Criminological-Social

Question 1

What does the social approach to criminal behaviour assume?

Answer 1

The social approach to explaining criminal and anti-social behaviour assumes that behaviour is shaped by the people around us - this implies that behaviour is determined by NURTURE.

Question 2

Describe the main principles of Social Learning Theory

Answer 2

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY was developed by Albert Bandura (1977).
He proposed that observational learning is a major mechanism in explaining all human behaviour. The Social Learning theory puts forward the idea that behaviour is firstly observed then modelled and imitated to reproduced.

Question 3

What are the four cognitive processes in observational learning?

Answer 3

•Attention
•Retention
•Reproduction
•Motivation

Question 4

Describe the cognitive process Attention in observational learning

Answer 4

Behaviour has to be noticed and we must concentrate on it to be able to
imitate it. We are more likely to show an interest in the behaviour of models that are of higher status/well respected and of the same sex. We are more likely to be attracted to behaviour that is distinctive to us in some way. So we make a choice about what behaviour is observed and imitated

Question 5

Describe the cognitive process Retention in observational learning

Answer 5

The behaviour has to be remembered to be imitated

Question 6

Describe the cognitive process Reproduction in observational learning

Answer 6

The person has to be capable of reproducing the behaviour. We have to have the physical and mental abilities to enable us to imitate the behaviour.

Question 7

Describe the cognitive process Motivation in observational learning

Answer 7

There is often an incentive present encouraging us to imitate the behaviour. This often takes the form of vicarious reinforcement

Question 8

Define vicarious learning

Answer 8

Learning that is derived from indirect sources such as hearing or observation rather than hands-on instruction

Question 9

Give an example or vicarious reinforcement

Answer 9

Vicarious reinforcement - a person works hard because a colleague has been rewarded for hard work

Question 10

Apply Social Learning Theory to explaining criminal behaviour

Answer 10

Bandura’s research focused on social explanations of all behaviour. But he was very interested in aggression and his “Bobo doll” experiments looked at how we learn to behave aggressively as children by observing and imitating others.
His Social Learning Theory (SLT) might help explain deviant or criminal behaviours too by suggesting that as children people who become criminal are exposed to criminal role models (in parents and peers) and the observe, learn and imitate this behaviour.

Question 11

how is social learning theory a developmental theory of criminality

Answer 11

SLT is a developmental theory of criminality because it is concerned with the acquisition of antisocial behaviour as part of the process of socialisation that occurs in childhood adolescence and early adulthood.

It describes how values of a society or culture are internalised as a product of how someone is raised.

As children develop exposure to aggressive with antisocial role models can affect how children internalise these behaviours.

A persistent exposure to antisocial models may have an accumulative effect throughout development.

Question 12

Briefly describe the conclusion from Banura’s 1961 lab experiment

Answer 12

“-Modelling”:
Children could learn aggressive
behaviour through process of
observational learning

Question 13

Briefly describe the conclusion from Banura’s 1963 lab experiment

Answer 13

“Media”
Observing filmed aggressive acts can lead to children behaving aggressively

Question 14

Briefly describe the conclusion from Banura’s 1967 lab experiment

Answer 14

“Vicarious reinforcement”
Boys in particular showed more
imitative responses compared to girls. Reintorcements administered to model influenced the observers behaviour

Question 15

How might the conclusion from bandura’s 1961 lab experiment relate to crime?

Answer 15

Children, especially boys might observe their fathers committing crime or anti-social behaviour. They may then copy this.

Question 16

How might the conclusion from bandura’s 1963 lab experiment relate to crime?

Answer 16

Children may learn to commit anti-
social behaviour through watching tv
programmes or violent video games

Question 17

How might the conclusion from bandura’s 1967 lab experiment relate to crime?

Answer 17

Children could learn ASB/crime by seeing others rewarded or reintorced
eg criminals getting away with it. ASB being rewarded by being seen as being desirable or increasing someone’s status.

Question 18

Explain what a ‘natural’ experiment is

Answer 18

The independent variable is not
manipulated by the experimenter, it occurs naturally. The studies usually take place in a naturalistic environment

Question 19

Describe a natural experiment that supports SLT

Answer 19

Williams (1986) carried out a natural field experiment looking at the effect of TV on the behaviour of children in a remote community in Canada where TV hadn’t been available before. Williams found that the introduction of TV increased the children’s aggressive behaviours as rated by teachers and peers.

Question 20

Describe a correlational study supporting SLT

Answer 20

Johnson et al (2002) found that there was a positive correlation between the amounts of TV children in New York State watched and increased aggressive behaviour. They also found that those who watched toe most TV also committed the highest number of violent acts.

Question 21

Describe how social learning theory can explain gender differences in criminal and anti-social behaviour

Answer 21

• Social Learning Theory can explain differences in criminal behaviour between the genders by proposing that males and female children are usually socialised differently.
• Bandura (1961) showed that boys tended to copy the same sex model more so compared to females.
• Therefore boys might be encouraged to imitate more risk taking behaviour in male models.
• This might lead males to getting involved in criminal activity, especially if they are aggressive acts.

Question 22

What evidence is there supporting SLT as an explanation of crime

Answer 22

Bandura’s series of lab based experiments provide evidence that aggressive behaviour is learnt through the observation of role model, (Bandura, 1960s). These are well controlled experiments where cause & effect links can be established
There is also some evidence from and natural experiments (Williams, 1986) and correlational studies (Johnson et al 2002) of a link between violence in the media and aggressive behaviour.
However, it should be noted that much of this evidence is related to aggressive behaviour rather than criminal behaviour itself.

Question 23

Explain how SLT can explain cultural differences in crime

Answer 23

Cultural differences in anti-social behaviour as different cultures may provide different role models for children. This is also a strength of SLT as an explanation of crime.

Question 24

Explain how SLT can explain individual differences in crime

Answer 24

A strength of SLT as an explanation of crime is that is can explain individual differences. Individual differences in criminal behaviour as every individual has differing role models. So a
child exposed to violent role models will be more likely to be a violent criminal whereas a child brought up with a thief will be more likely to be a thief.

Question 25

Describe the strengths of methodology in STL as an explanation of Crime

Answer 25

Lab Experiments (Bandura) provide credible scientific evidence linking observation of role models to aggressive behaviour so reliable cause and effect link can be established due to good control of the independent variable and confounding variables. Furthermore, the studies that are not based in the lab do use objective quantitative methods.

Question 26

Describe the applications of SLT as an explanation of crime

Answer 26

Research in this field has led to society being much more aware of the power of role models and the fact that children learn by observation.
Attempts have been made to control violence in the media by censorship. E.g. films and video games are subject to a certification system so that certain audiences are not available to the film
maker if there are certain kinds of violence present. However, if these
measures cannot easily be applied to internet viewing by children though parental controls are available they are often easily overcome.
The theory also suggests that offenders need appropriate role models to aid in their rehabilitation.
Although the violence children are exposed to in the media is an ongoing
concern. The media do use observational learning to promote pro-social role models: for example in TV programmes such as Sesame Street where concepts sharing and helping one another are modelled by puppets.

Question 27

Describe the weakness of SLT as an explanation of crime using evidence against the theory

Answer 27

Social Learning Theory predicts that punishment, whether direct or vicarious should make reoffending less likely. High rates of recidivism go against this prediction. Prison should act as a punishment. However. reoffending statistics in England and Wales suggest this is not always the case.

Question 28

Describe the weakness of SLT as an explanation of crime using methodology used to test the theory

Answer 28

Although Bandura’s lab based experiments are highly scientific,
one of their main weaknesses is that they are conducted in artificial environments so lack validity/ecological validity and do not reflect real life situations so may tell us little about the role of social learning in the development of real life criminal behaviour.
It is virtually impossible to use experiments to study the role of social learning in criminal behaviour in real life families, due to ethical constraints. But the alternative methods that have been used such as natural experiments in the field and correlations have practical Issues in their design and implementation that mean firm cause and effect links cannot be made between social learning and criminal behaviour.

Question 29

Describe the weakness of SLT as an explanation of crime using alternative theories

Answer 29

A criticism of social learning theory as an explanation of crime generally is that it tends to overlook the possibility of a strong biological influence on criminal behaviour in certain individuals. It does provide and explanation for the evidence that criminality runs in families. But this data may also be explained by other factors such as genetics or social deprivation rather than imitation of role models the theory is therefore reductionist.

Question 30

Define the term labelling

Answer 30

The term labelling refers to when general and broad terms are used to describe members of a group.

Question 31

Define stereotype

Answer 31

An overgeneralised belief about someone or something typically based on limited information.

Question 32

Define prejudice

Answer 32

Dislike or unfair behaviour based on false or misjudged opinion.

Question 33

Define discrimination

Answer 33

The practice of treating one person or group differently from another in an unfair way.

Question 34

Describe the process of labelling

Answer 34

•The Label is given by powerful (majority) social groups e.g parents, teachers, bosses, police and courts (often based on stereotypes)
•The person/ group is then treated to according the label given (discrimination)
•The label becomes the MASTER STATUS i.e it overrides the other forms of status a person has eg sibIng friend, son/daughter
•SELF CONCEPT changes as the person accepts label. How we see ourselves often relies on how others see us and behave towards us
•This may influence the person’s behaviour

Question 35

Why can labelling theory be used to explain crime? (Application)

Answer 35

Labelling theory can explain crime because:
• What is “criminal’ is decided by powerful social groups
• Behaviour e.g. aggression is not itself
criminal
• It becomes a crime when someone in
power in society LABELS it a crime.
• Becker (1963) - the DISADVANTAGED are most likely to be labelled as criminals

Question 36

Describe the evidence from Bessemer 2013 to support labelling theory

Answer 36

Besemer et al (2013):
• Found children from families labelled as ‘criminal’ through “official bias” are more likely to be convicted than children from other families.
Conclusions:
- Families labelled as ‘criminal’ are paid more attention to
-Such children are more likely to be caught and to be prosecuted and found guilty than children from other
families.

Question 37

Describe the evidence from Lieberman 2014 to support labelling theory

Answer 37

Lieberman et al. (2014) found that juveniles who had been previously arrested were more likely to commit other crimes compared with juveniles who had not been previously arrested. They argued that this could be due to labelling theory and how others treat them.

Question 38

Describe the evidence from Chambliss 1973 to support labelling theory

Answer 38

Chambliss (1973) observed 2 groups of high school boys, the Roughnecks & the Saints. He found the Roughnecks were much more likely to be labelled as deviant by the police and were more likely to have legal action taken against them.

Question 39

Describe the evidence challenging Labelling theory

Answer 39

However, Labelling theory doesn’t really explain how people turned to crime in the first place, for example, Lemert (1962) found that cheque forgers had been forging cheques long before they were caught, so had been active in this crime before they had been labelled. He argues that their self-image was not affected by a label.

Question 40

Describe a weakness of labelling theory relating to how the theory is incomplete

Answer 40

A weakness of labelling theory is that it is only a partial explanation of crime. The theory implies that without labelling, crime would not exist. This seems to suggest that someone who has committed an offence, but has not been labelled, is not a criminal. Most people would agree that serious offences are more than social constructs, and that murdered are criminals whether they are labelled or not.

Question 41

Define self-fulfilling prophecy

Answer 41

“The process by which one person’s expectations about another become
reality by eliciting behaviours that confirm the expectations.”
Smith and Mackie (2000)

Question 42

The self-fulfilling prophecy is sometimes called the Pygmalion effect.
Complete the diagram by writing the correct concepts

Answer 42

Question 43

List 4 AO1 features of self-fulfilling prophecy

Answer 43

•Self fulfilling prophecy is based on labels being given to people.
•Others will then behave towards the person according to the label.
•Because they are treated in a certain way the person internalises the label.
•They then behave according to the label so the prophecy is fulfilled.

Question 44

Describe the evidence from Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) linked to SFP as an explanation of crime or ASB

Answer 44

Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968): ‘Pygmalion in the classroom’.
Procedure; At the start of an academic year some teachers in San Francisco (USA) were told that 20 pupils in a class were about to “bloom’. All the pupils in the class had an IQ test before the start of the year, and the researchers told the teachers that the predictions about these 20 pupils came from the results of the IQ test. This was not true, and the 20 pupils were chosen at random.
At the end of the year, the pupils were all IQ tested again, and they were also tested at the end of two years.
Results; The 20 who had (falsely) been said to be “bloomers’ did have improved IQ scores, both after one and after two years, compared to others in the class.
Conclusions; It seemed that the teachers had expected those pupils to do better, and that they must have given them some extra attention or some additional feedback, such that they did indeed ‘bloom’
It was concluded that:
•teacher expectation, and the related behaviour, affects student performance,
•what someone expects of another person can come true through a self-fulfilling prophecy

Question 45

Describe how the self fulfilling prophecy can be linked to explain why someone would turn to crime? [4 marks]

Answer 45

The SFP argues that powerful social groups in society decide what is criminal or deviant and can label people as such (1).
This label can affect people’s self-image from the way other in society
respond to them and treat them(1).
Our self image then affects our actions and our actions then cause other peoples reactions to change(1)
Therefore, if someone is labelled as a criminal, they begin to act as a criminal, and in turn people react to them as a criminal (1)
The consequences of labelling can be seen in the self-fulfilling prophecy (1)

Question 46

How can Labelling & SFP explain gender differences in crime?

Answer 46

Boys may be far more likely to be labelled as daredevils and aggressive
than girls due to common gender difference stereotypes.
This is linked to developmental psychology as these stereotyped labels
may be influence males’ and females’ self-concepts from a very early age

Question 47

Describe evidence from Madon 2004 supporting SFP as an explanation of crime

Answer 47

Madon et al (2004) found that when parents have negative expectations about their child’s likelihood of drinking alcohol, their child is indeed likely to drink.

Question 48

Describe evidence from Jahoda’s 1953 supporting SFP as an explanation of crime

Answer 48

Jahoda (1954)
The Ashanti people (South Ghana) were studied .They give boys ‘soul names’ when they are born. These names are linked to the day of the week on which they are born and supposedly influence their characters.

•Kwadwo (Monday) are seen as calm and peaceful
•Kwadku (Wednesday) are seen as aggressive and angry.
Jahoda discovered that:
•Kwadwo (Monday) names were responsible for 6.9% of violent crime
•Kwadku (Wednesday) names were responsible for 22% of violent crime

Question 49

How does SFP explain individual differences in criminal behaviour?

Answer 49

SFP as a theory of criminality can highlight individual differences in the development of criminality because some people are associated with criminal behaviour was others or not. No individuals live up to expectations of others around them and therefore do not respond to the SFP particularly individuals with high self-esteem, greater autonomy and less regard for the opinions of others. Some people may actively resist the labels was given to them and work overcome the labels that have been assigned to them.

Question 50

What is a strength of methodology used in testing SFP?

Answer 50

Much of the research in this field is from real life settings and so the ecological validity of the findings is high meaning that labelling and SFP is probably a factor in the criminal and anti-social behaviour of individuals in even day situations.

Question 51

What applications have arisen from SFP?

Answer 51

Research in this field has led to society being much more aware of the power of labels and how they can influence a person’s self-concept and!subsequently, their behaviour. This has led to important real life
applications: for example, during their training, teachers are prepared carefully so they can recognise how the SFP may negatively influence the views of their students. For example, a child might be labelled as a “troublemaker” because of her family and social background and that might lead the teacher to expect bad behaviour from her etc.

Question 52

What are weaknesses with the evidence supporting SFP as an explanation of crime?

Answer 52

•It is virtually impossible to use experiments to study the influence of SFP and labelling on criminal behaviour, due to ethical constraints.
Supporting evidence from experiments is therefore lacking because it would be highly unethical to deliberately label people as criminals to test the theory.
• Much of the evidence that does exist is linked to EDUCATIONAL outcomes. Therefore it may not be relevant to criminal behaviours.

Question 53

What are problems with the methodology used in developing the SFP theory?

Answer 53

The problem with studying the influence of labelling and the
self-fulfilling prophecy on criminal behavior is that the existence of negative beliefs and expectations in those doing the labelling are difficult to study because they are not directly
observable. So researchers must rely on self -report. (E.g Madon et al’s 2004 study on the SFP and drinking behaviour). Similarly, the self-concept of those who are labelled can only be studied in this way. This means that practical issues in are raised in attempting to gain valid data on certain parts of the processes involved in the SFP.

Question 54

Give a weakness of SFP as an explanation of crime relating to alternative theories

Answer 54

•A shortcoming of the self-fulfilling prophecy is that it is not a complete social explanation of criminal behaviour. It does not explain how the individual learns the actual criminal behaviour they get involved in. So there must be other social factors that influence criminal behaviour and these may have a much more powerful effect than the self - fulfilling prophecy.
•In addition, the self-fulfilling prophecy is a purely social explanation for
criminal behaviour and does not allow for the possibility of biological
explanations e.g. genetic inheritance, of criminal type behaviour traits
so therefore it can be thought of as reductionist.