1. Learning Theories

2. Crime is learned Crime is learned, like other behaviors Focus on content and process of learning – What crimes can be learned? – What behaviors that support crime can be learned? – How does this learning take place? – What cultural supports for this learning are present? Link with strain theory – Social structure may set the stage where learning takes place

3. What is learning? Habits and knowledge that develop when individuals interact with their environment – Not instinctual or biological Current learning theories based on association – Classical conditioning – passive learning Associating bell with meat produces salivation when bell rings – Operant conditioning – active learning Organism learns how to get what it wants Press a lever to get food – associate lever with food – Social Learning – active learning + cognition Direct - reinforcement through rewards and punishments Vicarious - reinforcement by observing what happens to others Criminological Theories - crime is a “normally learned behavior”

4. Learning crime through differential association (Sutherland) Criminal behavior is learned from persons who transmit ideas or “definitions” that favor law-breaking Two basic elements of the theory – Content of what is learned techniques of committing the crime the underlying drives, rationalizations and attitudes – Process by which learning takes place Learning occurs in intimate groups Motives and drives for behavior originate in attitudes towards legal codes by a person’s social group – “Normative conflict” – societal and group norms may be in conflict – “Definitions” can be favorable/unfavorable to lawbreaking – Delinquency is caused by an excess of definitions favorable to lawbreaking

5. Views on differential association Criticisms – It focuses on juvenile crime committed in groups Perhaps delinquents simply “flock together” Not all who associate with delinquents become delinquent – Hard to test: How can we identify and count the definitions favorable and unfavorable to law in each setting? – Cannot apply to all kinds of crime – Difficult to use to explain differences in crime rates in different places and between different demographic groups Defenses – Strength, intensity of associations vary – It includes a cognitive (active processing) component in learning – Those with more delinquent friends do commit more crimes – Those reporting more definitions favorable to crime commit more crime

6. Cultural & subcultural learning theories

7. Walter B. Miller: Learning to be delinquent from a gang Lower and middle-class cultures are distinct Middle-class emphasizes achievement Lower-class has different concerns, which are a breeding ground for crime – toughness, smartness (street sense), excitement, fate, autonomy – Male role models often absent, so an exaggerated sense of masculinity results – Crowding and domestic conditions send boys to the street, where they form gangs

8. Wolfgang and Ferracutti: Learning violence from a violent subculture Violence is a cultural expression for lower socioeconomic status males Many homicides result from very trivial events – Defending honor of relatives, neighborhood Significance of an event (e.g., a jostle) is differentially perceived by races and socioeconomic classes – Persons who respond as socially expected are admired - those who do not are put down – Causes of “passion” behavior are ideas - norms, values, expectations - that originate in social conditions Don’t focus on the origin of a subculture – Worry instead about the ideas it generates – Remedy is to disperse and assimilate the subcultures

9. Elijah Anderson: Learning violence in a black “street” subculture Criminogenic environment – High concentration of poverty – Decline in legitimate jobs, increase in illegitimate jobs – Drugs, guns, crime and violence – Declining welfare payments, no hope for the future – Lack of faith in C.J. system Mainstream code of civility, respected by “decent” people, has no value on the “street” Code of the street – Cultural adaptation to living in declining circumstances – “Respect”, “disrespect” and “manhood” – Spreads to “decent” children through contagion and necessity Theory is partly cultural, like Wolfgang & Ferracutti; partly social/structural, like Merton

10. Social learning theories

11. Akers: Learning through differential reinforcement Behaviors can be learned as well as ideas Differential association – Behaviors can be learned socially, from others and from “reference groups” whose definitions are favorable or unfavorable to lawbreaking Differential reinforcement – Behaviors can be learned socially and non- socially, according to their actual or anticipated consequences (“differential reinforcement”) – Learned socially through approval/disapproval by others – Learned non-socially (e.g., getting sick/high on drugs) – Learned vicariously by observing consequences of behavior for others Once criminal behavior begins, it continues if reinforced either socially or non-socially Structural conditions (inequality, strain) affect a person’s differential associations, definitions, models and reinforcements

12. Athens: Violentization How do persons become violent criminals? – Based on his observations growing up in a violent environment – Theory developed through in-depth interviews with 58 prisoners Three steps – Brutalization - victim of intra-familial violence, and coached in violence – Belligerence - person decides to stop being the victim and take charge of their situation – Violent performances - person experiments with violence Failures may lead to exit from violence Successes may lead to more violence & acquiring weapons – Virulency - person treated differently by others, embraces image Sees violence as best response to many situations

13. Discussion If criminal behavior can be learned by “normal” individuals, then the cause may lie in the social structure – How society is organized – Rules and values that support thats structure So... – Is crime whatever is so defined by the ruling class? (precept of conflict criminology) – Or does culture mediate between social structure and behavior? Social structure  culture/subculture  behavior