The Differential Association-Reinforcement Theory
Burgess and Akers came up with this theory in 1966. It was a revision of the previous theory forwarded by Sutherland. Their main aim was to re-evaluate Sutherland’s theory which tried to explain differential association using behaviorism. They based their argument on the fact that non-social effects such as operant conditioning also played a pivotal role in reinforcing criminal behavior.
Akers asserted that differential association with deviant peers to a large extent contributed to the introduction of deviant behavior in an individual. He stated that differential association is strengthened by differential reinforcement. This refers to the process through which new criminals learn how to gain from their acts and avoid being caught. The theory asserts that an individual’s interaction with criminals may psychologically influence him/her to commit crime.
The theory proposes that lack of self, control, peer pressure and lack of adequate social roles (unemployment) are some of the factors that contribute to criminal behaviors. According to Fisher (2006), lack of proper supervision may lead some people into associating with criminals. From these associations, individuals are influenced into committing crime and becoming notorious criminals. This theory proposes that a criminal mind can be acquired through an individual’s association with criminals.
Deadline panic?
We're here to rescue and writea custom academic paperin just 1 hour!
It assumes that from such interactions, an individual learns how to think, act and react to different situations like a criminal. Good examples of such criminals include robbers, pickpockets and conmen who are often indoctrinated on the art of performing their crimes without being detected. They are not crimes that anyone can commit and they require a lot of skills and intelligence to identify the “mark” and pull off.
The Differential Association-Reinforcement Theory was based on seven pivotal assumptions. Burgess and Akers proposed that the execution of any criminal act is as a result of learned criminal behaviors. The second assumption was that criminal behaviors can be acquired not only from the social but also from nonsocial situation. In addition, they asserted that learning of such behaviors occurs in groups and it involved the attitudes and techniques as well as the procedures implemented to avoid detection and apprehension.
Also, they argued that the availability and frequency of the rein forcer was a great determiner of the class of criminal behavior possessed by an individual.
This theory applies to the robberies in the following ways: robberies require some significant amount of courage to execute successfully. As Payne and Salotti (2007) explain, crime no matter its intensity requires planning. Planning in this case refers to the procedures that should be followed from the start to the exit strategy. In addition to this, the perpetrator must analyze the costs (risks) and weigh them against the expected benefits. The Differential Association-Reinforcement Theory assumes that criminal behaviors are learnt through the association of individuals with deviant parties. It further asserts that aspects of crime must be learnt (Conklin, 2007).
Statistics indicate that most robberies are carried out by gang members. From these gangs, individuals gain useful insight on how and when to commit crimes as well as the measures that should be employed during a robbery to ensure that the perpetrators are not caught. This theory therefore supports the fact that robbery is a learnt crime which gets worse as it is repeated over time.
Eysenck’s theory
One of the aspects that make us as human beings so unique and special is our diversity both in looks and character. This diversity is experienced in all avenues of our lives as we interact with others. An understanding of the various psychological types that exist can help us to not only better relate with others but also to better understand ourselves. While this classifications do not served to explain the intrinsic details of one’s psyche, they do offer an understanding of psychological types thereby leading to better understanding of human beings (Butt, 2005).
The Eysenck’s personality theory holds that criminal actions and behaviors are to a large extent determined by genetic, biological and social factors. According to Fisher (2006), human behaviors may be inherited from one generation to another. This theory further asserts that factors such as physical trauma, nutrition and DNA work together to nurture criminal behavior. The theorist claims that the effects of hormones and various environmental contaminants may lead a person in