The Collaborative Coercion Theory

Theorist Mark Colvin utilized previous theories in the conception of deferential coercion theory in 2000. According to Dolu and Büker (2010), most of the early research came from the problematic coercive measures and noncompliant behavior in a New Mexico prison (p. 3). In addition, Dolu and Büker (2010) refer to coercion as “a power creating fear or anxiety that induces or threatens a person to do something. This power can exist in relations between individuals as well as in larger social contexts that are not directly related to individuals” (p. 3). Colvin, with the help of other theorist, asked about the relationship between coercion and criminality, and if the two had an effect on each other. Through their observations and research
6). To that end, Colvin concluded that ‘both impersonal and interpersonal coercion are positively related to delinquent involvement” (p. 6). It is evident that the theorist attempted to validate his hypothesis through the application of an empirical study. The deferential coercion theory relates to the parental theory by the present deficits. Parental social bonds, and school social bonds where among the deficits. The differential coercion theory is yet a small branch of the Social Bond Theory and Social Control Theory. In another attempt to validate the theory based on the parental theory, one can examine and analyze the policy implications that follow. For example, Dolu and Büker (2010) explain how parents should “develop a strong social bond to legitimate institutions and especially to the family, children should be disciplined in a consistently non-coercive fashion” (p. 7) in order to retract from criminal behavior. This can be done through training programs. Simply put, criminal behavior can be reduced through consistent, non-coercive controls. This sub-theory relates overall due to the interactions, both personal and interpersonal, relationships individuals have with one or others, much life Social Bond Theory and the attachment, or involvement one has in
However, the parent must ne absent of delinquent behavior as well. Implementing parenting programs that focus on building a cohesive relationship between the parent and the child will, according to Hirschi, reduce the likelihood of that child becoming deviant. Making children go to school will build attachment, involvement, and commitment in the academics, sports, and relationship. Additionally, the implementation of after-school programs, or programs in school that drive the adolescent to become committed to an activity reduces crime. Programs include: Boys and Girls Club, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, after school sports, education centered afterschool-care, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, any program that involves a commitment. These programs are designed to not only implement an attachment, but also offer a commitment to a club or sport that would in turn reduce the urge to commit crime because they could jeopardize their position or rank. Commitment can also be closely related to involvement. Positively utilizing the adolescent’s time to implement sports, clubs, recreational activities, can implore involvement and provide the child with many activities that detracts their involvement in crime. In addition, involvement with conventional individuals presents a role model that embodied certain beliefs and conventional norms that reduce crime. Lastly, a policy implication that