1. Exposure to Delinquent Peers zWhy S.L. measure? zStrength of Relationship yR’s =.2 -.4 are common zCriticisms Measuring delinquency twice Causal (time) ordering (birds of a feather

2. Pro-Criminal Attitudes zWhy a measure of S.L.? zStrength of relationship? R’s >.4 zCriticism CAUSAL ORDERING: Rationalization are simply post-hoc excuses, they do not “cause” crime, but only allow the criminal to wiggle out of trouble

3. Social Learning and the Life-course zWhen do the concepts of social learning (Akers/Sutherland) theory operate? zGerald Patterson’s Social-Interactional Theory yFocus on early childhood, and rewards/punish y“Definitions” and “Imitation” not central yRather, “Parental Efficacy”

4. Gerald Patterson (OSLS) z1982 “Coercion Theory” z1992 “Social- Interactional Approach” yOregon Social Learning Center yVery Applied: Work with families with young, antisocial boys.

5. Patterson’s Social-Interactional Model Family Structure SES Difficult Infant High Crime Neighborhood Divorce/Stress Unskilled Grandparents Parental Efficacy Monitor Recognize Discipline R + Problem Solving Antisocial Child Social Incompetence Context Family Management Outcomes

6. Later in the Theory zAntisocial Child Affects the Environment yPeer Rejection yPoor Academic Performance yParental Rejection zThis leads to further problems yDeviant Peer Group ySchool Failure yDelinquency

7. Beyond Surveys zEstablishing causation via experiments with offenders yWhat is the policy implication of S.L.T.? yMeasure both “intermediate objectives” and long-term outcomes

8. Patterson and OSLC research zRecruited “high risk” children yStealers, fire-starters, truants… zFocus on training parents yAlso cognitive/behavioral methods to build social competence zAble to substantially reduce delinquency, improve school performance

9. Don Andrews (1980) zGroup treatment for Prisoners and Probationers yManipulated content (definitions), group leaders (quality of role model), and self- management yReductions in recidivism ranged from 10- 25% Support for the Sutherland/Akers Tradition

10. Achievement Place zHouses with a married couple serving as “parents” yServed as “role models” yToken economy + verbal physical praise yPeer groups (“positive peer culture”) zEvaluations are mixed (some positive) yTend to lose positive effects after release yBe wary of “peer culture” programs

11. Cognitive Programs zChanging what criminals think y“Criminal Thinking Errors” x(Rationalizations, Definitions) zChanging how criminals think yAnger management yProsocial Skills SUPPORT FOR BANDURA, PATTERSON

12. SUMMARY OF APPLIED RESEARCH zCognitive and/or Behavioral Programs are the best bet for reducing Recidivism y“Meta-analysis” findings are impressive yAverage reduction in recidivism across 45 studies? x>30%

13. SUMMARY OF S.L.T zGOOD 1. Substantial Empirical Support (survey and experimental) 2. Useful Policy Implications 3. Scope and Parsimony zBAD 1. Causal ordering? 2. Is all antisocial behavior “learned?”

14. Review of Social Learning Theories zBandura yHow aggression is learned yoperant conditioning, cognitive, vicarious zSutherland/Akers yHow deviant values are transmitted yoperant conditioning, vicarious learning yAntisocial values (definitions) are central zPatterson yEarly childhood, family processes and “context”