Delinquent Behavior

Compare Sutherland’s Differential Association, Cohen’s Subcultural Theory, Akers’ Social Learning Theory, and Cloward & Ohlin’s theory of Differential Opportunity.

Similarities

The social learning theory statement about the delinquent behavior identifies various concepts of the theory, which are similar to the differential association theory. The ideas include the assumption that the individuals are presumed more likely to commit a crime by associating with the criminal patterns. Additionally, the other theory states that when individuals learn about the cognitive definitions, which are favorable for climate likely to learn about criminal acts. Furthermore, the social learning theory is similar to Sutherland’s differential theory association that comprises of the reinforcement. In this regard, the support in the delinquent behavior, according to the Akers Social learning theory refers to the balance of anticipated punishments and the rewards that are as a result of the negligent behavior (Brauer, 2012).

The theory of Social Learning theory explains that the individuals refrain from committing the crime and deviant actions depending on the frequency, and the probability of the past, present punishments perceive attached to form the behavior (Brady, 2017). The social learning and Sutherland’s differential theory that both consider the delinquent behavior is imitation (Brady, 2017). The two approaches incorporate the concept of replica from cognitive learning theories. Consequently, imitation refers to the separation of the learning mechanism that is characterized by the modeling one’s actions on the observed behavior of others and the effect of the behavior (Brady, 2017).

Sutherland’s theory states that delinquent acts are criminal behavior that is learned. The practice is determined by interacting with other people, which may be through communication or living together. The theory is similar to the Cohen subcultural theory that assumes that delinquent behavior is a result of the interaction between the children of low class and the higher social level because of the inequality of the existing class society (Williams, 2014). The theory states that the youths from the low class strive to adapt the higher social data of their friends in the more upper social class, but the differences come out as the youth from the small class cannot fulfill their expectations and goals (Cochran, Maskaly, Jones, & Sellers, 2015). The child fails to recognize their inferior prestige, low status, and the little chances they have in society and business.  In this regard, they end up merging into various subgroups defined by their boundary from the unattainable middle class. Similarly, the social learning theory by Akers states that youths are influential than adults in engaging in delinquent behavior (Brauer, 2012).

Teenagers are referred to influence colleagues in the family unit. Additionally, the youths create opportunity by seeing possibilities and see the benefits of engaging in different delinquent behavior, convincing other teenagers on the benefits of participating in risky habits, imitating the risky behaviors, and defining crime as acceptable in the society (Williams, 2014). The following codes are obtained by sharing interests, interactions, and communicating with the other youths. The delinquent performance increases with the increased population, thus in this regard, the increase of the teenagers in a family will result in increased anti-social behavior in society (Wickert, 2019).

The theory states that siblings can influence others directly, indirectly, or considered role models as elder children act as role models to the young siblings in the family. In this regard, an older sibling will serve as a role model in delinquent conduct. Additionally, the teenage will provide an opportunity to discuss and practice the negligent behavior reinforced through communication (Brauer, 2012). Additionally, Sutherland’s theory states that the principle of the learning of the delinquent demeanor is conducted in the intimate personal groups, and the learning techniques include committing a crime, specifying the direction of drives, motives, attitudes, and rationalizations (Williams, 2014).

Similarly, according to Cohen, delinquent subcultures are considered malicious with the aim of annoying and injuring others, being resistant to the extent of being loyal toward their group members. Additionally, being negativity by committing criminal acts as a result of their prohibition in the society, committing actions not as a result of the economic rationality, focusing on the momentary pleasure and being versatile in the sense of various delinquent behavior that occurs (Wickert, 2019). In this regard, Sutherlands states that the direction of drives and motives is learned from the drives and the definition of the legal codes, whether favorable or unfavorable. Moreover, the theory terms an individual to acquire delinquent behavior due to excess of interpretations helpful to violation of law over the definitions opposed to the breach of the law. The learning of the negligent behavior by association theory includes the mechanisms that are involved in any other education (Wickert, 2019).

Differential opportunity theory by Cohen is similar to the Sutherlands differentiation association. In this regard, both methods state specialized areas of crime, and crime constitutes a normal response to a condition (Williams, 2014). Additionally, the theories state that cultural tradition and differential association tradition assumes that the access of the youth to illegitimate means is variable. However, the illegal does not recognize the significance of the comparable differentials in access to the legitimate mechanism (Wickert, 2019). Therefore, both theories assume that people have equal and free access to legal means regardless of the social position they held. The theories state that money or any other drive does not account for delinquent behavior (Cochran, Maskaly, Jones, & Sellers, 2015).

Cohen, Cloward’s theories have similarities about delinquent behavior. The authors maintain that adolescents who mostly engage in negligent behavior have internalized an emphasis on comfort goals. The theories argue that lower-class boys face inadequacies of legal avenues of access to the goals and unable to revise their ambitions. In this regard, the youths experience severe disappointments, thus resulting in to engage in further levels of delinquency (Brady, 2017). Akers and Cohen’s theory argues that learning of the delinquent conduct occurs through processes such as differential association. The methods ensure that the groups, including symbolic, reference, primary, and secondary groups, control the individual’s sources of reinforcement, discriminative stimuli that result to the commitment of the repetition of the behavior, and salient behaviors models (Cochran, Maskaly, Jones, & Sellers, 2015). Additionally, the theories agree that on instrumental behavioral psychology, individuals are considered to behave in a manner that will result in maximizing the rewards and, at the same time, reducing punishments (Williams, 2014). Additionally, the differential association theory is similar to Sutherland’s learning theory that argues that individuals and mostly the youth engages in delinquent behavior, including deviant behavior the same way they learn the non-deviant behavior.

Differences

The social learning is different from the differential association as it argues that people in the deviant behaviors is the same way they learn non-deviant expressions and the cues that are referred to trigger them on by the process of differential reinforcement. The social learning theory states that associating with individuals who commit crime ad espouse definitions favorable to criminal behavior results in an increased probability of the individuals engaging in illegal and deviant behavior (Williams, 2014). Additionally, the association reduces the likelihood of conforming to the norm. The learning theory is different from the differential theory as the theory specifies mostly on how various people engage in the deviant and non-deviant behavior and the cues that trigger several youths in participating in the process of differential reinforcement. In this regard, the speculation differs from the differential theory that argues that the child learns the deviant behavior the same way they learn non-deviant behavior (Williams, 2014).

Cohen’s theory states that delinquent subcultures are malicious, negativistic, and nonutilitarian. Therefore, the delinquent method is reported to have not rejected the common standards while focusing on the lower level class.  The delinquent boys tend to have ambivalent attitudes referred to the common standards and conformity to the law (Williams, 2014). Moreover, the subcultures are known to solve the dilemma by using the techniques of neutralization that permit the youths to neutralize the rational delinquent acts. In this regard, the children engaged in negligent behavior may refuse that their actions cause harm to people (Brauer, 2012). Consequently, Cohen’s theory is different from the Cloward and Ohlin theory of differential opportunity that states that the delinquent subculture exists in retreats, criminal, and conflict subcultures. The theory indicates that the delinquent behavior is not available to the lower-class youths and depending on teenagers that have access to the adult criminal role models within the neighborhoods, and access to criminal opportunities (Williams, 2014).

Social learning theory is different as it is considered to focus on the hypothesized products in reinforcement and to forget the support itself. The main goal of the argument concerning delinquent behavior is different from the other theories. The objectives aim at specifying the learning assumption that underlies the relationship among the differential association, practice, and association as crucial as they expose the definitions, present models that imitate, and provide the differential reinforcement on the criminal behavior (Brady, 2017). Additionally, it refers to the explanations to be vital because they act as discriminative stimuli that identify specific actions as punishment. Furthermore, the theory contrast with the others as it argues that imitation is essential because it stems from an individual for observing reinforcement experienced by the others. In contrast, the differential association by Sutherland’s affects the individual’s probability of engaging in crime and deviance as of the differential reinforcement (Williams, 2014).

Research that can be done on these Theories

Delinquent behavior has been the cause of the social problem since the industrial revolution. The rehabilitation, punishment, and treatment have been considered among the solution that could lead to a reduction of criminal actions. Multiple factors, including parent psychopathology, has been found to be a cause of the youth associating in the delinquent behavior. However, future research should consider various factors, including harsh punishment. In this regard, the best financial interest intervention in the community include prevention and treatment that has been found to be cost-effective.  In this regard, future research should consider identifying the validated interventions technologies and the malleable variables in all levels of delinquent behavior.

The levels of prevention will include the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels.  Additionally, future research should consider the development of the gender-specific prevention and predictive modes that will assist in identifying the small percentage of the youth that are accountable for the crime and delinquent. Additionally, identifying the children that are likely to engage in the transfer the delinquency behavior across the generations. Furthermore, future theoretical and methodological advances should include and focus on the interaction that will consist of the social environments and genetic variables.

Various individuals have been considered to engage the youths in reinforcements that will assist them in curbing the delinquent behavior. However, while involving the child in the support, the alternative procedure should be used that includes the provision of specific instructions concerning the appropriate responses and consequences that may occur. Additionally, it is advisable for the social learning theory to focus on the reinforcement and avoiding the use of different associations but to include the measures of the learning mechanisms. Furthermore, an analytic distinction should be made between the direct actions in the differential reinforcements that will tap the actual consequences of various reinforcements assumed to be the stem for prior support and strive to include multiple measures of the reinforcement in the empirical models.

The improvement should be conducted through recording the subjects that research subjects, personal experiences that produce definitions that are favorable for deviance that may result in actual deviant behavior. Moreover, future researches should turn Aker’s learning theory for inspiration that will be used in constructing measures of reinforcement useful as they will act as incorporators of indicators in individuals’ direct experiences that will reward and punish the consequences of behavior. Future research is advisable for researchers to establish proper temporary order that will include variables such as the prospective, longitudinal, and retrospective data. The data will be useful for identifying content, multiple sources, punishment subjected to individuals, and the contingencies of reward. However, the researchers should consider collecting cross-sectional data and using secondary sources that might concentrate on the retrospective items that reveal the previous experiences of deviant behaviors.

References

Brady, C. M. (2017). Social Learning Theory. The Encyclopedia of Juvenile Delinquency and Justice, 5.

Brauer, J. R. (2012). Social Learning Theory and Human Reinforcement. Sociological Spectrum, 2-25.

Cochran, J. K., Maskaly, J., Jones, S., & Sellers, C. S. (2015). Using Structural Equations to Model Akers’ Social Learning Theory With Data on Intimate Partner Violence. Crime & Delinquency, 22.

Wickert, C. (2019, May 10). Subcultural Theory (Cohen). Retrieved from Soz Theo: https://soztheo.de/theories-of-crime/learning-subculture/subcultural-theory-cohen/?lang=en

Williams, J. P. (2014). Subcultures and Deviance. In J. P. Williams, The Death and Resurrection of Deviance. Critical Criminological Perspectives (pp. 108-123). London: Palgrave Macmillan.