Theories in the Sociology of Crime

There are many theories about crime and criminal behavior, but one theory in particular stands out. Becker argues that crime is a rational choice, much like economic behavior. Just as individuals weigh the costs of goods and services against their utility, they also weigh the benefits and costs of criminal actions. The rational choice view proposes that individuals would commit crimes when the benefits outweighed the costs. This theory has proven to be remarkably accurate in explaining crime and criminal behavior, but there are many other theories that are just as valid.

Control theory

There are several different types of theories in sociology, but one is called the control theory, and it’s most applicable to the study of crime. In this theory, crime is a problem that people cannot solve on their own, but a society can use control measures to prevent this problem. These measures include both preventive and repressive measures, as well as social norms. The term “social control” is generally used to refer to any method that attempts to reduce the incidence of crime.

In addition to social control, Hirschi also argues that deviance can be explained by belief. The theory claims that deviance is the result of individuals’ beliefs and values, and that this causes people to engage in criminal behavior. In addition to this, the theory also asserts that deviance can be rationalized, and that people can violate rules while maintaining the belief that they have done the right thing. However, this theory doesn’t explain all types of crime, and it makes it seem as if there are simple solutions.

A second type of crime theory, known as the control theory, argues that self-control is an important factor in criminal behavior. When individuals feel that they can control their own behavior, they are less likely to commit crimes. Self-control is also related to risk-taking behavior. The former is more likely to prevent crime, while the latter is the result of self-control. This theory, however, is not universally applicable to all crimes.

Another theory called social control is the inverse relationship between crime and severity. A higher crime rate is associated with higher crime severity, while fewer murders are associated with lower levels of crime. Social pressures can also affect criminal choice, as social control structures shape the alternatives that people have. Those who have high degrees of confidence in society are less likely to engage in activities that create opportunities for criminal activity. Ultimately, crime is a social problem and the more social pressures a society has, the lower its crime rates will be.

The social control theory is one of three major perspectives in contemporary criminology. It suggests that the role of a certain group in a society is reproduced in a family. The weaker the control influences, the more people deviate from social norms. In addition, this theory posits a direct relationship between social structures and crime, with both genders contributing to increased criminality rates. But this theory does not claim that these factors are causal.

Anomie theory

Anomie theory in sociology of crime proposes that excessive crimes are a sign of social disorder or loss of collective consciousness. As such, society must work to prevent anomie and ensure that everyone has a sense of social belonging. This political goal is achieved by communicating moral concepts and values to everyone. Individuals recognize this standardization, which leads them to reject certain desires or severely limit their needs. This theory also explains why anomie is often the culprit in violent crimes.

Anomie theory has its roots in classical sociology and aims to explain the increasing crime rates in society. It proposes that individuals who do not fit into society’s norms are social misfits and are more likely to commit crimes. This theory was popularized by Emile Durkheim, Robert Merton, and Richard Cloward. Its most influential contribution to criminology is its focus on the social environment and differential rates of deviance.

The first step in understanding anomie is to understand its roots in the broader social context. According to Merton, anomie occurs when individuals do not have any acceptable means of achieving their goals. If these methods fail, goals can become so important that people use illegitimate means to achieve them. The greater the focus on the end, the more the anomie will manifest. Similarly, when society forces people to achieve wealth and success, anomie will occur. People will violate norms out of personal gain and the fear of punishment.

In the nineteenth century, Durkheim observed massive social changes in Europe, and argued that anomie was a direct result of the dissolution of traditional institutions. After the industrial revolution, anomie was a social problem resulting from the lack of social support. Ultimately, the result is an increase in crime. Therefore, people who suffer from anomie are often dissatisfied with their lives.

Similarly, economic measures do not have a determinant effect on crime. Instead, the interplay between economic and non-economic institutions increases the likelihood of committing crimes. In such circumstances, committing crimes becomes a viable means to meet financial needs. The anomie theory can therefore be viewed as a necessary evil. In this context, it is crucial to understand the role of economic institutions in society.

Social disorganization theory

The theory of social disorganization in sociology of crime has been used to explain why some communities have high rates of crime. It focuses on the behaviors and choices that people make as well as the role of race and ethnicity in influencing criminal behavior. Social disorganization theory can be applied to any neighborhood, regardless of the size. Here are a few ways that it can be used. This theory is primarily used to explain the behavior of individuals in certain communities.

The theory of social disorganization has a mixed history, with both supporters and opponents. It has been argued that crime rates are higher in poor neighborhoods due to a lack of social organization and the lack of opportunities for investing in the community. Its empirical findings, however, indicate that there is a link between social disorganization and higher crime rates. While these results are inconsistent, these studies do point to the role of social disorganization in crime.

In the early 1900s, research on the social disorganization perspective focused on race, ethnic composition, and neighborhood stability. The eugenics movement and growing crime rates spurred much of this research. Although many researchers continued to focus on these variables, a handful of studies went beyond the theory to further understand crime and neighborhoods. Many studies, however, paid homage to the theory and attempted to prove its validity.

Social disorganization theory was developed during the Chicago School. Interestingly, it is closely related to ecological theories and suggests that crime rates are directly related to neighborhood ecological characteristics. It also states that people in certain neighbourhoods are more likely to commit criminal activity than those in other neighborhoods. In other words, the sociological theory of social disorganization claims that a neighborhood’s social and physical conditions determine crime rates.

In order to test the social disorganization theory in sociology of crime, a study has replicated the methodology in an independent national sample of 11,030 British localities in 1984. The results of both surveys support the theory. Moreover, they provide the core empirical support for the theory in urban areas. There are also implications for rural communities. It is worth mentioning that this theory is applicable in small towns as well as in rural communities.

Peacemaking theory

Peacemaking theory in sociology of crime has several implications. One is that crime is not a solitary act but rather a product of violence. The theory is informed by social and cultural theory, including penal abolitionism, anarchism, and humanism. It also suggests that crime can be a manifestation of personal transformations that promote peace. In this way, it can be used to change society.

This theory is based on the principle that conflict is a result of the inequalities in power and wealth. Inequalities are the primary source of societal conflict, and capitalism ignores and manipulates the criminal justice system in favor of the rich. Because of these injustices, the poor engage in criminal behavior because of the pain and misery that these social classes experience. Peacemaking theory in sociology of crime emphasizes the importance of creating a better future for everyone by addressing the causes of conflict.

One of the most important pillars of peacemaking criminology is an awareness of human suffering. Crime is an expression of human suffering, and peacemaking theory emphasizes the necessity for awareness and compassion. These three pillars lead to policy and broader change. However, evidence of its application is still difficult to come by. In the meantime, peacemaking theory is rooted in restorative justice processes. This theory also highlights the importance of justice for victims.

Peacemaking theory in sociology of crime challenges critical criminology by emphasizing relationship values. Relationship values include respect, forgiveness, and responsibility. In a violent society, the social conditions are conducive to revenge. For this reason, peacemaking theory challenges critical criminology by emphasizing the importance of relationship values in conflict resolution. Peacemaking theory in sociology of crime strives to address this gap. The theory has implications for all levels of social institutions.