang as a group of people who were, in fact, responding normally
to the slum conditions and the social deprivations of local environments. Shaw and
McKay regarded delinquent behaviour as an understandable choice, given the lack
of legitimate opportunity for lower-class families in the inner city (Krohn et al,
2019:198–200; Bellaire, 2017:3; Bartollas, 2003:101).

Through painstaking research, Shaw and McKay used juvenile court statistics to
map the spatial distribution of delinquency throughout Chicago. Their data analysis
confirmed the hypothesis that delinquency flourished in the transition zone and was
inversely related to the zone’s affluence and corresponding distance from the central
business district. By studying Chicago court records over several decades, they also
were able to show that crime was highest in slum neighbourhoods, regardless of the
racial or ethnic group who lived in these neighbourhoods. They also were able to show
that, as groups moved to other zones, their crime rates decreased commensurately.
This observation led to the inescapable conclusion that it was the nature of the
neighbourhood – not the nature of the individuals within the neighbourhood – that
regulated involvement in crime.
But what social process could account for this persistent spatial distribution of
delinquency? Borrowing heavily from Burgess and other Chicago sociologists, Shaw
and McKay emphasised the importance of neighbourhood organisation in preventing
or permitting juvenile delinquency. In more affluent communities, families fulfilled
youths’ needs and parents carefully supervised their offspring. But in the transition
zone, families and other conventional institutions (e.g. schools, churches, voluntary
associations) were strained, if not broken apart, by rapid and concentrated urban
growth, people moving in and out (transiency), the mixture of different ethnic and
racial groups (heterogeneity) and poverty. As a result, social disorganisation prevailed.
This, in turn, meant that juveniles received neither the support nor the supervision
required for wholesome development. Left to their own devices, slum youths were free
CMY3701/197
of the type of social controls operative in more affluent areas; there was no guiding
force to stop them from seeking excitement and friends – usually the wrong kind of
friends – in the streets of the city.
Shaw and McKay were able to collect data showing that crime was distributed across
neighbourhoods in a pattern consistent with social disorganisation theory. They
believed that juvenile delinquency could be understood only by considering the
social context in which youths lived – a context that itself was a product of major
societal transformations wrought by rapid urbanisation, unbridled industrialisation,
and massive population shifts. Youths with the misfortune of residing in the socially
disorganised transition zone were especially vulnerable to the temptations of crime. As
conventional institutions disintegrated around them, they were given little supervision
and were free to roam the streets, where they would become the next generation
of ‘‘carriers’’ for the neighbourhood’s criminal tradition. In short, when growing
up in a disorganised area, it is this combination of (1) a breakdown of control and
(2) exposure to a criminal culture that lures individual youngsters into crime and,
across all juveniles, creates high rates of delinquency. This vision of crime led Shaw
and McKay to assert that delinquency prevention programmes must be directed at
reforming communities, not simply at reforming individuals.
The work of the Chicago School established a tradition of research into the spatial
distribution of offenders. The focus in understanding crime was not on the characteristics
of individuals, but on the social circumstances brought about by rapid change in
certain parts of the city. The policy implications involved the physical renewal of such
areas and a need to redress social disorganisation through community development
(Bellair, 2017:13).
clear.
(1) Social organisation is associated with the following:

(a) Development of reciprocal expectations and decreased dependency on one
another.
(b) The regulation of own behaviour and the behaviour of others.
(c) Learning what to expect from others and others’ behaviour.
(d) The development of cultural traditions, customs and a system of rules.
Choose the most correct option
(a) ab
(b) bc
(c) bd
(d) ad
98
(2) Identify the assumption of the Chicago School of Sociology.

(a) Crime and crime rates were viewed as social phenomena and could not
be explained in terms of the individual’s biology or psychology.
(b) Crime was linked to social organisation, which means bonds between
family and the community.
(c) The social life of people living in neighbourhoods is seen as pathological
and not the neighbourhoods.
(d) There should be government intervention to improve the basis of social
organisation in all neighbourhoods.
(3) Community characteristics, such as ..........., ........... and ........... are indirect
causes of criminal behaviour because these characteristics increase levels of
social disorganisation.
(a) poverty; immobility; diversity
(b) poverty; mobility; individualism
(c) poverty; inertia; diversity
(d) poverty; mobility; diversity
(4) Which factors are delinquency a product of according to Shaw and McKay?
(a) Delinquency is the product of sociological factors rather than individual
pathology or any inherent ethnic characteristics.
(b) Delinquency is the product of individual pathology rather than sociological
factors or any inherent ethnic characteristics.
(c) Delinquency is the product of ethnic characteristics rather than sociological
factors or individual pathology.
(d) Delinquency is the product of sociological factors as well as individual
pathology and inherent ethnic characteristics.
(5) Contemporary spatial approaches to the study of crime can be grouped into
four broad research areas, as set out by McLaughlin (2006:186):
(a) Studies concerned with identifying the spatial distribution of crime,
criminogenic localities, vulnerable areas and undefended spaces.
(b) Studies of how and why the risk of crime victimisation is distributed over
space and the differential risks within and between different localities and
various sections of the population.
(c) Studies of how and why the fear of crime is spatialised. This involves
analysing the public’s perception of where the crime problem is located
and working through their mental mappings of safe and dangerous places.
(d) Studies of the flow and movement of specific crimes such as drugs and
prostitution between different localities and countries.
(a) abc
(b) bcd
(c) abd
(d) acd
CMY3701/199
3.2.8.3 Answer the paragraph-type and longer essay-type questions.
(1) List the differences between social organisation and social disorganisation. [10]
(2) Write notes on the social disorganisation theory as interpreted by Shaw and
McKay. [10]

(1) See sections 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.2.2.
(2) For background information use sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 regarding Shaw and
McKay.
100
3.2.10 REFERENCES
Belliar, P. 2017. Social disorganization Theory. Available at: https://
oxfordre.com/criminology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/
acrefore-9780190264079-e-253?print=pdf [Accessed on 20 September 2020].
Burke, R.H. 2014. An introduction to criminological theory. 4th ed. Routledge: New
York.
Dağlar, M. & Argun. 2016. Crime mapping and geographical information systems in
crime analysis. International Journal of Human Sciences. Available at: https://j-
humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/3736/1784 [Accessed on
28 September 2020].
Joyce, P. 2016. Criminal Justice: An introduction. Routledge, New York.
Krohn, M.D., Hendrix, N. Hall, P & Lizotte, A.J. 2019. Handbook of Crime and
Deviance. Springer, Switzerland.
Lamb, G. 2019. Social cohesion and violence in South Africa: constructing a puzzle
with missing pieces. Crime, Law and social Change. 72:365–385.
Pijper, L. Breetzke, G.D. & Edelstein, I. 2020. Building neighbourhood-level resilience
to crime: the case of Khayelitsha, South Africa. South African Geographical
Journal. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/037362
45.2020.1807398?needAccess=true [Accessed on 28 September 2020].
Piscitelli, A. 2019. Spatial regression of juvenile delinquency: Revisiting Shaw and
McKay. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 14(2) 132–147.
Tibbetts, S.G. 2019. Criminological theory: the essentials. SAGE: Thousand Oaks.
Tierney, J. 2013. Criminology theory and context. Routledge, New York.
CMY3701/1101
8 STUDY UNIT 3.3
8 Anomie and strain
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• explain Durkheim’s view of crime

• explain the concept of anomie
• explain Merton’s theory in terms of
– assumptions
– social inequity
– coping mechanisms or modes of adaptation
• evaluation

FIGURE 3.3.1
Visual overview of study unit 3.3
102
STUDY UNIT 3.3: Anomie and strain
3.3.1 INTRODUCTION
The most important version of strain theory is Robert Merton’s theory of anomie.
Merton applied the concept of anomie, which was first used by the French sociologist
Emil Durkheim, to society. ‘‘Anomie’’ describes normlessness as a condition of social
malaise that occurs when the existing social structure can no longer exercise control
over the individual’s needs and desires. Merton’s revised version of the concept of
anomie is regarded as one of the most durable theoretical concepts of 20th century
social thought.
the meanings of the concepts/terms.

ANOMIE is a term meaning “lacking in rules” or “normlessness” used by Durkheim
to describe a condition of normative deregulation in society (Walsh & Hemmens,
2008:22)
ANOMIE THEORIES: there are two variants: the first (developed by Emile
Durkheim) claims that anomie is a condition of normlessness experienced by
individuals during periods of rapid socioeconomic change, that is, when previous
forms of control and restraint have broken down; the second (developed by Robert
Merton) claims that individuals use alternative means, including criminal activities
to gain access to socially created needs that they cannot obtain through legitimate
behaviour (Burke, 2005:28).
MECHANICAL SOLIDARITY is a form of social solidarity existing in small,

isolated, pre-industrial societies in which individuals sharing common experiences
and circumstances share values, unquestioned beliefs and strong emotional ties (Walsh
& Hemmens, 2008:23; Siegel, 2004:478).
MODES OF ADAPTATION is Robert Merton’s concept of how people adapt to the

alleged disjunction between cultural goals and the structural barriers that hinder the
attainment of these goals. Methods of attaining cultural goals include conformity,
ritualism, innovation, retreatism and rebellion (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:23).
ORGANIC SOLIDARITY is a form of social solidarity characteristic of modern

societies, in which there is a high degree of occupational specialisation and a weak
normative consensus (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:23).
3.3.3 DURKHEIM’S VIEW ON CRIME

Durkheim’s work was influential in shifting the analysis of criminality away from
sources rooted in the individual to sources rooted in socio-cultural factors. He was a
proponent of the positivist school of thought, especially with reference to methodology;
in other words, he attempted to develop an objective scientific understanding of
society (Tierney, 2013:81).
CMY3701/1103
Durkheim (Tibbetts, 2019:112–114) made two important statements about crime:
• Crime is a normal phenomenon in any society.

• Crime is therefore functional.
(a) Crime as a normal phenomenon
Societies are complex structures made up of people who often have very diverse values.
Some people’s ideas of socially acceptable behaviour (e.g. sniffing cocaine) may be a
breach of the rules or norms of the greater group. Durkheim believed that crime is
both normal and provides an essential function in society, namely to define moral
boundaries (Tibbetts, 2019:113). For this reason, some actions (e.g. drug abuse) are
described as criminal or illegal by those who control group norms. According to
Durkheim, crime is the result of the creation and application of norms. Just because
some behaviour is regarded as ‘‘wrong’’, other behaviour is regarded as ‘‘correct’’. Crime
is therefore a normal phenomenon because, while there are people in every society
who obey the norms and laws, there are always others who disobey them (and who
therefore deserve to be punished). The identification of the rule breaker furthermore
creates a bond between law-abiding members of society thorough a “common sense
of self-righteousness or superiority” (Tibbetts, 2019:114).
Durkheim (Tierney, 2013:86) believed that crime is both inevitable and necessary. For
him, crime is a social fact, and a stable suicide rate (for example) is just that: a social
fact. If crime and suicide are found in the average society then, almost by definition,
they must be normal. This means that crime is normal. As far as Durkheim was
concerned, a complete absence of crime would depend on all members of a society
being in total agreement with each other about what constituted acceptable norms
and values.
(b)
Crime is functional
Crime is functional in a society because, according to Durkheim, it forms the basis of
social change. Interestingly, he proposed that progress in society depended on deviating
from established moral boundaries, especially if the normative structures are so strong
and rigid that it hinders progress. In some instances, such as political unrest during
the apartheid era, “crime is the price society pay for progress” (Tibbetts, 2019:114).
Crime often highlights those aspects and processes that need to be changed. In South
Africa, the high incidence of crime has made it necessary to identify priority crimes,
and a national crime prevention strategy has been established to address the problem.
Crime, in fact, helps society prepare for change.
Durkheim (Tierney, 2013:87) argues that crime is functionally useful; it helps to

maintain a healthy society. Crime fulfils an adaptive function and a boundary
maintenance function.
• Adaptive function: Crime’s adaptive function is to introduce new ideas into society,
thereby preventing society from stagnating.
• Boundary maintenance function: Media reports and conversations between people
lead to the criminal event being inserted into people’s lives and this, in turn,
functions to reaffirm the boundary between good and bad behaviour. The collective
nature of the responses to the criminal event in fact promotes social solidarity. In
modern society the focus of laws is therefore not to define societal norms but to
104
regulate interactions between members in society and to set behavioural limits and
prevent what Durkheim refers to as anomie or normlessness (Tibbetts, 2019:114).
3.3.2.1 The concept of anomie

Anomie is a French word, and although the term may be traced back to ancient
Greek (it literally means ‘‘lawlessness’’), Durkheim used the term ‘‘anomie’’ to refer
to a state of normlessness (absence of norms). In general it refers to “weakness in the
normative order of a society” (Krohn, Hendrix, Hall & Lizotte, 2019:162). Norms
or socially expected behaviour determines how people act, and contravening these
norms poses a threat to social control. In his classic work, the division of labour in
society (as translated by George Simpson in 1933), Durkheim developed the ideas
inherent in the concept of anomie which he also referred to as deregulation. One of
the products of anomie according to Durkheim is a high crime rate (Williams &
McShane, 2015:96).
According to Durkheim, societies develop and change from a relatively simple

and uncomplicated existence (mechanical solidarity) to a more complex setup
(organic solidarity). Societies that are characterised by a collective conscience are an
example of societies characterised by mechanical solidarity. For Durkheim (Burke,
2018:93) societies with high levels of mechanical solidarity are characterised by
group conformity: there is a likeness and a similarity between individuals and the
members of this society hold common attitudes and beliefs that bind one person to
another. Laws are established to prevent people from damaging the group’s collective
conscience. However, this form of social solidarity severely restricts the individual’s
ability to develop a sense of personal identity or uniqueness. Within society there
are, however, also individuals who are different and do not conform to the group’s
shared attitudes and beliefs. In such cases punishment is used to reinforce the moral
consensus (world view) of the group (Burke, 2018:93).
As societies develop, they become characterised by population density as well as

economic and technological development: such societies necessarily become more
complex. The structure of social relationships changes to what Durkheim calls organic
solidarity. Organic solidarity is characteristic of modern societies with high degrees
of occupational specialisation and a diversity of experiences and circumstances. This
diversity weakens common values and social bonds and antisocial behaviour tends to
become more frequent (Burke, 2018:94; Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:111). Roles and
positions are divided and specialised and, to survive, people become interdependent.
This, in turn, changes the role played by the law.
Durkheim (Burke, 2018:95) identified three typologies of deviants. Firstly, the

biological deviant who suffers from physiological and psychological malfunctioning
and secondly, the functional rebel, who is described as a “normal” person who
rebels against a pathological society. A pathological society is characterised by an
inappropriate and unfair division of society resulting in the existence of strains in
the social system. Lastly, the skewed deviant is a person who is socialised into a
disorganised pathological society and is a student of deviance and criminal behaviour.
CMY3701/1105
Activity 3.3.1
Do you think South Africa is part of organic solidarity? Discuss fully.
Reading through the following article will assist you with your argument:
Sentencing guidelines in South Africa. Available at: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/

sentencing-guidelines/southafrica.php [Accessed on 29 September 2020].
Metz, T. 2019. Reconciliation as the aim of a criminal trial: Ubuntu’s Implications in

sentencing. Constitutional Court Review. 9: 113–234 Available at: https://journals.
co.za/docserver/fulltext/jlc_conrev1_v9_a5.pdf?expires=1601366827&id=id&acc
name=guest&checksum=3498C911D5F30B79E97E2D0029C95FE7 [Accessed
on 29 September 2020].
In societies organised based on organic solidarity, the purpose of legislation is

compensation (restitution). The idea is to punish the offender for harm caused to
another person. In other words, the punishment is not imposed because the group’s
collective conscience has been injured in some way. In such complex societies, there is
also greater emotional distance between people, and this leads to increased incidences
of depression and loneliness. Both depression and loneliness may stem from a sense
of isolation which, in turn, may lead to a loss of self-identity. This loss of identity
may be the start of anomie or normlessness: people no longer know which rules to
follow or they do not care about rules. It is not difficult to see that, in such societies,
crime may become commonplace.
Durkheim’s most important contribution to criminology lies in his revival of the

concept of anomie, a concept clearly described in Suicide, a book published in 1897
and 1951. (Tibbetts, 2019:112–116). This work provided the foundation for the theory
of anomie as developed by Merton. As in Durkheim’s previous work (The division
of labour in society), anomie is used to explain how the disintegration of social
conditions may lead to a sense of personal loss and dissolution. Durkheim studied
the most individual of all forms of deviant behaviour, namely taking one’s own life.
He found that suicide occurs when rapid or extreme social changes or crises threaten
group norms. People become uncertain about how they should behave, and this leads
to a state of confusion or normlessness. Criminologists subsequently expanded on this
idea of anomie (or ‘‘strain’’) to account for the causes of crime (Tibbetts, 2019:113).
3.3.2.2 Merton’s theory of anomie

Merton developed his theory of anomie in 1938, and this theory is still considered to
be a classic explanation of the causes of crime (Tibbetts, 2019:117). Although Merton
used Durkheim’s concept of anomie, his formulation was broader in orientation
and more specific in application. In order to remain true to his belief that criminal
behaviour was concentrated among the deprived Merton had to move away from
Durkheim’s definition of anomie (i.e. that anomie applied to society as a whole).
Merton equated anomie with a lack of equality of opportunity. At a time when crime
was assuming serious proportions in America, Merton set out to clarify the problem.
106
According to Merton, social conditions bring uneven pressure to bear on people of

different classes, and people react as individuals to such conditions. In other words,
this pressure will cause some people to commit crime (Fattah, 1997:237).
According to Merton, people are not bad by nature. People are basically good. When
people depart from norms, we need to examine the social environment. He proposed
that the breakdown in cultural beliefs associated with the American Dream is an
example of what constitutes anomie or normlessness and in this regard “when a high
degree of anomie has set in, the rules once governing conduct have lost their savour
and their force” (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010:613).
Activity 3.3.2
Do you agree with Merton that people are basically good? Given the level of
violence in all societies, this is a highly debatable statement. Can certain factors
in the environment really cause an individual to act against his or her nature? Or
are people inherently bad? Think about this statement and give some practical
examples. To assist you with your arguments, go to:
Olaiya, T.A. 2020. Colonial basis of anomie in African youth: Implications for
political governance. Developing Country Studies. 10(7), 39–55.
Merton argues that society will not be characterised by anomie if its members use only
legitimate means of advancement (even if people’s desires are totally unrestricted).
It is the relationship between desires and the means of achieving those desires that
is fundamental and produces various modes of personality adaptations as will be
discussed in more detail below. This link between desires and means has led to his
theory being regarded as a version of strain theory. In other words, everybody is
under pressure to succeed, but those who cannot or who are least likely to succeed
legitimately are under strain to use illegitimate or illegal opportunities for advancement
(Chamberlain, 2015:80).
3.3.4 Assumptions of Merton’s theory

According to Merton, there is a distinction between cultural goals and institutional
means. Cultural goals refer to values that members of a society want to achieve as
legitimate objectives, while institutional means includes the resources available to
achieve those means (Triplett, 2018:143). An integrated society maintains a balance
between the social structure (approved social means) and culture (approved goals).
This statement contains two main elements, namely
(a) A society has cultural goals that are generally regarded as being worthwhile
(e.g. wealth, material possessions and status).
(b) A society has institutionalised means or approved methods whereby these
objectives may be realised, such as educational qualifications and steady
employment. People should, therefore, be prepared to start at the bottom and
to succeed through hard work.
CMY3701/1107
The cultural emphasis on the goal to succeed, however, is stronger than the emphasis
on approved means. This imbalance between goals and means brings about anomie
(Siegel & Senna, 2000:145). People are encouraged and eventually socialised to pursue
success, and success is idolised in the media, emphasised in schools and encouraged by
governments. This means that the value of success is passed on from one generation
to the next. Material and monetary success is measured by the material things that
people are supposed to acquire by honest, hard work. But in Merton’s opinion, the
values in a country such as America revolve around achieving success and money at
any cost. For example, members of wealthy middle and upper classes will engage in
criminal activities, such as white collar crime, because of the emphasis on material
success. The pressure to maintain such status “erases the distinction between right and
wrong in the world of business” (Chamberlain, 2015:78). In this competitive world,
anomie is created and undermines society itself and this, in turn, increases strain.
3.3.4.1 Crime as a lower-class phenomenon

Having put forward his views on goals and means, Merton turned his attention to
patterns of crime and delinquency. According to official statistics (bear in mind that
Merton applied his theory to American society), most offences were committed by
lower-class people. Merton explained the higher incidence of crime among the lower
classes as follows:
• Those in lower class or disadvantaged minority groups want to achieve wealth

and financial success just as much as people from the middle and upper classes
(Siegel, 2018:196–197).
• However, people from the lower classes do not have access to the legal institutionalised
means (e.g. education and career opportunities) to realise their ambitions.
• The resulting anomie leads to strain and pressurises these groups into using any
effective means to obtain an income, including illegal means (e.g. theft). This is
particularly true of societies in which there is little emphasis on obeying the law.
Social inequality exists in America because American society is structured in such a

way that it obstructs or limits the access of the lower class or minority groups to the
approved means to success. According to Merton, it is the structure of society itself
that is anomic. This does not mean that anomic conditions remain constant. The
degree of anomie will vary according to changes in society (i.e. changes that reduce
or increase social inequality).
3.3.4.2 Reactions to anomie

When a society finds itself in a state of anomie, a number of reactions or modes of
adaptation are possible. Each of these adaptations is a way of coping with the balance
(or imbalance) between goals and means (Triplett, 2018:146).
Conformity is the most common reaction, even in societies characterised by anomie.

This means that both the cultural goals and the institutionalised means of achieving
them are accepted. People simply accept the status quo and continue their pursuit
of success within the constraints of the conventional (accepted) means available. In
Merton’s view, this approach (conformity) works because most people fall into this
category – which means that society remains basically stable (Cullen & Wilcox,
2010:17).
108
Innovation is the most common deviant reaction. The innovator strives to achieve
culturally prescribed goals, but is willing to use any means available to achieve such
goals (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010:17). In an anomic society, innovators (deviants) get the
opportunity to act. These people pursue society’s goals, but do not attach any value
to the rules or accepted means, simply because society as a whole is unaware of any
rules. The overriding principle is that the end justifies the means. Scarce goods such
as money and jewellery may be obtained, for example, by stealing. It is interesting
to note that, as far as the potential offender is concerned, innovation may be a more
effective means of achieving success than conformity. Instead of saving money in
the bank and earning interest, for example, robbing the bank is much quicker and
enables one to obtain large amounts of money at once. It is in this category that
Merton (Williams, 2004:309) includes most of the individuals who make up the
crime statistics. This is why Merton saw innovation as particularly common among
the lower classes: they are stigmatised anyway owing to their low skill levels, low pay
and greater vulnerability to unemployment. Their reaction tends to be to commit
crimes against property (e.g. theft and burglary) and get involved in organised crime
(where the sole end is financial gain).
Ritualism involves the acceptance of institutionalised means and the rejection of

cultural goals. Ritualists are usually not regarded as deviant. These people are no
longer trying to get ahead, but are concentrating purely on keeping what they have
obtained already – by rigidly following the rules and norms. Ritualists’ jobs (and
keeping their jobs) are their security, and they do not try to use their jobs as a means
to improve their positions (e.g. by working hard with a view to promotion). Ritualists
include many lower middle-class people who have abandoned any dreams of bettering
their lot in life, but who still abide by the rules of society, literally just going through
the motions (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010:17).
Retreatism is an escapist reaction and involves the rejection of both goals and
institutionalised means to achieve the goals (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010:17). Here,
both the cultural goal of progress and the approved means are rejected. This category
includes vagrants, drunkards, drug addicts and the mentally ill. Merton (Williams,
2004:309) felt that these people did not really belong to the society in which they
lived. Retreatists might also include racial or religious minorities, particularly if these
people are severely disadvantaged. Retreatists who are alcoholics and drug addicts
may commit offences (either to fund their habit or while under the influence of
alcohol or drugs).
Rebellion involves rejection of the system as such. Both the goals and the means
are rejected and replaced by new ones. One example may be deliberately damaging
property and a more extreme example may be a revolutionary who attempts to
overthrow a government by force. In this category are street gang members, terrorists
and/or freedom fighters. The rebellious reaction often involves destructive crimes,
such as wilful damage to property and crimes of public disorder. It may even include
murder, terrorist offences and, in fact, any crime designed to attack the basis of that
society’s culture (Williams, 2004:308).
When trying to explain crime, it is innovation, rebellion and, to a lesser extent,

retreatism (withdrawal) that are relevant.
CMY3701/1109
READ
Read more about Merton’s anomie theory and how it can be applied to explain
crime in society in the following article:
Olofinbiyi,S.A. & Mtambo, T. 2020. Fire on the mountain: Reinvigorating legislative

measures to quench the flame of illicit drug use in South Africa. Asian journal of
interdisciplinary research. 3(2):15–29.
3.3.4.3 Evaluation of Merton’s theory

The theory of anomie explains the concentration of crime, not only in the lower-
class urban areas, but also among the lower classes and minority groups in general.
Merton’s theory does not clearly address the reasons why a specific individual commits
an offence. It focuses, instead, on explaining crime trends in society resulting from
blocked economic opportunities. Although Merton’s theory focuses on explaining
crime in American society, it is also relevant to other societies, such as in South Africa
to explain the high crime rate.
South Africa also has structural shortages where large-scale poverty and unemploy-
ment are found which emphasise the economic disparities. Gaps in education – such
as inadequate facilities and varying degrees of education (private schools versus schools
in isolated rural areas such as KwaZulu-Natal) – block economic opportunities for
certain groups. Frustration and anger then come to the fore in rebellious conformity
to anomic feelings: school buildings are damaged by vandals and gang activities
become violent. The dispute about land ownership also reflects economic disparity,
and explains rebellious actions such as unauthorised squatting and farm attacks.
The theory of anomie sets the scene for clear policy implications. If obstruction
of legal opportunities causes people to engage in criminal activities, then certain
groups have to be given access to the legal means of achieving success (education
and occupational training programmes (Akers, 1997:131)). Moreover, rehabilitation
programmes in prisons should offer offenders an opportunity to improve their
educational qualifications and to acquire career skills. However, Merton’s theory
fails to explain why it is that legal means of advancement are unevenly distributed
in society and nor does his theory really explain the origins of people’s motivation
(i.e. to commit crime).
Merton’s theory of anomie is a broad explanation in that it can be applied to a wide

range of deviant and criminal activities. That said, the theory was developed mainly
to explain one specific phenomenon: the concentration of crime among the lower
classes. White-collar crime (e.g. fraud) is ignored and the impression is created that
lawlessness is an exclusively lower-class problem. The scope of this theory is therefore
limited mainly to property crimes committed by the lower classes.

Durkheim used the term anomie to explain how the disintegration of existing social
rules, laws and values may lead to a sense of personal loss and disillusionment.
Anomie may therefore be defined as a state of normlessness (absence of norms) due

to “weakness in the normative order of a society” (Krohn et al, 2019:162).
110
Anomic conditions occur when the existing social structure can no longer control
an individual’s behaviour. The rule of law has disintegrated. Under such conditions,
deviant behaviour such as suicide and other offences may be regarded as normal
reactions to existing social conditions.
In South Africa, the abolition of the death penalty, the decriminalisation of abortion
and a general distrust of the criminal justice system have enhanced the feeling of
uncertainty about what constitutes the norm. The high crime rate may well be
examples of anomie.
One feature of Merton’s theory of anomie is the assumption of consensus concerning

social values. A common value system teaches people what to pursue (cultural goals)
and the most appropriate ways (societal means) of achieving these goals. Unless the
means to goal achievement have been evenly distributed in society, overemphasis of
goals and unequal access to the means of attaining them will cause disorganisation
in society and therefore create anomic conditions.
Groups that have the greatest access to the legal means of achieving cultural goals
are largely conformist (law abiding). In contrast, those with the least access to such
means, namely economically deprived citizens, will display a higher incidence of
deviant behaviour simply because the people in this group suffer most under anomic
conditions. In short, structural inequality is a causal risk associated with the causation
of deviant behaviour and crime.
clear.
(1) According to Durkheim crime is ...........

(a) a normal phenomenon in society and therefore functional.
(b) an abnormal phenomenon in society and therefore functional.
(c) a normal phenomenon in society and therefore malfunctional.
(d) a relative phenomenon in society and therefore routine.
(2) Choose the statements which describe organic solidarity in society.

(a) Societies have a relatively simple and uncomplicated existence.
(b) It is a characteristic of modern societies.
(c) Diversity weakens common values and social bonds in society.
(d) Low incidence of antisocial behaviour.
CMY3701/1111
(a) ab
(b) bc
(c) bd
(d) ad
(3) According to Merton there is a distinction between cultural goals and institutional
means. Cultural goals in this instance refer to:
(a) Values that members of a society want to achieve.
(b) The resources available to achieve goals.
(c) Approved methods whereby goals may be realised.
(d) Goals that support a balanced society.
(4) When a society finds itself in a state of anomie, a number of reactions or modes
of adaptation are possible. When a person commits an economic crime, such
as theft or robbery the form of adaptation he/she uses is known as?
(a) Conformity
(b) Innovation
(c) Ritualism
(d) Retreatism
(5) Which mode of adaptation involves destructive crimes, such as wilful damage
to property and crimes of public disorder?
(a) Conformity
(b) Innovation
(c) Rebellion
(d) Retreatism
3.3.5.3 Answer the paragraph-type and longer essay-type questions.
(1) Briefly discuss the six premises of structural theory. [15]
(2) Identify and briefly discuss the three branches of structural theory. [6]
(3) Name the three independent variables that are central to the ecological
theory. [10]
(4) Critically discuss the work of the Chicago School regarding the study of
crime. [20]
(5) Why does Durkheim believe that crime is functional in a society? Explain the
various functions that crime fulfils (according to Durkheim). [5]
(6) Discuss the adaptations and reactions to anomie in a society. [15]
112

(1) See section 3.1.2.
(3) Poverty, mobility of residents and racial heterogeneity (section 3.1.3.1).
(4) See section 3.2.3. Pay attention to crime statistics, study of rural crime, power
and class, sociological explanations, disintegration, and social policies.
(6) See section 3.3.3.2 and discuss the five points.
CMY3701/1113
3.3.8 REFERENCES
Burke, R.H. 2014. An introduction to criminological theory. 5th ed. Routledge: New
York.
Chamberlain, J.M. 2015. Criminological theory in context: An introduction. SAGE:
London.
Cullen, F.T. & Wilcox, P. 2010. Encyclopaedia of Criminological Theory – Volume
Two. SAGE: California.
Krohn, M.D., Hendrix, N. Hall, P & Lizotte, A.J. 2019. Handbook of Crime and
Deviance. Springer, Switzerland.
Metz, T. 2019. Reconciliation as the aim of a criminal trial: Ubuntu’s Implications
in sentencing. Constitutional Court Review. 9:113–234 Available at: https://
journals.co.za/docserver/fulltext/jlc_conrev1_v9_a5.pdf?expires=160136682
7&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=3498C911D5F30B79E97E2D0029C
95FE7 [Accessed on 29 September 2020].
Olaiya, T.A. 2020. Colonial basis of anomie in African youth: Implications for political
governance. Developing Country Studies. 10(7), 39–55.
Olofinbiyi, S.A. & Mtambo, T. 2020. Fire on the mountain: Reinvigorating legislative
measures to quench the flame of illicit drug use in South Africa. Asian journal
of interdisciplinary research. 3(2):15–29.
Sentencing guidelines in South Africa. Available at: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/
sentencing-guidelines/southafrica.php [Accessed on 29 September 2020].
Tibbetts, S.G. 2019. Criminological theory: the essentials. SAGE: Thousand Oaks.
Tierney, J. 2013. Criminology theory and context. Routledge, New York.
Williams, F.P. & McShane, M.D. 2015. Criminological theory. Selected classical reading.
Routledge, New York.
114
9 STUDY UNIT 3.4
9 Gender and crime
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• identify critical factors relating to African feminism

• explain the underpinning of the African feminism
• explain the underpinning of critical feminism
• explain the underpinning of radical feminism
• explain the underpinning of liberal feminism
• explain the role of patriarchy in women’s involvement in criminal activities

FIGURE 3.4.1
CMY3701/1115
3.4.1 INTRODUCTION
“What is feminism? Who is a feminist? How do we understand feminism across
national boundaries? Across cultures? Across centuries” (Offen, 1988:119). Marganski
(2019:1–2) highlights that gender is at a focal point of discourse and analysis of
feminists’ theories. Gender is the strongest and most dependable link of crime
and misbehaviour. Research reveals that men are more prone to committing crime
than females, the gender gap in crime rates is one of the undisputed finding in
criminology (O’Neill, 2020:410). Issues surrounding female offending have gained
attention within the criminological theory and research; however, there are no clear
explanations (Vold et al., 2002:267). Does this mean the best predictor of whether an
individual will violate the law is dependent on gender? Could this be partly a result
of hormonal differences between men and women? (see Study Unit 2.2), or could
the difference between gender offending behaviour be as a result of the socialisation
process between a boy and girl child or because boys and men engage in crime to
validate their masculinity? (Rios cited in O’Neill, 2020:412). We cannot debate
these issues in isolation because the socialisation process with the combination of the
social structure ‘assigns’ social standing to people who contribute to the differences
in personality and behaviour, which to a large extent is linked to historic differences
in crime rates between males and females (Conklin, 1995:103).
Feminists recognise the multifaceted interactions between biology and culture that
produce gender but conceptualise gender as a process that is shaped by and that shapes
social action, opportunities and experiences (Renzetti cited in Zahn, Brownstein &
Jackson, 2004:132). Feminist criminology poses the question of the extent to which
these theories can be “generalised” to explain women’s offending (Vold et al 2002:267).
This study unit opens with a discussion of feminist criminology, which has raised a
variety of issues related to women’s offending, women’s victimisation, and women’s
experiences in the criminal justice system. Not everyone is equally likely to commit
a crime, or to be the victim of one. Offence rates and victimisation rates vary with
social characteristics such as gender, age, race and class (Conklin, 1995:103).
Feminism is not a state of notion but evolves and is generally shaped by our worldviews
and although it is a complex notion, we can trace it back to its development. The
below discussion will take us through the development of feminist criminology. This
discussion highlights that feminism needs both Enlightenment and post-modernist
agendas. Since it is shaped and embedded in the views that “freedom, autonomy
and emancipation which were initially developed in the Enlightenment thought,
reconstructing them so that they can move beyond the abstract individualism
(patriarchy) inherent in the liberal tradition itself” (Hoffman, 2001:198).

CRITICAL FEMINISM these scholars are mainly focused on the impact of gender
inequality including the inequality of power between men and women in a competitive
system (Siegel, 2012:658).
116
STUDY UNIT 3.4: Gender and crime
FEMINISM is a theory of emancipation, and feminist empiricism, perspective

theory and feminist post-modernism, in which the emphasis is on female freedom
(Hoffman, 2001:198).
FEMINIST THEORIES feminist theories are those that “embrace physiological,

psychological, and social-structural factors” (Klein, 1973:11).
LIBERAL FEMINISM THEORY claim that because the roles and lifestyle of
women have changed there is probability that their involvement in crime will increase.
Further, they posit that supposition is deduced from the history of women being
marginalised economically and social position (Siegel, 212:663).
MARXIST FEMINISTS are rooted in the notion that the link between class and
gender division of labour play a role in determining societal position of men and
women (Adler, 2006:218).
RADICAL FEMINISM views crime as part of the biological makeup of men and
the belief that men are born to be dominant and aggressive (Adler, 2006:218).
SOCIALIST FEMINISM challenges to merge Marxist and radical feminism by

exploring numerous influences that exist between patriarchy and capitalism that
ultimately lead men to crime and women to subordination (Adler, 2006:218).
3.4.3 THE DEVELOPMENT OF FEMINIST CRIMINOLOGY

Feminist criminological theories are deeply rooted in ancient, political, economic,
societal and other realities. They observe and examine lived experiences of women
and girls as well as men and boys and any “queer, non-binary or fluid folks” that
will offer meaningful background and understanding into several criminological
issues and concerns (Marganski 2019:2). Feminist criminology developed from the
feminist movement which was central to the constituency of a collective social action
that aimed at addressing sexism and endorse gender equality (Renzetti cited in Zahn
et al., 2004:133). According to Whiteley (2014:1), feminist criminology movement
influenced criminological thought greatly and this movement was initiated in the
1960s and 1970s during the second wave of feminism. Adler (2006:208), suggests that
a noteworthy evolution in criminology occurred during this period, which necessitated
the new emergence of theories that linked crime to gender roles, arguing that the
nature and the increase in crime would equalise that of their male counterparts. The
distinct feature of this movement was incisive on women’s rights and women’s liberation
(Whiteley, 2014:1). Further, scholars explored how crimes committed by and against
women were shaped by the gender inequality entrenched in patriarchy. Some of the
scholars proposed that crime was a form of exhibiting masculinity. Feminism is a
wide-ranging area that has applications to the field of criminology, although this is
certainly not its key prominence (Vold et al., 2002:267).
3.4.4 SCHOOLS OF FEMINIST CRIMINOLOGY

Various feminist literatures in criminology could be interpreted as forming a larger
part of traditional criminology, while aiming to fill in gaps and correcting historical
misrepresentations. As such, they were part of what was termed liberal feminism.
Notwithstanding the diversity in feminist criminology, there is a set of assumptions
CMY3701/1117
that motivates these feminist viewpoints (Renzetti cited in Zahn et al., 2004:132). Daly
and Chesney-Lind (1988:108), posits that the focus of the feminist criminologist has
continually been on gender issues. These included socially constructed expectations,
attitudes, and behaviour linked with females and males, which perpetuated the
gender difference characterised by femininity and masculinity. For these reasons
when examining any aspect of social life, including violence, we should reflect in what
ways the criminal act is gendered, for instance, how gender influences its frequency
and manifestations. Feminism has three main schools of thought, namely critical,
radical and liberal, African feminism is also included. These schools of thought are
discussed briefly in the below discussion:
3.4.4.1 Radical feminism

According to Simpson (1989:618), radical feminists have dominated but not
monopolised feminist perspectives in this area. The origins of patriarchy and the
subordination of women are seen by radical feminists to rest in male aggression
and control of women’s sexuality. Men are inherently more aggressive than women,
because of their relative size disadvantages and independency on men during child-
bearing years, are easy to dominate and control. Radical feminism examines the role
of patriarchy, a male-oriented and male dominated system in constructing the social
world and argued that gender inequality is the most prominent source of oppression, as
it is found across various class structures (Marganski, 2019:11–12). A major feature of
liberal feminism is that women should receive the same rights and treatment as men.
3.4.4.2 Liberal feminism

This branch of feminism basically operated within the framework of existing social
structures to direct attention to women’s issues, promote women’s rights, increase
women’s opportunities, and transform women in society. Liberal feminism is also
termed the mainstream feminism and is mainly founded on political liberalism. Liberal
feminists viewed gender role socialisation as well as the emancipation of women and
women’s entry into the workforce as opening doors to crime, in addition to sharing
a belief in equal opportunity for working women. Changes in female offending
were connected with female status and opportunity, with the struggle for social and
economic equality relating to behaviour (Maganski, 2019:11).
3.4.4.3 African feminism

Feminist Africa was initially intellectualised in 2000 with an aim to radicalise
the discipline of gender and women’s studies by developing a feminist knowledge
focused on undertaking women’s issues and their local context (Mama, 2017:2). The
varied context within which feminism is established across the African continent
is still designed by numerous layers of control in “imperial colonial, military and/
or authoritarian civilian rule” (Mama, 2017:18). It is crucial for criminological
discourses to demystify the myths of colonial criminology and delink itself from
patriarchal discourses that lead to Black women’s silences (Dastile & Agozini, 2019:30).
Sachikonye (2010), commented that “African feminism should not stereotype women
as ‘problem to be solved’, but should portray them as people who can seek their own
priorities and agenda. Distinctively African feminism will portray women as strong,
innovative agents and decision-makers in their specific context. The development
118
should empower African women and work for them in ways that they want it to”.
Guy-Sheftall (2003:31), posits that an anthropologist, Filomina Chioma Steady, a
Sierra Leonian at a conference on ‘Women in African Diaspora’ held at Howard
University in 1983, defined the relationship between women of African descent and
the mainstream women’s movement in the West as problematic, and argued that
the former have evolved their own brand of feminism and for them the struggle
against gender oppression has always been “fused with liberation from other forms
of oppression, namely slavery, colonialism, neocolonialism, racism, poverty, illiteracy
and disease”.
African feminism acknowledges a joint struggle with African men for the prohibition
of oppressions of external domination and European exploitation. This move is an
attempt to challenge African men to be aware of prominent characteristics of women’s
suppression that varied from the generalised oppression of all African people… “[it]
recognises that certain inequalities and limitations existed or still exist in traditional
societies and that colonialism reinforced them and introduced others” (Guy-Sheftall,
2003:32). Dastile and Agozino (2019:22) argue that though women may face similar
circumstances, their experiences of womanhood differ as they are generally shaped by
race, gender and class and construct diverse systems of embodied self and prejudices.
They further argued that the effort to appreciate women’s paths to incarceration
without taking contributary factors into account is limiting and creates criminological
discourses that fail to encapsulate the understated “micro-social and macro forms of
oppression and resistance, deviance and social control”.
Daly and Chesney-Lind (cited in Whiteley, 2014:1–2) proposed five features of

feminist thought that serve to distinguish feminist criminology from traditional
criminological analysis:
(1) Gender is not a natural fact purely resulting from biological and sex differences,
but a multifaceted social, historical, and cultural phenomenon.
(2) Gender and gender relations in critical ways control social life and social
establishments.
(3) Gender relations and ideas of masculinity and femininity are not symmetrical
and founded on an organising principle of men’s superiority and social, political
and economic control over women.
(4) Structures of information echo men’s opinions of the natural and social world
and the production of knowledge is gendered.
(5) Women should be the focus of intellectual inquiry not peripheral or invisible
to men.
3.4.4.4 Critical feminism

Critical feminism describes both victimisation and criminality among women in
terms of gender inequality, patriarchy and the exploitation of women under capitalism
(Siegel, 2011:212). Patriarchy is tied to the economic structure of capitalism and results
in a “sexual division of labor” in which men control the economy and women serve
them and their sexual needs. Messerschmidt (cited in Siegel, 2011:213), maintains
that capitalist society is noticeable in both patriarchy and class conflict, since the
labour of workers and men have control over women including economically and
biologically. Further, “this double marginality explains why females in a capitalist
society commit fewer crimes than males”. Marxist feminist criminologists argue that
CMY3701/1119
actions which threaten this capitalist-patriarchal system are defined as crimes by the
criminal law and the criminal justice system. Their view is that the law is a direct
instrument of men’s oppression while others take a more complex structural view
that looks to overall patterns through which law maintains the system of patriarchy
(Vold et al., 2002:271). Patriarchy or male dominance continues to be reinforced by
the capitalist system. This system sustains female oppression in primary institutions,
such as in the workplace or at home (Siegel, 2011:2013). Marganski (2019:11) posits
that a major feature is that society is constructed of relations people form through,
which create class divisions that affect other institutions like family. This calls the
need to anchor Ubuntu principles in communities and more so in families, because
families are “the primary institution of formative moral development” (Okin cited in
Letseka, 2014:548). Further, this approach is regarded as an attempt to promote the
repositioning of women’s status in society because Ubuntu advocates that we affirm
our humanity when we acknowledge the existence of everyone. The acknowledgement
of inequalities in society will limit the feminisation of poverty and gender-based
insubordination attitude. This will necessitate the adoption of egalitarian families,
where husband and wife share similar positions of power at home and in the workplace.
It is believed that in an egalitarian family, girls are more empowered and are afforded
greater opportunities to engage in legitimate adult-status behaviours and have less
need to be involved in deviant behaviour (Siegel, 2011:214). Consequently, children
raised in such an environment will be socialised in a manner that does not advocate
for different gender roles in society. Power relations are not only structured solely on
material things but are entrenched in discursive structures of normativity, whether
these are models about heterosexuality, religion, culture or tradition, most of the time
they are imposed as too often imposed as the only likely sole identity. Further, the
general observation of the struggles of feminists in the continent mostly addresses
the processes of power in arenas that are viewed different from one another (Pereira,
2017:19).
TABLE 3.4.1
Subareas of Critical Criminology
Theory Major Premise Strength Research Focus
Left realism Crime is a function of Signifies a compromise Deterrence; protection

relative deprivation; between conflict and
criminals prey on traditional criminology
the poor
Critical feminist The c a p i t a l i st Describes gender Gender inequality;

theory system produces bias, violence against oppression; patriarchy
patriarchy, which women and repression
oppresses women
120
Theory Major Premise Strength Research Focus
Power- c ontrol Girls are controlled Clarifies gender Power and control;
theory more closely than differences in the crime gender differences;
boys in traditional rate as a function of domesticity
m a l e - d o m i n ate d class and gender
households. There conflict
is gender equity
in contemporary
egalitarian homes
Adapted (from Siegel, 2011:216)
Activity 3.4.1
3.4.1 In your opinion considering global changes in addressing women and
issues that relate to women, how would you explain the main reason for
gender-based violence?
3.4.2 Compare your arguments under the discussion tool on MyUnisa.
FIGURE 3.4.2
Adapted: https://www.en.cgs.aau.dk/digitalAssets/420/420821_feminism_word_cloud_650x350.jpg
3.4.5 THE NATURE OF FEMALE CRIMINALITY

Feminist theories have much to offer in terms of understanding offenders and victims
along with respective power dynamics and inequalities produced by social conditions
and continue to exist. There are different views on why women commit crime and
CMY3701/1121
one of the views is that the increase in women involvement in criminal activities is a
consequence of the feminist movement. However, existing data to collaborate these
findings where arrest data is concerned does not reveal a clear increase. Renzetti
(cited in Zahn et al., 2004:131), until recent years the criminality of women had a
long history of neglect. Information about the nature of female criminality is still
at its initial stages and is fairly new in criminology. There is no concrete evidence
to verify that the onset of feminist movement contributed to the increase of women
involvement in deviancy (Conklin, 1995:106).
Globally, the work carried out in the area of women and crime is extremely limited
whereas, there is abundant and well-documented information on male delinquency
and criminal pathway activities. This finding is no different to South Africa, as Artz,
Hoffman-Wanderer and Moult (2011:1), reveal that most of the known documented
evidence concerning male criminal activities is well established, including how justice
and punishment constructs male experiences, whereas the involvement of women
in crime or deviancy is reduced to either because these women are socially and/or
economically disadvantaged.
Klein (in Vold et al., 2002:268), posits that early feminist writings in criminology
were critiques of traditional criminology theories because numerous topics relating
to women offenders were misrepresented for ignoring or heavily distorting several
topics related to women offenders. Furthermore, traditional criminology theories were
criticised for their lack of addressing the patent difference in which women were treated
by the criminal justice system in comparison to men. This calls for acknowledging the
contribution on the definition of violence or crime. Traditionally violent behaviour
has been defined relatively narrowly and contained acts of physical assault or using a
weapon against another person. Key contribution of feminist research and theories was
broadening the definition of violent behaviour which included sexual, psychological,
and economic violence and, followed the lead of radical or critical criminologists by
including interpersonal violence and structural violence (Barak, 2003; DeKeseredy,
2000). “The gender ratio and the practice of one-size-fits-all theory for males and
females led to the notion of gender blindness” (Whiteley, 2014:2).
3.4.6 MYTHS ABOUT FEMINISM

According to Potter (2006:111), the Black feminist and critical race feminist addresses
concerns in the lives of Black women that are categorised into four themes:
(a) Social structural oppression

(b) The Black community and culture
(c) Intimate and familial relations
(d) The Black woman as an individual
The narrative is that Black women are generally oppressed and marginalised by
society and within their communities based on their “subordinated statuses” within
each of these spheres. Dastile and Agozino (2019:25), assert that Black women in
comparison to White, Indian and Coloured women, are more likely to be affected
by high unemployment. This supposition is influenced by a research conducted on
racial profiles of women incarcerated in correctional centres in South Africa. The
research reveals that a key contributory factor is the numerical over-representation
of Black women, consistently to the international trends with Black and African
122
American women in correctional centres. Jules-Macquet shared her experiences with

Black female offenders at NICRO, the largest percentage of which is female offenders
and the most common offence is theft or attempted theft (2015:5). These conclusions
are in line with numerous researches on the issue, as the majority of incarcerated
women are said to have committed economic crimes. Dastile and Agozino (2019:25),
argue that in South Africa, chronic unemployment among underprivileged people is
heightened by the history of inequalities. Van Dieten, Jones and Rondon (2015:2),
found that where violent offences are concerned, the highest proportion of violent
offences committed by women occurs within the milieu of intimate relationships. In
South Africa, there is no sufficient data to support or refute the statement. However,
identified violence risk factors for women include younger age, unemployment, low
socioeconomic status, lack of social support and poverty (Simpson, 1989:618).
Lack of current supporting evidence is attributed to the substandard offender self-

report surveys which contribute to criminologists ignoring female offending behaviour,
including circumstances of the crimes committed. This deduction is proven by how
in both the late 19th and early to mid-20th centuries, there was an insignificant
number of literatures that addressed issues that concerned women and crime. Against
this background this demonstrates how during early literature different investigative
methods were used, yet the results were inconclusive and there were several shared
assumptions about the nature of women and the crimes they committed (Klein cited
in Adler, 2006:209).These assumptions focused on crime as the result of individual
physiological or psychological characteristics of women.
Adler (cited in Daly & Chesney-Lind, 1988:511), assumed that women from a low-
income background were involved in crime because they are seeking equality with their
male counterparts, supposing that involvement in deviancy is an attractive occupation.
According to Stacey and Thorne (cited in Daly & Chesney-Lind, 1988:498), theories
and concepts rooted in men’s experience formerly exploited intellectual inquiry,
but currently arguments in some fields echo the effect of feminist thought across
the disciplines. The underdevelopment of this area of study appears to be in part a
significance of the pervasiveness of the belief that female misconduct is insignificant
(Smart, 2013:1).
Our understanding of female criminality is largely based on the picture presented

to us by official statistics and empirical research. This gives rise to opposing views
on whether the levels of female involvement in violent crime has increased in recent
years (Steffensmeier & Rosenthal, 1979:217). Because there appear to be so few female
offenders, they are perceived in these studies to exhibit abnormal factors in their
biological, physiological and psychological makeup associated with being peculiar to
the female sex. Dalton and Pollak (cited in Smart, 2013:18) argue that the narrative
persists where men are considered to turn to crime for economic or social reasons or
through poor socialisation and women are believed to become criminals because of
their menstrual cycle or menopausal symptoms.
According to Jurik (cited in Renzetti et al., 2004:131), “Beginning in the mid-1970s,

feminist-inspired analyses drew attention to the neglect of women and the bias in
male-centred theories of crime and criminal justice”. The notion that gender shapes
and is shaped by social action, opportunities, and experiences is not intended to suggest
that the genders or gender relations are balanced in our society. However, the core
principle of feminist criminology is that our society, both on a macro (structural/
institutional) level and a micro (interpersonal) level, is characterised by sexism. In our
CMY3701/1123
society sexism takes place within the context of patriarchy, a social system in which
men dominate. As Cohen (cited in ONeill, 2020:416) puts it, girls reject violence
because the ‘characters’ they aspire to encourage affiliation and nurturant behaviours
which require empathic ability. Whereas, Steffensmeier and Allan (cited in O’Neill,
2020:416) argue women are socialised to be more empathetic to others’ needs than
men, inhibiting their desire to offend. As Chesney-Lind puts it (cited in Whiteley,
2014:1), “the task of describing and changing a spectrum of women’s experiences, which
have been formed by particular and often competing allegiances to class, race and
other social groups is not a straight forward but a blurred and contingent enterprise”.
A major influence of the early feminist work was its emphasis on the importance of
gender in understanding crime. According to Renzetti (in Zahn, 2004:134) Freda
Adler in 1975, proclaimed that women were not only involved in more crimes,
but that their crimes were becoming more masculine in nature. Steffensmeier (in
Adler, 2006:216) emphasised that research contradicted the view that women were
committing more masculine violent crimes. He also noticed that reported arrest rates
for women were in fact increasing but the gap between male and female crime rates
was not closing. Messerschmidt (in Siegel, 2011:213), explains that this observation
might be perpetuated by the fact that in every culture, males attempt to emulate
“ideal” masculine behaviour. More so, in the Western culture, this translates to being
“authoritative, in charge combative and controlling”. His observation is not different
from what is happening in the African culture where male and male children are
given more respect than their female counterparts.
Gender is the strongest predictor of criminal involvement while males consistently

commit more crime than females, and mostly those that are violent by nature. This
argument further demonstrates how crime and violence by women was left largely
unexamined. Women’s criminality requires taking a more multidimensional approach
(Artz et al., 2011:2). Wesley (cited in Artz et al., 2011:2) argues that issues relating
to women’s criminality “encompasses the gendered complexity of women’s realities
and allows for a more in-depth understanding of the nuances of their violence”. The
traditional studies of female criminality continue to be unchallenged and require
critical reappraisal and analysis because it indirectly affects social research and policy,
including culturally specific explanations of the behaviour and nature of women
(Smart, 2013:xv). According to Whiteley (2014:1) this is not a new phenomenon
but has continued throughout the 1960s and 1970s and confirmed that research
and research articles by female criminologists that focused on female offending were
absent in the major journals. This observation was further supported by a study
conducted by Hannon and Dufour and in their analyses which comprised of four
major criminology journals found that the female criminologists were dramatically
under-represented and that research samples were exclusively male. Although there
are still some shortfalls in this area we must recognise that feminist criminology has
made an immense contribution and expanded the foci within the field of criminology,
beyond exploring female criminal offending and female offenders and also examined
violent acts against women and girls (Britton cited in Potter, 2006:107). Further, it
is imperative to explore the role that women play either as victims or as offenders,
for Black women and arguably for all women, other inequalities must be considered
principal, not peripheral, to the analysis of women (Potter, 2006:107).
124
Interesting read
19 moms who killed their kids. Available at: https://thoughtcatalog.com/

jim-goad/2014/04/19-moms-who-killed-their-kids/
Why mom killed her four kids, ex-lover speaks out. Available at: https://www.
sowetanlive.co.za/news/south-africa/2019-01-09-why-mom-killed-her-four-kids-ex-
lover-speaks-out/
Father kills children and hangs himself! Available at: https://www.dailysun.co.za/
News/National/father-kills-children-and-hangs-himself-20190623
Please read these articles and use the information in this study unit to answer the
questions in the below activity.
Activity 3.4.2
3.4.2.1 In your opinion do society and the criminal justice system treat women
and men who committed murder of their children the same? If not, why?
3.4.2.2 Compare your arguments under the discussion tool on MyUnisa.
3.4.7 CONCLUSION
The analysis of the key theories that focus on feminism and violence has foreground
the strength and weaknesses of various theoretical perspectives on feminism and
violence. The main emphasis of feminists is on the social forces that shape women’s
lives and experiences to explain their world and female criminality. According to the
critical feminist view, control over women by all other key institutions including men
triggers the onset of female delinquent and deviant behaviour. However, we need
to recognise that it is extremely important to strike a balance between recognising
the significance of gender and gender inequality and also not reducing everything
to gender. Furthermore, this calls for an empirical analysis on men’s and women’s
narrative accounts that will assist to have a better understanding on why they engage
in criminal activities. This activity will enable us to differentiate “pure” criminal
activities and those that are gendered influenced.

Make sure you have mastered the key concepts that were listed at the start of the
study unit by making brief notes so that the meaning of each term is clear.
Make a summary of this study unit. Ensure you have achieved the outcomes listed
at the start of the study unit.
CMY3701/1125
3.4.9 ANSWERS TO MULTIPLE CHOICE, PARAGRAPH-TYPE AND
LONGER ESSAY-TYPE QUESTIONS:
(1) According to the ........... feminists draw attention to the influence of patriarchal
society on crime.
(a) African
(b) Critical
(c) Liberal
(d) Radical
(2) According to Potter (2006:111), Black feminist and critical race feminists
address concerns in the lives of Black women that are categorised into four
themes. Choose the incorrect option.
(a) Social structural advocacy
(b) The Black community and culture
(c) Intimate and familial relations
(d) The Black woman as an individual
(3) Whiteley (2014) maintains that the feminist criminology movement influenced
criminological thought greatly and this movement was initiated in the ...........
and ...........
(a) 1920s; 1930s
(b) 1940s;1950s
(c) 1960s; 1970s
(d) 1980s; 1990s
(4) Patriarchy is tied to the ...........
(a) Western culture which is authoritative
(b) Gender equality in key institutions
(c) Non-value of gender differences
(d) Economic structure of capitalism?
(5) Which branch of feminism is also termed mainstream feminism?
(a) African
(b) Critical
(c) Radical
(d) Liberal
(6) What are the primary assumptions of feminist criminology? (15)
(7) Explain the role that gender plays in violence. (10)
(8) Answers to self-assessment questions
(1) (b)
(2) (a)
(3) (c)
(4) (d)
(5) (d)
PARAGRAPH QUESTION ANSWER

For the purpose of question 6 and 7 respectively see paragraph 3.4.6 and 3.4.5.
126
3.4.10 REFERENCES
Adler, F. 2006. The Gendering of Criminology: Feminist Theory. Available at:
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/13409_Ch_10_The_
Gendering_of_Criminology.pdf [Accessed on 3 October 2020]
Africa, A. 2010. “Murderous women”? Rethinking gender and theories of violence.
Available at: http://www.agi.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/429/
feminist_africa_journals/archive/14/fa_14_-_standpoint_adelene_africa.pdf
[Accessed on 17 October 2020]
Artz, L., Hoffman-Wanderer, Y., & Moult, K. 2011. Women, Crime and Incarceration:
Exploring Pathways of Women in Conflict with the Law. Available at: http://
policyresearch.limpopo.gov.za/bitstream/handle/123456789/762/Women,%20
Crime%20and%20Incarceration-%20Exploring%20Pathways%20of%20
Women%20in%20Conflict%20with%20Law.pdf?sequence=1 [Accessed on
1 October 2020]
Barak, G. 2003. Violence and Nonviolence: Pathways to Understanding. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daly, K., & Chesney-Lind. 1988. Feminism and Criminology. Justice Quarterly
5(4):497–538. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
248966903_Feminism_and_Criminology [Accessed on 1 October 2020]
Dastile, N.P., & Agozini, B. 2019. Decolonising incarcerated women’s identities: Looking
through the lens of prison abolitionism. South African Crime Quarterly, Issue
No. 68.
DeKeseredy, W.S. 2000. “Current Controversies on Defining Nonlethal Violence
Against Women in Intimate Heterosexual Relationships”. Violence Against
Women, 6(7):728–746.
Du Plessis, G.E. 2019. Gendered human (in) Security in South Africa: What can
ubuntu feminism offer? Available at: http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/aa/v51n2/03.
pdf [Accessed on 15 October 2020].
Guy-Sheftall, B. 2003. African feminist discourse: A Review essay. Available at: https://
www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10130950.2003.9674490?casa_token
=VIT9FOswKt8AAAAA:h6hM7i3QExIr9VYz_UQdxUFy6rbnD4euow-_
Mz8nATnZU7V1sNh9KuluCjZG_89gOYnanVBDECS4 [Accessed on
15 October 2020]
Hoffman, J. 2001. Defining Feminisms. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/
doi/pdf/10.1111/1467-9256.00151?casa_token=RvsuTv1L71cAAAAA:TOAG4U
mU7num9zDHruDZvOvT75ihBpKaesSCdIo0z_aBFb6hZ0P3tNRAG8BJ1_
uVhyvsibtosvi8qQ [Accessed on 10 January 2021]
Islam, M.J., Banarjee, S., & Khatun, N. 2014. Theories of Female Criminality:
A Criminological Analysis. International Journal of Criminology and
Sociological Theory, Vol.7, No. 1, December 2014, 1-8. Available at: https://ijcst.
journals.yorku.ca/index.php/ijcst/article/viewFile/39737/35977 [Accessed on
2 October 2020]
Jules-Macquet, R. 2015. Exploring female offender profiles and social reintegration
service delivery. National institute for crime prevention and the reintegration
of offender. Available at: http://press.nicro.org.za/images/PDF/Exploring-
Female-Offender-Trends-and-Dynamics.pdf [Accessed on 18 October 2020]
Letseka, M. 2014. Ubuntu and Justice as Fairness. Available at: https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/263466044_Ubuntu_and_Justice_as_Fairness
CMY3701/1127
Mama, A. 2017. The power of feminist Pan African intellect. Feminist Africa Journal,
Issue 22.
Mama, A., & Abbas, H. 2015. Editorial: Feminism and Pan-Africanism. Available
at: http://www.agi.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/429/feminist_
africa_journals/archive/20/1_fa20_editorial.pdf [Accessed on 17 October 2020]
Marganski, A.L. 2019. Feminist Theories in Criminology and the Application of
Cybercrimes. Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-
3-319-90307-1_28-1.pdf [Accessed on 20 October 2020]
Offen, K. 1988. Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach. Available
at: http://www.drbeardmoose.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/
whatisfeminism.pdf [Accessed on 10 January 2021]
O’Neill, K.K. 2020. Adolescence, Empathy and the Gender Gap in Delinquency.
Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1557085120908332
?casa_token=2RxcpiVDe7MAAAAA:RG8FiZT4FHsLh5BFpv8VB7RzbYXp
6rigG2OFOubzC-rQjBHjjPEaKhiXtCG9AwgvVHTzAhSYVAvH [Accessed
on 2 October 2020]
Potter, H. 2006. An argument for Black Feminist Criminology: Understanding
African American Women’s Experiences with Intimate Partner Abuse Using an
Integrated Approach. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.11
77/1557085106286547?casa_token=_BumniVg_jQAAAAA:xL2oFCTgse-bT
J7MI5rJli2u1od5rq6k1t5nC2UcwpUCY3fTcMLASJ9CmcgfqUJl9wGaAY9Z
gzwD [Accessed on 15 October 2020]
Pereira, C. 2017. Feminist organizing-Strategy, Voice, Power. Feminist Africa Journal,
Issue 22.
Renzetti, C. M. 2004. Feminist Theories of Violent Behavior. In Zahn, M.A.,
Brownstein, H.H., & Jackson, S.L. Violence from Theory to Research Anderson
publishing.
Sachikonye, T. 2010. African Feminism Driven by African Women. Available at:
http://www.ngopulse.org/article/african-feminism-driven-african-women
Siegel. L.J. 2011. Criminology The Core. (4th edition). Wadsworth Cengage Learning
Simpson, S.S. 1989. Feminist, Theory, Crime and Justice. Available at: https://student.
cc.uoc.gr/uploadFiles/181-%CE%9A%CE%9C%CE%9C%CE%9A397/
Simpson%20Feminist%20Theory%20crime%20and%20justice.pdf [Accessed
on 20 October 2020]
Smart, C. 2013. Women, Crime and Criminology: A Feminist Critique. Available
at: https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=GQZUAQAAQBA
J&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=feminist+theory+in+the+explanation+of+crime
+&ots=c0Ywt2uS3D&sig=mYKnUm400Kv9xeJ7xewsYhEPA84&redir_
esc=y#v=onepage&q=feminist%20theory%20in%20the%20explanation%20
of%20crime&f=false [Accessed on 29 September 2020]
Steffensmeier, D.J., Steffensmeier, R.F., & Rosenthal, A.S. 1979. Trends in Female
Violence, 1960–1977. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20831126.
pdf?casa_token=ZMw_cAObaQsAAAAA:kqJ0P9zajvsrLzuHWF8fdZ69ukjo4
kcdYcLuW5YlIZxTVqjUdPtdBc7JJwOTCtxE-AgCcVRx1fFYoWXDx3AHZ
tGAekOVJ2wmBqzWWixX2f YT3XkkxGg [Accessed on 1 November 2020]
Vold, G.B., Bernard, T.J., & Snipes, J.B. 2002. Theoretical Criminology. (5th edition).
Oxford University Press.
Whiteley, K.M. 2014. Feminist Theories of Criminal Behavior. Available at:
https://library.pcw.gov.ph/sites/default/files/feminist%20theories%20of%20
criminal%20behavior.pdf [Accessed on 3 October 2020]
128
3 THEME 4
Social positivism: process theories
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
DEFINITIONS is a term used by Edwin Sutherland to refer to the meanings that
our experiences have for us, our attitudes, values, and habitual ways of viewing the
world (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:563). A modern adaptation of the term “definition”
refers to the favorable “interpretation” of violating the law outweighing the unfavorable
interpretations thereof (Vinney, 2019).
DEVIANCE refers to actions committed by individuals that society condemns, but

which are not actually illegal. Those who engage in such activities may well encounter
hostility from their fellow citizens (Cullen & Wilcox, 2010; Case, Johson, Manlow,
Smith and Williams, 2017:60).
DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT THEORY is an attempt to explain crime

as a type of learned behaviour. First proposed by Ronard Akers in collaboration
with Robert Burgess in 1966, it is a version of the social learning view that employs
both differential association concepts and elements of psychological learning theory
(Siegel, 2017:243). Behaviour is reinforced by either being rewarded or punished while
interacting with others; also called direct conditioning (Siegel, 2016).
INVOLVEMENT in social control theory is one of the four social bonds. It refers to
a pattern of involvement in conventional activities that prevents one from becoming
involved in criminal activities (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:566; Manasse, 2018).
LEARNING is a change in pre-existing behaviour or mental processes that occurs

as a result of experience (Cassel & Bernstein, 2007:293). Criminal behavior is learnt
like any other behaviour (Case et al, 2017:384).
REINFORCEMENT is a key concept in social learning theory, which states that crime
is largely a response to reinforcing stimuli. If individuals are rewarded for committing
crimes, they are more likely to commit them again (Beirne & Messerschmidt,
2006:488; Case et al, 2017:368).
SOCIAL BOND is the tie that a person has to the institutions and processes of
society. According to Hirschi, elements of the social bond include commitment,
attachment, involvement, and belief (Siegel, 2004:482; Wickert, 2019).
SOCIAL BONDING THEORY is a social control theory focusing on a person’s

bonds to others (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:571).
SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY is the theory that holds that social behaviour is
a cognitive process in which personality and social environment are involved in a
continuous process of reciprocal interaction (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2006:489;
Siegel, 2017:163).
CMY3701/1129
HUMAN BEHAVIOUR is modelled by the individual observing human social
interactions, either directly (from contact with social intimates) or indirectly (from
the media). People copy interactions that are rewarded and avoid those that result in
punishment (Siegel, 2004:482; Siegel, 2017:347).
130
10 STUDY UNIT 4.1
10 Process theories
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• explain the assumptions of process theories

• describe the branches of control theories
• explain the essential characteristics of learning and control theory

FIGURE 4.1.1
CMY3701/1131
4.1.1 INTRODUCTION
Social process theories attempt to explain how individuals become criminals. The
emphasis is on social interactions or processes with groups such as the family and
peer groups that the individual finds meaningful. It is within these groups where
every individual is exposed to and learn morals, values and rules which contributes
towards law-abiding or law breaking behaviour (Tibbetts & Hemmens, 2015).
Two branches of process theories can be identified: learning theory and control
theory. As far as learning theory is concerned, in this study unit we look specifically
at Sutherland’s contribution explaining how and why individuals learn criminal
behaviour rather than conforming behaviour and also on how Akers’ reformulated
Sutherland`s contribution.
Control theories on the other hand specifically focus on personal or social factors that
will prevent individuals from law-breaking behaviour therefore Hirschi’s explanation
of social control is of importance here.

learning outcomes for this study unit. A multilingual glossary to Additional resources
on myUnisa.
SOCIAL CONTROL a theory suggesting that an individuals’ bonding plays a role

in one’s decision to their involvement to offending behaviour (Farrington & Ttofi,
(2018:38).
SOCIAL PROCESS THEORY holds the view that criminality is a function of

people’s interactions with various organisations, institutions, and social processes.
Theorists examine the interactions between individuals and the environments that
encourage these individuals to become involved in delinquent behaviour (Bartollas,
2006:543; Siegel, 2017:234).
SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY is the view that people commit crime when the
forces that bind them to society are weakened or broken (Siegel, 2004:482; Bartollas,
2006:543). Theorists maintain that human beings must be held in check or somehow
be controlled if delinquent tendencies are to be repressed (Bartollas, 2006:537). An
adopted modern definition, according to social control theory crime is seen as social
institutions losing control over individuals. Weak institutions constitute certain
types of families, the breakdown of communities and the breakdown of trust in the
government and the police are all linked to higher crime rates (Revise Sociology, 2016).
SOCIAL LEARNING refers to learning by watching other people, called models,

and vicariously experiencing the consequences of their behaviour (Cassel & Bernstein,
2007:295; Case et al, 2017:367).
We will investigate the assumptions of process theories next.
132
STUDY UNIT 4.1: Process theories
4.1.3 ASSUMPTIONS OF PROCESS THEORIES

Process theories are micro- theories
Social process theories attempt to explain how individuals (micro) become offenders.
The focus is on social interactions or processes as experienced by the individual
rather than the social structure (macro) (Williams & McShane, 2004:201, Creative
Commons, 2012).
Crime is not necessarily a class phenomenon
Crime is not approached as being primarily a lower-class phenomenon. Process
theorists claim that not all people who are subjected to social disorganisation become
offenders, and they challenge the assumption that there is a value gap between the
different social classes that make up a society. Even young people who have grown
up in a poor urban environment learn the same values at home, at school and in
religious settings as young people from the middle and upper class. Although young
people from the lower class do experience economic difficulties, strain (in the family
itself), inadequate education and a poor self-image, most of them are willing to abide
by the rules (laws) of society (even though their peer group may well include people
who regularly break the law). Those who do succeed in coping with all this and
who remain law abiding are those who tend to have the support of a happy family,
and law-abiding friends and teachers who take an active interest in them. In short,
according to process theorists, misconduct and crime occur in any social class, rich
or poor, if the socialisation process is inadequate and/or destructive.
Emphasis on social interactions
According to social process theory, a person who engages in misconduct and crime is
someone whose personality and behaviour (which are shaped by key social relationships
and social processes) are out of line with conventional society. Process theorists focus
on the social interactions of individuals with intimate groups such as the family and
the peer group. It is these interactions, they claim, that are the key to explaining
criminal behaviour.
Special attention is paid to the family as the primary socialising agent. Where parental
care is inadequate, absent or destructive, the child’s development (i.e. towards emotional
maturity) will be hampered. Although there is some debate about which elements of
the parent-child relationship are the most important, there is consensus that family
relationships have a crucial influence on antisocial behaviour.
The influence of peer group relationships is also considered to be important. Young
people who form close relationships with peer group members may end up acquiring
undesirable attitudes. The young person may adopt the techniques and attitudes of
a group that favours drug use, that engages in various criminal offences and that is
prepared to use violence to attain its ends. Associating with such a group will obviously
alienate the young person from his or her more conventional friends and institutions.
Misconduct and crime are also linked to factors such as under-achievement at school
and inadequate educational facilities. This, in turn, contributes to conflict which
leads to the alienation of the person from a conventional social institution such as the
school. The young person then develops a poor self-image and displays little interest
in following a law-abiding lifestyle (Hoffmann, 2018).
We will explore the branches of the process theory next.
CMY3701/1133
4.1.4 BRANCHES OF PROCESS THEORY
There are two main branches of social process theory. The first is learning theory,
which contends that criminal behaviour is learnt by means of the close relationships
formed with other people. The techniques for committing crime and the necessary
reinforcing attitudes are acquired via these close relationships.
The second branch is social control theory. This theory is based on the argument that
people who commit crime feel isolated from the significant institutions in society,
namely the family, the peer group and the school. The ties with these institutions have
been severed and subsequently the conventional societal control over people is absent.
This then makes the individual feel that he or she is free explore antisocial behaviour.
We will look into learning theories next.
4.1.4.1 Learning theories

Learning theorists believe that poverty and social class are not pivotal to explain crime
and misconduct. They emphasise that the morals, values and behaviour associated
with criminal activities need to be learnt. Before learning can take place, these
morals, values and rules must be internalised by an individual. Young offenders must
learn how to become criminals (e.g. they need to learn the techniques used to steal a
car) and how to handle the consequences of their actions (e.g. shame and guilt). The
values, norms and motives associated with committing criminal acts are learnt via
interaction with significant others, such as family members or peer group members.
Activity 4.1.1
Read the following section and answer the questions.
According to Statistics SA (2020) 20,4 million young people aged 15–34 formed
part of the South African population composition in the first quarter of 2020, of
which 63,3% of these young people accounted for the total number of unemployed
individuals. Half the young persons who start school don’t make grade 12 and
3.4 million aged 11–24 is not in education, employment or training. The economy
demands skilled and experienced jobseekers. This never-ending high youth
unemployment rate is one of the most pressing socioeconomic problems in South
Africa. In Cape Town alone, this unemployment figure, at last count, was estimated
at 317 000 (Gangs and youth-Insights from Cape Town, 2017).
With the above-mentioned in mind, it is therefore understandable that gang activities

are rife in the Cape Flats.
Gang members often target children because they are useful for gang activity and
they slip through the cracks of police arrest policies due to their age (Zinn, 2014).
How and where do children learn to become gang members?
134
18 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVIY 4.1.1

There are countless reasons, let`s consider a few:
Social problems include poverty, the breakdown of family control and a loss of
ties to extended families.
• Dropping out of school

• Unemployed family members
• Domestic violence
• Drug abuse
The ever-increasing divorce rate leads to more single parent households.
Boys from such disrupted households, full of anger and humiliation are susceptible
to gang formation where they will be able to demonstrate a degree of manly defiance
and pride in their abandoned communities (Chetty, 2016).
Role models are gang leaders, living the good life of flashy cars, expensive clothes,
beautiful women and power.
Do you think that a similar situation is also found elsewhere in Africa?
Consider the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo:
The exodus of people from rural to urban areas contributed to unplanned urban
development overshadowed by marginalisation poverty and insecurity. Uneducated
children from impoverished households added to the street youth known as “Shengues”.
Frustration under these “Shengues” led to the birth of a new form of unprecedented
violence (International Development Research Centre, 2016).
“Shengues” aged 10–35 form a large proportion of criminals. They see themselves as
“socially dead” and lack any legal means to express their frustrations and concerns.
What do they do? They turn to crime, gangsterism, theft, illegal prostitution and rape.
Each group has its own membership and initiation rites (International Development
Research Centre, 2016).
The above examples substantiate the answer to the question that similar circumstances
experienced by individuals on the same continent can force them to join gangs.
4.1.4.2 Control theories

Unlike learning theories, control theories are based on the view that various forms of
misconduct, such as drug abuse and truancy, are attractive to virtually all teenagers.
Such actions represent the exciting and adventurous behaviour portrayed in the
mass media. So, the question should be: why do some young people refrain from
misconduct, obey conventional rules and finally become law-abiding adults? In other
words, conformity itself needs explanation – it should not be assumed. Social control
theorists in effect ask, ‘‘Why do people refrain from crime?’’ “Why do they obey rules”?
(Lumen, 2021). According to control theorists, the answer to this question should be
sought in young people’s ties to conventional groups, individuals and institutions and
in the strength of these ties. Those who have a close relationship with their parents,
family and teachers and who maintain a positive self-image will be able to resist the
CMY3701/1135
temptations of misconduct. Offences which lead to punishment and incarceration
mean that the person will obviously lose his or her good standing in the community.
People are law-abiding because they are controlled or constrained in some way.
TAKE NOTE
Direct control to most people will mean that not only is someone watching over
them but also that approval is given for them to be punished. Such control may
be carried out by family members, friends, teachers, neighbours, the police, and
others. Family members, however, are the major source of direct control given
their intimate relationship with the person. Direct control has three components:
setting rules, monitoring behaviour, and punishing crime.
Consider the following example: At school, learners will be subjected to the same
direct controls, that is, the same rules, same monitoring and same punishment
if they deviate. Yet some juveniles abide by the controls imposed on them while
others prefer to commit deviant acts on a regular basis.
Can you recall any such experiences or examples when you attended school?

Social process theorists analyse the social processes or interactions associated with
crime. They reject the view that individuals are born offenders and do not support
the argument that offenders experience intellectual or psychological problems. They
also reject the argument that misconduct, and crime can be explained in terms of
society’s socioeconomic structure. Social process theories are micro-theories: they
focus on the individual and the way in which an individual becomes an offender
rather than on a group of people (i.e. the lower classes).
Learning theorists emphasise the fact that both criminal and noncriminal behaviour
is learnt behaviour.
Criminal behaviour is always normative, at least within a subculture. Car theft may
be contrary to the laws of society, but in a juvenile gang it may be a prerequisite to
maintaining one’s status within the group. The individual is neither good nor bad;
instead, he or she learns to be law abiding or deviant. People learn to commit crime
because they have been exposed to antisocial or law-breaking influences (e.g. as
members of a criminal gang or crime syndicate). Misconduct or crime is therefore
the product of a negative environmental experience.
According to control theorists, the forces of social control are important. If people are
not controlled, they will pursue their own interests rather than the interests of society.
Therefore, social institutions are so important, because people need to be educated
into living a controlled social existence if they are to remain law abiding. If crime
does occur, then this means that these social restrictions have somehow failed. People
inherently seek pleasure and would far rather pursue their own interests than the
interests of society. Intervention is necessary to ensure that people will conform and
abide by the law through a process of socialisation and control. People are controlled
or restrained from criminal behaviour by means of their stake in conformity. What
do I have to lose? Who will get hurt in the process? It is people’s bond with society
and institutions (e.g. the family and school) that prevent them from breaking social
136
rules. If this bond is weak, people will feel they are at liberty to commit crime, because
the necessary social support is lacking and simply because they have nothing to lose.
Answer the multiple-choice paragraph-type and longer essay-type questions:
(1) According to process theorist’s crime and misconduct will prevail in poor and
rich socioeconomic classes unless ...........
1. disorganisation is relatively stable.
2. the socialisation process remains satisfactory.
3. governments impose stern laws.
4. poverty is eradicated.
(2) Will inadequate, absent or destructive parental care have a direct influence on
the child`s development?
1. No, the child will also encounter the influence of other groups
2. Yes, the family is the primary socialising agent
3. No, because the child can adapt to acceptable norms
4. Uncertain, a child`s behaviour is unpredictable
(3) Why can the formation of close relationships with negative peer groups lead
to acquiring undesirable attitudes?
1. Some personality types are more susceptible than others.
2. Young people are unpredictable.
3. Techniques that favour law-breaking behaviour are learnt.
4. Crime tendencies in a country can enhance negative attitudes.
(4) Due to underachievement at school, indicate which factors can contribute to

misconduct and crime.
1. A poor self-image, negative labelling and a partial law-abiding lifestyle.
2. A poor self-image, poor self-control and not committing to positive values.
3. A poor self-image, undesirable attitudes and alienation.
4. A poor self-image, alienation and an anti-law-abiding lifestyle.
(5) The answer to the question “why do we not all break the law’ lies in young
people`s ...........
1. ties and strengths to conventional groups.
2. attitude towards life in general.
3. adapting to challenging situations.
4. reactions to crime situations.
CMY3701/1137
PARAGRAPH-TYPE QUESTIONS
(6) ‘‘The study of the individual’s interactions brings a micro-theory orientation
to process theories.’’ Explain this statement. (15)
(7) ‘‘Control theories explain why most people are law abiding.’’ What does this
statement mean? (10)

1. 2
2. 2
3. 3
4. 3
5. 1
PARAGRAPH-TYPE QUESTIONS
(6) The assumptions of process theories are based on a micro-theory approach to
criminology. Process theories emphasise the value of socialisation and the role
played by the family is of importance. Attention is also paid to the influence of
peer groups and to factors relating to education (e.g. poor school achievement
and inadequate education facilities).
(7) Law-abiding behaviour is regarded as the product of an individual’s strong

bonds with people within social institutions (e.g. parents and teachers). These
bonds are reminders, to young people, of what they stand to lose by committing
an offence.
138
4.1.8 REFERENCES
these references.
Aslan, M., Rosinaite, V., Khojanashvili, L. 2019. Social Control Theory Variables
in Conceptualizing Bonding Models of Attachment Theory and Adolescent
Development.Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. 8,2:199–207
Available at: http://archive.sciendo.com/AJIS/ajis.2019.8.issue-2/ajis-2019-0031/
ajis-2019-0031.pdf [Accessed on 15 July 2020].
Baines, P. & Messerschmidt, J.W. 2006. Criminology. 4th edition. Los Angeles, CA:
Roxbury
Case, S., Johnson, P., Manlow, D., Smith, R., Williams, K. 2017. Criminology, OUP,
Oxford. Available at: file:///C:/Users/joubee/Downloads/312-Article%20Text-
1476-1-10-20191025.pdf [Accessed on 30 June 2020].
Cassel, E., & Bernstein, D.A. 2007. Criminal behavior. 2nd edition. Mahwah,NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chetty, R. 2016. Gang offer a tempting “home” to frustrated, unhappy youngsters.
Available at: https://theconversation.com/gangs-offer-a-tempting-home-to-
frustrated-unhappy-youngsters-54840 [Accessed on 11 June 2020].
Creative Commons. 2012. Sociology: Brief edition. Vol 11. 2012 Books Lardbucket.
org. Available at: https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/sociology-brief-
edition-v1.1/s04-03-theoretical-perspectives-in-so.html [accessed on
12 June 2020].
Cullen, F.T., & Wilcox, P. 2010. Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory Hirsch, Travis:
Social control theory. Available at: https://study.sagepub.com/system/files/
Hirschi%2C_Travis_-_Social_Control_Theory.pdf [accessed on 15 July 2020].
Farrington, D.P., Ttofi, M.M. (2018). Developmental and Psychological Theories of
Offending. In Davies, G., & Beech, A. Forensic Psychology: Crime, Justice, Law,
Interventions. (2nd edition). BPS Blackwell.
Gangs and youth-Insights from Cape Town. 2017. Available at: https://www.saferspaces.
org.za/understand/entry/gangs-and-youth-insights-from-cape-town [Accessed
on 19 June 2020]
Hoffmann, J.P. 2018. Academic underachievement and delinquent behavior. Available
at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0044118X18767035 [Accessed
on 15 August 2020].
International Development Research Centre. 2016. Urban violence and exclusion in
the Democratic Republic of Congo. IDRC. Available at https://www.idrc.ca/
sites/default/files/sp/Documents%20EN/urban_violence_and_exclusion_in_
the_drc_-_letter_-_rgb_-_online.pdf [Accessed on 30 April 2021]
Lumen. 2021. Social control. LumenLearning.com. Available at: https://courses.
lumenlearning.com/boundless-sociology/chapter/social-control/ [Accessed on
30 April 2021].
Siegel, L.J. 2016. Criminology, Theories,Patterns and Typologies. 12th edition, Boston,
MA: Centage Learning.
Siegel, L.J. 2017. Criminology: The Core. 6th edition. Boston, MA: Centage Learning.
Statistics South Africa. 2020. Available at: www.statssa.gov.za [Accessed on 19 June
2020].
Tibbetts, S.G. & Hemmens, C. 2015. Criminology Theory: A Text/reader. Thousand
Oaks, CA:Sage. Available at: Criminological Theory: A Text/Reader, Second
Edition | Online Resources (sagepub.com) [Accessed on 19 June 2020].
CMY3701/1139
Vinney, C. 2019. Sutherland`s differential association theory explained. Available
at: https://www.thoughtco.com/differential-association-theory-4689191
[Accessed on 30 July 2020].
Walsh, A, & Hemmens, C. 2008. Introduction to Criminology: a text/reader. London:
Sage.
Wickert, C. 2019. Social Bond`s Theory (Hirschi). Available at: https://soztheo.de/
theories-of-crime/control/social-bonds-theory-hirschi/?lang=en [Accessed on
15 July 2020].
Zinn, C. 2014. Gangs target children in Cape Town. Available at: https://www.
urbanafrica.net/urban-voices/cape-towns-gangs/ [Accessed on 21 June 2020].
140
11 STUDY UNIT 4.2
11 Sutherland’s theory of differential association
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• explain the principles of learning in Sutherland’s theory

• evaluate the contribution of Sutherland’s theory as such
• explain the key elements of Akers’ social learning theory

FIGURE 4.2.1
Visual overview of Study unit 4.2
CMY3701/1141
4.2.1 INTRODUCTION
Before Sutherland developed his theory of differential association, criminology was
dominated by the views of medical doctors and psychiatrists who found explanations for
criminal behaviour purely in biological and psychological abnormalities. Sutherland’s
theory was responsible for the diminishing popularity of biological and psychological
explanations of crime in that it argued that crime was the result of environmental
influences on people who are biologically and psychologically normal. Sutherland
created a general theory of criminal behaviour by insisting that behaviour was learnt
in a social environment. In fact, all behaviour is learnt in more or less the same way.
The main difference between conforming (law-abiding) and criminal behaviour is in
what is learned, rather than how it is learned. When Sutherland died in 1950, Cressey
successfully continued to explain and popularise his mentor’s work, contributing
to the value of differential association as one of the most enduring explanations of
criminal behaviour (Siegel, 2010:219; Cullen & Agnew, 2011:126; Case, Johson,
Manlow, Smith & Williams, 2017:384).

DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION is a theory that attempts to explain both the
process by which a person learns to engage in crime and the content of what is learned.
According to Sutherland, differential association refers to the principle that criminal
acts are related to an individual’s frequent or constant exposure to antisocial attitudes
and values (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2006:482; Siegel, 2016)
4.2.3 THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF DIFFERENTIAL

ASSOCIATION
Sutherland maintained that criminal behaviour was learnt through social interactions.
To describe this learning process, he developed the concept of differential association.
The fundamental principles of differential association have been set out in nine (9)
propositions that explain the process whereby a person becomes involved in crime
(Bartollas, 2006:136–138; Cullen & Agnew, 2011:126–129; Siegel, 2018:240). These
propositions are listed as follows:
We will explore each of the above-mentioned propositions in turn starting with:
Proposition 1: Criminal behaviour is learnt
The basic argument of differential association is that, like all forms of behaviour,
criminal behaviour is learnt from other people. This eliminates the roles of heredity,
human nature and innovation as causes of deviant behaviour.
TAKE NOTE
Proposition 1
explains how and why juveniles or any other person, learn criminal behaviour within
group activities. These individuals may come from good homes, where social norms and
values are accepted and followed – but it is the behaviour learnt from deviant friends that
may have an overriding influence. Let us try to establish whether criminal behaviour
142
STUDY UNIT 4.2: Sutherland’s theory of differential association
can indeed be learned in group context by reading through the newspaper article
below. Please read the following article:
How organised crime is exploiting COVID-19, by Aron Hyman, 8 April 2020.
They were born in crisis, moulded by it, and SA’s organised criminals are
likely to thrive while many people are counting rands and cents to make
sure they can afford to eat for the next two weeks.
According to experts from the Global Initiative against Transnational

Organised Crime, underworld bosses are likely to exploit new opportunities
as the double shock of the Covid-19 induced lockdown and post-lockdown
recession rock the country, and the world, to its core.
Over the past few weeks in Mitchells Plain drug houses were visited by addicts
carrying essential services permits, this according to TimesLIVE sources.
Tik (crystal meth) and other drugs were transported across the country,
sometimes stashed in food parcels and medical supplies, and police officers
were arrested for transporting alcohol which, along with cigarettes, and
thanks to the banning of these products, have now also entered the catalogue
of black-market items ripe for exploitation by criminal groupings.
According to the Global Initiative’s senior drug expert Jason Eligh, SA’s
crystal meth or tik supply is unlikely to run out any time soon but that won’t
stop drug dealers from upping their prices, and “adulterating” their drugs
with other substances to reduce the purity.
“Organised crime networks experience a crisis as part of the nature of being

the organisation that they are. Law enforcement is always trying to interdict
them, always trying to identify supply chains, always trying to find ways of
throwing up barriers and blockages against their business,” said Eligh.
He said that criminal organisations are adaptable and exploit opportunities as

they arise and that globally there have been reports of illicit drug shipments
hidden among medical masks and essential goods shipments.
He said that it is likely the ban on the sale of alcohol and cigarettes will
also be exploited. This week the Daily Maverick reported that 11 police
officers were arrested for allegedly trafficking alcohol.
And around the country, several arrests have been made in attempts to
smuggle counterfeit cigarettes.
TimesLIVE report that President Cyril Ramaphosa on Friday defended the

ban on the sale of alcohol saying that its use is proven to be linked to “an
increase in violent crime, motor vehicle accidents, medical emergencies
and results in full emergency rooms and hospitals”.
“In the face of a pandemic such as Covid-19, the experience of the rest of
the world has shown us that hospitals need to be prepared to receive and
treat vast numbers of Covid-19 patients and to quarantine them from non-
infected patients,” read a letter sent by the president to the Gauteng Liquor
Forum after its request to ease restrictions was denied.
CMY3701/1143
“I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see an illicit alcohol and cigarette market
pop up in SA — where the licit has become illicit just by the stroke of the
pen by the government just by closing those facilities,” said Eligh.
“Like some illegal drugs, I mean alcohol is probably one of the most
dependence-forming substances in the world, nicotine is also extremely
addictive. So people who smoke and people who drink are not just going to
stop smoking and stop drinking just because the shops are closed, they’re
going to find other ways of sourcing their alcohol and their tobacco,” he said.
As in the rest of the world SA’s working-class suburbs are often associated
with high levels of drug use and where there are drugs there are gangs.
The Global Initiative this week released its Crime and Contagion policy brief
which looked at the organised crime response globally to the challenges
and opportunities posed by the Covid-19 pandemic.
According to the paper, in cities in developing countries there were already

reports of gang bosses using the crisis to boost their legitimacy and social
standing in their communities and “by implication inviting partnerships with
the state, and the social legitimacy that this, in turn, may bring them”.
“In cities of the developing world where gangs exercise a great deal of
influence and territorial control, authorities have to manage situations where
they are not the sole arbiters of governance and power,” read the paper.
“Gang leaders, who have an interest in maintaining their local legitimacy

by protecting communities within their territory and being seen as the
figureheads of power and stability in a crisis, may have a shared interest
with government.
“The risk inherent in such strategies is that, in the long term, criminal figures
become more entrenched in local governance and it becomes ever more
difficult for the state to win back territory.”
In the Cape Flats suburb of Steenberg senior Mongrels gang member Leon
“Poppie” Meyer breathed life into the Global Initiative’s analysis.
On Thursday he became one of many figures associated with the underworld

to feed people in SA’s poorest communities when he set up a soup kitchen
outside his driveway.
Careful to sanitise his hands with surgical alcohol while preparing a 200 litre
pot of beef and vegetable soup, Meyer told TimesLIVE that the government
made it easy for people such as himself to win over the community.
“The government is allowing the people to look up to gangsters. We’ve been

shooting at each other here for six months non-stop. Twenty people killed,
families destroyed, many small children who were killed, then we come in and
we make peace. No shooting, nothing’s happening. What does government
do now? They sit back. The government doesn’t come into the community
to take the kids and recruit them into sports teams or social programmes.
You’ve got the talent let’s take the talented kids out of this place, but they
don’t do it,” he said.
144
Earlier in the week, alleged underworld figure Nafiz Modack launched feeding
schemes in the Johannesburg suburb of Eldorado Park and in Cape Town,
using security companies to deliver large pots of food and food parcels to
poor communities.
In one picture supplied to TimesLIVE Modack can be seen standing next

to his bodyguard, who is carrying an assault rifle, while delivering essential
goods at a house in Eldorado Park.
And throughout the week his “people” reportedly gave out cooked food in
Manenberg, Bonteheuwel, Athlone and Mitchells Plain in self-publicised
feeding events on his Facebook page, with photos accompanying the names
of the suburbs they visited.
Community members showered him with praise in the comments section.

In these communities, where hunger stalks families who have lost their
income, he is becoming a saviour.
“Why does that lady go to that drug merchant asking for help? Ask her,
because the politicians and government officials come when they want the
votes, and when they’ve got their vote it’s all over,” said Meyer.
“You buy your community’s loyalty in a certain way. I’m not doing this for
loyalty. You can go to any house here and ask them what they think of me.
I grew up in this community, I was gone for 18 years (in prison) and I came
back,” he said.
He claims that he is no longer involved in the trade of drugs but that he is

still more privileged than most of his neighbours and that he feels it is his
responsibility to feed the community and avoid a repetition of the scenes
seen in other Cape Flats communities where shops were looted.
“The ripple effects of Covid-19 is hitting the poorest people, those who have
to make sure every day they have something on the table, who have to take
care of their kids. They don’t have contract work, they have to carry scrap
around every day and bring something home,” he said.
In his area the supply of drugs has not been disrupted at all and, according
to Eligh, in SA tik prices have remained unchanged at R300 per gram,
while the price of heroin, which needs to be smuggled over the border, has
increased by roughly 25%.
“We’ve got to be careful that the increase in drugs is not necessarily equated
to a reduction in supply. And in the case of Covid-19 pandemic shock to
the drug market around the world, there’s no question that drug supplies
have not been impacted. Production continues of heroin and cocaine and
cannabis around the world,” said Eligh.
“There’s not been a supply side shock in drug markets that would eventually
lead to some sort of shortage. What we’re not seeing is necessarily a shortage
of supply but we’re seeing a more conservative approach taken by dealers
and distributors with the product that they have on hand already,” he said.
He said that normally the first reaction by drug dealers is to exploit the crisis
by increasing drug prices, but as the lockdown progresses and lengthens
they may turn to adulterating their current stock.
CMY3701/1145
Unlike heroin which needs to be smuggled across the border, Eligh says
high quality tik is produced in large quantities in SA, mostly by Chinese
“cooks” using precursor chemicals, such as ephedrine, which are imported
for pharmaceutical use from China.
When the crisis is over, and the purity of drugs improves, the risk of drug
overdoses will also increase rapidly.
“Many people using methamphetamine and heroin tend to be the poorest of

society. Many of them are homeless. A lot of them are suffering from other
co-morbidities like HIV, hepatitis, tuberculosis, and these are the people
who are unable to remain quarantined during the current crisis because they
have nowhere to go or they have a habit, a dependency that they have to
address, they’ve got to go out and get their drugs, otherwise they’re going
to go through the horrors of withdrawal,” he said.
Global Initiative director Mark Shaw said the crisis might knock out
the competition for some groups by eliminating less resilient players. But it
could also help them embed themselves deeper into society.
“What a shock like this does is it strengthens people with a bit of capital, who
can ride it out and who can invest. And what it will also do in the criminal
world is it will remove less resilient players and embed those who are already
embedded further,” he said.
After reading the article one can conclude that organised crime fits Sutherland`s first
proposition that crime is learned. Gangs usually comprise of family and community
members. In order for gang members to execute illegal activities they must have
undergone a learning process. Members will not be able to move up in the hierarchy
if they have not learned and practised their skills and prove their worth to the gang
leaders.
Propositions 2 and 3:
Proposition 2: Criminal behaviour is learned through interaction with other people

by means of a process of communication.
Proposition 3: The learning process takes place mainly within intimate personal
groups.
The second and third propositions state that criminal behaviour is learnt through
active involvement with others in a process of communication. Parents’ influence in
the process of education during which language, habits and customs are acquired is
accepted as a given. The learning process is expanded, however, to include the sphere
of crime. As a child gets older, the behaviour initially shaped by the parents comes
increasingly under the influence of peers, which is why parents are often concerned
about their children’s choice of friends.
The role and influence of the media changed considerably since Sutherland’s theory
was first formulated in 1939. Modern-day technology has given us a media that
is considerably more attention-grabbing, dynamic and enticing. Young people are
particularly at risk with new crimes such as revenge porn. Criminals also use social
146
media platforms to track potential victims and their possessions. Harassment and
threats as well as fraud and identity theft, seen as old crimes, are conducted in new
ways through social media. Performance crimes are becoming increasingly common,
this is where offenders boast about their criminal behaviour to friends and followers
online. Through social media interaction on various platforms, prosecutions and
the right to a fair trial of the accused can be compromised by sharing photos of the
accused and the creation of hate groups before the prosecution. The victim is also
not spared, victim blaming can occur directly after an incident which can contribute
to secondary victimisation of friends and family (McGovern & Milivojevic, 2016).
Activity 4.2.1
According to Proposition 3, the learning process takes place mainly within intimate
personal groups (the family, friends and colleagues).
In relation to proposition 3 read the following two newspaper reports on the

activities of Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jammah (ASWJ) and Boko Haram in Africa. The
first article contains information on the Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jammah (ASWJ) aligned
with the so-called Islamic State who are militants controlling key transport routes,
waterways, and strategic towns in northern Mozambique. The second article
contains information on how Boko Haram kidnapped 276 schoolgirls in Nigeria.
The purpose of the following information is to present background information on

the motivations of violent extremism which forms the basis of both articles.
According to the Centre for the Prevention of Radicalisation Leading to Violence

(Extremism and radicalisation leading to violence, 2017).
Violent extremism can be categorised in four ways:
(1) Left-wing violence, violent acts committed by anti-capitalist groups in order

to transform political systems. This category can also include violence by
animal rights extremists or environmentalist groups.
(2) Right-wing violent acts, committed by far-right groups, often referred to as
‘neo-Nazi’ groups. Such groups are motivated by racism and a desire to
defend supposed racial supremacy.
(3) Religiously motivated violence, committed by extremist Islamic movements,
which often have specific grievances against Western governments in rela-
tion to foreign policy.
(4) Issue-based violence, such as violence carried out by groups concerned
with a single issue – such as, abortion or homosexuality (Extremism and
radicalisation leading to violence, 2017).
Article 1
Who is the source of the conflict?
At first the small group of militants were dismissed as bandits and machete-wielding
gangs by Mozambique’s government, they are known as Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jammah
(ASWJ) aligned with the so-called Islamic State.
It started in the early hours of 5 October 2017, when assailants wielding machetes
and machine guns attacked police offices and government buildings in Mocímboa
CMY3701/1147
de Praia, in the Cabo Delgado province of Mozambique. After two days, the death
count was 17 – two police officers, 14 assailants and one civilian. According to
Matsinheb & Valoi (2019) the province’s Muslim residents, including religious
leaders, maintained that signs of the radicalisation of young people appeared in
their communities since 2014. While the authorities were warned, nothing was
done until the event of 5 October 2017.
It is estimated there were at least 18 attacks between October 2017 and December
2018. In 2020, the attacks escalated.
In February 2020, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR)
estimated that at least 28 attacks were carried out in Cabo Delgado in the first
month of 2020.
According to the commission, at least 100 000 of the province’s residents had
been internally displaced by February 2020. By June 2020, this figure was reported
as 210 000.
Who are the attackers?
While the locals reportedly refer to the militant extremists as “Al Shabaab”, the
group that has become known as Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah has nothing to do
with the Somalian terrorist group Al Shabaab.
It is believed that the group grew out of radical Muslim clerics and that their goal
is to establish an extreme form of Islamic law in the province.
However, they reportedly have links with the criminal underground in the region.
While Mozambique is a key port in the global heroin trade, reports suggest that
Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah is involved in the cannabis trade, but not opioids.
It also hasn’t gone unnoticed that their activities started shortly after plans became
known to exploit the mineral-rich region’s offshore gas fields – believed to be
among the biggest in the world (Gerber, 2020).
Before reading article 2, background information is presented on Boko Haram, a

radical Islamic movement.
Boko Haram seeks the establishment of an Islamic state in Nigeria. It opposes

the Westernisation of Nigerian society and the concentration of the wealth of the
country among members of a small political elite, mainly in the Christian south
of the country
Boko Haram is a radical Islamist movement shaped by its Nigerian context and
reflecting Nigeria’s history of poor governance and extreme poverty in the north.
The movement is unique in that it combines a sectarian, radical Islamic agenda
with violence.
Boko Haram is one of the largest Islamist militant groups in Africa, and it has
launched terrorist attacks on religious and political groups, local police, the military,
villages and civilians in Nigeria since 2011.
The conflict has led to the killing of more than 37,500 people and displaced 2.5
million people, according to the Council of Foreign Relations on its Global Conflict
Tracker (Felter, 2018).
148
Article 2
Six years ago, Boko Haram kidnapped 276 schoolgirls. Where are they now?
The ‘Chibok girls’ kidnapping sparked international outrage. More than a hundred
are still missing. Today the survivors are trying to rebuild their lives.
For five years a rebel insurgency in northeastern Nigeria had terrorized the region
and shut down schools. The Government Secondary School for girls in Chibok had
reopened in April 2014 for students to take their final exams. In a region where
less than half of all girls attend primary school, these students had defied the
odds they were born into long before the war reached them. But around 11 p.m.
on April 14, trucks of militants from Boko Haram, whose name roughly translates
to “Western education is forbidden,” forced 276 girls from their dorms onto trucks
and drove toward the lawless cover of the Sambisa forest, a nature reserve the
jihadist group had taken over to wage a bloody war against the government
(Strochlic, 2020)
After reading the two articles will it be correct then to assume that the individuals
who joined these two respective extremist groups learned the beliefs and warfare
as a result of the influence of group dynamics within intimate personal groups?
The answer is yes, radicalisation can be a two-stage process. The first stage
involves an attitudinal journey, where a vulnerable individual begins to hold extremist
views – vulnerabilities being influenced by background factors (e.g. criminality,
troubled family background), experiences and influences (e.g. friends and family),
and unmet psychological needs (e.g. for belonging and status).
The second stage focuses on behaviours, where extremist views turn into violent
actions influenced by social, emotional or experiential factors (Chrisholm, Coulter
& Public, 2017).
Proposition 4: When criminal behaviour is learnt, this learning process includes

the following:
• learning the techniques needed to commit specific crimes (which may be simple
or complex)
• the presence of the necessary motives, drives, rationalisation and attitude.
However, learning the techniques for committing crime is less important than
acquiring the disposition needed to commit crime, which will include motives,
attitude and drives. Once this disposition has been acquired, learning certain criminal
techniques (e.g. how to rob a bank) will then contribute to the eventual success of
the criminal action. Learning such a skill is a specific prerequisite for the eventual
success of the offence (this is particularly true of white-collar crime such as fraud and
forgery). Offenders may steal or rape because they have learnt specific attitudes and
rationalisations, such as a lack of respect for the possessions of others (‘‘they have too
much and I need what they have’’) or abuse of a woman as an outlet for aggression
(‘‘she was asking for it’’). Of course, the ‘‘skills’’ needed to rape someone or steal from
them are minimal indeed.
CMY3701/1149
How do people rationalise bad choices?
Bad choices can be seen as a process of moral disengagement. Because people are
self-centred, they need to see themselves as good people. We unintentionally, and
quite effortlessly, use a series of cognitive maneuvers to justify self-interested choices
that do not align with who we say we want to be or what we want others to think
about us (Bowers 2019).
Proposition 5: The specific direction of motives and drives is learnt from definitions
of the legal codes as favourable or unfavourable.
Anybody may come across definitions (or views of crime) that are favourable or
unfavourable towards criminal activities. The dominance of either the criminal or the
conventional influences in a person’s life will determine whether the particular person
will regard crime as an acceptable way of life. The definition that is favourable or
unfavourable (i.e. towards breaking the law) provides the key to differential association,
because it is this definition that determines an individual’s values or mindset. All
of us are exposed to a combination of definitions, regardless of whom we associate
with. Even in the parental home, children learn definitions that favour breaking the
law. Examples are parents regularly committing traffic violations, bringing home
office supplies such as paper and pens, or discussing possible ways of evading tax.
Together with these ‘‘minor’’ transgressions, attitudes and rationalisation are also
significant. A traffic violation may be justified by saying, for example, that there was
no oncoming traffic and that it was therefore justifiable to cross against a red light or
exceed the speed limit. Taking supplies from the office may be justified by pointing
out that nobody at the office notices or needs the supplies. Tax assessments may be
regarded as excessive and the receiver of revenue as the common enemy of all people
who work for their living.
The transfer of values, no matter how positive the intention, may lead to the development
of a negative definition. An otherwise law-abiding parent who says that it is acceptable
to steal to feed your children probably regards it as an argument that will reinforce a
sense of commitment to the family (‘‘I will do anything for my children, even steal’’).
On the other hand, a parent who has violated the law and who has been to prison,
for example, may make his or her children aware that theft is wrong. In both these
instances, the child receives conflicting definitions or messages.
Proposition 6: A person engages in delinquency or crime when most definitions are

in favour of breaking the law.
This sixth proposition illustrates the fundamental principle of the theory of differential
association. When the influence of definitions favouring crime carries more weight
than the influence of definitions that discourage breaking the law, this majority will
encourage the learning of criminal behaviour. One should not take a simplistic view
of the influence of this majority. The majority should have a value attribute which
is determined by the quality and intimacy of the interaction with others (hence the
emphasis on frequency, priority, duration and intensity). For example, since President
Cyril Ramaphosa announced the first lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic,
22 schools were vandalised and four torched in Gauteng in April 2020. The vandals
who were behind these atrocious acts were influenced by the majority of definitions
in favour of breaking the law.
150
Proposition 7: Differential association varies in respect of frequency, duration,

priority and intensity.
Not all associations carry the same weight. Sutherland’s theory makes provision for
variation in frequency, duration, priority and intensity. Frequency refers to how often
a person is exposed to favourable definitions of crime, and duration relates to the time
spent in each such exposure. Priority specifies the phase (age) during which certain
associations begin (e.g. lawful behavior/ definitions absorbed during childhood may
persist throughout life, unlawful behaviour/definitions may also persist throughout
life) intensity reflects the degree of identification with certain associations. The more a
child identifies with a person (admiring such a person), the more weight will be attached
to the definitions provided by that person (Siegel, 2018:241). For example, if cash in
transit robbers have had a successful “career”, they will be passionate (intensity) on
planning their next heist. They will have to meet often, spent a considerable amount
of time together to improve on their previous efforts.
Proposition 8: The process of learning criminal behaviour by means of association

with criminal and anti-criminal patterns involves all the mechanisms that apply in
any learning process.
TAKE NOTE
What are the mechanisms that apply in the learning process?
Let us briefly look at cognition, conation, and affectation, which are the three
mechanisms of learning. Intelligence, levels of abstraction and the individual’s
life experiences are indicators of an individual’s cognitive aptitude. Cognition
forms the information control centre where all incoming stimuli are processed.
Cognition stores our thoughts and experiences. The function of conation within
the learning process is the ‘‘performance guiding factor.’’ Conation (the will to
perform an action) establishes the pace at which we perform a learning task and
the autonomy we exercise when learning. Some people will be slow to respond and
first think a matter over and consider the options. Others respond more quickly.
Conation also consists of our skills of fluidity, dexterity, mobility, and coordination.
These include the tactics or skills used by the individual to solve real-life problems
and his or her unique perspectives or view of the world.
Affectation runs concurrently with the interaction of cognition and conation in

the learning process. Affectation is made up of feelings, emotional responses,
and values.
Proposition 9: Although criminal behaviour is an expression of general needs and

values, the offence is not explained by such needs and values, because noncriminal
behaviour is an expression of the same needs and values.
The last two propositions illustrate the link with general learning principles. Both
propositions emphasise the fact that criminal behaviour is learnt in the same way
as any other behaviour, and that both types of behaviour are the product of similar
needs and values. It is therefore meaningless, for example, to explain theft in terms of
the desire for a high income, because many law-abiding people would also like a high
income. For example, corrupt traffic officials will bribe motorists who are exceeding
the blood alcohol limit of 0,05% when being tested or speeding motorists to secure
an additional income whereas the labour force have to work in order to secure money.
CMY3701/1151
4.2.4 EVALUATION OF DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION
Sutherland’s legacy to criminology is not his theory of learning as such, but his
argument that criminal behaviour is normal learnt behaviour. The adequacy of
Sutherland’s argument can only be assessed in the context of general theories and
research about human learning. The main strength of the theory of differential
association is that it showed that crime was not just a product of poverty, but that
it could occur in all settings, ranging from slum areas to large business operations.
A valid criticism is the argument that differential association alone is not sufficient to
explain crime. If this were the case, one could expect officials of correctional services,
for example, to become criminals because of their constant and continued association
with prisoners. Moreover, if Sutherland’s theory is valid, people who may have been
wrongfully punished will turn to crime as soon as they are released from prison. In
fact, there is no evidence that either of these scenarios actually happens. Criticism
is that differential association does not really make provision for freedom of choice
in individual circumstances. There are people who are surrounded by those intent
on following a criminal career who nevertheless succeed in upholding noncriminal
(law-abiding) values.
Another criticism is that the theory cannot be tested empirically. Concepts such as
definitions and associations are vague and, as a result, researchers attach their own
interpretations to these concepts. The theory has also been criticised as being too wide,
for although it attempts to explain all forms of crime, the theory does not succeed
in explaining any specific offence.
Despite this criticism, a number of researchers have tested the principles of Sutherland’s
theory. Hinduja and Ingram (Siegel, 2018:243) discovered that the proportion of
delinquent friends in a person’s network (including social media) had a strong positive
effect on the person’s subsequent delinquency, for example pirating music off the
internet. Sutherland had no idea that his theory will still be able to explain criminal
behavior 70 years after he first proposed the theory. Jones (2017:99) found that friends’
attitudes and behaviour were significant factors in a person’s offending, irrespective
of the person’s own attitudes, or whether the friends were present when the offence
occurred. These research findings therefore partially support Sutherland’s theory,
because there is no doubt that peers play a crucial role in delinquency. However, it
is questionable whether disposition can be transferred from one person to another.
4.2.5 ONGOING RESEARCH AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Sutherland believed that he had formulated a general explanation of criminal behaviour
which could be applied to a wide range of illegal activities. His investigations were
therefore not limited to delinquency and crime among juveniles in poor neighbourhoods
(Siegel, 2010:222). For example, he compiled the familiar life history of a professional
thief. This study showed how differential association among thieves is the critical factor
in determining whether a person will become a purse-snatcher or, say, a shoplifter.
Contact or association was essential because it provided aspiring professional thieves
with the necessary training, values and associates needed to learn to carry out a
sophisticated criminal role.
Sutherland claimed that differential association can account for offences committed
by people with a high social status. Sutherland called these illegal acts ‘‘white-collar
152
crimes’’. His investigation revealed that lawlessness is common in the business,

political and professional world. In fact, his own study of the illegal actions of large
American corporations showed that legal standards were regularly breached. The
research into white-collar crime reinforced Sutherland’s argument that crime cannot
be attributed to poverty, because most white-collar criminals were not poor, and
neither were they raised in slum neighbourhoods. White-collar workers start their
careers in good neighbourhoods and come from stable homes. However, when these
people enter the business world, they come into regular contact with illegal practices
and these practices are commonplace. Similarly, to young people from the slums and
offenders who become professional thieves, the association of white-collar workers with
definitions that favour violation of the law will eventually shape their orientations and
transform them into white-collar criminals. The principle of differential association
can, therefore, explain why wealthy people commit crimes.
As far as policy is concerned, Sutherland’s theory has implications for the treatment and
even the study of alternative types of crime. In South Africa, for example, concerted
efforts are being made not to detain juveniles together with adult offenders; hence
the establishment of juvenile detention units. The influence of negative associations is
therefore recognised in principle. School programmes also use role models (e.g. sport
heroes who warn against the use of drugs). Conditions for parole may also include
warnings to stay away from criminal associations, especially syndicate members.
4.2.6 REFORMULATION OF DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION:

AKERS’ SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY
Various attempts have been made to reformulate Sutherland’s theory of differential
association, but the most significant of these reformulations was Akers’ social learning
theory, also known as differential reinforcement (1977).
Akers argues that both law-abiding behaviour and criminal behaviour can be explained
by means of his social learning theory. Individuals are furthermore seen as being
born as “blank slates” and will learn antisocial behaviour through their associations
(Ward, Mc Conaghy & Bennett, 2018:513).
4.2.6.1 Key elements in terms of behaviour

Akers (Ward, Mc Conaghy & Ward, 2018:513) identified four key elements which
form part of the complex learning process that influences human behaviour:
• differential association
• definitions
• differential reinforcement
• imitation
The most important source of social learning, according to Akers, is differential
association. According to this theory learning occurs across the lifetime in various
contexts which include peer groups, family settings, schools, neighbourhoods and
even online (Ward, Mc Conaghy and Ward, 2018:513). This refers to the patterns
of interactions with others who are the source of definitions that either encourage
or discourage violating the law. The definitions themselves, according to Akers,
reflect the meanings one attaches to one’s behaviour. Definitions refer to a person’s
CMY3701/1153
disposition, to his or her experiences of life, and to the principles of right and wrong.
These definitions are influenced by religion and other moral values and norms and
by the individual’s own opinions on various matters. A person who smokes dagga,
for example, may be fully aware that it is illegal to smoke dagga in public since the
decriminalisation of cannabis by the Constitutional Court in September 2018 (Pieterse,
2018), but may also feel that what he or she does is perfectly acceptable because he
or she is harming no one by smoking dagga in public spaces.
Differential reinforcement, also known as direct conditioning, is the element that

represents the core of Akers’ theory (Siegel, 2018:243) and refers to the real or expected
results of a specific action. The original feeling of wellbeing that often accompanies
drug use is a reward and a positive reinforcement for continuing to use drugs. The
opposite is also true. If the experience is unpleasant, however, the reinforcement will
be negative and will discourage further experimentation with drugs. Or the user can
readjust the process in order to establish pleasant experiences.
Imitation involves observing what others do and may occur outside the learning
process. A role model’s behaviour determines how first-time offenders, in particular,
will behave. Imitating admired criminal models will exceed exposure to prosocial
models (Gamble, 2018:np).
Akers also proposed a specific sequence of events during which criminal behaviour is
learnt. Social learning occurs first in a process of differential association. The person
interacts and identifies with groups that provide models for social reinforcements and
behaviour. The individual learns definitions of behaviour through imitation within
these groups; these definitions are reinforced by the group and serve as reinforcers
for the person’s behaviour. Firstly, there is an association with members of the peer
group who advocate or tolerate crime, when definitions that favour law-breaking are
learnt. This behaviour is strengthened by others (e.g. gang members) who support or
defend criminal behaviour.
Behaviour will be repeated when the positive reinforcers outweigh the negative
reinforcers. This includes taking account of all the positive results of crime. These
include external gains (e.g. financial and material gains) and the less obvious
reinforcement from peer groups (e.g. either some concrete reward by participating
in the crime or enhanced status within the gang). Positive reinforcers also include
internal gains, such as feelings of power or autonomy (Crossman, 2019). Negative
reinforcers are also important. Examples of external negative reinforcers may be the
possibility of arrest, loss of freedom, fear of injuring someone or oneself, or fear of
being ostracised by family and friends (Crossman, 2019).
The content of what is learnt includes specific techniques for committing crimes,
appropriate motives, drives, rationalisations and attitudes and more general ‘‘definitions
favourable to law violation’’. All these are cognitive elements; that is, they are all ideas
rather than behaviours.
Akers has recently extended social learning theory to the macro level, where group
differences in crime rates are explained, including differences between sociodemographic
groups (class and gender), communities and societies (Cullen & Agnew, 2011:130).
154

Sutherland is a prominent exponent of learning theory and, in his theory of
differential association; he portrays the offender as a person who has been exposed
to a preponderance of law-breaking definitions with which he or she has come to
identify. This leads to the acquisition of deviant values. According to Sutherland,
poverty and social class differences are therefore insufficient reasons for explaining
misconduct and crime. The person learns to break the law and learns how to deal
with the emotional consequences of this learnt behaviour.
To Sutherland, the difference between law-violators and law-abiders could be found

in the contents of that which they learned. Those who are fortunate enough to grow
up in a conventional (mainly law-abiding) environment will, in their spare time,
learn to practise sport and, say, regularly participate in religious activities. The less
fortunate, who grow up in slum areas, will learn instead to rob drunks and wander
the streets looking for trouble.
According to Sutherland, two basic things are learnt: the technique needed to commit
crime and the definitions (values, motives, drives, attitudes and rationalisations) that
support such behaviour. Sutherland emphasised the need for an actual relationship
to exist between people, and that skills or values are not established by means of,
for example, illustrations in books or movie scenes. The techniques therefore refer to
the how of the criminal act and the definitions refer to the whys or the reasons for
committing crime.
Akers acknowledged Sutherland’s theory of differential association but regarded it as

only one element within the context of social learning. Akers’ explanation for criminal
behaviour centres around the consequences or results of behaviour; these consequences
are to be seen as positive or negative reinforcers for future behaviour. Akers’ theory
successfully combines the learning concept from a social and physiological viewpoint.
Criminal behaviour is learnt as a result of the influence of others (who have a positive
view of crime) and this behaviour is reinforced by reward (e.g. acceptance by the gang).
Answer the multiple choice, paragraph-type and longer essay-type questions:
CMY3701/1155
4.2.9 MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS
(1) Proposition 1 of Sutherlands Differential Association theory states, when
criminal behavior is learned the learning process includes:
1. Acquiring the techniques needed to commit certain crimes
2. That the necessary norms and values must be present
3. The frequency at which one is being exposed to
4. Definitions unfavorable to misbehavior and crime
(2) A definition that is favourable or unfavorable towards breaking the law, provides
the key to differential association, because this definition ...........
1. will influence a person to act instantaneously.
2. prioritises a certain type of behaviour.
3. determines an individual`s mindset and values.
4. indicates with whom the law breaker associates.
(3) Is it a valid argument to predict that correction officials will become criminal
because of their constant association with criminals?
1. Yes, the officials only need this negative association to adjust their pro-
criminal definitions.
2. Yes, the officials may learn how lucrative crime can be.
3. No, if you have a solid upbringing, negative influences will have no effect.
4. No, when the official’s mindset and values are against crime, they remain
will not transgress.
(4) The concept of differential reinforcement represents Akers` (1977) theory and
refers to:
1. Imitation of positive and negative behaviour
2. Behaviour that will be repeated under all circumstances
3. Behaviour that is influenced by religion and moral values
4. The real or expected results of a specific action
(5) Indicate which two concepts form part of Akers` theory that was neglected by
Sutherland`s theory.
1. Self-control and reinforcement.
2. Imitation and reinforcement.
3. Positive or negative reinforcers.
4. Social bonding and Imitation.
4.2.10 PARAGRAPH-TYPE QUESTIONS

(6) Write notes on the elements of Akers’ social learning theory. (10)
(7) Present a short discussion on what each of the nine propositions of Sutherlands
Differential Association theory focus on. (15)
156
4.2.11 ANSWERS TO THE SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS
1. 1
2. 3
3. 4
4. 4
5. 2
(6) Consider section 4.2.5.1

Explain the meaning of each concept according to Akers.
• differential association
• definitions
• differential reinforcement
• imitation
(7) Consider section 4.2.2
Proposition 1: Criminal behaviour is learned
Explain from whom and does hereditary play a role?
Is behaviour such as writing or painting learnt in a similar manner?
Proposition 2: Learning is a by-product of interaction

Sutherland believed that simply by living in a criminogenic environment does
not imply that individuals will violate laws.
Proposition 3:
Learning occurs within intimate groups
Intimate personal groups such as the family, friends and peers are very influential
on peoples’ deviant behaviour and attitudes.
Proposition 4: Criminal techniques are learned

Learning techniques can be complicated or simple.
Learning the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalisation and attitudes
is important.
Proposition 5: How legal codes influence motives and drives

Are these legal codes favourable or unfavourable when deciding to break the law?
Social rules and norms are not uniform across society.
Proposition 6: This is the principle of differential association. It refers to both

criminal and anti-criminal associations and has to do with counteracting forces.
Proposition 7: Differential association may vary in frequency, duration, priority

and intensity
Quality of social interactions is vital, lasting duration will have greater influence.
Frequent contacts have greater effect than rare and random contacts.
Priority, early life contacts have more far-reaching influence than those developed
later.
CMY3701/1157
Intensity: The importance and prestige from whom the definitions are learned.
Proposition 8: Learning criminal behaviour by association with criminal and

anti-criminal patterns.
Proposition 9: Needs and values, criminal vs non-criminal behaviour. Criminal

behaviour cannot logically be the same as for conventional behaviour.
158
4.2.12 REFERENCES
these references.
African News Agency. 2020. Teenage girls and friends arrested for killing elderly
parents. Available at: https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/free-state/teenage-
girl-and-friends-arrested-for-killing-elderly-parents-40683165 [Accessed on
15 September 2020].
Bowers, K. 2019. How people rationalise bad choices. Available at: https://www.
insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/03/01/519015.htm [Accessed on
10 July 2020].
Chrisholm,T., Coulter,A., & Public, K. 2017. Safeguarding and radicalisation. Research
Report. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/
uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/635262/Safeguarding_and_
Radicalisation.pdf [Accessed on 15 September 2020].
Crossman, A. 2019. What is social learning theory? Available at: https://www.
thoughtco.com/social-learning-theory-definition-3026629 [Accessed on
20 August 2020].
Cullen, T.F., Anew, R. 2011. Criminological Theory: Past to Present. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Extremism and radicalisation leading to violence, 2017. Available at: https://pjp-eu.
coe.int/en/web/youth-partnership/extremism-and-radicalisation-leading-to-
violence. [Accessed on 15 Augustus 2020].
Felter, C. 2018. Nigeria`s battle with Boko Haram. Available at: https://www.cfr.
org/backgrounder/nigerias-battle-boko-haram [Accessed on 15 August 2020]
Gamble, J. 2018. Menace II Society: A Social Learning Perspective. Available at:
https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context=grad_rev
[Accessed on 20 August 2020].
Gerber, J. 2020. News24. What’s behind the”ISIS” attacks in Mozambique and how
does it affect South Africa? Available at: https://www.news24.com/news24/
southafrica/news/explainer-whats-behind-the-isis-attacks-in-mozambique-and-
how-does-it-affect-sa-20200711 [Accessed on 10 August 2020].
Jones, S. 2017. Criminology.Available at: https://www.google.com/search?hl=
en-ZA&authuser=0&rlz=1C1GCEU_enZA940ZA940&biw=1042&bih=698&
ei=W W UuY LvK JoGM8g L d _ 7 7A BA& q=fou nd+t h at+f r iend s%
E2%80%99+attitudes+and+behaviour+were+
significant+factors+in+a+person%E2%80%99s+offending%2C+irrespective+
of+the+person%E2%80%99s+own+attitudes%2C+or+whether+the+
friends+were+present+when+the+offence+occurred.+&oq=found+
t h a t+f r i e n d s % E 2 % 8 0 %9 9 + a t t it u d e s + a n d+b e h a v i o u r+w e r e +
signif icant+factors+in+a+person%E2%80%99s+of fending%2C+
irrespective+of+the+person%E2%80%99s+own+attitudes%2C+or+
whether+the+friends+were+present+when+the+offence+occurred.+&gs_
lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyCAgAEOoCEI8BMggIABDqAhCPATIICAAQ6g
IQjwEyCAgAEOoCEI8BMggIABDqAhCPATIICAAQ6gIQjwEyCAgAE
OoCEI8BMggIABDqAhCPATIICAAQ6gIQjwEyCAgAEOoCEI8BUI2
FoAFY3IygAWDnnKABaAFwAngAgAGbAogBmwKSAQMyLTGYAQG
g AQ G g AQK q AQ d nd 3Mtd 2 l 6 s A E KwA E B& s c l ie nt= g w s -
wiz&ved=0ahUKEwj72uuPv_PuAhUBhlwKHd2_D0gQ4dUDCA0&
uact=5 [Accessed on 18 August 2020].
CMY3701/1159
Matsinke, D.M., Valoi, E. 2019. Institute for Security Studies. The genesis of insurgency
in northern Mozambique. Available on: https://issafrica.org/research/southern-
africa-report/the-genesis-of-insurgency-in-northern-mozambique [Accessed on
25 August 2020].
McGovern, A & Milivojevic, S. 2016. Social media and crime: the good, the bad
and the ugly. Available at: https://inforrm.org/2016/10/19/social-media-and-
crime-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-alyce-mcgovern-and-sanja-milivojevic/
Pieterse, C. 2018. Dagga: What to do and not to do. Available at: https://www.
news24.com/witness/news/dagga-what-to-do-and-not-to-do-20180919
Siegel, L. 2018. Theories, Patterns and Typologies. 13th edition. Boston, MA: Cengage
Learning.
Strochlic, N. 2020. National Geographic. Six years ago, Boko Haram kidnappd
276 schoolgirls. Where are they now? Available at: https://www.
nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2020/03/six-years-ago-boko-haram-
kidnapped-276-schoolgirls-where-are-they-now/ [Accessed on 15 September
2020].
69 People Killed in Nigeria Village by Suspected Boko Haram Militants. Available at:
https://www.voanews.com/africa/69-people-killed-nigerian-village-suspected-
boko-haram-militants [Accessed on 10 September 2020].
Ward, J.T, Mc Conaghy, M., & Bennett, J.Z. 2018. Differential Applicability
of Criminological Theories to Individuals? The Case of Social Learning
vis-à-vis Social Control. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/
full/10.1177/0011128717707716 [Accessed on 15 August 2020].
160
12 STUDY UNIT 4.3
12 Hirschi’s social bonding theory
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• explain the assumptions of Hirschi’s theory

• explain the elements of the social bond by using examples
• evaluate the contribution of Hirschi’s theory to criminology

FIGURE 4.3.1
CMY3701/1161
4.3.1 INTRODUCTION
Social Control theory sees crime as a result of social institutions losing control over
individuals. Weak institutions such as certain types of families, the breakdown of
local communities, and the breakdown of trust in the government and the police are
all linked to higher crime rates (Thompson, 2016). Socialisation as a lifelong process is
experienced by each individual and is the primary way of how social order develops.
Through this process people are taught from birth the behavioural and interactional
expectations customary to their family, peer groups, community and greater society
and in so doing effectively control our participation in society.
Strain and differential association presuppose that the environment within which a
person develops creates both the motivation and the opportunity to commit crime.
Social control theory rejects this assumption and regards crime as a morally neutral
concept. It assumes that people are, by nature, inclined to break the law. The motivation
for crime forms part of human nature, and all individuals will commit crime if left to
their own devices. For this reason, people need to be controlled and the restraining
forces of society need to be examined.
Although there are differences regarding the way in which social control theories
explain criminal behaviour, they all share the following basic thinking:
• Delinquency and crime are unavoidable. Hirschi (1967), who was a major proponent
of control theory, did not view crime as the expression of free will, but simply as
normal behaviour. This argument is a reflection of Durkheim’s influence, who
regarded crime as a normal phenomenon in any society.
• It is necessary to explain why people obey rules (and not why they break them).
• The essential component of all social control theories is, in short, their attempts to
identify those factors that prevent people from engaging in delinquency and crime.

ATTACHMENT is one of the four social bonds in social bonding theory. The
emotional component of conformity refers to one’s attachment to others and to social
institutions (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008: 56; Aslan, Rosinaite & Khojanashvili, 2019).
BELIEF in social control theory, is one of the four social bonds. It refers to the ready
acceptance of the correctness of pro-social values and attitudes (Walsh & Hemmens,
2008: 561; Cullen & Wilcox, 2010; Aslan et al, 2019).
COMMITMENT is one of the four social bonds in social bonding theory.

Commitment refers to the rational component of conformity and refers to a lifestyle
in which one has invested considerable time and energy in the pursuit of a lawful
career (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:562; Cullen & Wilcox, 2010; Aslan et al, 2019).
4.3.3 ASSUMPTIONS OF HIRSCHI’S SOCIAL BONDING THEORY

(1967)
Travis Hirschi is the theorist most closely identified with social control theory, or
bonding theory. Hirschi (1967) ascribes delinquent behaviour to the quality of the
bond an individual has with society; Hirschi states that ‘‘delinquent acts result when
an individual’s bond to society is weak or broken’’.
162
STUDY UNIT 4.3: Hirschi’s social bonding theory
Williams and McShane (2018:202) identify the following as the main assumptions
of Hirschi’s theory:
• Self-preservation and reward are the major concerns of human nature, which
means that human behaviour tends to be self-centred.
• Given the above argument, human behaviour has to be controlled and regulated
for the benefit of everybody.
• Society’s rules and regulations constitute the moral order.
• A person bonds with the moral order of society initially by way of socialisation
(as a child) and later by means of social institutions.
• The bond formed with the moral order consists of elements that maintain and
reinforce conformity (obedience to the law).
• The elements of the bond are identified as:
– attachment to significant others (e.g. parents and peers) and institutions (e.g.
church and school)
– commitment to or investment in conventional society (e.g. respect for and
obedience to the rules and laws of society)
– involvement in conventional activities (e.g. participation in sport)
– belief in society’s values (ability to distinguish between right and wrong)
All these elements are present to varying degrees. If the elements become weaker or
absent, individuals feel they have greater freedom to pursue their own interests by
means of delinquency and crime.
Hirschi assumed that all individuals are potential law violators, but they are being
controlled because they fear illegal behaviour which will destroy their relationships
with parents, friends, teachers and employers (Siegel, 2016:250). For Hirschi (as for
Durkheim), people’s behaviour reflects different degrees of morality. The power of
internalised norms, a person’s conscience, and the desire for approval encourage law-
abiding or conventional behaviour. Hirschi attributed a person’s feeling that he or
she is free to break the law to the disintegration or weakening of bonds with society.
In other words, the individual has failed to bond with the social group or society;
in his or her case, socialisation has failed. The individual who pursues his or her
own interests, therefore disregarding the sensitivity to the interest of others is always
prepared to act in order to secure the advantage for himself. Society therefore has to
exert a restraining influence on this type of behaviour. When social restraints become
relaxed, self-interest triumphs and crime is committed. Hirschi does not view society
as containing competing subcultures with unique value systems. According to Hirschi
in all elements of society people vary in how they act in response to conventional
rules and values. Among all ethnic, religious, racial and social groups, people whose
bond to society is weak, may fall prey to criminal behavior (Siegel, 2018:250).
4.3.4 ELEMENTS OF THE SOCIAL BOND

Hirschi (in Cullen & Agnew, 2011:215–223; Shoemaker, 2000:168) identifies
four dimensions or elements of the social bond, namely attachment, involvement,
commitment and belief.
Attachment refers to the emotional bonds that adolescents have with adults, role
models and most importantly parents, to the extent that they like, love or respect
others and are sensitive to the opinion others have of them (Costello & Laub, 2020:25).
CMY3701/1163
When people are attached to their significant others they learn the kinds of behaviour
that are required to maintain these relationships which also include what is expected
of them (boundaries). Strong attachment to a social group would therefore lead
to the internalisation of norms and values that generate conventional behaviour
choices. When a young person, however, does not recognise the importance of social
boundaries, they are more likely to engage in risky behaviour (Siegel, 2018:251). Their
attitude may be “I stayed out all weekend, I do not care about my parents and they
do not care about me”.
Attachment is important in creating conformity, even when others are delinquent

(e.g. parents who have committed crimes for which they have been convicted). In the
event that a family’s stability is shattered by divorce or separation; a child must retain
a strong attachment to one or both parents (Siegel 2010:227). Family detachment
that can include abuse of children, lack of affection and supervision are predictors
of delinquent conduct (Siegel 2010:228).
The acceptance of social norms and the development of social conscience not only
depend on attachment to but also caring for other human beings. According to
Hirschi the psychopath is an example of a person whose attachment to society is
virtually non-existent (Siegel, 2018:250). The attachment of other relatively ‘‘normal’’
individuals to society weakens when they become alienated from other people as a
result of interpersonal conflict. Such conflict, according to Hirschi (Schmalleger,
1996:261), can create strong feelings of hostility, which explains the aggressiveness
of those whose attachment to others has disintegrated.
Commitment to conventional society, includes traditional behaviour, normal

behaviour and actions, a person therefore makes a rational choice to conform (Case,
Johnson, Manlow, Smith and Williams, 2017:509). Examples of commitment are
the number of years that a young person has spent (and progressed) at school, having
a good reputation among his or her friends, or establishing a business. People with
commitments simply have more to lose if they are apprehended for criminal actions.
When considering crime or delinquent behaviour, a person also has to take the costs
and consequences of such behaviour into account. A university student, for example,
will have invested a great deal of time and energy (and money) in a career, and being
arrested for an offence represents the potential loss of such investment. Living in an
organised society, acquiring goods and reputations are all prospects not worth losing.
These accumulations are society’s insurance that will abide by the rules (Cullen &
Agnew, 2011:219). Partaking in risk-taking behaviour such as crime, becomes a
rational behaviour alternative (Siegel, 2010:227). For Hirschi, commitment is pure
common sense, because abiding by the rules of society helps one retain or enhance
one’s status in society.
In South Africa, with its social problems of unemployment, housing shortages and
cultural conflict, this commitment does not exist, which explains our high crime rate.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has described COVID-19 corruption as “an unforgivable
betrayal” for the millions of South Africans who have been negatively impacted by
the pandemic. What has caused the greatest outrage is that there are private sector
companies and individuals (including civil servants) who have exploited a grave
medical, social and economic crisis to wrongfully enrich themselves. Their selfish
craving for self-enrichment exacerbated the situation of the hungry, jobless masses
caught up in a situation of hopelessness (Regter, 2020:1).
164
Involvement refers to the amount of activity, time and energy available for conventional
or unconventional behaviour. Those who are most involved in conventional activities
such as participating in sport, religious activities, tied to appointments, deadlines
and working hours simply have less time to become involved in delinquent behaviour
and crime (Cullen & Agnew, 2011:219). Participation in recreational activities, for
example, increases people’s level of conformity. Hirschi agrees with the old saying
that ‘‘the devil makes work for idle hands’’.
Belief, in Hirschi’s theory, refers to the recognition that society’s rules are legitimate.
A person with this belief respects society’s rules and norms and feels morally obliged to
obey them. The more a person believes in behaving properly, the more likely it is that
such a person will conform (be law-abiding). Control theory assumes the presence of
a communal value system within a society or group. A person who disobeys the rules
or departs from social norms by committing crime may well accept those rules and
realise that his or her behaviour is wrong. However, he or she has no respect for the
rules and simply does not care. The existence or acceptance of the rules is therefore
not in question, but the necessary attitude of respect is.
Hirschi (1969:198) noted the following: “Delinquency is not caused by beliefs that
require delinquency, but rather made possible by the absence of (effective) beliefs
that forbid delinquency”.
These four elements all influence the bond between the individual and society. Hirschi
believes that the question criminologists should ask is: To what extent does this bond
have to weaken before delinquent behaviour and crime will be committed? If any
of the four bonds weaken or disintegrate, the freedom to commit crime increases.
TAKE NOTE
The following information shows how social media may impact negatively on the
four elements of Hirschi’s theory:
Over the past two decades social media has gained so much growth and fame
worldwide. The negative impact of this phenomenon on interpersonal relationships,
online and offline cannot be denied. Research revealed that the lives of adolescents
will have negative consequences on their personal and psycho-social well-being
due to the overuse of social networking sites (Marino, Vieno, Pastore, Albery,
Frings & Spada, 2016).
In countries where social media use is high, there is a significant link between
loneliness, isolation, anxiety and depression (Pittman & Reich, 2016; Allcott,
Braghieri, Eichmeyer & Gentzkow, 2019).
In 2019, there were almost 22.89 million social network users in South Africa, and
the projected figure for 2025 is 26.81 million users (Lama, 2020).
The most popular social media platform in South Africa is Facebook with 48,8%,
Pinterest, with 35,9% followed by Twitter with 9,6% (Lama,2020). Age distribution,
18–24 years, 4,4%, 25–34 years, 47,9% and 35–44 years, 9,4%.
The four countries with the highest number of internet users in the world are China,
India, the United States of America and Indonesia. Nigeria is in the 6th position
(Ang, 2020).
CMY3701/1165
Does the following scenario sound familiar? Social media distracts users not only
from sensible activities but also from our significant others who are offline. When
groups of friends or family visit a restaurant or a person’s home, one or all of them will
spend the majority of their time on their cellphones without speaking to each other
during their visit. Chotpitayasunondh and Douglas (2016) refer to this phenomenon
as “phubbing”, referring to people who ignore others by using their cellphones.
Negative outflows of social media can include the following: It can lead to the
misspelling of words and tenses by using short forms and abbreviations. This impacts
negatively on students because their language capabilities are affected, and this can
lead to poor grades.
In many single-parent working households, parents have become mere observers

and not role models to their children. Due to a lack of acceptance and approval
adolescents may seek acceptance and approval from cyber-space. It is further suggested
that children and young adolescents who are unsupervised social media users could
develop long-term anti-social behaviours (Álvarez-García, González-Castro, Núñez,
Rodriguez, & Cerezo).
Social media also provides a platform for anti-social activities such as cyber aggression,
sexting and bullying.
Teens below 18 years can be exposed to sexual predators and pornographic content
being spread in some social groups online. A further outflow of this can be teenage
pregnancies and contracting sexual transmitted diseases such as HIV forcing them
to drop out of school.
Social media is not all negative, teens can keep abreast with events happening around
the globe and stay connected with friends and loved ones. It also bridges the gap
between friends since a person in Africa can network and interact with his or her
friend in Asia.
Social media cannot be blamed for causing mental problems, the blame is on the
misuse/overuse/abuse of it by those who use it (Elhai, Tiamiyu, & Weeks, 2017).
Activity 4.3.1
Read through this section on drug abuse in The Cape Flats and other African
countries in order to participate in the activity.
According to Donnenfeld (2019) the number of drug users in sub-Saharan Africa

is expected to increase by nearly 150% in 2025. Driving forces behind this wave
in drug dependence is because Africa is persistently a young, rapid urbanising
scenario suffering from levels of poverty and inequality. According to projections
East Africa is to experience the most rapid rise in the proportion of its population
using illicit drugs, from two million in 2019 to about 5.5 million in 2050. The forecast
for West Africa is that it will double between now and 2050.
Apart from Cape Town being identified as one of the regions in the world with the
highest methamphetamine (street name, tik) use, the Afghanistan drug cartels are
now targeting South Africa via strife-torn Mozambique (Pinnock,2019; Hosken,
2020).
166
The media has drawn attention to the hardships of mothers at the hands of their
drug-addicted children. The well-known story of Ellen Pakkies who murdered her
methamphetamine addicted son made headlines in 2007 after years of falling victim
to her son’s mental and physical abuse (Svensson, Richert and Johnson, 2019).
With Hirschi’s theory in mind there are some factors that pose a risk to these
methamphetamines addicted adolescents. The Western Cape has also been
identified with the highest rates of Foetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) in the world. The
serious damage caused to the neurological development of a child only becomes
reality once the child goes to school. Reading disabilities are directly linked to
neural damage. Instead of being committed to school the child who is ridiculed
by his classmates for his inability to master reading can drop out of school and
seek affirmation in gangs where he will not be embarrassed.
If the family is dysfunctional the child or children can be exposed to a single

drug-addicted parent, inconsistent discipline, conflict, neglect, abuse, poverty
and unemployment. All these features will impact negatively on the attachment
a child or children may have with a parent or caregiver. Interpersonal conflict
between parent and child can give rise to feelings of alienation and aggression.
Joining a gang can be seen as a natural process where acceptance, stability and
camaraderie are priority.
Children living on the streets or those who join gangs cannot be involved in
conventional activities. Children who dropped out of school cannot participate in
any activities offered by the school. Unconventional activities offered by gangs
are inviting and lucrative.
When children grow up in a household where the parents have no respect for or
belief in norms, values and rules, these children will acknowledge this as normal
accepting behaviour which is also a prerequisite for joining gangs.
4.3.1.1 Can you add any additional contributing factors that can push an adolescent
to join a gang?
4.3.1.2 You can also discuss these factors on the discussion forum on myUnisa.
Additional contributing factors:
• Absent fathers
• Grandparents as caregivers
• Pathological behaviour in the family
• Step-parents
• Bad friends
• Parents do not encourage children to attend school
• Social grants are used to buy drugs
• Lack of supervision
• Incarcerated family members
• Sexual experimenting
• Alcohol abuse
• Harsh discipline
• Lack of food
• Domestic violence
• Criminal parents
CMY3701/1167
THEME 4: SOCIAL POSITIVISM: PROCESS THEORIES
4.3.5 EVALUATION AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF HIRSCHI’S

THEORY
Social control theory is supported by large amounts of data from a variety of empirical
studies. It is integrated because it exploits arguments from rational choice theory and
positivism, more specifically strain theory as well as psychological control (Case,
Johnson, Manlow, Smith and Williams, 2017:510) (Bartollas, 2006:149–150) points
out the various advantages of this theory as follows:
• Social control theory is amenable to empirical examination. Hirschi could test his
theory on a population of adolescents. Concepts such as ‘‘attachment to parents’’
and ‘‘involvement in school’’ are clearly defined and measurable.
• Social control theory has given us valuable insights into delinquent behaviour. The
importance of the intra-family relationship, for example, has been substantiated.
• Researchers are increasingly using this theory to develop integrated theories of
delinquent behaviour.
• Elliot believed in 1979 that social bonds can be further weakened by blocked
opportunities such as social disorganisation, unemployment and economic
recession (Case, Johnson, Manlow, Smith and Williams, 2017:510). In 2020 these
contributing factors are still and even more so applicable to the current economic
climate in South Africa with an unemployment rate of 30,1% (Stats SA 2020).
Questions have been asked, in particular, about the causal sequence of Hirschi’s
bonding elements or dimensions. To what extent can weakening or disintegration of
one element influence the other elements? For example: would the strong presence of
three elements and the absence of one element mean that a person will commit crime?
What is the relationship between the elements? There should be some interaction
between the four dimensions. Can delinquency lead to the disintegration of the
social bond? Hirschi believes that further empirical research will help to answer
these questions.
Not all elements of the bond are equal. Research showed that some adolescents who
report high levels of involvement do not shy away from crime, this is the opposite
what Hirschi proposes (Siegel, 2010:229).
Hirschi`s opinion that any form of social attachment is beneficial, even when parents
or friends are criminal, has been proven wrong. Research has found that youths
attached to drug-abusing friends or family are likely to become drug users themselves
(Siegel, 2010:229; Han, Kim & Lee, 2016:13).
The origin of the social bond is also vague. If weakening of the social bond is the
cause of delinquency and crime, then we need to study the social bond very closely
indeed. Hirschi also states that the strength of this bond varies and that we need to
be able to account for this. Bonds seem to change over time, it is possible at any age
level that weak bonds to parents lead to delinquency, but also that strong bonds to
peers lead to delinquency (Siegel, 2010:2290).
What can be seen as the most significant criticism of Hirschi`s work is his opinion
that delinquents are detached loners whose bond to friends has been broken. Drug
abusers report having closer and more intimate relations with their peers than non-
abusers (Siegel & Worrall, 2016:110).
168
The policy implications of social control theory are less direct than in the case of
strain theory and focus more on childhood education. Most parents try to ensure that
their children have an attachment to conventional people and institutions, which is
why they encourage their children to participate in conventional activities such as
sport and hobbies. Parents also encourage their children to commit themselves to
educational, professional and other (approved) social goals and want to instill in their
children beliefs that will enable them to participate in conformity.
Some critics believe that social control theory is supported by only one type of data,
namely self-report studies. The theory does give us a good explanation for certain
types of crime, namely juvenile delinquency and street offences. Social control theory
does not, however, really address the issue of how to prevent and control professional,
organised, corporate and white-collar crime.
As far as prevention is concerned, social control theory offered considerable support

for programmes aimed at reinforcing family ties and effective childhood education.
Support by both the parent and the school is regarded as the key to academic success.
Control theory continued to develop as a significant criminological perspective. One

example of a developed control theory is Hirschi and Gottfredson’s general theory
of self-control (1990) to which you were introduced in the first year of study. The
theory can be seen in policies such as curfew laws, after-school programmes, parenting
classes, and job placement programmes (Akers & Sellers, 2013:np).

Social control theory states that human nature is inclined towards self-interest and
personal gain, and therefore regards delinquent behaviour and crime as natural.
The real question to be answered and explained is, in fact, conformity (law-abiding
behaviour). Within a conventional framework that reflects society’s moral order there
are social institutions that reinforce the bond between the individual and society.
When these institutions are weak or disintegrate, for whatever reason, the bond
that ties the individual to the moral order is also weakened. This weakened bond
automatically allows the individual a greater degree of freedom to become involved
in crime and delinquency.
Attachment refers to the individual’s affection for others and the individual’s sensitivity
to other people’s opinions. Commitment involves long-term investment in society
and refers to those social goals that are culturally approved (as spelled out by Merton
in his theory of anomie). Involvement simply makes the point that a person who is
constructively occupied has fewer opportunities for criminal behaviour. Beliefs refer
to social values and, in terms of criminal behaviour, refer in particular to respect for
authority.
Social control theory is popular, but it is not new. According to Williams and
McShane (2018:202), it is probably the one theory that best reflects the public’s view
of why people commit crime. Arguments on whether a person becomes a criminal by
associating with the wrong friends, or as a result of poor education, lack of friends
or lack of the necessary educational qualifications are all included in the beliefs that
form the assumptions of this theory.
CMY3701/1169
Social control theory includes issues such as social disorganisation, differential
association and anomie, which makes it particularly attractive to criminologists who
are sceptical of conflict theories.
Answer the multiple-choice, paragraph-type and longer essay-type questions:
(1) Besides Hirschi, who also regarded crime as normal behaviour in

a society?
1. Becker
2. Sutherland
3. Quinney
4. Durkheim
(2) If the four dimensions of Hirschi`s social bonding theory become
weaker or absent, individuals feel that they have ...........
1. less freedom to pursue their own interests.
2. greater freedom for delinquency and crime.
3. no freedom but are forced to conform.
4. little freedom to deviate from societal norms.
(3) Can interpersonal conflict lead to weak bonds?
1. Yes, conflict enhances alienation
2. No, conflict can be resolved
3. Yes, conflict can be seen as negative
4. No, conflict is not that powerful
(4) Involvement refers to the amount of activity, time and energy available
for conventional behaviour. Does this also apply to unconventional
behaviour?
1. No, it is less time consuming
2. Not sure, depends on the laws of a specific country
3. Yes, unconventional behaviour also requires dedication
4. Uncertain, the meaning of unconventional can be misunderstood
(5) Belief in Hirschi`s theory clearly indicates that the acceptance of
rules is not the question but rather the attitude of ...........
1. conformity.
2. alienation.
170
3. rebelliousness.
4. respect.
4.3.7.2 Paragraph-type questions
(6) Briefly discuss the four dimensions of the social bond theory. (15)
(7) What are the main assumptions of Hirschi’s social bonding theory?
(10)

1. 4
2. 2
3. 1
4. 3
5. 4
4.3.8.2
(6) Here you need to discuss what each one of the four elements
(attachment, commitment, involvement and belief) entail according
to Hirschi. Consult section 4.3.3.
(7) Discuss the assumptions as explained by Williams and McShane
(2004). Consult section 4.3.2.
CMY3701/1171
4.3.9 REFERENCES
Allcott, H., Braghieri, L., Eichmeyer, S. & Gentzkow, M. 2019. The Welfare Effects
of Social Media. Available at: https://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/
facebook.pdf [Accessed on 10 August 2020]
Álvarez-García, D., González-Castro, P., Núñez, J.C., Rodriguez, C. & Cerezo, R.
Impact of Family and Friends on Antisocial Adolescent Behavior: The Mediating
Role of Impulsivity and Empathy. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/
articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02071/full [Accessed on 16 August 2020]
Akers, R.L. & Sellers, C.S. 2013. Criminological Theories: Introduction,
Evaluation, Application. Available at: https://global.oup.com/us/companion.
websites/9780199844487/guide1/study_guide.pdf [Accessed on 20 August
2020]
Ang, C. 2020. Which countries have the most internet users? Available at: https://
www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-with-most-internet-users/ [Accessed on
15 August 2020]
Bartollas, C. 2006. Juvenile delinquency. 7th edition. Boston, MA:Pearson.
Case, S., Johnson, P., Manlow, D., Smith, R., Williams, K. 2017. Criminology, OUP,
Oxford. Available at: file:///C:/Users/joubee/Downloads/312-Article%20Text-
1476-1-10-20191025.pdf [Accessed on 30 June 2020].
Chotpitayasunondh, V., & Douglas, K.M. 2016. How “phubbing” becomes the norm:
The antecedents and consequences of snubbing via smartphone. Available
at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303092282_How_phubbing_
becomes_the_norm_The_antecedents_and_consequences_of_snubbing_via_
smartphone [Accessed on 18 August 2020]
Costello, B.J., & Laub. J.H. 2013. Social Control Theory: The Legacy of Travis
Hirschi’s Causes of Delinquency. Annual Review of Criminology (3)1 Available
at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335598132_Social_Control_
Theory_The_Legacy_of_Travis_Hirschi’s_Causes_of_Delinquency/citation/
download [Accessed on 11 August 2020]
Cullen, F.T., & Wilcox, P. 2010. Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory Hirsch,Travis:
Social control theory. Available at: https://study.sagepub.com/system/files/
Hirschi%2C_Travis_-_Social_Control_Theory.pdf [Accessed on 15 July 2020].
Cullen, F.T. & Agnew, R. 2011. Criminological Theory: Past to present. New York:Oxford
University Press.
Donnenfeld, Z. 2019. What is driving sub-Saharan Africa`s rapid rise in drug use.
Available at: https://issafrica.org/iss-today/what-is-driving-sub-saharan-africas-
rapid-rise-in-drug-use [Accessed on 20 August 2020].
Elhai, J.D., Tiamiyu, M., & Weeks, J. 2017. Depression and social anxiety in relation
to problematic smartphone use. The prominent role of rumination. Available at:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56916e4805f8e207077fb3ed/t/5ab3e9c
670a6ad3f06b5c790/1521740235160/ElhaiTiamiyuWeeks2018.pdf [Accessed
on 15 August 2020].
Hosken, G .2020. Afgan dealers target SA as new crystal meth hub. Available at:
https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/news/2020-11-08-afghan-dealers-
target-sa-as-new-crystal-meth-hub/ [Accessed on 20 August 2020].
Lama. 2020. Social media statistics and usage in South Africa. Available at: https://
www.talkwalker.com/blog/social-media-stats-south-africa#:~:text=There%20
is%20a%2062%25%20Internet,19%25%20increase%20compared%20to%20
2019. [Accessed on 17 August 2021]
172
Marino, C., Vieno, A., Postore, M., Albery, I.P., Frings, D., & Spada, M.M. 2016.
Modeling the contribution of personality, social identity and social norms to
problematic Facebook use in adolescents. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/27423098/ [Accessed on 25 August 2020]
Pieterse, C. 2018. Dagga: What to do and not to do. Available at: https://www.
news24.com/witness/news/dagga-what-to-do-and-not-to-do-20180919
Pinnock, D. 2019. A new approach to criminalization could end Cape Town`s drug war.
Available at: https://theconversation.com/a-new-approach-to-criminalisation-
could-end-cape-towns-drug-wars-121769 [Accessed on 15 August 2020]
Pittman, M & Reich, B. 2016. Social media and loneliness: Why an Instagram picture
may be worth more than a thousand Twitter words. Available at: https://psycnet.
apa.org/record/2016-29062-017 [Accessed on 17 August 2020].
Regter, S. 2020. Ramaphosa: COVID-19 corruption an unforgiveable betrayal.
Available at: https://ewn.co.za/2020/08/23/cyril-ramaphosa-covid-19-
corruption-an-unforgivable-betrayal [Accessed on 10 August 2020].
Schoemaker, D.J. 2000. Theories of delinquency: an examination of explanations of
delinquent behavior. 4th edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Siegel, L.J. 2010. Criminology, Theories,Patterns and Typologies. Boston, MA:
Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Siegel, L.J. 2016. Criminology, Theories,Patterns and Typologies. 12th edition. Boston,
MA: Cengage Learning.
Siegel, L.J. 2017. Criminology: The Core. 6th edition. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Siegel, L.J. 2018. Theories,Patterns and Typologies. 13th edition,Boston,MA: Cengage
Learning.
Siegel, L.J. & Worral, J.L. 2016. Introduction to Criminal Justice. 15th edition. Boston,
Ma: Cengage learning. Avialable at: https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-
Criminal-Justice-Larry-Siegel/dp/1305261046 [Accessed on 12 August 2020].
Thompson, K. 2016. Hirschi`s social control theory of crime. Available at: https://
revisesociology.com/2016/04/04/hirschi-control-theory-crime/ [Accessed on
10 August 2020]
Svensson, B., Richert, T. & Johnson, B. 2019. Parents’ experiences of abuse by their
adult children with drug problems. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/
doi/full/10.1177/1455072519883464 [Accessed on 25 August 2020]
Williams, F.P., & McShane, M.D. 2018. Criminological theory. 7th edition. University
of Houston: Pearson.
CMY3701/1173
4 THEME 5
The victimised actor model
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
In Theme 1 of this study guide we saw that the rational actor model of crime and
criminal behaviour regards human beings as possessing free will. This means that
human beings have the ability to make rational decisions and to engage in activities
of their choice; according to this theory, criminal behaviour is simply a rationally
chosen activity.
The predestined actor model, on the other hand, claims that crime emanates from
factors (be they biological, psychological or social) that are outside the offender’s
control and which determine his or her behaviour. Therefore, the major concern of
this theory is to identify and analyse what is considered to be the causes that drive
individuals to commit criminal acts. The third model of crime and criminal behaviour
claims that the criminal is in some way the victim of an unjust and unequal society:
it is the behaviour and activities of the poor and disadvantaged that are targeted and
criminalised, while the actions of the rich and powerful are simply ignored or not
even defined as criminal (Burke, 2005:138).
The victimised actor model’s two theoretical foundations are labelling and conflict.
Although labelling and conflict differ, these two perspectives share an important
characteristic that distinguishes them from other explanatory theories. Biological,
psychological and environmental theories portray the offender as a person who is
unable, for some reason or other, to conform to the rules of society. Labelling and
conflict theories draw attention to the role of social institutions in delinquency and
crime. Both these perspectives are based on the premise that those members of society
with political power control the behaviour of others. The way in which the powerful
elite views and responds to certain behaviour determines whether a particular action
will be regarded as legal (acceptable) or criminal (against the law).
The role of powerful social institutions such as the government, education, corporations
and the criminal justice system came under the spotlight, because some social scientists
believed that these institutions actually encouraged delinquency and crime. Those
in positions of power protected their own interests by controlling the behaviour of
the lower class or the disadvantaged. As a result of this critical investigation, two
essential issues came to the fore:
• The law and the criminal justice system were not applied equitably in society.
• Those who had been involved in the criminal justice system were labelled as
deviants, and this put them on the road to a career in crime.
In South Africa the criminal justice system has also been subject to considerable
criticism. Although labelling originated in America, this perspective can also be
applied to the criminal justice system in South Africa.
174
13 STUDY UNIT 5.1
13 The labelling perspective
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• explain the labelling perspective

• discuss the interactionist approach
• differentiate between primary and secondary deviance
• discuss the social response approach
• explain labelling as a cause of crime
• outline the process of labelling
• describe the typology of deviants

This study unit will require approximately 2.5 hours.
FIGURE 5.1.1
CMY3701/1175
5.1.1 INTRODUCTION
The labelling perspective challenges our view of crime and criminal justice. According
to proponents of the labelling perspective, crime is a social process. As such, it involves
different perceptives of what constitutes ‘‘good’’ or ‘‘bad’’ behaviour (or persons),
and those specific power relationships that determine what (or who) is deemed to be
‘‘deviant’’ or an offender. Crime is not an ‘‘objective’’ phenomenon – instead, it is
an outcome of specific types of human interaction between the offender, the victim
and the officials of the criminal justice system (White & Haines, 2004:78). Labelling
theorists argue that earlier theories focused excessively on the individual deviant while
neglecting the different ways in which people react to deviant behaviour; hence the
term social response theories (Williams & McShane, 2004:140). Labelling can be said
to be an example of a social response theory but see below for two types of labelling
theory. Labelling theorists criticised criminologists for overemphasising the original
(initial) deviant act and the characteristics of the offender. However, the definition
of crime changes over time (an example here is the decriminalisation of abortion
and the personal use of cannabis in South Africa) and therefore labelling theorists
question the argument that, because crime is bad, those who commit crime are also
bad, and that a criminal act is necessarily bad. If an act is not a crime in one country,
and a person commits the same act in another country where it is a crime, is that
person necessarily bad or is the criminal legislation that applies in that country the
‘‘cause’’ of the crime?
One may say that the basic argument of labelling is that continued crime is the result
of limited opportunities for acceptable behaviour, which is the result of the negative
responses of society to those people defined (labelled) as offenders.
The labelling perspective has also been described as the theory of societal reaction,
sociology of deviance, social interactionism, the neo-Chicago School and the ‘‘new
deviancy’’ theory (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2006:378).
There are two variations of labelling theory (Ntuli, 2017:51):
• Interactionist approach, which focuses on self-identification and is more concerned

with what is in the offender’s mind.
• Social reaction approach, which focuses on the identity of individuals as assigned
to them by significant members of society and is more concerned with what is in
the minds of those significant members as the agents of social control.

BOURGEOISIE are the wealthy owners of the means of production (Walsh &
Hemmens, 2008:561). These people are powerful not because of their superior skill,
but because they own and control the means of production. Marx believed that the
bourgeoisie used deception, force, and fraud to steal the production of the working
class (proletariat), whose labour created most of society’s wealth. The bourgeoisie are
those members of society who create the shape of criminal law (Anderson, Dyson,
Langsam & Brooks, 2007:23).
176
STUDY UNIT 5.1: The labelling perspective
CLASS STRUGGLE is a Marxist principle that claims there is continuous conflict

between political and economic groups (e.g. the bourgeoisie and the proletariat) for
power. All history is the history of class struggles (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:561).
COMMUNISM is a theory advocating the elimination of private property. Its

proponents believe that, with the abolition of private property and the disappearance
of the class nature of the state (i.e. when communism triumphs), crime will virtually
disappear (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2006:480).
DEVIANT BEHAVIOUR refers to actions that are not aligned with social norm.
These actions are viewed as either “criminal or as harmless aberrations” (Siegel,
2017:14).
LABELLING PERSPECTIVE in essence, explains offending behaviour as a reaction

to having been labelled as a delinquent. This theory is focused on the notion that
when offenders are caught out and stigmatised as delinquents, they are more likely to
be driven to acting out a self-fulfilling prophecy. In short, labelling pushes violators
onto a path of further deviance. Labelling theorists assert that those in power place
labels on the powerless, labels that cannot be removed. The labelling perspective is
also known as the Societal Reaction School (Burke, 2014:14).
LUMPENPROLETARIAT is the lower classes; the criminal class (Walsh &

Hemmens, 2008:566).
MODE OF PRODUCTION is a Marxist concept that refers to how things are

produced and the social relations of production (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2006:486).
PRIMARY DEVIANCE is a term coined by Edwin Lemert to describe criminal

conduct that does not change the offender’s self-image and public image and these
acts have no real long-term influence on the offender, as they go undetected (Siegel,
2018:584.
PROLETARIAT refers to the working class (Walsh & Hemmens, 2008:569).
SECONDARY DEVIANCE is a term coined by Edwin Lemert to describe the

process whereby the offender accepts a deviant label as their personal identity on the
basis of society’s reaction to offenders’ primary deviance (Siegel, 2018:585)
5.1.3 INTERACTIONIST APPROACH

Lemert’s theory can be described as the ‘‘model’’ of the interactionist approach.
5.1.3.1 Edwin M Lemert (1912–1996)

The central elements of Lemert’s theory are explained by Ntuli (2017:23) as follows:
• Individuals enter into an offending career after they have been labelled, especially
if the labelling is done by people important to the individual.
• Labelling creates a stigma and influences an individual’s self-image, especially if
society responds to the offender as if the negative label was correct.
• Labelled individuals see themselves as deviant and are more likely to increasingly
partake in offending behaviour.
CMY3701/1177
THEME 5: THE VICTIMISED ACTOR MODEL
Lemert focused on the process that leads juveniles to describe themselves as delinquent.
Lemert explained this phenomenon partly by referring to the juvenile’s social class and
interaction with the formal decision-making powers. He was critical of rehabilitation
– in his opinion, such attempts merely encourage recidivism.
Lemert (Siegel, 2018:257) developed the concepts of ‘‘primary deviance’’ and

‘‘secondary deviance’’:
• Primary deviance refers to initial offending behaviour that has little influence
on the offender’s life. An example of this is a person who uses an opportunity
to steal an item from a shop (without being caught) or who drives a car under
the influence of alcohol (without being caught). These actions are regarded as
wrong, but the person (offender) is not seen as a bad person or labelled as deviant
by others because he or she has not been caught. Lemert does not attach much
value to primary deviance, because the person’s self-image is not damaged in the
process. There is no change in identity, and deviance is seen as nothing more than
a passing event.
• Secondary deviance refers to the phase when a person’s offending behaviour
is noticed by significant others who apply a negative label. The newly labelled
offender is now stigmatised and labelled as a bad person and starts to reorganise
their behaviour and personality around the offending act. This results in the
amplification of the offending act as the offender may feel isolated from society
and seek out other negatively labelled offenders to form subcultures or groups. This
is the core of the labelling theory where offending behaviour is seen as a process
where an individual’s identity is transformed.
However, not all people who have been labelled assume these roles. Some offenders
resist labelling by denying or downplaying the seriousness of their actions (Walsh
& Ellis, 2007:127).
The labelling perspective emphasises the process of labelling and does not see deviance
as a state of being, but as an outcome of social interaction.
5.1.4 SOCIAL RESPONSE APPROACH

The labelling theory focuses on the role of society in developing crime and deviance and
little interest in the varying causes and conditions of offending behaviour (Bernburg,
2019:1). The attention is focused on the response to behaviour (the social response
perspective), as highlighted by the contribution of Howard Becker. Becker’s work
Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance was published in 1963. In this work,
Becker fully developed the labelling perspective. In Outsiders, Becker describes the
deviant subculture of jazz musicians and the process whereby an individual becomes
a user of marijuana (dagga or cannabis) (Tierney, 2006:142).
Becker’s contribution can be divided into the following three segments:
• labelling as a cause of crime

• the process of labelling
• the typology of deviants
178
5.1.4.1 Labelling as a cause of crime

In developing his labelling theory, Becker attempted to explain how some rules carry
the force of legislation, while other rules carry less weight or apply only within the
context of marginal subcultures (e.g. black people having to carry a pass book during
the apartheid era in South Africa).
Once a person has been labelled as deviant, opportunities for conforming (law-abiding)
behaviour become limited. Instead, the behavioural opportunities that are available
are largely deviant. Continued deviant behaviour is therefore not a matter of choice
but takes place because a person’s choices have been limited by society. Becoming
a ‘‘successful’’ offender then requires techniques and the resources to carry out the
deviant (criminal) act (e.g. knowing where to obtain drugs and how to smoke, sniff
or inject such substances).
Labelling is a cause of crime because society regards the actions of the offender as
deviant and this pushes the offender further in the direction of continued crime.
5.1.4.2 The process of labelling

The primary focus of Becker’s study was to explain how a person is labelled as an
outsider. Deviant behaviour, according to Becker, is a social product created by society.
Whether a juvenile is therefore labelled as deviant will depend on the reaction of
other people to the act, and not on the nature of the activity itself.
Becker describes this process whereby a person acquires the label of deviance in a series
of phases which culminate in the deviant behaviour achieving master status, a status
which then becomes the most significant, both for the labelled person and for others.
• First phase: A person carries out a deviant action (even if not consciously). The
offender may have no idea that others will regard the action as deviant.
• Second phase: The person is caught, which puts him or her in a different light
and others then attach a new status or label to the person. It is assumed that the
particular person will continue with similar behaviour, simply because people
expect offenders to commit other crimes as well. The stigma (negative label)
therefore becomes generalised.
• Third phase: The deviant behaviour reaches master status. Regardless of other good
qualities, the person is labelled as deviant and this carries the greater weight in the
minds of others. This leads to the self-fulfilling prophecy (Bernburg, 2019:4): as a
result of labelling, the person is excluded and forced to break ties with conventional
(law-abiding) groups and to turn to illegal activities in order to make a living.
Deviant behaviour is, therefore, the result of other people’s reactions.
• Final phase: The person joins an organised deviant group where each member
learns to rationalise deviant (criminal) activities. They find reasons to continue
such activities and represent a source of social support (Bernburg, 2019:5).
5.1.4.3 A typology of deviants

According to Becker (Siegel 2018:14), a deviant is one to whom that label has
successfully been applied and deviant behaviour is the behaviour that people have
labelled as deviant. Becker (Brown et al, 2013:369–371) distinguishes between four
CMY3701/1179
types of deviants and non-deviants as illustrated in Table 5.1 below. This typology
helps explain labelling:
• The pure deviant engages in norm-violating behaviour which is regarded as such

by society (e.g. the burglar who is caught red-handed, followed by arrest, a hearing
and conviction). Such a person gets what he or she deserves.
• The falsely accused deviant is a person who is, in fact, innocent, but who may
sometimes be incarcerated. These individuals may be misjudged because of their
age, sex, race, social status, physical appearance or peer group association. The
impact of conviction and incarceration experiences is likely to lead to a negative
self-image. The life of a person who has been falsely accused changes just as
dramatically as the life of the pure deviant, purely as a result of the process of
labelling and the incorrect placing of a deviant label by society.
• The conformist is a person who does not engage in norm-violating behaviour.
This person has been accurately perceived by society as not deviant according to
their behaviour.
• The secret deviant is a person who engages in norm-violating behaviour, but
his or her behaviour goes undetected. No negative reaction follows. This is the
category that once again illustrates the power of social response, because there
are no negative consequences (i.e. for the deviant).
Table 5.1
Becker’s typology of deviant and non-deviant behaviour
Adaptation of Becker’s typology of deviant and non-deviant behaviour
Conforming Norm-violating
behaviour behaviour
Perceived as deviant Falsely accused Pure deviant
Not perceived as deviant Conformist Secret deviant
Adapted (from Brown et al., 2013:370)
Interesting read
According to Becker, deviants are not a homogeneous group. Some people who have
been labelled as deviant have not broken any rules (the falsely accused) and others
have broken rules but have not been officially caught and labelled (secret deviants).
There are many offenders who have been freed as a result of being wrongfully accused
by the criminal justice system. Follow the links below and see how easy it is to attach
a deviant label on an individual based on the clothing brand they choose to wear and
how falsely accused individuals struggle after being released:
• https://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2015-04-22-when-you-buy-uzzi-you-get-a-
criminal-record/
• http://www.2oceansvibe.com/2015/04/30/first-choice-for-criminals-uzzi-clothing-
seems-to-be-coming-up-a-lot-in-our-courtrooms/
180
• https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2017-04-04-five-wrongfully-convicted-
men-one-judge-no-compensation-from-the-state/#gsc.tab=0
• https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2018-10-03-i-can-never-forgive-
the-state-man-released-after-12-years-in-jail/
You can also find the links above in Lesson 5.1 in the module site of myUnisa.
Activity 5.1.1
Estimated time for activity: 60 minutes.
In your own words, explain the impact of labelling on those who are falsely accused
by society.

In addition to the information in this study guide, kindly refer to other online
platforms and come up with your own explanation that will cover all the possible
elements that may apply to falsely accused individuals.
Consult additional sources to support your response. There is no model/one

correct answer for this activity. Each student submits his/her own interpretation
of the information from additional sources they have consulted.
5.1.5 EVALUATION OF THE LABELLING PERSPECTIVE

The term ‘‘labelling’’ refers to the focus on the informal and formal stigmatisation
and labelling of certain individuals (i.e. by society).
As far as labelling theorists are concerned, the deviant behaviour itself is of less
importance. Instead, this perspective asks the following basic questions:
• Who attaches the label to whom?

• Who determines when such deviant labels should be attached?
• What produces this stigmatised label?
• What determines the way in which the label is attached?
These questions place the spotlight on the formal agents of control (the criminal
justice system) as salient sources of labelling in society (Bernburg, 2019:2). According
to labelling theorists, the agents of control who act on behalf of those with power in
society force such labels on the less powerful. In short, it is the powerful who decide
which behaviour will be labelled as deviant or unlawful. Whether or not an individual
is labelled as criminal is not decided directly by the fact that the person has violated
the law. It is important that for the same law-violating behaviour, individuals from
less powerful groups will be subjected to more official labelling and punishment than
the powerful who break the same rules. Stigmatising a person by labelling him or
her as criminal is the result, therefore, of who that person is rather than what he or
she has done. The law and the criminal justice system represent the interests of the
middle and upper classes and the various dominant groups in society. The likelihood
that a person will be arrested, convicted and imprisoned is determined by a person’s
CMY3701/1181
race, gender, age, social class and whether he or she belongs to the more or the less
powerful groups in society. This last argument is the argument advanced by conflict
theorists regarding the criminal justice system (Akers, 1997:99–100).
The viewpoint of more traditional theories is that deviant behaviour and crime lead to
social control (e.g. stricter penalties). Labelling, on the other hand, asserts that social
control leads to deviant behaviour and crime. Labelling theory is not restricted to
explaining delinquency and crime. It is often used to explain other forms of deviant
behaviour, such as mental illness, alcoholism and suicide.
Labelling theorists have contributed a number of unique ideas to the literature of

criminology. Schmalleger (1996:277) lists the following:
• Deviant behaviour is the result of social processes that include the definition of
such behaviour and is not the result of any characteristic that is inherently part
of human behaviour.
• An individual is awarded the status of ‘‘deviant’’ as a result of social definition,
rather than because he or she possesses certain inherent characteristics.
• Society’s response to deviant behaviour and to deviants is the key element in
determining the criminality of the person and the behaviour in question.
• A negative self-image is the result of the formal mechanisms of the criminal justice
system and does not precede delinquency.
• Labelling by society and treatment by the criminal justice system tend to encourage,
rather than discourage, crime and delinquency.
The labelling perspective sheds light on the process of labelling as a cause of continued
delinquency and crime, but it does not explain the origin of crime (Coleman &
Norris, 2000:72).
In other words, to use Lemert’s terminology, labelling does not explain the beginning
of primary deviance. A significant number of offenders offend only once, they are
punished and do not offend again and nor do they embark upon a criminal career.
Labelling focuses mainly on the role of social responses to deviant behaviour and
crime, especially the long-term consequences, for the individual, of labelling and
stigmatisation. But it does not deal with the reasons why the person offended in the
first place. It is too simplistic to argue that a label causes specific behaviour, and more
specifically future behaviour.
Also, there is a lack of empirical support for secondary deviance, and studies have not
proven that offenders do, in fact, have a deviant or criminal self-image. Furthermore,
there is no empirical proof that the personal life of an offender is adversely affected by
contact with the criminal justice system. Yet another criticism of labelling theory is
that it places too much emphasis on the impact of formal interactions (e.g. between
a juvenile and the police or juvenile court). What about the significance of informal
interactions? Labelling theory relieves a person of moral responsibility for his or her
behaviour.
Furthermore, some criminologists describe the argument of labelling theories that

no action is inherently evil or criminal as ‘‘naïve’’. Certain crimes (e.g. rape and
murder) are condemned universally. The phenomenon of child abuse, for example,
is condemned by all population groups in South Africa.
182
Nevertheless, this criticism does not mean that the contribution of labelling should
be disregarded. Labelling focuses attention on the importance of the roles of those
who function as agents of social control in the criminal justice system, namely the
police, the courts and correctional services. The labelling perspective also confirms
that delinquency and crime are not a disease or a pathological aberration (Siegel,
2004:237). Instead, it focuses attention on social interactions and the reactions that
shape individuals and their behaviour. Labelling and Lemert in particular, distinguish
between primary deviance (the deviant act) and secondary deviance (criminal career).
These concepts need to be interpreted and addressed in different ways. It is therefore
necessary to study the similarities between secondary deviance and the position of
the chronic offender or recidivist.

Two fundamental components may be identified in labelling theories. The first is the
concept of social response. This component is concerned with the different responses
to deviant behaviour and focuses on the meanings that others attach to such deviant
behaviour.
The second fundamental concept is secondary deviance as developed by Lemert,

which deals with the meaning of a label as such and the effect of such a label on the
particular person.
Becker’s contribution clearly illustrates why labelling theories are also classified as
process theories. The process whereby a person becomes an outsider is described in
four phases. In his typology of deviants, the emphasis is on the falsely accused and the
secret deviant, because these two types effectively illustrate the arguments of labelling.
Labelling’s most important contribution is that it has forced criminologists to question

the middle-class values that they use to describe deviant behaviour and criminality.
Labelling takes a critical view of the criminal justice system and makes it clear that
offenders are not objects but people – people who should be dealt with humanely.
Finally, the labelling perspective was the precursor to conflict theories.
clear.
The following section contains self-assessment questions comprising multiple-choice

questions and paragraph-type questions. Although your answers should not be
submitted to your lecturer for formal assessment, these questions allow you to self-
assess whether you have achieved the outcomes of the study unit, so please do not
skip the section.
CMY3701/1183
5.1.7.3 Self-assessment multiple-choice questions
(1) Which of the following options is a combination of the theoretical

foundations upon which the victimised actor model is built?
1. Power and control
2. Psychological and biological positivism
3. Labelling and conflict theories
4. Structure and process theories
(2) Identify the theory that focuses on the formal and informal
stigmatisation of certain individuals.
1. Social disorganisation theory
2. Labelling theory
3. Social bond theory
4. Structure theory
(3) Which variation of the labelling theory is concerned with what and
how the offender thinks?
1. Interactionist perspective
2. Psychological perspective
3. Social reaction perspective
4. Rational choice perspective
(4) Which one of the following options describes the secret deviant
according to Becker’s typology?
1. An innocent person who is not accurately labelled by society.
2. Does not engage in norm-violating behaviour.
3. A person who is perceived as deviant by society.
4. Engages in norm-violating behaviour but is undetected.
(5) Identify the correct statement that describes secondary deviance.

1. An individual’s self-image is not tarnished by the negative label
attached by society as offending behaviour goes unnoticed.
2. An individual who is in fact innocent, but his self-image is

tarnished by the negative label attached by society.
3. An individual’s identity is transformed by the label attached by

society and offending behaviour is amplified.
4. An individual who is accurately perceived as a non-deviant by

society and engages in conforming behaviour.
5.1.7.4 Feedback on self-assessment multiple-choice questions
1. 3
2. 3
3. 1
4. 4
5. 3
184
5.1.7.5 Self-assessment paragraph-type questions
(6) Explain the interactionist approach to labelling and outline Lemert’s

theory. (10)
(7) Explain the social response approach to labelling and discuss Becker’s
theory. (15)
5.1.7.6 Feedback on self-assessment paragraph-type questions
(6) Refer to paragraph 5.1.2

CMY3701/1185
5.1.8 REFERENCES
these references.
Akers, RL. 1997. Criminological theories: introduction and evaluation. 2nd edition.
Los Angeles, Ca: Roxbury.
Becker, HS. 1963. Outsiders. London: Free Press.
Beirne, P & Messerschmidt, JW. 2006. Criminology. 4th edition. Los Angeles, Ca:
Roxbury.
Bernburg, J.G. 2019. Labeling Theory. In: Marvin D. Krohn, Nicole Hendrix, Gina
Penly Hall, and Alan J. Lizotte (eds.), Handbook of Crime and Deviance, Second
Edition. Springer Nature Switzerland.
Brown, S.E, Esbensen, F & Geis, G. 2013. Criminology: explaining crime and its
context. 8th edition. Waltham, MA: Anderson.
Burke, R.H. 2014. An introduction to criminological theory. 4th edition. Cullompton:
Willan
Coleman, C & Norris, C. 2000. Introducing criminology. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Ntuli, P.N. 2017. Exploring Diversion Programmes for Youth in Conflict with
the Law: Case Studies of the Youth Empowerment Scheme Programme at
NICRO, Durban, South Africa. Unpublished dissertation: MA Social Sciences.
(Criminology), University of KwaZulu-Natal. Durban.
Schmalleger, F. 1996. Criminology today. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Siegel, LJ. 2004. Theories, patterns & typologies. 8th edition. Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth.
Siegel, L.J. 2018. Criminology: Theories, patterns and typologies. 13th edition. Boston,
MA: Cengage Learning.
Tierney, J. 2006. Criminology: theory and context. 2nd edition. Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
Walsh, A & Ellis, L. 2007. Criminology: an interdisciplinary approach. London: Sage.
Williams, FP & McShane, MD. 2004. Criminological theory. 4th edition. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
186
14 STUDY UNIT 5.2
14 The labelling perspective
LEARNING OUTCOMES
• describe the assumptions of the conflict perspective in terms of power and the
struggle for scarce resources
• explain Marx and Bonger’s contributions to criminology in terms of the radical
perspective
• explain Chambliss and Quinney’s contributions to criminology (both are exponents
of the radical conflict perspective)
• debate the criticism of contemporary radicalists regarding Chambliss and Quinney’s
theories
• evaluate the contribution of the radical conflict perspective to criminology

This study unit will require approximately 2.5 hours.
FIGURE 5.2.1
CMY3701/1187
5.2.1 INTRODUCTION
Conflict theories came to the fore in the middle to later part of the 20th century
(1950s, 1960s and 1970s), shortly after labelling theories. Like labelling theories,
conflict theories focus on the political nature of crime and examine the introduction
and enforcement of criminal legislation.
As you know, the focus for labelling theories was the way in which the definition of
offending behaviour was constructed and the subsequent impact on the behaviour
of those individuals who were labelled as offenders (Joyce, 2018:27). However,
labelling theorists failed to provide detailed explanations on how social reaction was
underpinned by power relationships that exist in society (Joyce, 2018:27). Theories
that focus on the struggle between individuals and/or groups in terms of power fall
within the general category of conflict theory. Some conflict theorists attempt to
determine the origin of such conflict, while others attempt to develop a theoretical
basis for the elimination of this conflict.
In this study unit we discuss some of the major conflict theories. These theories are
classified in different ways, but for the purposes of this study guide, we distinguish
between the following:
• the traditional or conservative conflict perspective

• the radical (Marxist) conflict perspective
• the contemporary conflict perspective (also known as neo-critical theories)
The conservative conflict perspective, with exponents such as Vold and Turk, approach
conflict from a group perspective. Vold was of the view that conflict between groups
is one of the principal and essential processes in the functioning of society (Reid,
2018:112). Furthermore, Vold was also of the view that conflict between groups
was not caused by any abnormality, but by ‘natural human beings struggling in
understandably normal and natural situations for the maintenance of the way of life
to which they stand committed’ (Reid, 2018:112).
Vold regarded societal conflict as normal and beneficial (Hunter & Dantzker,
2002:120).
Intergroup competition prevents one group from dominating the others and leads to
laws being made – and laws being broken.

CONFLICT MODEL OF CRIME is a model based on the assumption that

differences in race, class, income and age cause groups to fight for power. Groups
with the most power pass laws that protect the status quo against resistance by
marginalised groups. Definitions of crime depend on who is in power, with less
powerful groups characterised and targeted as criminals to keep them in a subordinate
position (Anderson et al., 2007:41).
188
CONFLICT PERSPECTIVE maintains that society is composed of diverse groups

with conflicting values and interests. The view that criminal behaviour is defined
by people in power and they are only interested in protecting and advancing their
personal interest (Siegel, 2017:15). The Marxist approach to conflict theory focuses on
economic determinism and the importance of social class (Anderson et al., 2007:41).
SOCIAL CLASSES are groups of people who share the same position in the same
production system (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2006:489).
In this discussion we focus mainly on the contributions of radicalists because of their

relevance to South Africa at present. We pay more attention to contemporary conflict
theories at honours level.
5.2.3 ASSUMPTIONS OF CONFLICT THEORY

Conflict theories share one fundamental assumption, namely that societies are
characterised by conflict and not by consensus. A society that is characterised by
consensus is one that shares common norms and values and considers crime as an
illegal act because it disregards the rules of the majority and harmful to society (Siegel,
2019:12). A society characterised by conflict is one that is composed of groups that
have opposing norms and values and that the state represents the interests of the
majority groups with the most power (Brown, Esbensen & Geis, 2013:382).
Conflict arises when the use of power and rules of the majority group in society is
not used to serve the interests of the society at large. Essentially, the main outcome
of conflict is that somebody gains power and somebody else loses power. The most
powerful groups in society control the law, and it is the values of these groups that
are accepted as the legal standard for behaviour.
According to Schmalleger (1996:312), the conflict perspective may be described in

terms of the following six key elements:
• Society is made up of diverse social groups. The distinction between groups is

reflected in gender and social class.
• Each group has different definitions of right and wrong. Moral considerations
and standards of behaviour vary from one group to the next. (The activities of
PAGAD (People Against Crime and Gangsterism) illustrate the grey area between
right and wrong.)
• Conflict between groups is unavoidable and is based on differences that are socially
significant (e.g. ethnicity, gender and social class). Groups that are distinguished
on the basis of these characteristics will compete for power, wealth and other
forms of recognition.
• The fundamental nature of group conflict focuses on the exercise of political
power. Political power is the key to obtaining wealth and other forms of power.
• The law is a tool of power and promotes the interests of the powerful. Laws provide
those in control with access to scarce resources, and the same laws keep others
from gaining access to power.
• Those with power are invariably interested in retaining such power.
CMY3701/1189
Even if society were to reach consensus about values and goals, the existence of resources
and their uneven distribution mean that one group will benefit to the detriment of
another. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels pointed out these very conflicts as long ago
as the 19th century.
The struggle for scarce resources usually revolves around three related issues, which
are money, power and influence. Those who have a greater share of the resources
strive to maintain the status quo, while those who have less pursue change in order
to increase their share in these scarce resources.
Those with wealth, power and influence possess the resources to place themselves in
a dominant position. The ‘‘haves’’ make the rules, control the content and flow of
ideas and information, and devise and mete out punishment to those who break the
law. Dominance means that the dominant are in a position to promote their own
interests, including at the expense of others.
The struggle for scarce resources may be blatant (even bloody), but is more often
subtle and restrained. The reasons for such restraint are complex. For example,
since the dominant group controls the ideas and information, they can promote
perceptions and values that support the existing order. The disadvantaged classes
therefore develop what Marx and Engels referred to as a ‘‘false consciousness’’ – the
perception that the prevailing social conditions are in their own interests when, in
fact, the opposite is true (Barlow & Kauzlarich, 2010:102). Marx and Engels applied
this argument to the law. The law is presented to the masses as the will of the people,
and this juridical illusion undermines the development of opposition and resistance
among the disadvantaged. In reality, the law reflects the interests of the ruling class
and is by no means based on public consensus.
A second way to restrain the struggle for scarce resources is to institutionalise conflict.
Special mechanisms such as courts, arbitration and civil rights hearings are introduced
to resolve differences. Differences between individuals and groups are often based
on conflict over the distribution of scarce resources. When disputes are ‘‘resolved’’
by means of institutionalised channels, the underlying struggle is watered down
and concealed. The aggrieved parties are calmed by the emphasis on procedure.
This is particularly true of crime: the victim is subjected to delays and endless legal
complexities.
Example: Rape legislation (from the conflict perspective)
Whose interests are served by rape legislation? The answer is: men (the dominant
group). In other words, women are victimised by the very thing that is supposed to
protect them. Although there is general consensus that rape is a crime, the laws are
applied in such a way that successful prosecutions depend as much on the actions
of the victim as on those of the attacker. Conflict theory therefore regards rape as a
manifestation of the unequal power relationships between males and females (Barlow
& Kauzlarich, 2010:119).
190
Activity 5.2.1
Estimated time for activity: 45 minutes.
Select a newspaper article or internet source about power relations in South Africa.
Log in to the myUnisa discussion forum and discuss the contents of the article
with reference to the following:
• Identify the diverse social groups

• Explain their definitions of right and wrong
• Explain how conflict arises among the social groups identified

In addition to the information in section 5.2 in this study guide, consult additional
sources to discuss power relations of the social groups identified. There is no
model/one correct answer for this activity. Each student submits his/her own
interpretation of the information from additional sources they have consulted.
Although responses from students may differ, the following key issues may be
included in responses:
• Who prescribes the values and norms?

• Is there any hope that the minority group will achieve consciousness?
• How the criminal justice system responds to these power relations?
5.2.4 THE RADICAL (MARXIST) CONFLICT PERSPECTIVE
5.2.4.1 Introduction
Radical criminology, which came to the fore in the 1970s, originated in the works
of 19th century social utopian thinkers, and particularly in the works of Karl Marx.
Marx’s works on conflict as an inherent part of capitalism gave rise to the formulation
of communist ideals (Schmalleger, 1996:316).
5.2.4.2 The legacy of Marx and Bonger

Marx argued that the economic means of production (the way in which people develop
and produce material goods) was the core of any society, since it determines the
nature of people’s social, political and spiritual existence (Brown et al, 2013:383). The
economic structure of society moulds and shapes human consciousness (what we think
and believe). However, there are contradictions within the system. A capitalist society,
for Marx, is one in which property and wealth become progressively concentrated in
fewer and fewer hands. Society polarises into two groups (or classes) whose interests
are fundamentally in opposition. Eventually, should the proletariat achieve class
consciousness, the contradictions of capitalism will become so serious that, following
a revolution, it will be replaced by a whole new social system – communism (Barlow
& Kauzlarich, 2010:109).
CMY3701/1191
Marx identified two fundamental social classes within any capitalist society, namely
the proletariat (the ‘‘have-nots’’) and the bourgeoisie (the ‘‘haves’’). The proletariat
represent the masses, who have less education and no power. The proletariat may also
be referred to as the working class, while the bourgeoisie are the capitalists who are
the wealthy owners of the means of production (e.g. factories, businesses and other
elements of the organisational infrastructure of society). The proletariat owns no
capital or means of production and earns money by working. The bourgeoisie, on
the other hand, are the capitalist class whose members are locked, by virtue of their
privileged position in society, in an ongoing class struggle with the proletariat. Marx
regarded this struggle between the two classes as unavoidable and believed that the
natural outcome of this struggle would be the overthrow of the capitalist social order
and the birth of a truly classless (or communist) society.
The ruling class controls production and therefore also controls labour. The workers are
therefore pawns in the game of competition and profit maximisation. The bourgeoisie
necessarily exploit the workers. In Marx’s critical thought it is important that he did
not separate people from society. People were a social product and therefore cannot
be studied in isolation from society.
Marx did not say much about crime as such, but Willem Bonger, a Dutch criminologist,
attempted to apply a number of Marx’s arguments to crime in capitalist societies. In
his work Criminality and economic conditions (1916), Bonger remarks that capitalist
societies appear to have more crime than other types of societies and that crime
rates increased as capitalism developed. Bonger (Barlow & Kauzlarich, 2010:106)
argued that self-interest as a basic characteristic trait of human was encouraged
under the capitalist economic system, where individuals were inclined to be greedy
and selfish and to pursue their own benefits without regard for the welfare of their
fellow human beings. Crime is concentrated in the lower classes because the justice
system criminalises the greed of the poor while it allows legal opportunities for the
rich to pursue their selfish desires. The emphasis is on maximisation of profits and
competition, while social relations are class structured. As a result, capitalist societies
encourage intraclass and interclass conflict as individuals strive to survive and flourish.
Interclass conflict, however, is biased because those who own and control the means
of production are in the position to exploit and coerce the less advantaged.
Bonger argued that a socialist society would ultimately eliminate crime because it
would encourage a concern for the welfare of society as a whole and would remove
the legal bias that favours the rich.
Criminal legislation is seen as an instrument of coercion and is used by the ruling

class to protect their position and interests. Behaviour which threatens the interests
of the ruling class is designated as criminal. Egoistic inclinations weaken internal
control. Both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat become susceptible to crime.
The working class is further demoralised because they are exploited by the ruling
class – long hours of work, monotonous work, poor housing conditions and absolute
poverty.
Although a lot of crime is the result of poverty, it is not wealth as such which is
meaningful, but how wealth is distributed in society. It is precisely the disproportional
distribution of wealth which is primarily responsible for crimes such as theft, burglaries
and robbery.
192
According to Bonger, economic conditions promote egoism, together with a system

where the creation and enforcement of laws are controlled by the capitalist class.
These circumstances account for the following (Barlow & Kauzlarich, 2010:106):
• higher crime rates in capitalist societies than in other societies

• crime rates that increase with industrialisation
• the working-class character of official crime, as reflected in crime statistics.
Today, radical criminologists are considerably more sophisticated than their Marxist
precursors. Current radical criminologists believe that the cause of crime can be
found in those social conditions that empower the affluent the politically organised.
Social class is a central theme within the radical conflict perspective.
5.2.5 EXPONENTS OF THE RADICAL CONFLICT PERSPECTIVE

William Chambliss and Richard Quinney are two well-known exponents of the
radical conflict perspective.
5.2.5.1 William Chambliss

Chambliss’s work, Law, order and power, was published in 1971. This work represents
a bridge between the earlier conflict theorists (conservatives or traditionalists) and the
more radical approach of the Marxists. The emphasis is on social class, class interests
and class conflict. The more economically stratified a society becomes, the more
necessary it becomes for the dominant groups in society to enforce the behavioural
norms that guarantee their supremacy.
Lilly, Cullen and Ball (2007:164–165) explained the five propositions of Chambliss’s
argument as follows:
• People’s life situations influence their values and norms. Complex societies
are composed of groups with different life situations.
• Complex societies are therefore composed of divergent and conflicting sets of norms.
• The normative systems of different groups are not equally represented in the law.
• The stronger a group’s economic or political position, the greater the likelihood
that such a group’s views will be reflected in the law.
Chambliss also believed that it would be more probable for offenders from the middle
and upper classes to escape detention and punishment by the criminal justice system.
The reason for this is not that these offenders are cleverer or better able to disguise their
crimes, but that it suits the law to ignore those offenders who may cause difficulties
for others in the middle and upper class. Prosecuting offenders from the lower class,
on the other hand, will lead to the community praising the law for taking action.
Since the publication of that work in 1971, Chambliss has become more obviously
Marxist orientated. He even uses Marxist terminology and asserts that the more
industrialised a society becomes, the greater the gap between the proletariat and
the bourgeoisie. Criminal law will expand in an attempt to force the proletariat to
surrender. Socialist societies, according to Chambliss, should have a lower crime
CMY3701/1193
rate because the class struggle in such societies will not be as intense and this should
reduce the power of those forces that lead to crime and the functioning of crime.
Chambliss established the intellectual base for radical criminology, but it is Quinney’s
contribution that clarified the position of the radicalists.
5.2.5.2 Richard Quinney

In order to understand crime, Quinney describes it with reference to the two competing
economic classes where the powerful define the social reality of the entire society
(McCaghy, 2016:92).
This reality is characterised by the following six propositions (McCaghy, 2016:92–93):
• Official definition of crime: In a capitalist society, crime is referred to as a legal

definition of human conduct that is created by agents of the dominant class.
• Formulation of definitions of crime: The definitions of what constitutes crime
are composed of behaviours that are against the interests of the dominant economic
class.
• Application of the definitions of crime: Definitions of crime are applied by the
dominant class that has the power to enforce and administer criminal law.
• Development of behaviour patterns in relation to definitions of crime:
Behaviour patterns are constructed in relation to how crime is defined, and
within this context individuals engage in actions that have relative likelihoods of
being defined as criminal.
• Construction of conceptions of crime: Conceptions of crime formed and diffused
in the process of communication. The more the dominant class is concerned about
crime, the greater the likelihood the definitions of offending behaviour will increase.
• Construction of the social reality of crime: The social reality of crime is structured
by the formulation and application of the definitions of crime, the development
of behaviour patterns in relation to these definitions, and the construction of
conceptions of crime.
In his later work Class, state and crime (1977), Quinney argued that virtually all
crime committed by members of lower classes is essential for the survival of individual
members of those classes. Quinney concluded that crime is unavoidable under
capitalist conditions, because crime is the reaction to the material conditions of life.
Therefore, the only solution to the crime problem is the collapse of the capitalist
society. However, permanent unemployment and the acceptance of such conditions
may lead to a lifestyle where crime is an appropriate response. (Unemployment is a
very real and intractable problem in South Africa, of course.)
5.2.6 RADICAL CRIMINOLOGY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Contemporary writers of radical criminology point out that Marxist criminology has
been rejected as a utopian view which had no applicable policy implications other
than revolution. Furthermore, revolution is regarded as an extremely impractical
approach to the crime problem. The current approach of radicalists is to consider
what may be done within the context of the existing system. The focus falls on a
gradual transition to socialism and socialist government activities. Attention is paid
to a more equitable application of bail conditions, abolition of compulsory penalties,
194
prosecution of corporate crime, improved employment opportunities, and promotion

of community alternatives to imprisonment. Other strategies that are receiving
attention include programmes aimed at reducing overcrowding in prisons, attempts
to highlight injustices within the current system, eliminating racism and other forms
of inequality in dealing with both victims and offenders, as well as greater equity
in the criminal justice system. These strategies are applied to bring about a more
equitable judicial system which will be closer to the radical ideal. Such strategies are
also being promoted in South Africa at present, although there are those who contend
that victims’ rights are being neglected in the process.
Radicalists themselves, however, do not expect large-scale changes in the near future.
According to them, the criminal justice system has failed as an agent of social change
because the system is aimed at the individual and not at social recovery (remedial).
In fact, efforts should be aimed at creating economic equality or more employment
opportunities.
Radical criminology has been criticised for almost exclusively emphasising methods
of social change at the expense of developing a carefully thought-out theory.
There is also the point that radicalists ignore the public consensus that crime is
undesirable. The fact is that crime is an activity that is condemned by everybody,
which is why criminal activities must be controlled. If criminal activities were the
true expressions of the sentiments of those who have been denied their civil rights,
why does public opinion not support at least some of these criminal activities? Even
drug dealing, which is a type of crime that provides an alternative means of wealth
to those who have been denied their civil rights, is condemned by members of the
working class community.
Radicalists confuse personal politics and social reality. Political convictions influence
their view of criminology as a whole, and in the process, they lose their objectivity.
Toby (Schmalleger, 1996:323), for example, states that Marxist and radical theorists
build on the tradition of sentimentality towards those who violate social rules. How
effective is such sentimentality, given that more colour televisions and cars are being
stolen than basic necessities (e.g. food and blankets)?
Radicalists furthermore deny the multiplicity of problems that contribute to the

problem of crime. Society simply does not consist of only two social classes. As
Mannheim (Schmalleger, 1996:323) points out, the development of semi-skilled
workers, together with highly schooled workers, creates multiple classes and a more
even distribution of the available wealth in society, and this necessarily reduces the
likelihood of a revolution.
Marxism lost considerable prestige, of course, when the former Soviet Union collapsed
in 1991.
Interesting read
Read more about the conflict perspective at:
• http://www.sociology.org.uk/notes/pctmmarx.pdf
• https://www.stabilityjournal.org/articles/10.5334/sta.eb/
• https://theconversation.com/whats-behind-violence-in-south-africa-a-sociologists-
perspective-128130
CMY3701/1195
You can find the links above in Lesson 5.2 in the module site of myUnisa.

Conflict and scarce resources (money, power and influence/status) are prominent
issues in the assumptions of those who support the conflict perspective. Competition
for power and money increases the incidence of relative deprivation. The positions
and possessions of others are coveted, and this encourages crime (which may be the
only way of obtaining scarce resources).
For Marx, power was centred round those who controlled labour. His identification
of two social classes within a capitalist society oversimplified the social situation and
completely disregarded intellectual ability and the significance of individual input.
Bonger applied Marx’s contributions to capitalist societies in order to explain crime.
No provision was made for the presence of a middle class, and the causes of crime
were attributed solely to the exploitation of workers by the ruling class.
Chambliss failed to recognise the fact that societies have divergent values and norms.
The influence of Marx is strong in Chambliss’s thought because he is so thoroughly
convinced that those with economic and political power (the bourgeoisie) will
eventually be forced to surrender to a socialist dispensation – and crime will then
decrease.
Quinney built upon the arguments of Chambliss. His explanation of crime, however,
was also class-bound in that he regarded crime among the lower classes as simply a
matter of survival.
Both Chambliss and Quinney saw a socialist dispensation as the solution to crime,
which implies that both men realised that a revolution would be impractical. The
recommendations of contemporary radicalists for improvements within the current
dispensation which deal with bail, penalties, imprisonment and employment are more
realistic, and these strategies can also be identified in South African criminological
studies today. Radicalists do not recognise the consensus in society’s condemnation
of crime, a condemnation that is currently true of South Africa. The causes of crime
are portrayed simplistically, and no recognition is given to the multiplicity of factors
that account for the complex nature of crime.
clear.
The following section contains self-assessment questions comprising multiple-choice

questions and paragraph-type questions. Although your answers should not be
submitted to your lecturer for formal assessment, these questions allow you to self-
assess whether you have achieved the outcomes of the study unit, so please do not
skip the section.
196
5.2.7.3 Self-assessment multiple-choice questions
(1) Identify a theory that focuses on how different groups in society are
characterised with regards to power relations.
1. Power and control theory
2. Social disorganisation theory
3. Conflict theory
4. Social bond theory
(2) Which segment of a population comprises of members who are at a
relatively similar economic level?
1. Bourgeoisie
2. Social class
3. Proletariat
4. Lumpen proletariat
(3) Which one of the following statements describes the term bourgeoisie?
1. The wealthy segment of a society who are the owners of the
means of production and shape criminal law.
2. The marginal segment of the society’s population who do not
produce anything and live parasitically, off the work of others.
3. The minority segment of the society’s population who create
and shape criminal law and own the means of production.
4. The working class segment of the society’s population who
produce goods and service but do not own the means of
production.
(4) Identify an appropriate description for class consciousness as one of
the reactions of the capitalist system.
1. Unauthorised squatting.
2. Weakened sociological factors and high crime rates.
3. Revolting against the capitalist society.
4. Blocked economic opportunities.
(5) Which one of the following options describes the official definition
of crime according to Quinney’s propositions?
1. In a communist society, crime is defined as human conduct
that is created by the agents of the minority class.
2. In a socialist society, crime is defined as human conduct that
is created by the criminal justice system.
3. In a socialist society, crime is defined as human conduct that
is created by the minority class.
4. In a capitalist society, crime is defined as human conduct that
is created by agents of the dominant class.
5.2.7.4 Feedback on self-assessment multiple-choice questions
1. 3
2. 2
3. 1
CMY3701/1197
4. 3
5. 4
5.2.7.5 Self-assessment paragraph-type questions
(6) Outline the assumptions of the conflict perspective. (10)

(7) Discuss Quinney’s contribution as an exponent of the radical conflict
perspective. (15)
5.2.7.6 Feedback on self-assessment paragraph-type questions

198
5.2.9 REFERENCES
these references.
Anderson, JF, Dyson, L, Langsam, A & Brooks, W. 2007. Criminal justice and
criminology: terms, concepts, and cases. Lanham, Md: University Press of America.
Barlow, H.D & Kauzlarich, D. 2010. Explaining crime: a primer in criminological
theory. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield.
Beirne, P & Messerschmidt, JW. 2006. Criminology. 4th edition. Los Angeles, Ca:
Roxbury.
Brown, S.E, Esbensen, F & Geis, G. 2013. Criminology: explaining crime and its
context. 8th edition. Waltham, MA: Anderson.
Burke, RH. 2005. An introduction to criminological theory. 2nd edition. Cullompton,
Devon: Willan.
Burke, R.H. 2014. An introduction to criminological theory. 4th edition. Cullompton:
Willan
Hunter, R.D & Dantzker, M.L. 2002. Crime and criminality: causes and consequences.
Jones, S. 2001. Criminology. 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Joyce, P. 2006. Criminal justice: an introduction to crime and the criminal justice system.
Joyce, P. 2018. Criminology and criminal justice: a study guide. Abingdon, Oxon:
Routledge
Lilly, J.R, Cullen, F.T & Ball, R.A. 2007. Criminological theory: context and consequences.
4th edition. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
McCaghy, C.H.2016. Deviant behaviour: crime, conflict and interest groups. 8th
edition. London: Routlege
Reid, S.T. 2018. Crime and criminology. 15th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer
Schmalleger, F. 1996. Criminology today. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Siegel, L.J. 2018. Criminology: Theories, patterns and typologies. 13th edition. Boston,
MA: Cengage Learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Walsh, A & Hemmens, C. 2008. Introduction to Criminology: a text/reader. London:
Sage.
CMY3701/1199

CMY3701 Study Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

CMY3701 Study Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

© 2021 University of South Africa

All rights reserved

Printed and published by the

Part 1: The rational actor model of crime and criminal behaviour 1

Study unit 3.2: Social disorganisation theory90

4.1.5 Summary and conclusion 136

5.2.5 Exponents of the radical conflict perspective 193

FOUNDATION: Classical and neoclassical schools of thought

• Legal definition of crime

• Rational theories, also known as opportunity theories

KEY CONCEPTS AND TERMS

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES are those circumstances that cause the

CLASSICAL CRIMINOLOGY as an approach to studying crime emphasises the

CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT refers to the processes through which individuals

LIMITED OR BOUNDED RATIONALITY is a term used to indicate that even

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES are those circumstances that would result in

NEOCLASSICAL SCHOOL is a body of theory that contends that scientific

ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY is theory (associated primarily with Marcus

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY is a theory which emphasises the importance

SOCIAL CONTRACT is when an individual is bound to society only by his or her

• describe the following assumptions, listed below, of the classical school of

TIME REQUIRED FOR STUDY UNIT 1.1

VISUAL OVERVIEW OF STUDY UNIT 1.1

• Human nature: Rationality

• Conception of society or social order

Again, according to this school of thought, behaviour is guided by the hedonistic

• Implications for policy

• Classical School of Criminology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwH1KioDtkA

Time for activity: 15 minutes.

1 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 1.1

Follow the link in Lesson 1.1 of the myUnisa module site.

1.1.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF

Time for activity: 35 minutes.

1.1.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

1.1.5.3 Answer the following multiple-choice questions followed by paragraph-type

1.1.5.3.1 Multiple-choice questions

(2) The thinkers or philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment turned

1.1.5.3.2 Long questions

1) Briefly discuss the development of the neoclassical school. (15)

1.1.6 ANSWERS TO SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1.1.6.2 Long questions

1) Refer to section 1.1.3

• describe the basic elements of routine activities theory

TIME REQUIRED FOR STUDY UNIT 1.2

VISUAL OVERVIEW OF STUDY UNIT 1.2

DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY is a theory which emphasizes the importance

1.2.2 ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY

Time for activity: 10 minutes.

3 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 1.3

Time for activity: 15 minutes.

4 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 1.4

1.2.2.1 Evaluation of the routine activities theory

Next we will look at a concise summation of the routine activities theory.

1.2.2.2 Concise summation of the routine activities theory

(i) proximity to criminals

1.2.3 RATIONAL CHOICE PERSPECTIVE

1.2.3.1 Propositions of the rational choice perspective theory

Time for activity: 15 minutes.

5 FEEDBACK ON ACTIVITY 1.5

Further exploration of the rational choice perspective leads us to the following:

1.2.3.2 Bounded rationality of the rational choice perspective theory

This process of choice making will be explained next.

1.2.3.3 The choice process of the rational choice perspective theory

Part 1: The rational actor model of crime and criminal behaviour 1

Study unit 3.2: Social disorganisation theory90

4.1.5 Summary and conclusion 136

5.2.5 Exponents of the radical conflict perspective 193

1.1.5.3 Answer the following multiple-choice questions followed by paragraph-type

2.2.1 ho would be the appropriate person or persons to assess the offender

2.1.7.3 Answer the following multiple-choice questions followed by paragraph-type