Travis Hirschi Has Had An Important Influence On Criminology

Travis Hirschi Has Had An Important Influence On Criminology First Au

Travis Hirschi has significantly influenced criminology through his characterization of control theories and his development of major versions of social control perspectives. His work, beginning with "Causes of Delinquency" in 1969 and culminating in "A General Theory of Crime" in 1990 co-authored with Michael Gottfredson, offers a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms that inhibit criminal behavior. This essay traces Hirschi’s scholarly trajectory, focusing on his demarcation of control theories, their core assumptions, and how they differ from competing perspectives such as social learning and strain theories. It also examines Hirschi’s social bond theory, elaborating on each bond as a form of social control, alongside Gottfredson and Hirschi’s self-control theory, highlighting its foundations and implications for criminological understanding.

What Constitutes a Control Theory?

According to Travis Hirschi, control theories are distinguished by their foundational premise about human nature and the core questions they pose. Control theories posit that individuals inherently possess tendencies toward selfishness, impulsivity, and a disregard for conventional norms. This view contrasts with other theories that might emphasize external circumstances or learned behaviors. The fundamental premise of control theories is that human beings are naturally inclined to pursue their own interests, often at the expense of societal rules, and that social controls serve to restrain these tendencies (Hirschi, 1969).

The primary question control theories seek to answer is: Why do people conform to rules and laws instead of engaging in deviance or crime? Hirschi explains that social bonds—connections to family, friends, and society—are what effectively regulate these innate tendencies. When these bonds are strong, individuals are less likely to commit crimes because their bonds motivate conformity, while weak bonds result in a higher likelihood of deviance. Thus, control theories focus on internal and external social controls as central mechanisms that inhibit criminal behavior (Hirschi, 1969).

Differences from Differential Association and Strain Theories

Control theories fundamentally differ from their main competitors: differential association/social learning theories and strain theories. Differential association theory, pioneered by Edwin Sutherland, emphasizes that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with others who advocate for or model deviant behavior. Social learning theory further develops this idea, asserting that individuals learn attitudes, techniques, and motivations for crime via reinforcement and imitation (Akers, 1998). These perspectives assume that deviant behavior results from a process of social influence and learning, with less emphasis on inherent human tendencies.

In contrast, control theories, including those by Hirschi, assume that innate tendencies toward self-interest require external social controls to prevent deviance. The emphasis is on the strength or weakness of social bonds, rather than the frequency or intensity of deviant associations (Hirschi, 1969).

Strain theories, such as that proposed by Robert Merton, argue that societal structures create pressures or strains that push individuals toward crime when they cannot achieve culturally valued goals legitimately (Merton, 1938). These theories focus on societal inequities and blocked opportunities rather than individual self-control or social bonds.

Hence, while differential association and strain theories focus on external influences or societal structures to explain criminality, Hirschi’s control theories concentrate on internal self-regulation and social bonds as the key deterrents of criminal conduct.

Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory

Hirschi's social bond theory, introduced in his 1969 work, emphasizes four key social bonds that connect individuals to society: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief (Hirschi, 1969). Each bond acts as a form of social control by fostering emotional and moral ties that inhibit deviant behavior.

• Attachment: Emotional closeness to significant others, such as parents, teachers, and peers, discourages individuals from engaging in delinquency because they do not wish to disappoint or hurt those they care about.
• Commitment: Investment in conventional activities such as education and career prospects acts as a rational stake in conformity; the more invested, the less risk to future prospects through criminal acts.
• Involvement: Excessive engagement in conventional activities leaves less time and opportunity for delinquency, functioning as a circumscription of deviant behavior.
• Belief: Strong moral beliefs and respect for rules make deviance less acceptable and less likely to occur, acting as an internalized control.

Each bond inhibits crime by fostering internal moral standards, emotional commitments, and involvement in prosocial activities. When these bonds weaken, the individual’s self-control diminishes, increasing the likelihood of offending (Hirschi, 1969).

Gottfredson and Hirschi’s Self-Control Theory

In 1990, Gottfredson and Hirschi expanded on control theory with their development of self-control theory, emphasizing low self-control as the primary factor influencing criminal and deviant behavior (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). Unlike social bond theory, which focuses on bonds to society, self-control theory centers on individual traits that predispose people to engage in impulsive or risky behaviors, including crime.

Self-control is defined as the capacity to delay gratification, control impulses, and consider long-term consequences. A person with high self-control reliably resists temptations and refrains from impulsive acts, while someone with low self-control is more prone to immediate gratification without regard for future costs. Low self-control is viewed as a stable personality trait that originates during early childhood, primarily shaped by effective parenting and socialization during the formative years (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). Poor parenting practices, such as inconsistent discipline, lack of supervision, and neglect, result in the development of low self-control, predisposing individuals to criminal behavior throughout their lives.

This theory explicitly functions as a control theory because it attributes criminality to personal characteristics that diminish self-regulation, effectively removing internal restraints on impulsive urges. The low self-control trait influences a broad range of risky behaviors, not solely criminal acts, but its strong association with criminal conduct has made it a central concept in criminology (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001).

Fundamental Critique of Earlier Social Bond Theory

The core critique that Gottfredson and Hirschi present against their earlier social bond theory is that social bonds, while influential, are not the fundamental cause of criminal behavior. Instead, they argue that low self-control, which develops early in life, is the most critical predictor of criminality. They posit that social bonds and other external controls are effective only insofar as they influence the development of self-control during childhood. This shift signifies their recognition that internal traits like low self-control are more stable and predictive than external social bonds, which can weaken over time (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990).

Therefore, their self-control theory represents a more parsimonious and empirically supported framework for understanding criminal conduct, as it emphasizes internal personality traits over external social factors. It critiques the social bond theory by asserting that social bonds influence crime primarily through their impact on self-control, positioning low self-control as the fundamental root of criminal behavior.

Overall, the evolution from social bond theory to self-control theory highlights an important theoretical shift in criminology—moving from external social mechanisms to internal personality traits as the core explanation for criminal activity. This transition underscores the importance of early childhood socialization in shaping individual self-control, which has profound implications for crime prevention policies (Hirschi & Gottfredson, 2001).

Conclusion

In conclusion, Travis Hirschi’s contributions to criminology significantly advanced understanding of control mechanisms that inhibit criminal behavior. His social bond theory emphasizes the role of external social ties in fostering conformity, while his collaboration with Gottfredson led to the development of a self-control theory that emphasizes internal traits rooted in childhood socialization. Both theories are integral to the control perspective, with the latter offering a more focused explanation rooted in personality development. Their work collectively underscores the importance of internal self-regulation as a critical factor in preventing crime, marking a major evolution in criminological thought.

References

• Akera, A. (1998). Learning crimes: The social construction of criminal knowledge. Law & Society Review, 32(3), 473-502.
• Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press.
• Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. University of California Press.
• Hirschi, T., & Gottfredson, M. R. (2001). Aging and crime. In J. P. Wright & L. E. Bursik Jr. (Eds.), Disadvantaged youth and crime (pp. 37-58). Routledge.
• Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672-682.
• Paternoster, R., & Bachman, R. (2001). Explaining criminal careers. Crime and Justice, 28, 1-64.