1. Informal Social Control
Control Theories
Informal Social Control

2. Assumptions about human nature
Humans are hedonistic, self-serving beings
We are “inclined” towards deviance from birth
“natural motivation”
no “positive” motivation required
“variation in motivations toward deviance”
Is this different from Differential Association/Social Learning?
Sutherland: All crime is learned, not invented

3. If we are inclined toward deviance...
Key Question: Why aren’t most of us deviant?
Hirschi: “There is much evidence that we would be if we dared.”
Answer: Informal Social Control

4. Are control theories “different?”
Akers
They don’t try to explain “non-crime” or conformity
Different sides of the same coin
Control Theorists
Completely different assumptions about human nature and “motivation” towards crime

5. Ivan Nye (1958) Identified 3 types of informal control
1. Direct Controls
2. Indirect Controls
3. Internal Controls

6. Walter Reckless: Containment Theory
Inner (Good self concept)
Containment
Outer Containment
parents/school
supervision
Pushes and Pulls
poverty, anger,delinquent
subculture
DELINQUENCY OUT HERE !!!!!!

7. Enter Travis Hirschi
Social Bond Theory

8. Social Bond Theory Causes of Delinquency (1969)
Was an attack on other theories as much as a statement of his theory
Self-report data (CA high schools)
Measures from “competing theories”
This book was the first of its kind!

9. Hirschi’s Criticisms of Past Theory
1. A “pure” control theory needs no or external “motivation” to explain crime.
Exclude “pushes and pulls” from control theory
Other theories present an “over-socialized” human
2. Internal control is too “subjective” and nearly impossible to measure.
Exclude “conscience, self-concept, or self-control”
Subsumed under “Attachment”

10. Social Bond Theory “Bond” indicates “Indirect Control” Attachment
Direct controls (punishment, reinforcement) less important because delinquency occurs when out of parents’ reach (adolescence).
Attachment
Commitment (Elements of the social bond
Involvement are all related to each other)
Belief

11. Attachment The “emotional bond”
Sensitivity towards others (especially parents)
Measured as
Identification with and emulation of parents
Concern with teacher’s opinion of oneself

12. Commitment The “rational bond” One’s “stake in conformity”
Social Capital
Measures:
academic achievement
grades
test scores
educational aspirations

13. Involvement “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop”
Involvement in conventional activity
Simply less time for deviance
Measures:
time playing basketball, baby-sitting, doing homework….

14. Belief Belief in the validity of the law
Hold values consistent with the law
Measures
Neutralizations (from Sykes/Matza)
Belief in the value of education
Respect for police and the law

15. Neutralizations as a “Pirate” variable
How can “neutralizations” support both social learning theory and control theory?
Neutralizations as a “Pirate” variable
1. Sutherland/Akers: “definitions” that motivate delinquency
2. Hirschi: indicator of weak moral beliefs
3. Bandura: disengagement of cognitive self-evaluation (can be negative reinforcement)

16. Research on Bonds Hirschi’s own research supportive
But, couldn’t explain delinquent peers
So, “birds of a feather” explanation
Subsequent research
Attachment, commitment, beliefs are related
Relationships are moderate to weak
Causal ordering?

17. Delinquent Peers and Parents
Hirschi: Any bonding insulates a person from delinquency
Even if the person you bond to is delinquent
Akers: Bonding to delinquent persons increases delinquency
Who’s right? AKERS