TURNING TO CRIME
Upbringing
Rank these factors as to how much they would
affect a person who turns to crime:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Television
Gender
Social class
Occupation
Newspapers
Genes
Parents
Brain function
Pets
Age
Education`
Addictions
Films
Peers
Siblings
Upbringing
• Influence of upbringing includes influences
from families, friends, teachers and general
life experiences such as where a person has
been brought up.
• It is unlikely that a single factor will explain
this, but we can try to build a picture of effects
that come together as potential triggers of
criminal behaviour.
Turning To Crime
Upbringing
The Cambridge
Study
Farrington
Differential
Association
The
Peterborough
Youth Study
Sutherland
Wilkstrom &
Tafel
Evidence 1: Farrington et al (2006)
• Many would argue that the biggest influence on criminality is
family.
• If your family are criminals it is likely that you will also be a
criminal.
• However, this is obviously a very deterministic explanation, as
it ignores individual differences, some people do manage to
buck the trend and turn their lives around.
• Conversely, some people from law abiding families go on to
become criminals.
Read page 8 of your booklet
• Describe what has been the cause of marital
instability?
• What did the authors of ‘Broken Homes’ say
about disrupted families?
This study, then, aimed to look not simply at
broken vs. intact homes but also to disentangle a
number or pre- and post- disruption variables to
consider their effect on delinquency. These
included:
Pre-disruption variables
Post-disruption variables
Reasons for the disruption
Timing of the disruption
Gender of the lost parent
Level of conflict
Gender of the custodial
parent
Subsequent family
reconstitution
Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
• Methodology: Self-report – Interviews & Questionnaires
• Advantages:
• Disadvantages:
_______________________________________________________________
• Sample: 411 Boys from East London
• Can this be generalised?
• Is the research ethnocentric?
Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
• Correlation: Farrington showed a relationship between
parental offending and offspring offending, however, what is a
problem when drawing conclusions from correlational data?
Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
ISSUES
• Type of data collected: Quantitative & Qualitative
• Advantages:
•
Disadvantages:
_______________________________________________________________________________
• Type of design: Longitudinal Design
• Advantages:
•
Disadvantages:
_______________________________________________________________________________
• Comment on the ethics of the study:
Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
• DEBATES
• How does the study link to the Nature vs Nurture debate?
• How does the study link to the individual/situational debate?
Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
• DEBATES
• How does the study link to reductionism vs holism debate?
• How does the study link to determinism?
Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
• USEFULNESS
• Is Farrington’s study useful to everyday life?
Evidence 2: Sutherland – The Influence of peers
Learning from others
• What is the differential association (pg 10)?
Learning from others
Sutherland’s theory of Differential association is based on 9
principles.
• Edwin H.Sutherland (1939) used social learning theory principles to produce
his differential association theory. Sutherland suggests that criminal behaviour
is learned through exposure to criminal norms, which happens within the
family and peer group.
Criminal behaviour results from two factors:
• Learned attitudes (criminal behaviour becomes the accepted social norm)
• Imitation of specific acts (how to do the behaviour is observed and then
imitated)
In situations where there is peer pressure a young person moves
away from parental influence and learns a new set of ‘rules’
about which situations are appropriate for deviant behaviour.
Evidence 2: Sutherland
• Summarise Sutherlands 9 Points:
Evidence 2: Sutherland
Explain these three points in more detail.
• 1. Criminal behaviour is learned in interaction with other persons in a
process of communication.
• 2. The principle part of the learning of criminal behaviour occurs within
intimate personal groups.
• 3. The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions
of the legal codes as favourable or unfavourable.
Evaluating Sutherland’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
•
How does the theory link to Behaviourism?
•
How is the study reductionist?
•
How is the study linked to determinism/freewill?
•
How is the study linked to the nature/nurture debate?
•
Is the research ethnocentric?
Evaluating Sutherland’s research into explanations of
criminal behaviour
• What are the strengths of the theory?
• What are the weaknesses of the theory?
Akers
Evidence 3: Wikstrom & Tafel
•
In terms of the relationship between poverty/disadvantaged neighbourhoods and crime, there is
not a direct link. Instead, poverty and disadvantage are associated with the risk factors that may
lead a person into crime.
•
Government figures show that the most disadvantaged 5% in society are 100 times more likely to
have multiple problems than the most advantaged 50%.
•
The question for researchers then is to investigate how individual risk factors, lifestyle and
living in a disadvantaged area/poverty interact to lead a person into crime, and to consider
the relative importance of individual and situational factors in turning to crime.
•
Just how big an influence does social disadvantage have on whether a person turns to crime
or not?
•
The Peterborough Youth Study set out to test these factors and others to see which in fact were the
most significant predictors of criminal behaviour.
Evaluating Wikstrom & Tafel’s research into
explanations of criminal behaviour
• Methodology: Interview & Data Collection
• Advantages:
• Disadvantages:
_______________________________________________________________
• Sample: 2000 Year 10 Students
• Can this be generalised?
Evaluating Wikstrom & Tafel’s research into
explanations of criminal behaviour
ISSUES
• Type of data collected: Quantitative & Qualitative Data
• Advantages:
•
Disadvantages:
_______________________________________________________________________________
• Type of design: Snapshot/Cross-sectional design
• Advantages:
•
Disadvantages:
______________________________________________________________________________
• Comment on the validity of the study:
Evaluating Wikstrom & Tafel’s research into
explanations of criminal behaviour
• DEBATES
• How is the study linked to the nature/nurture debate?
• How is the study linked to individual/situational explanations of
behaviour?
• How is the study linked to reductionism/holism?
January 2013
How can criminal behaviour be learnt from others? (10)