While Differential Association Theory Would Stress The Influ

While Differential Association Theory Would Stress The Influence Of Pe

While differential association theory would stress the influence of peers, social control theories would emphasize the role of parents, teachers, and coaches. How do you see these two competing models in terms of predicting delinquency?

Directions: Students will be required to post one (1) original response and one (1) supplemental response based on another student’s post by the last Sunday in the module at 11:59 p.m. Students are expected to post a high quality message that are related to the discussion topic. Original responses are to be at least 250 words in length, in Times New Roman, 12-point font, American Psychological Association (APA) format, which includes in-text and endnote citations as needed. Supplemental responses are to be at least 100 words in length, in Times New Roman, 12-point font, APA format. Students can include the following types of information in the reply posts: 1) agreements or di

Paper For Above instruction

The study of juvenile delinquency has long been central to understanding the factors that influence youth behavior. Among the prominent theoretical frameworks are Differential Association Theory and Social Control Theory, each offering distinct perspectives on the roots of delinquent activity. While both aim to explain why youth may engage in criminal or delinquent acts, their contrasting emphases—peer influence versus social regulatory mechanisms—highlight different pathways through which delinquency can develop.

Differential Association Theory, originally proposed by Edwin Sutherland, posits that delinquency is learned through interactions with others, especially peers who are involved in criminal behaviors (Sutherland & Cressey, 1978). This theory emphasizes the role of social environments and peer groups, asserting that individuals adopt delinquent attitudes and behaviors after frequent exposure to definitions that favor violation of laws and norms. For example, if a youth's peer group consistently justifies theft or drug use, the adolescent is more likely to internalize these behaviors as acceptable. The central idea is that delinquency is not innate but transmitted through social interaction, making peers a critical influence in shaping an individual's propensity for criminal activity.

In contrast, Social Control Theory, associated with Travis Hirschi (1969), emphasizes the importance of social bonds and institutions—such as family, schools, and community groups—in regulating youth behavior. This theory suggests that strong attachments, commitments, involvement, and beliefs act as controls preventing individuals from engaging in delinquency. When these bonds are weak or broken, individuals are more likely to drift into delinquent acts because they lack the social constraints that discourage such behavior. For instance, a youth with strong family ties and invested in school is less likely to engage in delinquency compared to one with dysfunctional family relationships and weak educational attachments.

When evaluating the predictive power of these models, research indicates that them both contribute valuable insights but operate differently in explaining delinquency. Differential Association Theory emphasizes that delinquency is primarily learned from social interactions, particularly with delinquent peers (Akers, 2011). This model is particularly effective in explaining occurring patterns of youth involvement in gangs or drug networks. However, it may overlook the role of personal bonds and internal mechanisms of self-control. Conversely, Social Control Theory emphasizes the role of social bonds in preventing delinquency, making it useful in understanding how strengthening family and community ties can reduce criminal activity (Hirschi, 1969). Nonetheless, it may underplay the influence of peer networks and the social learning component.

In practice, these models are complementary rather than mutually exclusive. Juvenile delinquency likely results from a complex interplay between learned behaviors from peers and the strength or weakness of social bonds. For example, a youth may have delinquent peers but also possess strong family attachments that deter them from engaging in criminal acts. Conversely, weak social bonds and association with delinquent peers may synergistically increase the likelihood of delinquency. Therefore, holistic intervention strategies should consider both peer influences and strengthening social bonds to effectively prevent and reduce youth delinquency.

References

• Akers, R. L. (2011). Docking social learning theory. In R. L. Akers & G. Sutherland (Eds.), Learning theories of crime and deviance (pp. 111-138). Routledge.
• Hirschi, T. (1969). causes of deliquency. University of California Press.
• Sutherland, E., & Cressey, D. (1978). Principles of criminology. Lippincott.