Criminology of Computer Crime - Social Theories CJ 520 15.0

Social Structure Theories “Crime arises from economic disadvantage”

Social Structure Theories Socioeconomic conditions & cultural values impact crime Originally used to explain crime in lower socioeconomic areas Has been expanded to cover middle class / upper class crimes Most computer crimes committed by middle/upper class

Three Types of Social Structure Theories Social disorganization theory Focus on community differences & crime rates Not covered in this class Strain theory Crime caused by frustration due to inability to achieve success Cultural deviance theory Crime occurs due to conformity to subcultures

Strain Theory Society instills in its members a needs for success Society does not provide equal opportunity to obtain success Discrepancy between goals & means to obtain goals causes strain Crime is result of attempt to relieve strain

Robert Merton’s Strain Theory Every society has a unique combination of goals & means to achieve them U.S. - financial success Means to obtain goal Education Occupation Deferral of gratification Some individuals blocked from education/occupation means Discrepancy between desire/ability causes strain Five modes of adaptation to strain

Merton’s Strain Theory Adaptations Conformity Accepts goals Accepts means Little/no crime Most common adaptation Ritualism Rejects goals Lower expectations of financial success

Merton’s Strain Theory Adaptations cont. Innovation Accepts goals Rejects means Develops new means of achieving goals Most Crimes in this category All money crimes White collar crimes Computer crimes

Merton’s Strain Theory Adaptations cont. Retreatism Rejects goals Rejects means Use of escape mechanisms Drugs / alcohol abuse Homelessness Some crime to support addictions Rebellion Rejects goals and means Replace with new goals and means Gangs / militias / cults Some crime

Robert Agnew’s Strain Theory More modern version Strain causes negative affective states Anger Frustration Disappointment Depression Fear Crime occurs because of negative affective states

Agnew’s Strain Theory Causes of Strain Failure to achieve positive valued goals Disjunction between expectations & achievements Feeling of inequality Removal of positive stimuli Death/loss of significant person Loss of job Presentation of negative stimuli Family conflict Failure in school More intensity & frequency of strain - more likely to turn to crime

Criticisms of Strain Theory Assumes one universal cultural goal Does not address motivation Does not apply to females/youths very well Applies only to property crimes Cannot explain maturational reform Crime dwindles with age

Cultural Deviance Theory / Subculture Theory “a set of values. Norms, and beliefs that differ from thee dominant culture” Examples: Gangs Hackers Not all subcultures are criminal The Amish

Criminal Subcultures Act in accordance with their own set of beliefs regardless of the law Many crime theories in this area Two theories effecting computer technology Cohen: Delinquency & Frustration Theory (1955) Cloward & Ohlin : Differential Opportunity Theory

Delinquency & Frustration Theory Lower class children want to join the middle class Lack educational skills to obtain middle class membership Poor school performance leads to frustration Children will associate with other poor performers Group will commit crimes as protest against the middle class

Criticism of Cohen No rigorous empirical evidence Failure to account for rational criminal behavior Cohen felt delinquent behavior was non-utilitarian, malicious, and negative

Differential Opportunity Theory Focused on urban male gangs Two goals Economic success (Merton - Strain Theory) Middle class status (Cohen - Delinquency & Frustration Theory) Not all gangs have access to stable criminal enterprises Crime mentor Three types of gangs dependant upon Access to established criminals Goals

Types of Gangs Criminal gangs Conflict gangs Retreatist gangs Have access to older offenders Obtain goals from association w/ mentors Develop into organize communities Gambling / drug dealing / commercial theft Conflict gangs No access to adult criminal role models No way to obtain goals Violence frequently used Retreatist gangs No access to mentors or goals Failed / unwilling to accept illegal goals Use drugs / alcohol Sell drugs / petty crimes

Criticism of Cloward & Ohlin More than one type of gang in one area Gangs don’t specialize in one type of behavior

Explaining Hackers by Social Structure Theories Computer technology new means of social approval Hackers have developed a subculture Motives come from the environment Hacking is personally rewarding Feel power/control lacking in real life Confessions take form of justification of actions Hard to reintegrate into the real world Not all hackers are criminals

Social Process Theories Focus on the relationship between socialization & crime Impact of certain factors on crime Family/peer relationships Failure in school Underlying assumptions: Criminality is a function of an individual’s socialization Interaction of an individual with more immediate groups is key to explaining behavior Focus on crime across all social classes

Branches of Social Process Theory Learning Theory Criminal behavior is learned from associations with others Social Control Theory Criminal behavior is due to lack of social bonds with non-criminals -or- Socialization process did not encourage lawful behavior Culture Conflict Theory Crime results from conformity to norms of a subculture

Learning Theories Assumptions Key Objective: Three Learning Theories Criminal behavior is learned in a social context from friends/family Crime is “normal” rather than ‘pathological” Crime is a product of learning the norms, values, and behaviors associated with criminal activity Key Objective: Detail the process through which criminal patterns are cultivated Three Learning Theories

Differential Association Theory Edwin Sutherland 1939-1947 Criminal behavior arises from learning behavior from family/peers Criminal behavior does not arise from stress / failure to achieve financial success Both criminal and non-criminal are motivated by need for money & social gain Associations more than past behavior indicative of criminal behavior Focuses on how someone becomes a criminal, not why Nine propositions that social interactions & learning lead to crime

Differential Association Theory Propositions Criminal behavior is learned Not biological, psychological or social structure Criminal behavior is learned in interactions with other persons in a process of communications Verbal communications The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs with intimate personal groups Family/peers have greatest influence on behavior

Differential Association Theory Propositions cont. When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (1) techniques to commit the crime and (2) the specific directions of motives, drives, rationalization, and attitudes The specific direction of motives an drives is learned from definitions of the legal codes as favorable or unfavorable A person becomes criminal because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of the law Can have different definitions for different crimes

Differential Association Theory Propositions cont. Differential associations may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns is the same as any other learning Criminal and non-criminal behavior have the same needs and values

Criticism of Differential Association Theory Testability Causal framework Does internalization of deviant attitudes precede or follow criminality

Differential Reinforcement Theory Ronald Akers - 1966/1985 Builds on Differential Association Combines Differential Association with Operant Conditioning Premises: Criminal behavior depends on an individual’s experiences with rewards for conventional & deviant behavior Reward for deviant behavior leads to crime Reward more powerful than punishment

Neutralization/Drift Theory David Matza & Grisham Skyes - 1960’s Criminals hold conventional values, not separate values of a subculture Criminals neutralize these values in order to commit crimes Neutralizing techniques allow criminals to drift back to conventional behavior Theory based on four observations

Neutralization/Drift Theory Observations Criminals express guilt over illegal actions Criminals respect/admire law-abiding individuals A line is drawn between who a criminal can victimize & who they can’t Criminals not immune to the demands of conformity

Neutralization/Drift Theory Neutralizing Techniques Denial of responsibility Behavior accident or beyond criminal’s control Denial of injury Denies offense caused any harm - especially computer criminals Denial of victim Victim had it coming Condemnation of the condemners Criminal shifts blame back to those condemning him/her Appeal to higher loyalties Peer group takes priority over society

Criticism of Neutralization/Drift Theory Not all criminals approve of societal values When does neutralization occur - before or after act

Social Control Theories Why don’t people commit crimes? Assumptions: Consensus in society People will pursue self-interest rather than those of society Behavior is controlled by social constraints - crime is a failure of those constraints Key Objective: Identify the processes which bind people to social order

Containment Theory Walter Reckless - 1961 Internal & external forces to behavior Some forces encourage criminal behavior & some inhibit it Four motivating/restraining factors

Containment Theory Behavioral Factors Inner desires - wants, needs Inner containments - self esteem, strong sense of responsibility Outer pressures - peer influence, unemployment Outer containments - parents, school, police, criminal justice system Inner containments most effective

Criticism of Containment Theory No measurement of outer pressures & how they influence criminal behavior Measurement of inner factors ambiguous

Social Bond Theory Travis Hirschi - 1969 People don’t commit crimes because of potential damage to relationships Premise: Individual’s bond to society prevents him/her from violating the rules. If the bonds weaken, the person is free to commit crimes Four elements to theory

Four Elements of Social Bond Theory Attachment Emotional/psychological connection to others Commitment Time, energy, and effort expended in activities connecting to others Involvement More time spent connecting with others, less time for criminal activity Belief Strength of belief in common morals (law should be followed)

Criticism of Social Bond Theory Causal order Weak bonds lead to crime -or- Criminal behavior leads to bonds weakening What are the origins of social bonds How is the strength of a social bond determined

Self Control Theory Michael Gottfredson & Travis Hirschi - 1990 Premise: Self control prevents people from seizing opportunities to commit crimes No/little self control, individuals will be impulsive, insensitive, and seek immediate gratification Cause: inadequate child rearing, instilled by age 8

Criticism of Self Control Theory Assumes self control to be fixed Tautology (A and not A) People are compulsive when they commit crimes All criminals are impulsive or they would not commit crimes

Social Process Theories & Virus Writers Offer best explanation for malware writers Have money for computers - social structure des not fit Malware written for Money, fame, attention, competition, fun Malware writing requires a learning process Malware writers use neutralization techniques to explain behavior