Social Learning Theory

Social Learning Theory 1. Basis of Social Learning Theory   

Results of socialization relationships (peers, families) various ways people can learn) Role of environment over internal causes situations where behavior is learned through environmental influence Symbolic interaction ideas in terms of concepts, that we live in a world of symbols notions of learning processes: symbols of doing a crime (technology facilitates crime) meaning and conveying those meaning associated with criminal behavior is important (ex. Don’t ever back down in a fight)

2. Early influences of psychology 





Classical conditioning: Pavlov connection between manipulation and peoples behavior (Milgram experiment, dogs+bells, children+monkeys) Operant conditioning: BF Skinner could operatize people’s behavior with condition of rewards and punishment reinforce behavior by rewarding actual behavior, and punish if they don’t Social learning theory: reinforcement more developed idea of conditioning experiences reinforce behavior through a complex system of reward sand punishments and looking at reactions of some people`s behavior

Influence of Albert Bandura 





Direct experience is how we learn  young children imitate the environment they grow up in  learn right and wrong from people’s reactions to behavior.. learn from errors learn from doing things and observing other people Modelling and mimicking behavior  watch others and do actions to get to required goal  valued activity is it is regarded as something with significance humans respond and interpret symbols and it shapes environment quite significantly Social environment shapes modeling feedback and reinforcement positive feedback reinforces the behavior VISE VERSA

4. Modern Social Learning Theory 

Crime is learned crime has to be learned at all different class levels



becomes a social process.. people learn criminal behavior by observing it than doing it Social relations influence behavior peer groups

5. Edwin Sutherland: Theory of Differential Association 

 





Two elements of learning content: ideas about doing crime attitude, rationalizations, motivations about criminal behavior thinking about doing crime process: association with others different way we day-to-day interactions with people and various ways meaning are developed. actually doing crime ideas of crime and deviance have to be seemed as okay Ties to symbolic interaction meanings arrive from this interactive process Skill set and meanings have to be learned acquire access of definitions favorable to crime techniques, motives, circumstance favorable to criminal behavior Crime occurs when there is an excess of definitions leaning toward crime people often associate with deviant people by accident initiation to crime is when people are tied towards criminal behavior Nine propositions (pg. 180-181)

6. Critics towards differential associations  

 

Measuring “excess of definitions” what leads one to the next Too simplistic learning process is simplistic in nature takes place over long periods of time Crimes of passions (and impulsivity) Individualistic explanations other things going on beyond the social environment (social choice, parenting, free will) issue of falsifications: it’s actually impossible to do as such, key idea of theories is various types of statements. No significant data to back that up.

7. One response: Ronald’s Akers and Differential reinforcement Theory 

Uses operant condition and imitation and modeling



influence of bandura differential reinforcement: operant condition and different complexity in which this can occur different ideas of positive reinforcement: different ways to promote behavior (ex. privileges in prison, graduating from university) and negative reinforcement Blends sociology and psychology psychology reinforcement= promoting behavior by reinforcing it reinforcing by not doing anything about it

8. Central Ideas of Akers     

Differential association way people associate and how we sanction those associations (parents saying cant hangout with so and so) Definitions of the situation appropriate/ inappropriate Differential reinforcement different ways of reinforcing right and wrong Imitation (modelling)

Ronald Akers: Differential Reinforcement Theory Stimulus

Behavior Increases Reinforcement

Behavior decreases punishment

+

Positive reinforcement (reward received)

Positive punishment (punishment received

-

Negative reinforcement (punishment removed or avoided)

Negative punishment (reward removed or lost)

9) Akers and rewards and punishments:

    

sees past experience as a way to manipulate people’s behavior Behavior is repeated if reinforced (rewarded) works with juvenile offenders Behavior is stopped if punished (sanctions) Positive and negative reinforced Positive and negative punishment Importance of modelling

10) Akers and crime







Criminal behavior will be reinforced if positive rewards are gained (positive reinforcement) money, status, power Criminal behavior when punishment is avoided (negative reinforcement) social stigma in peer relationships perceptions of crime reinforced through different relationships between peers and criminal justice system Criminal behavior is reduced by sanctions (positive punishments) and loss or avoidance of reward (negative punishment negative sanction: jail time

11) Other points about differential reinforcement: 

Learning can be direct (reinforcement) serve to explain a variety of criminal behavior.. social setting in which it occurs. social environment changes learning experiences subculutre become importance of reinforcement where learning takes place  Learning can be indirect (imitation) learning criminal behavior becomes a function of reinforcing criminal behavior (street credibility for becoming a great crack dealer) 13)Another response to Differential Association Theory: Gesham Skyes and David Matza: Neutralization Theory   





Central ideas of neutralization theory  master techniques to help neutralize various attitudes and behavior Criminals are not always criminals Drift: moving in and out of criminal activity enable them to drift in and out of criminal behavior  ex. Tony Soprano’s “double life”  how people can sustain this over periods of time Criminals use rational techniques prior to each criminal act able to rationalize the various things that they do things that are done after the fact What does data show? criminals do not see what they do as wrong, because their deviant subculture change what they view as “right” and “wrong”  criminals show remorse, shame, admiration of people of (legitimate) high social status  target certain people and victims

 criminals are semi-conformists (married, friends, plans, ect..)  various types of juvenile delinquents will say that there are certain types of people that are off limits (ex. Disabled, elderly, children)—show human element, sympathy and morality 13) Skyes and Matza: 5 techniques of neutralization 

   

Denial of responsibility say its not their fault factors out of his or her control—coercion disembowel Denial of injury illicit drugs, taxation Denial of victim sexual assault (victim-blaming) crimes of passion, gay bashing, gang hits Condemnation of the condemners a situation where the offender legitimates their behavior by saying everyone is corrupt Appear to high loyalties criminals feel they are coerced and loyalty to head person becomes important

14) Neutralization: other points  Used prior to a deviant act  Resemblance to mitigating circumstances something got into the way of ration judgement (self defense, accident, mental health) disavow criminal behavior  Importance of subterranean values hockey violence is fine a lot of adults may not know the appropriate time for these ideas to take place  Criticisms of neutralization problems we find is one of the various types of valid tests that exists is asking what is the first moment you committed a deviant act, many criminals cannot answer and do not know the exact mindset that led them towards criminal behavior  can’t see when behavior began and when moral values shifted possible that criminals have different moral values than the rest of society (psychopaths?)