A 

Abortion
Accounting
Advertising
Africa
African-American Studies
Aging
Agriculture
American Indian Studies
Anthropology
Archaeology
Architecture
Argumentative
Art: Artists (Alphabetized)
Art: General
Become an Affiliate and Earn $$$
Biographies (Alphabetized)
Book Reviews (Non-Fiction) (Alphabetized)
Business: Companies (Alphabetized)
Business: General
Business: Industries (Alphabetized)
Business: International
Business: Small
California
Canada
Caribbean
Child Abuse
China
Communication: Journalism
Communication: Language & Speech
Communication: Media
Communication: Non-Verbal
Communication: Television
Communication: Television & Children
Communism
Computer Science
Consumerism
Criminal Justice: General
Criminal Justice: Juvenile Delinquency
Criminal Justice: Police Science
Criminal Justice: Prisons
Cuba
Death & Dying: Euthanasia
Death & Dying: General
Death & Dying: Suicide
Drama: American
Drama: English
Drama: World
Drugs: Alcohol
Drugs: General
Economics: Banking
Economics: Economists (Alphabetized)
Economics: General
Economics: Inflation
Economics: International Trade
Economics: Macroeconomics
Economics: Microeconomics
Economics: Taxation
Education: Administration
Education: Curriculum
Education: General
Education: Higher
Education: Physical
Education: Psychology
Education: Reading
Education: Special
Education: Teaching Methods
Education: Theory
Energy: General
Energy: Nuclear
Energy: Solar
Environmental Studies
Evolution
Family & Marriage
Films: Artists (Alphabetized)
Films: General
Finance: Companies (Alphabetized)
Finance: General
Former Soviet Union: Post-1990
France
Gender & Sexuality
Geography
Germany
History: Ancient Greek & Roman
History: European
History: Great Britain
History: U.S. (After 1865)
History: U.S. (Before 1865)
History: U.S. Presidency
History: U.S. Presidents (Alphabetized)
Homosexuality
Immigration
India
Indonesia
International Relations: Arms Control
International Relations: Cold War
International Relations: Non-U.S.
International Relations: U.S.
Japan
Jewish Studies
Korea
Labor
Latin America
Law: Business
Law: Capital Punishment
Law: General
Law: International & Non-U.S.
Law: Supreme Court
Leadership
Literature, American: Authors (Alphabetized)
Literature, American: Faulkner
Literature, American: Fitzgerald
Literature, American: General
Literature, American: Hawthorne
Literature, American: Hemingway
Literature, American: Melville
Literature, American: Poe
Literature, American: Steinbeck
Literature, American: Twain
Literature, English: Authors (Alphabetized)
Literature, English: Chaucer
Literature, English: Conrad
Literature, English: Dickens
Literature, English: General
Literature, English: Joyce
Literature, English: Lawrence
Literature, English: Shakespeare
Literature, English: Swift
Literature, General: Children
Literature, General: Classic (Greek & Roman)
Literature, General: Russian
Literature, General: World
Management: General
Management: Japanese
Management: Motivation
Management: Theory
Management: Women
Marketing: Companies (Alphabetized)
Marketing: General
Marketing: Plans
Mathematics
Medical: Aids
Medical: Dentistry
Medical: Diseases & Disorders (Alphabetized)
Medical: General
Medical: Nursing
Mexican-American Studies
Mexico
Middle East: Egypt
Middle East: General
Middle East: O.P.E.C.
Military
Music: Classical
Music: General
Mythology
Nutrition
Parapsychology/Occult
Philosophy: Ancient Greek
Philosophy: Descartes
Philosophy: Eastern
Philosophy: General
Philosophy: Kant
Philosophy: Sartre
Poetry: American
Poetry: English
Poetry: Milton
Poetry: World
Political Science: Elections & Campaigns
Political Science: Foreign
Political Science: Lobbyists & Pressure Groups
Political Science: Machiavelli
Political Science: Mill
Political Science: Political Theory
Political Science: U.S.
Psychology: Behaviorism
Psychology: Child & Adolescent
Psychology: Disorders
Psychology: Dreams
Psychology: Experimental
Psychology: Freud
Psychology: General
Psychology: Jung
Psychology: Physiology
Psychology: Piaget
Psychology: Rogers
Psychology: Social
Psychology: Testing
Psychology: Therapies
Public Administration: General
Public Administration: Government Agencies (Alphabetized)
Racism
Real Estate
Recreation & Leisure
Religion: Eastern
Religion: General
Religion: Islam
Religion: The Bible
Research: Completed Studies (With Statistics & Results)
Research: Designs & Proposals
Research: Statistics & Methodology
Russia: Pre-1917 Revolution
Science: Astronomy
Science: Biology
Science: General
Science: Genetics
Sociology: Durkheim
Sociology: General
Sociology: Marx
Sociology: Social Problems
Sociology: Social Theory
Sociology: Social Welfare
Sociology: Weber
Soviet Union: 1917-1990
Sports: Drugs
Sports: General
Technology
Transportation: Automotive
Transportation: Aviation
Transportation: General
Transportation: Railroads
Urban Studies
Vietnam
Women Studies
 

CONTAINMENT THEORY OF CRIME.   Term Paper ID:25300 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Defines & assesses Walter Reckless's theory that crime is caused by individuals' trying to control, and being controlled by, their environment & their own minds.... More...

11 Pages / 2475 Words 5 sources, 11 Citations, APA Format $44.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Defines & assesses Walter Reckless's theory that crime is caused by individuals' trying to control, and being controlled by, their environment & their own minds. Paper Introduction: This discussion seeks to examine the containment theory of crime that Walter Reckless developed in the 1950s and 1960s, looking at both the strengths and weaknesses of the model and very briefly at the experiments Reckless and his colleagues used to test it. Reckless’s model is then compared to other “control” models of crime and these control models are then compared to a set of related but differing rational actor and social learning models of crime. Finally, both control theories and social learning theories are placed within the broader psychological literature on human cognitive development. The purpose of this discussion is to bring to light the underlying assumptions of a model as well as to assess the usefulness of different established models to current criminological theory. Reckless’s “containment” theory of crime falls loosely into the c Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. All that would be required to predictwhether someone could successfully resist the universal tendency towarddeviance would be a way to measure the strength of that tendency in theindividual at hand and the strength of the containment factors. The idea that people are basically inclined toward crime ordelinquency does not run exactly counter to other sociological andcriminological theories, although it does deviate from them in importantways. Finally, people often act in delinquent ways when their chance ofbeing caught and punished is so high that a rational choice model wouldsuggest that they should have acted otherwise. This is true of all humans(according to Reckless's theory), not because of who the individual is butbecause of what humans are. Containment and social control theories in general are based onbroad-ranging psychological theories that model and seek to explain themost basic processes of human cognition; moreover, these broader theorieshave implications not only for an understanding of criminal behavior byscholars but for the underpinnings of public policy that citizens in ademocracy must decide upon. Taking sides onmoral issues is generally not the job of a scholar, but the type of modelone chooses in pursuing criminological research in fact does incorporatemoral elements, and so the researcher should carefully consider the ethicalimplications of the model that he or she chooses. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. (To this list must be addedsanctions that are both extra-legal and formal such as ex-communication andthe Amish practice of shunning.) Control theories that predated Reckless's work - and on which in somemeasure he based his own model - include the work done by both Nye andReiss. Reckless's "containment" theory of crime falls loosely into thecategory of control theories of crime. (In other words, whileall control theorists believe that all people would commit crimes if theythought that they could get away with them, some also believe thatcriminals have in addition to this pan-human tendency special factors intheir lives or personalities that incline them toward criminal acts.)(Reckless, 1967) In fact, as Akers (1997, p. However,operationalizing a variable as slippery as self-concept will never be easyand may not be possible to do to meet current strict standards for formaltheories. This discussion seeks to examine the containment theory of crime thatWalter Reckless developed in the 195 s and 196 s, looking at both thestrengths and weaknesses of the model and very briefly at the experimentsReckless and his colleagues used to test it. The social learning element of rational actor theories and the relatedidea in containment and other control theories that people can learn todifferentiate what behaviors will be rewarded and which will be punishedhas an important implication in ascertaining what individuals are likely tobe criminals. 8 ) points out in his analysis ofReckless's work, there is actually less substantive difference betweencontrol theories and other theories of criminal behavior than was at leastinitially argued, for all theories that seek to explain criminal behaviorare in fact asking the same question: Why do some people commit crimes andothers refrain from doing so (Akers, 1997, p. (1951). Examining the precepts in Reckless model has shown how he stood uponthe shoulders of researchers like Reiss and Nye, who in turn stood on theshoulders of cognitive researchers like Piaget, who are all sharing spacewith social learning theorists, who are collectively creating better andbetter models. Criminological theories: Introduction andevaluation. Rational choicemodels assume that people are capable of weighing all the factors relevantto a possible line of action and then choosing to act in whatever way ismost beneficial to themselves. Rational choice, deterrence, and social learningtheory in criminology: The path not taken. It may seem a substantial leap to go from the particularities ofReckless's containment theory to the broad-based Piagetian view of howbabies and then children learn to connect cause and effect with evergreater precision, but there is a deep-rooted and undeniable link betweenthe two of them. Any theory of criminal behavior - and especially any social policy ofpunishing delinquent behavior - that relies on an individual's ability toconnect his or her actions to some consequence (or probable consequence) isin fact based on some of the most fundamental beliefs about how the humanbrain develops. Rational actormodels - and all models based on social learning theory - incorporate ideasabout the human ability to recognize causality that are at the very core ofpsychological assumptions about human cognition. In contrast to this, othertheories (including social learning theories and many theories ofdelinquency based in systems of moral thought) have asked why some peopledeviate from social norms to perform criminal acts. Reckless's model is thencompared to other "control" models of crime and these control models arethen compared to a set of related but differing rational actor and sociallearning models of crime. Reckless specified a number of the pushes and pulls that tended toincline people toward delinquency: Young individuals might be pushed towarddelinquency by inner psychological impulses and drives such as aggressionor hostility or by environmental factors such as poverty or racism.Alternately, young people might also be pulled toward delinquency byparticipation in delinquent subcultures (and the desire to belong to and beaccepted by these subcultures) or by companions' espousing delinquentvalues (Akers, 1997, 83). Some proponents of control theory -particularly early proponents of this family of theories -- saw controltheories as fundamentally different from social learning and all othertheories of crime. (Interestingly, this assessment of human natureaccords both with one put forth by a number of religions, includingChristianity, with its doctrine of original sin, as well as with ideascentral to sociobiology, which preaches a hard-line form of Darwinism inwhich every creature is in a constant struggle against unrelatedindividuals.) While external controls are usually thought of in terms offormal strictures on behavior, they also include a number of moral andemotional sanctions, such as the desire to be good, to be thought well of,the desire to liked, the desire to be respected. The umbrella of control theory is in fact quite a broad one. For example, as Akers (1997, p. Suicide. Thiscontainment could come either in the form of internal control or externalcontrol - in other words, only one of these forms of containment would benecessary - but it must be at least as strong as the pushes and pullstoward crime (Akers, 1997, p. Scholars (and of course thosepeople in position to set public policy) who choose a control model areactually selecting a more lenient view of criminality than those who choosea learning theory model. However, an argument could be madethat argued the exact opposite: In a neighborhood experiencing high ratesof delinquency, young people would have strong pushes away from criminalbehavior for a number of reasons. The purpose of this discussion is to bring tolight the underlying assumptions of a model as well as to assess theusefulness of different established models to current criminologicaltheory. Thus a person whodrinks excessively and kills a pedestrian on the way home from the bar isheld accountable because s/he knew before the first drink that inebriatedpeople should not drive. (199 ). While Reckless's finding that delinquent youths are linked todelinquent attitudes (both in terms of how they see themselves and in termsof how others see them) is both bad science and not particularlyinteresting, this does not mean that Reckless's model itself is not useful,merely that it was not tested in a sufficiently rigorous way to demonstratewhat usefulness it might have. However, setting aside these problems with rational actor models, thebasic precepts of such models - and all models based on social learningtheories - are of interest here because they help one to place Reckless'swork within the broader scope of cognitive psychology. Reckless's work is in fact based on basically sound underlyingprinciples. (1997). Instead of presupposing a predisposition towardsselfishness, rational choice theory - or rational actor models, as thisarea of research is also called - supports the idea of a predispositiontoward rational intelligence in any given individual. Rational choice theoristshave countered that people may act well even when they are not beingwatched because they feel rewarded for simply being altruistic. Such problems with rational choice theory, coupled with the problemsraised in critics of Reckless's research, begin to suggest at thecomplexity of creating realistic, predictive, testable models for an areaof human behavior as complex as the arena of criminality. Differential reinforcement models dictate thatlearning is achieved by balancing rewarding with aversive stimuli until anindividual repeats those actions/choices that she or he has been rewardedfor and avoids those that he or she has been punished for. In this respect, control theories are related to classical theories onthe nature of criminal behavior, although these older theories did notposit that people had any particular predisposition either toward or awayfrom criminal behavior per se. 83) notes, Reckless and hisassociates simply assumed that in a neighborhood with high delinquencyrates that the pull toward delinquency for what might be called pre-delinquent youths would be very high. (In other words, people are capable ofintelligently and rationally assessing a situation and choosing whichcourse of action is likely to result in their being rewarded rather than intheir being punished.) This model of behavior assumes a sort of initialcognitive neutrality, an a priori mental condition in which humans arenaturally inclined neither towards goodness nor towards evil but rather fittheir actions to meet the needs and opportunities of their currentsituation. Why don't all people becomecriminals? The journal of criminal law andcriminology, pp. In fact the American legal system - along with most otherjurisprudence systems - specifically requires a recognition of cause-and-effect to be recognized by an offender: One of the general requirements ofthe legal standard of sanity is that a person be able to connect his or heractions to the consequences that resulted from them. Rationalchoice theory, for example, accords more importance to individual free willthan do containment or control models, basing its precepts on economicmodels of loss and reward. 653-676. and Hirschi, T. Why does anyoneconform to social rules and conventions? 656), rational choice theory is a subset ofsocial learning theory, specifically of the idea of learning bydifferential reinforcement. Humans - by their cognitive and developmental nature - are inclined toseek pleasure and satisfy personal needs and desires, according toReckless, and they only fail to do only when forces like laws and socialdisapproval are stronger than these urges to fulfill selfish desires. Reiss called these two forms ofcontrol "personal" control and "social control" (Akers, 1997, p. Although the focus of this paper has been specifically onpsychological and cognitive models of criminality, these models in fact areconnected to the much wider field of cognitive psychology. Among these are the fact that they wouldhave seen that (at least in many cases) delinquents are caught and punishedand they would also have seen the high social disapproval meted out todelinquents. Nye's model of control theory divided Reiss's dichotomy into atrilogy, arguing that young people desist from criminal behavior for threereasons: they fear punishment that would be directly imposed for wrongdoing(either by parents or by other authorities); they refrain from committingcriminal acts because they realize that such actions will disappointfriends and family; or they are constrained by internal control mechanisms- something like the traditional definition of conscience - that make suchbehavior unappealing (Akers, 1997, p. Such arguments have met with some degree of skepticism by manyresearchers on a number of grounds, primary among them being that peopleoften act well when they could get away with being delinquent. Rather, classical theorists assumed thathumans (like individuals of other animal species) simply acted along auniversal vector to enhance their own pleasure and well-being (Gottfredsonand Hirschi, 199 , p. Durkheim, E. References Akers, R. Both scholars of human cognition and participants in jurisprudencesystems recognize the fundamental human cognitive ability to understandcausality. A schizophrenic, on the other hand, who gives achild a poisonous substance to drink in the belief that it is really atonic that will keep the child safe would not be considered legallyculpable. Los Angeles: Roxbury. In many ways, the formalsocial sanctions of a society are based upon these informal, unwrittenmoral ones. ThusReckless predicates a fail-safe mechanism connected to the human ability(existent in all but the most developmentally damaged adult) to connect apossible action with a possible consequence. However, some controltheorists downplay any positive factors that induce people to commit crimeswhile others stress the importance of these factors. Reckless, W. Finally, both control theories and sociallearning theories are placed within the broader psychological literature onhuman cognitive development. The less socialized a person is, the more likely that personis to commit delinquent acts, especially if the punishment is likely tocome not in terms of formal social sanction but in terms of a more informalone such as disapproval. Reiss -following in a long-accepted sociological tradition - posited a model ofsocial control that includes both internal control (also calledsocialization), in which a person learns to control his or her ownbehavior, and external control, in which a person is controlled by otherpeople (usually agents of the state). Akers, R. Moreover,people often act in altruistic ways that are clearly not in their own bestinterest (if one were to measure best interest in purely rational, economicterms). Reckless's highly developed control theory incorporated work by othertheoreticians such as Albert Reiss and Ivan Nye, who in turn based theirown work on long-standing and widely accepted sociological principles (someof which are set forth in Durkheim's 1951 treatise on suicide). This is based on the fact that control theory has as itscore the questions: Why is anyone a law-abiding citizen? 81),noting that social control is exercised through both informal social andcultural sanctions and formal legal sanctions. To assess how Reckless's model and research fits into the larger bodyof the cognitive perspective of criminological research, one must compareit to other types of models as well as to examine some of the most basiccognitive and psychological precepts at work in these models. 85). The crime problem. Unlike theories of criminality that rely solely or at leastfundamentally on the importance of social forces (such as poverty, racism,limited educational opportunities, substantial social inequality),Reckless's model along with those models proposed by other controltheorists relies on a particular concept of the way that the human brainfunctions and how the biology of the human brain requires that humans learnto think in certain ways. New York: Free Press. Researchers must be aware of their own ideas aboutthe way that human cognition functions to make the best choice oftheoretical model. (Or perhapsthey simply assess the chance of being caught as higher than it actuallyis.) Alternately, people may act delinquently when they are likely to becaught not because they are not following a rational actor model but simplybecause they are not following it very well: A model of rational choicedoes not assume that all humans are equally intelligent or talented atgauging risk. 81). (1989). Reckless's model has some significant appeal on a common-sense level,but his work has been criticized as being tautological: Because he and hisassociates failed to define the variables they were working with in preciseterms, his research tended to show that delinquency is related todelinquency. Gottfredson, M.R. Reckless seems not to have considered these possibilities.Others scholars (Akers, 1997, p. Reckless's theory also incorporated the idea of internal and externalcontrols but - and this must be seen as the distinguishing element ofReckless's work that set him apart from other scholars working in the areaof control theory - he added another dimension to his matrix of explainingcriminality - the idea of "pushes" and "pulls" toward delinquency.Reckless's model contains a basic predictive (and at least hypotheticallytestable) element to it: Vectors towards delinquency will producedelinquent behavior in the absence of sufficiently strong containment. A general theory of crime.Stanford: Stanford University. As Akers notes (199 , p. (1967). Control theories make the central assumption that people are likely tocommit crime unless they can "contain" the impulse to do so, either becauseof internal controls (such as conscience) or external controls (such asformal legal strictures). The concept of a deep-rooted appreciation for cause andeffect is at the heart of the work of many psychologists, but perhaps mostimportantly that of Piaget, to cite probably the most well-known butcertainly not the only proponent of the developmental cognitive method ofstudying human behavior. 8 )? Controltheorists share a common focus on social relationship that dampen crimerather than social interconnections that promote it. Just as the atheist is unlikely to be afraid ofany punishment by divine powers, the asocialized individual is far lesslikely to fear ostracism or group disapproval. 84, cites Jensen as an example) havesucceeded in more closely specifying Reckless's variables, and no doubtmore could be done by other researchers along these lines. 82). Different models ofcriminality assess a different level of the degree of responsibility peoplemust take for their own deviant behavior. Control theory setsaside the question of why some people are drawn into deviance andessentially asks: Why not be deviant? If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.