Explaining the Differential Reinforcement Theory and Its Standpoint on Crime

While I can appreciate the Neutralization theory, there are simply too many holes. A criminal that steals only from big corporations can be said to neutralize the guilt of it by only stealing from big corporations so "it's not bad," they aren't hurting the little guy. However, it can also be said that this behavior was learned from peers or family members with the same believes. Thus, neutralization is purely too inconclusive. Between social learning theories, differential reinforcements better meets the needs of explaining criminal behaviors. It also has the Akers, et al. (2006) survey which questioned 3065 males and females who had or did engage in drug and/or alcohol use, found a viable association between drug and/or alcohol use and social learning. Furthermore, it was found that learning deviant behavior was an ongoing process; meaning it continues as individuals continue to spend time with their deviant social group (p. 206 - 207). The empirical evidence aids in the case of the differential reinforcement theory, while the neutralization theory lacks this sort of evidence.

The differential association theory is backed by some empirical evidence; however, the nature of it can apply to the differential reinforcement theory as well. A survey for the differential association theory found that association with deviant social groups or individuals sustain deviant behaviors, and that those youths that continue to associated with deviant peers continue in deviant behavior (Siegel, 2006, p. 205). While the survey exhibits results that support various theories of the differential association theory (i.e. that deviant behavior is a product of upbringing), it also seems to support the findings and assertions of the differential reinforcement theory.

The differential reinforcement theory explains criminal behavior through the idea that violence is learned. Individuals abused as children are more likely to abuse. This same principle can explain criminal behavior under the differential reinforcement theory. Violent behavior at school is reinforced by the positive reactions of the audience, and by the reputation gained. Furthermore, association with individuals who are violent weighs upon their friends and family, and these individuals are more likely to commit violent crimes.

For example, if an individual is angry, and the have been raised in a manner in which violent behavior solves problems, they are more likely to turn to violence to resolve their anger. Take a child in elementary school who has his toy stolen. If they usually receive a slap on the hand, or a spanking, the child will probably turn to the same methods to "punish" the student who stole their belongings; just as a child who hears their parents curse is more likely to do so in the same context as their parent did. I once watched a young girl who, upon having a little girl eat her cookie, called her a less than desirable word. Turns out, the father used this word often to describe annoying or irritating people, and the child had learned through modeling. Violence is similar.

References:

Siegel, L., J. (2006). Criminology, 10^th Edition. University Of Massachusetts, Lowell. Thomson.