Techniques of Neutralization.

Techniques of Neutralization.

Techniques of neutralization are means that facilitate explanations as to why criminals engage in wrong actions (Schaefer,2017). In the world of crime, behavior correction is the key goal at the end of the day. There have been numerous theories suggesting that the occurrence of crime is an essential aspect of the progression of criminal engagement. Behavior correction is the psychological procedure of cleaning the conscience without necessarily having to suffer guilt. The process of understanding how criminals avoid guilt enables learners to understand how criminals live with themselves after committing illegal activities. For this reason, we seek to look at some techniques of neutralization of Sykes and Matza.

The Sykes and Matza theories state that people are always kind of aware of the moral duty that restricts them from doing illegal activities. As Becker (1963) presents, neutralization techniques are cases of functions by which those who commit crimes are temporarily sanitized, thus prohibiting the criminals from carrying out such behavior. The five techniques of neutralization, as presented by Becker (1963), include denial of injury, denial of responsibility, denial of victims, condemnation of condemners, and finally appeal to higher loyalties. The first scenario is whereby the criminal denies responsibility. Sykes and Matza’s theories state that the criminal argues that they were just victims of the circumstance, therefore, had no option but to commit the crime. The next technique of neutralization is the denial of injury. Most of the criminals attend to argue that their cause of action did not harm any single person.

Furthermore, it is the technique of denial of victims. Criminals always argue that the said victims deserved the criminal activity performed against them. Moreover, there is the technique of condemnation of the condemners. At many times, criminals argue that it is not only unfair that they are being blamed for illegitimate acts but also feel like they are being persecuted for something they did not take part in. Lastly, there is the technique of appeal to higher loyalties. The criminals usually argue that even though their action was illegitimate, the end will always justify the means.

Becker (1963) presents, there is a need to distinguish between master and auxiliary status traits. The term master status stands for a social standing that has exceptional importance for personal identity, thus often molding a person’s social experience. The master status allows an individual to feel prestige that is related to his primary social role (Schaefer, 2017). On the other hand, auxiliary traits are linked to master statuses.  Auxiliary status traits are those that have characteristics that are presumed to follow that of master status only that it is a sub-division of a deviant subculture.

All in all, these theories hold society’s reaction to various actions as a vital factor in defining oneself as deviant. However, the study reveals that people become deviant just because some labels have been attached to these illegitimate actions. For example, names such as prostitutes and thieves result to a particular way of reaction and treatment from society. In conclusion, I believe the master traits apply to the status of a career criminal.  This is because career criminals always engage in the same behavior, thus being viewed as deviants.