Which of the following theories suggest that neighborhood environments contribute to criminal behavior?

Abstract

Social learning theory (SLT) is a leading explanation of criminal behavior which maintains that crime is learned and more likely to occur when individuals differentially associate with people who are criminally involved, experience greater exposure to delinquent models, anticipate or actually receive more rewards and fewer punishments for crime, and have a greater number of definitions favorable to crime. Empirical tests have garnered moderate to strong support for the theory. SLT serves as the foundation for many delinquency prevention and offender treatment programs, and has recently been merged with social structural concepts into a social structure–social learning model.

Social Learning Theory

Akers' social learning theory focused on learning experiences that could be measured using survey data and most research on that perspective has used that methodology. As a theory of criminality, social learning theory emerged from a combinations of principles derived from behaviorist operant learning and other psychological theories stressing vicarious learning and imitation. Robert Burgess and Ronald Akers reformulated differential association theory in terms of operant learning theory in 1966, and Akers and colleagues elaborated a more general social learning theory in later works (1979). The social learning theory has been subjected to more empirical tests than any other theory of delinquency.

Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory (SLT) is a cognitive and behavioral approach that has provided an informative theoretical framework for some CCT methods (Black and Mendenhall, 1990; Morris and Robie, 2001). Proposing that people learn by both observation and experience, Bandura (1977) introduced SLT comprised of four main components: attention (behavior must first be noticed before it can be copied), retention (behavior must be remembered), reproduction (behaviors in memory must be put into action), and incentives (behaviors that are perceived to be positively rewarded are enacted). SLT can inform cross-cultural adjustment, as different behavior patterns may occur across cultures. SLT helps explain how people adjust to different cultures, as well as challenges they face with adjustment. The U-curve theory of adjustment provides a general timeline of adjustment challenges; SLT can help explain what is needed for successful adjustment.

Black and Mendenhall (1990) proposed that SLT can influence cross-cultural adjustment. As SLT suggests that people learn from both observation and experience, these scholars posited that CCT would be most beneficial if it includes models (either hypothetical or simulations) of appropriate behavior. Building on their work, Liu and Lee (2008), described four dimensions of successful cross-cultural acculturation. These four dimensions include self-orientation, other-orientation, perceptual skills, and cultural toughness. Self-orientation increases self-esteem and confidence, which helps people deal effectively with stress and adjust to a different culture. Other-orientation is the ability to develop relationships in other cultures (especially mentoring). Perceptual skills are being nonjudgmental and more willing to align beliefs with a host country. Cultural toughness means adapting to the living standard in another country. Together, this is related to the concept of cultural distance, because adjustment proves more difficult when discrepancies in living standards are larger.

Applying the four-dimension learning process of acculturation with SLT can enhance CCT (Liu and Lee, 2008) by guiding training to incorporate methods, which allow for both observation and behavior modeling (e.g., experiential training, simulations, etc.). Training that incorporates observation and experience can increase successful acculturation by helping participants associate positive outcomes with culturally appropriate behaviors, thereby increasing self-orientation (which has been recently advocated by others (e.g., Chao et al., 2011)). This experience can provide individuals with an initial positive interaction that can help develop future successful relationships, enhancing their other-orientation. Accordingly, when training participants encounter a cross-cultural social interaction that they observed or experienced in training, they are more likely to remember and be able to reproduce this behavior. Perceptual skills can be helped by CCT that includes information about how others view the world (e.g., in culture assimilator training) and draw attention to appropriate models of behavior. Making the assumption that trainees receive accurate information, they will develop accurate cognitive maps of appropriate behavior and be able to envision the appropriate behavior in a cross-cultural interaction (Black and Mendenhall, 1990). The role of toughness in relation to SLT needs further study, but holds much promise. While cross-cultural scholars have started to integrate theories, there is still more work to be done (Landis, 2008).

Social Learning

Social learning theories explore the social and interactional factors that play a role in prosocial development. Social learning theories place a heavy emphasis on the actors besides the child, particularly parents and peers, but also teachers, as well as larger social systems, such as schools and communities (Spivak and Howes, 2011). Nevertheless, parents remain an important focus of the literature, and particularly how parenting style, parental discipline techniques, and other socialization techniques are related to children's prosocial behavior (Grusec et al., 2013).

Although early social learning theory has in the past favored a unilateral transmission model of prosociality from parent and the larger society to the child, converging in some ways with the sociological model that Piaget sought to reject, more recent research has stressed a bidirectional developmental relation between the child and others. For example, as children display certain prosocial behaviors such as cleaning up in the context of play and spontaneous interaction, their parents may (or may not) come to expect these behaviors of the child. However, the child may also respond to the parent's bids in various ways, such as by disobeying parental requests for these acts, or differentially responding based on how the parent solicits cooperation (Grusec et al., 2013).

Background: Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory found earlier proponents for application in the classroom than did cognitive theory because of the focus in the social theories on ways in which students learn from interacting with one another. The main concept in social learning theory is that learning occurrences by individuals observing others, especially one's peers. Additionally, social theory blends behavioral concepts of reinforcement and punishment with cognitive concepts of awareness and expectations. A reciprocal causation between environmental conditions and cognitive variables explain the how of learning from this perspective.

The work of Albert Bandura (1969, 1986) spans much of the rich literature in social learning theory. Bandura's model of social learning theory revolves around the individual having the opportunity to model a best example of a desired behavior. Four variables within the modeling paradigm are necessary for learning to occur. These four are attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation. Attention actives the individual's focus on the presentation of the behavior to be learned. This variable establishes the role of the environment as the primary source of information to be learned. Retention, on the other hand, evokes a cognitive condition in which the individual recalls the desired behavior. For learning to have a lengthy duration, retention must occur. The reciprocal causation to retention is the behavioral variable of performing an observable behavior (or motor reproduction). This third variable requires the individual to assume the necessary role conditions of the desired behavior. Simply imaging a behavior in a mental model is insufficient for learning. Finally, learning a behavior is largely dependent on the effort or motivation that the individual puts into the task. Motivation in this model is the responsibility of the individual.

The reciprocal relationship between cognitive variables and environmental conditions is the within the affective domain. For example, self-efficacy, defined as a situational attitude, reflects on the person's belief toward possible task success. High self-efficacy would imply that a person feels that they can achieve success in a given situation. On the other hand, low self-efficacy would necessarily inhibit a goal of success. Another affective domain variable that strongly shows the cognitive role in learning is the concept of self-regulation. This variable is central to the cognitive theories of constructivism. For self-regulation to develop, the individual needs to establish personal criteria by which to make decisions and choices. Other affective/cognitive variables in social learning theory are self-observation and judging, self-monitoring, and self-imposed stimulus control.

Social Learning Theory

Social Learning Theory was popularized by Bandura (1986), and encompasses how observations in the social world impact behaviors and cognitions. Although classical and operant conditioning are still relevant, Bandura also proposed modeling, where an observer views a person's actions and their consequences. If that person is rewarded, the observer is more likely to mimic those actions. However, if the action is punished, the observer learns to expect negative consequences from that behavior. Modeling may take place immediately (direct imitation) or the consequences of the behavior are remembered later (observational learning) (Nelson, 2010). For example, premarital sex may be rewarded in some communities and punished in others; and by observing these consequences, members of these communities learn the expectations of acceptable sexual behavior. In fact, the belief that peers are also sexually active is a strong predictor of previous engagement in sexual activity (Christopher et al., 1993; see Sexual Debut). Thus, socialization, culture, and media contribute to the development of expectations of the consequences of behaviors and one does not need to experience reinforcement or punishment personally in order to be affected. Bandura (1977) proposed that after successfully performing a task, one experiences a sense of self-efficacy. In the sexual context, the affective experience and timing of first intercourse may be of particular importance, as it has a strong impact on sexual self-efficacy, which is positively correlated with healthy sexual adjustment in later life (Reissing et al., 2011, 2005).

Although heavily supported through empirical research, the primary criticisms of the social learning theory include that it assumes passivity in the nature of the observer who recieves rewards or punishments, that the theory does not explain why certain behaviors are rewarded or punished, and that it fails to explain why some individuals will not conform to social norms (Nelson, 2010). The following theories will address some of these concerns.

Social Learning Theories

Social learning theories reject the emphasis on internal mental processes that characterize attachment and psychoanalytic theories of child abuse. Rather, learning theories suggest that behavior, including abuse, is shaped through individual interaction with the environment. In this framework, child abuse results from dysfunctional child-care practices that are modeled by succeeding generations of children. Interventions drawing upon learning theory attempt to change the child-rearing behaviors of maltreating parents through education and behavior modification. However, some studies indicate that these interventions are inadequate without corresponding emphasis on attitudinal and relational changes.

Drawing on the available evidence which includes prospective studies conducted in the United States, researchers estimate that 25%–35% of maltreated children will abuse their own children. Although these rates suggest that a history of abuse is an important risk factor for future child or partner abuse, many childhood victims do not abuse their own children and some nonabused adults initiate abusive practices. Recent scholarly attention has focused on identifying the processes which diminish risks of intergenerational transfer. These studies suggest that social support and social bonding play an important role in ending the cycle of violence: child victims of abuse who were supported by a nonabusive adult during childhood are less likely to be abusive toward their children. Moreover, adults who are able to express anger about their childhood victimization and those who have participated in psychotherapy have decreased risks of perpetrating abuse against their own children, while those who dissociate from their abusive experiences are less able to end the violent cycle. Future research on pathways to abuse among adults who did not experience abuse as children and on the processes which mitigate the intergenerational transfer of abusive practices will aid understanding of the complex etiology of abuse.

The RNR Model and Its Implementation in Practice

Based on the evidence from ‘what works’ the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model of Andrews et al. (1990) became particularly influential in practice. According to this concept appropriate treatment must match the offender's risk for reoffending (R), address his/her specific criminogenic needs (N), and use methods that fit to the individual's learning style (R). Meta-analyses showed that appropriate programs reduced reoffending by up to 60% (Andrews et al., 1990) or – more realistically – by approximately 20–30% (Andrews and Bonta, 2010). Treatment effects systematically increased with the number of principles realized (Andrews and Bonta, 2010; Hanson et al., 2009; Koehler et al., 2013b), whereas programs that met none of the three conditions even had a slightly negative effect.

The social learning theory background of the RNR model particularly supports CBT, but it is not limited to such programs. The model has been expanded by emphasizing organizational factors, staff skills, therapeutic relationships, offenders' strengths, and linkages to the community (Andrews and Bonta, 2010; Andrews et al., 2011; Lösel, 1995a). Such broader perspectives go beyond the content of single programs. In various countries they were transformed into accreditation criteria. For example, the Correctional Services Advisory and Accreditation Panel of England and Wales applies the following criteria:

clear model of change;

thorough selection of offenders;

targeting a range of dynamic risk factors;

effective learning and teaching methods;

skill-orientation;

adequate sequence and duration;

promotion of offender motivation;

continuity of services;

ensuring program integrity;

ongoing evaluation.

Within a decade many programs for various offender groups have been accredited. Measures of systematic offender assessment, staff training, supervision, and auditing (mainly in prisons) have been implemented to ensure quality. The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) has been established for more integration of prison and probation services. The fast roll-out of offending behavior programs inevitably led to some implementation problems and, in particular, to deficits in controlled evaluation (Maguire et al., 2010). Quasi-experimental studies showed some encouraging findings, but also mixed results (Harper and Chitty, 2005; Hollin, 2008). However, in a large study of more than 17 000 participants of the custodial Enhanced Thinking Skills program there was a reduction in reoffending by 12% in comparison to a national cohort of offenders matched for risk and sentence length (Travers et al., 2013b). The overall decrease in reoffending in England and Wales during the last decade (Ministry of Justice (2013)) may partially be attributed to the large-scale implementation of rehabilitation programs; however, this is only indirect and not robust evidence.

Social Learning and Observational Learning Theories

The social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) suggested that children imitate others for the appropriate gender roles and behaviors. While children are prewired to imitate whatever comes to their attention, rewards and punishments may moderate whether the learning is successful. Reward, be it direct or vicarious, is applied to reinforce gender-appropriate behaviors. For instance, parents tend to have more rough and tumble plays with boys (vs girls); parents also tend to provide gender-appropriate toys to their children (Levy, 1999), and show more acceptance to boys expressing anger than to girls doing the same (Zahn-Waxler and Polanichka, 2004). Parents are generally less tolerant to cross-gender behavior, which means behaving in an atypical manner to one's gender, among boys than in girls. Boys are more likely to be punished for not being masculine than girls being not feminine, or having gender role transgression (e.g., Sirin et al., 2004). As boys grow into men, studies found that men experience more gender role anxiety than women (Vandello and Bosson, 2013). This might be explained by the social learning theory, as men tend to receive punishment for not showing manhood since young age. As mothers are usually the primary caregivers of children, mothers tend to relate themselves more to daughters than to sons. When boys cannot fully identify themselves by modeling mothers, they recognize themselves as being different from mothers (Wood, 2011). Vandello and Bosson (2013) argued that in most cultural settings, boys can only adapt to ‘snormal’ or ‘healthy’ male gender roles by separating themselves from their female caregivers, and to avoid femininity by their best efforts to show that they perform, behave, and think differently compared with females to gain manhood.

As children grow up and build broader social connection outside the family, the learning models and rewards are extended, mainly in school settings. Eder et al. (1995) found that in middle schools, males and females are reinforced differently and they therefore may pick up different gender roles. For instance, males are reinforced by both peers and teachers as being athletes, while females are not; males are encouraged to act aggressively, again by teachers and peers; compared with boys, being physically attractive is valued among girls, while physically unattractive girls are more likely to be picked on; sexually active girls receive defaming comments, while sexually active boys receive social praise and approval; heterosexuality is widely accepted in middle schools; and those who do not act according to the widely accepted gender role would be socially rejected. Teenagers may be socialized to adopt the accepted gender role by conforming to the norm. Any preexisting differences in gender role are further strengthened by observing the hidden rule and reinforcing (or punishing) by following or violating them.

Parents and Siblings as Role Models and Teachers

As depicted in social learning theory, one way in which families have profound influences on children's learning is through the modeling of behaviors. Children who observe their parents reading are more likely to read themselves. Children are more likely to learn about organized sports if parents and/or siblings are involved in such sports. Children become ‘socialized,’ learning the acceptable behaviors of their culture, by observing parents and siblings. Thus, for example, a young Korean child will learn that a loud belch is an appropriate way to show appreciation for an excellent meal, whereas a child in Kansas will learn that such noises should be suppressed at the table.

Through observing parents and other family members, children learn cognitive skills such as language, social skills such as how to greet a stranger, and cultural attitudes such as appropriate dress for a party. The toddler observes an older sibling's interactions with friends and imitates that behavior later in other social situations. A young adolescent internalizes a social stereotype after observing his parent consistently becomes tense when encountering members of another racial group.

In addition to these examples of observational learning, children learn from the direct instruction of their parents and siblings. From birth onward, parents and siblings are an important source of children's knowledge. Through everyday conversations and activities with family members, children acquire concepts of schemas (e.g., what a visit to the doctor's office entails), grammar, and mathematical concepts (e.g., the early distinction between ‘one’ and ‘more’; how to fairly divide the last piece of cake). Children learn memory strategies (e.g., where can I put my show-and-tell item so I will not forget it tomorrow morning), metacognitive knowledge (I cannot concentrate on my homework while big brother is listening to that music), and problem solving (How should I clean up this spilled sugar?).

Instruction that takes place in the home is markedly different from that found in the school setting, in that it is largely unplanned, informal, and context-grounded, rather than the planned, formal, and context-independent instruction that occurs in school. Most instruction in the home occurs spontaneously based on the specific events, feelings, and needs of a given moment in the family life. Because it is so highly context-dependent, this instruction from siblings and parents provides the basis for most of the child's knowledge and skills of how to survive in the day-to-day world.