1. TURNING TO CRIME Upbringing

2. Rank these factors as to how much they would affect a person who turns to crime: TelevisionPets Gender Age Social classEducation` OccupationAddictions NewspapersFilms GenesPeers ParentsSiblings Brain function

3. Upbringing Influence of upbringing includes influences from families, friends, teachers and general life experiences such as where a person has been brought up. It is unlikely that a single factor will explain this, but we can try to build a picture of effects that come together as potential triggers of criminal behaviour.

4. Turning To CrimeUpbringing The Cambridge Study Farrington Differential Association Sutherland The Peterborough Youth Study Wilkstrom & Tafel

5. Evidence 1: Farrington et al (2006) Many would argue that the biggest influence on criminality is family. If your family are criminals it is likely that you will also be a criminal. However, this is obviously a very deterministic explanation, as it ignores individual differences, some people do manage to buck the trend and turn their lives around. Conversely, some people from law abiding families go on to become criminals.

6. Read page 8 of your booklet Describe what has been the cause of marital instability? What did the authors of ‘Broken Homes’ say about disrupted families?

7. Pre-disruption variablesPost-disruption variables Reasons for the disruption Timing of the disruption Gender of the lost parent Level of conflict Gender of the custodial parent Subsequent family reconstitution This study, then, aimed to look not simply at broken vs. intact homes but also to disentangle a number or pre- and post- disruption variables to consider their effect on delinquency. These included:

8. Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour Methodology: Self-report – Interviews & Questionnaires Advantages: Disadvantages: _______________________________________________________________ Sample: 411 Boys from East London Can this be generalised? Is the research ethnocentric?

9. Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour Correlation: Farrington showed a relationship between parental offending and offspring offending, however, what is a problem when drawing conclusions from correlational data?

10. Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour ISSUES Type of data collected: Quantitative & Qualitative Advantages: Disadvantages: _______________________________________________________________________________ Type of design: Longitudinal Design Advantages: Disadvantages: _______________________________________________________________________________ Comment on the ethics of the study:

11. Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour DEBATES How does the study link to the Nature vs Nurture debate? How does the study link to the individual/situational debate?

12. Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour DEBATES How does the study link to reductionism vs holism debate? How does the study link to determinism?

13. Evaluating Farrington’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour USEFULNESS Is Farrington’s study useful to everyday life?

14. Evidence 2: Sutherland – The Influence of peers Learning from others What is the differential association (pg 10)?

15. Learning from others Sutherland’s theory of Differential association is based on 9 principles. Edwin H.Sutherland (1939) used social learning theory principles to produce his differential association theory. Sutherland suggests that criminal behaviour is learned through exposure to criminal norms, which happens within the family and peer group. Criminal behaviour results from two factors: Learned attitudes (criminal behaviour becomes the accepted social norm) Imitation of specific acts (how to do the behaviour is observed and then imitated) peer pressure In situations where there is peer pressure a young person moves away from parental influence and learns a new set of ‘rules’ deviant behaviour about which situations are appropriate for deviant behaviour.

16. Evidence 2: Sutherland Summarise Sutherlands 9 Points:

17. Evidence 2: Sutherland Explain these three points in more detail. 1. Criminal behaviour is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication. 2. The principle part of the learning of criminal behaviour occurs within intimate personal groups. 3. The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal codes as favourable or unfavourable.

18. Evaluating Sutherland’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour How does the theory link to Behaviourism? How is the study reductionist? How is the study linked to determinism/freewill? How is the study linked to the nature/nurture debate? Is the research ethnocentric?

19. Evaluating Sutherland’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour What are the strengths of the theory? What are the weaknesses of the theory?

20. Akers

21. Evidence 3: Wikstrom & Tafel In terms of the relationship between poverty/disadvantaged neighbourhoods and crime, there is not a direct link. Instead, poverty and disadvantage are associated with the risk factors that may lead a person into crime. Government figures show that the most disadvantaged 5% in society are 100 times more likely to have multiple problems than the most advantaged 50%. The question for researchers then is to investigate how individual risk factors, lifestyle and living in a disadvantaged area/poverty interact to lead a person into crime, and to consider the relative importance of individual and situational factors in turning to crime. Just how big an influence does social disadvantage have on whether a person turns to crime or not? The Peterborough Youth Study set out to test these factors and others to see which in fact were the most significant predictors of criminal behaviour.

22. Evaluating Wikstrom & Tafel’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour Methodology: Interview & Data Collection Advantages: Disadvantages: _______________________________________________________________ Sample: 2000 Year 10 Students Can this be generalised?

23. Evaluating Wikstrom & Tafel’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour ISSUES Type of data collected: Quantitative & Qualitative Data Advantages: Disadvantages: _______________________________________________________________________________ Type of design: Snapshot/Cross-sectional design Advantages: Disadvantages: ______________________________________________________________________________ Comment on the validity of the study:

24. Evaluating Wikstrom & Tafel’s research into explanations of criminal behaviour DEBATES How is the study linked to the nature/nurture debate? How is the study linked to individual/situational explanations of behaviour? How is the study linked to reductionism/holism?

25. January 2013 How can criminal behaviour be learnt from others? (10)