Control Theories
Control Theory
• Everyone is motivated to break the law
– So, the question is NOT: Why do we break
rules? But, Why don’t we?
• Deviance result from weak social
constraints
– A theory of conformity
– Constraints originate in our social experience
Social Sources of Control
• We connect to society via social groups
– Family, neighborhood, and school
– “We are moral beings only to the extent that we
are social beings” Emile Durkheim (1925)
• Social rewards become contingent on
staying out of trouble
– We develop stakes in conformity
– “When you got nothing, you got nothing to
lose” Bob Dylan
Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory
• People break the law because they have
not internalized society’s rules
• Internalization requires strong social
bonds to groups in society (family, school,
job)
– Social bonds do not reduce criminal motivation,
they increase one’s ability to resist the
temptation of crime
Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory
• (Emotional) Attachment to conventional others,
such as parents, teachers, and peers leads us to
avoid their disapproval = source of conscience
• (Material) Commitment to conformity, deviance
places conventional investments at risk = rational
choice
• (Temporal) Involvement = opportunity – “idle
hands are devil’s workshop”
• (Moral) Belief in the rightness of conventional
rules, and the degree to which they should be
followed
Age-Graded Theory
of Informal Social Control
• Sampson and Laub (1993) extend
Hirschi’s original bond theory
• Attempt to explain change in offending
over the life course
– A developmental approach
• Social bonds reduce adult crime
– More optimistic than self-control theory –
people can change!
Research Questions
• Are there typical pathways to crime?
• Once formed, can these pathways be
altered?
• Why are some delinquents able to turn their
lives around while others are not?
The Life-Course Perspective
• Trajectories = long-term pathways through
life
• Transitions = short-term events that affect
life trajectories = turning points
• Turning points facilitate role transition
• Attending school -> employment -> career > marriage -> family
Age-Graded Theory
of Informal Social Control
• Social bonds foster informal control (Hirschi)
• Parent-child, teacher-student, employeremployee
– Tend to be age-graded
– Affected by larger context, neighborhood, history
• Weak social bonds = weak informal control
– Weak bonds = weak commitments to others = few
stakes in conformity = less to lose = deviance likely
Continuity and Change
• Continuity
– Prior delinquency reduces opportunities for
social bonding
• Contrast with low-self control theory
• Change
– Life transitions affect life trajectories
• If they create interdependency and obligation
• Bad relationships yield little informal social control
Empirical Evidence
• Predictors of delinquency
– Lack of bonds to family and school
– Lack of parental discipline, supervision,
attachment
– Neighborhood conditions (poverty, family
disruption) affect delinquency indirectly
through family bonds
• Change in adult bonds to work and
family = decrease offending
Policy Implications:
Foster and Protect Social Bonds
• Job training and family counseling
– Before and during prison
• Less reliance on incarceration
– Incarceration undermines work and family,
which undermines informal social control
• Use of community based punishment
– Protect existing social bonds to work and
family
Recent Developments:
Low Self-Control Theory
• Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990)
– One cause of crime: low self-control
• Self-control is formed in early childhood
and remains stable throughout life
• Restraint resides in the person, not in the
relationship to social groups in society
– In contrast to Hirschi
The Origins of Self-Control
• Young children lie, push, hit, steal, cheat
• By age 8-10, kids learn to control these
behaviors - self-control is achieved
• Sources of learning self-control
– Parenting is key – careful supervision and
punishment for misbehavior
– Natural sanctions – injuries, bruises, fear, pain
Low Self-Control Theory
• Most people know right from wrong
– Crime is a matter of human weakness
• Most offenders offend repeatedly
– Prior offending is best predictor of future crime
– Emphasis on continuity in offending
• Offenders tend to be generalists
• Most offending requires no special skill
• Offending usually brings immediate benefit,
with the potential for long-term costs
Low-Self Control Theory
• We are all born with low self control
• High self-control is created in early childhood
– Parental monitoring and punishment, set by age 8-10
• People with low self-control yield to the
temptation of immediate gratification
• De-emphasize social/motivational factors
– The cause is in the person
• De-emphasize the rationality of criminal choices
– Low self-control undermines rationality
A General Theory
• Self-control is the only important causal factor
• Other associations with crime are spurious
(also due to self-control)
– Failed marriages, unemployment, low education
• Crime co-occurs with other immediately
gratifying but high risk behaviors
– Smoking, drinking, drug use, speeding, unprotected
sex, accidents
– All give pleasure with minimal effort
Age-Crime Curve
• Individual differences in the propensity to
offend remain stable over time
• Regardless of initial starting point, everyone
slows down with age
Tautological?
• Low self-control = the willingness to engage in
behaviors that bring immediate benefits, with the
chance of long-term, negative consequences
– Crime is defined as such behavior
• How can low self-control predict crime when it is
part of the definition of crime?
• G&H do not see this as a problem, but rather an
unfortunate fact of life
Policy Implications
of Self-Control Theory
• Focus on early family-based intervention
– Formal CJ sanctions can play only a minor role
• Increase immediate difficulties and risks
of crime, not long-term risks
– Situational crime prevention – crime specific
• Restrict unsupervised youth activity for
those with weak families