Mini lecture
Week 4 Theories of Causation
What is a scientific theory? It is an explanation of a particular phenomenon (act) that has
repeatedly been tested and verified using the scientific method of accepted protocols of
observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. It basically explains why something
happens based on at least two asserted tested relations. The important aspect of a theory is that it
MUST be tested. As we start to look at theories that explain delinquency, we must keep in mind
that these theories have been tested. Now, we may not agree with them all, and that’s OK. And,
we may look at the test used and still not be sold, and that’s OK as well. As time goes by, we
progress and through this progression, we find newer more accurate methods of testing. And as
we do this, naturally we find flaws with previous “tested and proven” theories. Unfortunately,
we don’t get to spend much time on theories which is my favorite part, so I am going to try to
keep in a nutshell version.
Let’s go way back and start with the most basic; the theory that the Devil made him do it. When
you think about it, it would make sense because any person in their right mind would know
better than to act in certain ways, so it had to be something supernatural that made them do it.
Demonology is a theological theory of crime that was based on religion. Religion teaches us the
difference between right and wrong, and if an individual acts in the wrong unacceptable manner,
it must be because there is an evil influence that leads to this. When we think about it, in some
cultures, religiosity still plays an important role in how we see things today when it comes to
criminal behavior. Being “saved” while incarcerated is not uncommon. What are we being
saved from? Evil. But today, as opposed to drilling a hole in one’s skull to extract the evil
through trephining, we can hold a prayer group. One of the problems with demonology was the
inability to test it, including the practice of trephining. Now, it may have stopped the undesired
behavior, but it also stopped more than that.
So let’s move on to the Classical theory of criminology which is the most basic and one that is
hard to argue. Chances are all of you have applied this theory if you ever said or thought, “You
know better, you knew what the consequence would be.” For the most part, the classical school
is based on Free Will. In this, the assumption is we are all born with the free will to make
decisions and in doing so, there is nothing else to blame but our free will. It is based on the
assumption that we know better. When you choose to do something wrong, no matter what
influences you had, ultimately you have the free will to choose to not do it. That’s hard to argue.
Now, let’s take that a step further to the rational choice theory. With this, the assumption is that
by using my free will, I made a rational choice. This is not to say my decision was rational, but
the process I used to reach the decision was. I can give you a rational reason as to why I chose to
commit the crime. Wait, what? With the rational choice theory, there is the assumption that I
know the act is unacceptable, and the assumption is that I know there will be a consequence for carrying out that act. But, when I decided to carry out the act, I also chose to accept that
consequence, thus making a rational choice. I weighed the benefits I would get from carrying
out the behavior and measured that against the consequences to determine which the better of the
two options for me was. My family is hungry and needs food but I have no money and no means
to buy food. I can steal a loaf of bread to feed my family, but I know it is wrong and that if I get
caught, I will have a consequence to pay. For me, the decision is basically to determine if the
consequence is worth paying to feed my family. If I determine it is, then will steal the bread
because then my family would have at least eaten. If the consequence is a day in jail, I will do
that to feed my family.
Let’s look at some basic theories on crime.
Deterrence theory
This is a really simple one that would explain why people do NOT commit crimes, or should not.
Knowing the consequences of committing a criminal act should keep us from committing a
crime. If I know I will be punished for something, the threat of that punishment should keep me
from doing it. For some of us, that is what kept us in line at home; the fear of being punished.
Now, if I take that chance, commit the act, get caught, and then be punished, that should keep me
from committing a crime again. That would be specific deterrence. Knowing that some
individuals get the punishment of long prison terms or even death, should keep us from
committing crimes. General deterrence. We know this really doesn’t work for everyone.
If we go back to free will and determine that the delinquent act was worth the punishment, or, the
pleasure was greater than the pain, there is no deterrence. For some, their mental capacity may
not grasp the connection of a possible consequence with certain behavior. In some cases, there is
just no punishment. Unfortunately, for others, the punishment may be the result of not
committing the crime.
In general, deterrence is a pretty strong factor in our lives and not just from a criminal
perspective. Many times, our choices are based on the possible outcomes that may come from
that behavior, especially the potentially bad ones. These decisions may not result in a punitive
sanction, but it can be that action may disappoint someone we care about, who we don’t want to
disappoint. And we feel we have let someone down, that’s a hard pill to swallow for most. Now
let’s think about that kid who doesn’t have that important person in their life. The absence of that
factor (protective factor) can contribute to delinquent behavior.
Routine activities theory
This one explains how our activities can make it easier for crime to occur. First, there needs to be
a motivated offender, someone who has a reason to commit a crime. It is not hard to find one of
those. Next, we need a suitable target. This can be a person, place, or thing. Lastly, there needs to
be a lack of a suitable guardian. I think we can all think of situations that fall into this. The
person looking for a car to steal (motivated offender), the person who forgets something inside
so runs back into the house leaving the car running (suitable target) and no one else is in the car
to watch it (absence of a suitable guardian.) When we stop and think about this, for many of us,
our everyday activities set this scenario up perfectly. We go to work every morning and leave our house unattended for a good portion of the day knowing there are people looking for houses
to break into. Here is your motivated offender, a suitable target because I have stuff you can
steal and sell, and no guardian at home. Or, is there? I have an alarm system! This eliminates one
of the required elements. Now, what about that UHD student who attends evening classes and
parks in a free spot on a not-so-well-lit street who parks in the same place every evening? They
are alone. That motivated offender has seen this person’s routine. All of the elements are there.
Biological theories
Earlier we mentioned that a person whose mental capacity keeps them from being able to
effectively apply the deterrence theory is an example of biological theory plain and simple.
There can be many biological factors that affect one’s cognitive abilities or alter their rational
thinking ability. Some think of the criminally insane, the sociopath. We can go back and look at
those old theories that identified born criminals by their physical traits. The funny thing is I have
many of those. So let’s not worry too much about those. As far as juveniles, unmet mental
health needs do contribute to delinquency.
Learning theories/behaviorism
This is a pretty straightforward one as well. We learn our behaviors. We may learn these
behaviors from watching those significant people around us. And naturally, if it is acceptable for
them to do it, it must be okay for me to do it. And for others, the learning isn’t from watching, it
is from being taught. I have a kid tell me, “Mr. Gonzales, you know I am a (gave his last name)
and this is what we all do. This is what we were taught and raised to do, commit crimes. Why
would you expect me to do anything different?”
Sociological Theories
Much like the learning theory, this asserts that this learning process is influenced by the extent of
our interactions with those who commit crimes. Being that this is a common occurrence, the
person then adopts these criminal values and behaviors. Some kids get mixed up with the wrong
groups (gangs) and no matter what they learn from home, the more they associate with this group
and accept their ways of doing things, the more likely they will adopt those deviant behaviors.
Social bonds theories
This is one of those that explains why people do not engage in delinquent behavior. We hit a
little on this when we talked about not disappointing those who are important to us. This includes
the control theory.
Now, remember, I said I would expect you all to do some research on your own. The last 4
theories above are really categories of theories and I am going to ask you all to dive deeper into
them. For your assignment, you will identify at least one specific theory within each of the
categories. For example, sociological theories include differential association, anomie,
subculture, and so forth. Pick one and explain it to me in as much detail as possible. In total, you
will summarize 4 theories.
