deviant behavior.
The social learning theory, proposed by Ronald L. Akers, addresses the unintentional flaws within the social disorganization theory as well as builds on the efforts of Edwin Sutherland’s theory of differential association. Instead of standing separately both the social learning theory and the differential association complement one another and together establish the learning processes of crime. This work fused the earlier sociological theory of differential association with the developmental psychological theory of reinforcement. This approach presents a concept that learning can simply occur by observing. In terms of criminology, criminal behavior is taught through observation. By adding a social element to the understanding of criminal activity, Sutherland and Akers were able to explain how a person’s interaction with his or her environment and surrounding others could easily influence deviant behavior. The best method to address the question of whether or not an offender is intentionally persistence on becoming a career criminal, is to examine the patterns of behavior presented by Sutherland and …show more content…
Akers.
According to social learning theory, juveniles learn to engage in crime in the same way they learn to engage in conforming behavior: through association with or exposure to others. Sutherland introduces the power of social influences and learning experience on criminal action. From his perspective, the offender’s repetitive criminal involvements are due to his interactions with other individuals. Sutherland believed individuals learn criminal behavior while in their adolescence from intimate group such as family and friends. He is also adamant to mention that criminal behavior cannot be invention but is learned through a form of communication. Surprisingly individuals learn criminal behaviors though the same mechanisms as other behaviors. Individuals may learn criminal mindset, criminal attitudes, orientations, motives, desires, and rationalization. This increases the offender’s willingness to engage in a criminal act. He attributes recidivism to an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law. The offender in the scenario could easily reject the norms of law abiding citizens. Sutherland understands that individuals are subjected to a mixture of obedient and deviant influences. This influence ultimately determines individual’s outcomes.
Akers develop the Social Learning theory from the use of Sutherland’s theory of Differential Association.
Although he would agree with Sutherland, he would also accredit the offender’s acts of criminality to positive rewards and criminal reinforcement. The reinforcement model is a model of internal reward such as superiority or a sense of achievement. Crime is more likely to transpire when it is regularly reinforced and rarely punished. Reinforcements can be positive or negative. Positive reinforcements encourage offenders to remain deviant, while negative reinforcements deter. For a burglar, positive reinforcements could be adrenaline from the thrill, cash, societal approval, acceptance or pleasure and negative reinforcement could be imprisonment. As it relates to recidivism, individuals reoffend if the externally reinforcements does not match the offenders personal needs. For example, the scenario states that the offender has been arrested three times for the same crime. The frequency of robberies could ascribe to a financial burden and although this offender knows the consequences of his actions, this does not outweigh his
need. According to social learning theory, some individuals are in environments where crime is more likely to be reinforced and less likely to be punished. On the other hand, some individuals live in areas where criminal behavior is the norm. Sampson and Wilson argue that inner cities intensify criminal behavior because inner cities lack the opportunity for upward mobility. This has been identified as a structural problem, because these communities are destined to remain underclass and isolated. Crime will not decrease in these areas until the structural of the city transform. Instead of affirming the belief that inner cities have a central belief, Elijah Anderson actually presents a different perspective of inner city crime. There are those who are law abiding and want the best for the communities’ youth and there are those who value crime and benefit from criminal triumphs. However, regardless of the approach, it is evident that everyone must learn the “Street Code” to survive. As a shield of protection, one must give the perception of being dangerous. As this relates to the lack of criminal activity on suburban community, the individuals in this community identity criminal behaviors as acting outside on the norms of society.