Introduction to Criminology: Explaining Crime | Margit Averdijk, Ph.D. | Skillshare

Playback Speed

  • 0.5x
  • 1x (Normal)
  • 1.25x
  • 1.5x
  • 2x

Introduction to Criminology: Explaining Crime

teacher avatar Margit Averdijk, Ph.D., Criminologist

Watch this class and thousands more

Get unlimited access to every class
Taught by industry leaders & working professionals
Topics include illustration, design, photography, and more

Watch this class and thousands more

Get unlimited access to every class
Taught by industry leaders & working professionals
Topics include illustration, design, photography, and more

Lessons in This Class

48 Lessons (2h 37m)
    • 1. Course Trailer

    • 2. 1.1 Introduction

    • 3. 1.2 What is Criminology?

    • 4. 1.3 About Me

    • 5. 1.4 Course Assignment

    • 6. 1.5 Course Program

    • 7. 1.6 Summing Up

    • 8. 2.1 The Body and Crime

    • 9. 2.2 VIDEO: Example: Is crime heritable?

    • 10. 2.3 The Brain, Heart, and Hormones

    • 11. 2.4 VIDEO: Example: Can Exposure To Lead Increase Crime?

    • 12. 2.5 Summing Up

    • 13. 3.1 Personality, Plus EXERCISE

    • 14. 3.2 VIDEO: Example: “Types of People” and Crime

    • 15. 3.3 Mental Disorders and Crime

    • 16. 3.4 VIDEO: Case Study of Psychopathy and Aileen Wuornos

    • 17. 3.5 Summing Up

    • 18. 4.1 "The Calculating Criminal", Plus EXERCISE

    • 19. 4.2 VIDEO: Example - Can Police Activities Reduce Crime?

    • 20. 4.3 Rational Choice and Routine Activities

    • 21. 4.4 VIDEO: Example: How Do Burglars Choose Their Targets?

    • 22. 4.5 Summing Up

    • 23. 5.1 Crime as Learned Behavior

    • 24. 5.2 VIDEO: Case Study of the Rwandan Genocide

    • 25. 5.3 “It’s Not That Bad”: Neutralizations for Crime

    • 26. 5.4 VIDEO: Example: How Men and Women Neutralize Their White Collar Crimes

    • 27. 5.5 Summing Up

    • 28. 6.1 Believing in Social Bonds

    • 29. 6.2 VIDEO: Example: Can Offenders Turn Their Life Around? Age-Graded Social Control

    • 30. 6.3 Self-Control and Crime

    • 31. 6.4 VIDEO: Example: How A Facebook Friend Can Help Reduce Crime

    • 32. 6.5 Summing Up

    • 33. 7.1 Labeling: We Are What Others Think We Are

    • 34. 7.2 VIDEO: Example: On Hippies and Marihuana

    • 35. 7.3 Repairing The Damage: Reintegrative Shaming and Restorative Justice

    • 36. 7.4 VIDEO: Case Study of a 12-Year-Old Girl and Family Group Conferencing

    • 37. 7.5 Summing Up

    • 38. 8.1 Crime In The Neighborhood: Social Disorganization

    • 39. 8.2 VIDEO: Example: Does Litter Cause Crime? Plus EXERCISE

    • 40. 8.3 Designing Out Crime

    • 41. 8.4 EXERCISE: How Secure Is Your Home?

    • 42. 8.5 Summing Up

    • 43. 9.1 Strains and How They Can Lead to Crime

    • 44. 9.2 VIDEO: Case Study of Gangs in Medellin, Colombia

    • 45. 9.3 Anger, Negative Emotions, And Crime – General Strain Theory

    • 46. 9.4 VIDEO: Strain and Anger in Asia

    • 47. 9.5 Summing Up

    • 48. 10.1 Conclusion

  • --
  • Beginner level
  • Intermediate level
  • Advanced level
  • All levels

Community Generated

The level is determined by a majority opinion of students who have reviewed this class. The teacher's recommendation is shown until at least 5 student responses are collected.





About This Class

Have you ever wondered why some people commit crime? Do you want to better understand criminology and provide expert insights in discussions about crime?

If that is the case, this course is for you. In this criminology course – the first of its kind on Udemy – I will give you a full introduction to the ins and outs of explaining crime.

You’ll Learn the full Spectrum of Criminology

Every day, we are confronted with real crime stories in the newspaper, on TV, and online. This course will go beyond the quick soundbites and headlines of news stories and help you understand the backgrounds of criminal behavior.

In this course, we’ll cover several core domains of criminology:

-          The Psychology of Criminal Minds – How can the mind contribute to crime?

-          The Body and Crime – How do biological factors (e.g., genes, the brain) come into play when it comes to criminal behavior?

-          Decision-Making – How and why do people choose to commit crime?

-          Social Influence – How do the people and the places around us influence our criminal behavior?

Every topic is covered with comprehensive videos and slide presentations. You will also get examples of major studies, a course assignment, thought exercises, and case studies. At the end of each section, you can test your newly gained knowledge in a short quiz.

This course is based on a university curriculum. But instead of having to show up in a lecture room, reading a full textbook, and paying college tuition, you can enroll in this course in your own time and at your own convenience.

Your Instructor is an Expert

I have designed this course to provide you with the best learning experience possible. I am an experienced criminologist with a Ph.D. and have done research, teaching, and public speaking for more than ten years now. I’m friendly and approachable and you’re more than welcome to ask me any questions that you may have as you go through the course.

You’ll Transform the Way You Understand Crime

After completing this course, you will never look at crime and criminal behavior in the same way. You’ll be able to analyze crime, understand the backgrounds of criminal behavior, and inject everyday discussions with new insights into how crimes comes about.

This course is NOT for people who are seeking a lengthy, detailed treatment of criminological theory. Instead, I will give you a clear and concise overview of explanations for crime with lots of examples.   

Meet Your Teacher

Teacher Profile Image

Margit Averdijk, Ph.D.



Hello, I'm Margit. I am a criminologist by training and am passionate about the fascinating field of criminology and crime prevention. I have gained extensive experience with doing research, teaching, and public speaking in the domain of criminology over the course of the past decade. I am a senior university researcher and have published in the top journals in the field. I'm looking forward to the chance to share what I've learned with you!

See full profile

Class Ratings

Expectations Met?
  • 0%
  • Yes
  • 0%
  • Somewhat
  • 0%
  • Not really
  • 0%
Reviews Archive

In October 2018, we updated our review system to improve the way we collect feedback. Below are the reviews written before that update.

Why Join Skillshare?

Take award-winning Skillshare Original Classes

Each class has short lessons, hands-on projects

Your membership supports Skillshare teachers

Learn From Anywhere

Take classes on the go with the Skillshare app. Stream or download to watch on the plane, the subway, or wherever you learn best.


1. Course Trailer: welcome to this course, where you will learn all about criminology and how to explain crime. My name is Mark it, and I'll be teaching this course. I am a trained social scientist with more than 10 years of experience. I have a PhD in criminology and the senior university researcher and have published in the world's leading scientific journals in the field. I have also talked university courses and advised or done research for various well known organizations and NGOs Internationally. I made this course for anyone who wants to speak about criminology like an expert. By the end of this course, you can talk about criminal, logical hot button issues with confidence. Well, look at topics like the psychology of criminal minds, how burgers make decisions about which houses to pick, how our body plays, a role in crime and how Facebook can actually help to stop crime. We'll cover all of the major issues that college level criminology courses include, and the material that will go through will enable you toe expertly analyze many crime problems along the way. I'll give you lots of examples and case studies to make sure that you can see how theory relates to practice. The ideal student for this course is a criminology in criminal justice student, a law enforcement professional social worker, or even just a Persian who likes to learn more about criminology but doesn't have time to spend days in the library. The only requirement for joining this course is a willingness to learn and to be open minded. So feel free to look through the course description, and I look forward to seeing you inside. 2. 1.1 Introduction: hi there, and welcome to the scores on criminology. In this course, I'll give you an overview off the most important explanations for why crime occurs. Crime is a major social issue. Open your newspaper or turn on your TV and you'll be confronted with it right away. We all have our own images in our head of what crime is. We might think of infamous murder cases or offenders, or we may remember something that happened to us. But what is it that causes crime? What is it that motivates offenders to commit offenses? Crime costs society millions of dollars in damage annually there across for the criminal justice system, like for the police and for the courts and for prisons. There are costs for the health care system for insurance companies and so on. And there are obviously also cost to the victims of crime. Not only may have financial cross due to crime, but there may be many psychological and emotional consequences as well. For example, crime can lead to depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts and victims. They may not be able to live their lives in the same way that they used to in order to prevent that from happening in order to prevent crime and criminal behaviour from happening . What needs to understand how crime comes about, what causes it, and that is what this course is about. We'll cover many things in this class, including things like how burglars me decisions about which has just a big how our body plays a role in crime, the psychology of criminal minds and how people can learn to commit crime from other people . We'll cover a lot of ground. And to make things as practical as possible, I'll provide you with exercises. Question is a whole list of major studies and lots of examples and case studies just to make sure that you can see how theory release the practice. So let's hop on in and let's start out with the question of what is criminology 3. 1.2 What is Criminology?: one question that I get asked a lot is what Criminology A's Criminology is a scientific study of several different aspects of crime, namely, first, the nature and extent of crime. This asks questions such as how much crime is there in our society, what crime types are there, etcetera. The second field is the causes of crime, and this includes questions like, Why do some people commit crime there? Why do others not commit crime? Or why does crime happen at some places and not others? The causes of crime is, without a doubt, one of the most studies areas in criminology, and it's also exactly what this course is about, so we'll talk about different causes of crime in this course. Another area of criminology is the consequences of crime, crime effects. A large number of people offenders and the reasons why they commit crime often received the bulk of the attention. But many more people are involved in one way or another. Off course, the victims of crime can experience a range of consequences, including potential injuries, psychological consequences, an inability to work or pursue other activities and financial damages of mothers. And besides the victims, the people around them, such as their families, entire communities and even society as a whole are affected by crime. Another stop area is the reactions to crime. This covers responses to crime by law enforcement. For example, it covers the police and how they handle crime, the practices that they use, the decisions that they make while they're doing their job and the way in which they treat offenders. It also looks at the way in which courts sentence offenders, how judges make decisions and process cases, and whether and how different offenders are treated in different ways. And finally, this sub fields focuses on different types of punishment on what happens after imprisonment , such as when offenders are on parole or on probation, and also in prison. Life like on prison practices and how inmates experience day to day life in prison. And finally, criminology concerns the prevention off crime. There are many strategies that are cleaned to prevent crime, and some of these may be effective, but others may not, and so it requires good research to test out which programs are effective so that we can investing, goes and not invest in programs that do not work to reduce crime. One thing that I've always found useful when defining criminology is to see it as an object science. The idea here is that there are many different sciences that study crime, so crime is the object of study across those different sciences. Criminology is very diverse because people look at crime from very different perspectives. For example, lawyer, sociologists, economies, biologists, anthropologists, psychiatrists, psychologists, philosophers, political scientists and historians have all contributed to criminology. But they all come from their own background and have different views on crime on methods and theoretical perspectives. Some people think that that creates problems for criminology because it's very difficult to create a sort of integrated framework. But others think, and I feel that way, too, that it makes criminology so interesting because it's so multidisciplinary. Here are a couple of examples of how different disciplines who look at crime. We're looking a crime from a law perspective. It deals more normative Lee with the conditions under which punishment may be imposed. Sociology is about groups and social relationships, and how crime happens within these relationships. For example, in youth groups and gangs, psychology is all about human behavior and experiences biology about the natural, basic conditions of life and economics looks drugs out by the costs and benefits of criminal behavior. And history deals with questions like, How is the course of crime over the past centuries? How did people do with offenses in the past? And have there been any changes in what is considered to be a crime? So all of these disciplines offer their own unique blends on crime. And as you'll see throughout the modules in this course, we'll use insights from several of these disciplines for our purpose in this course, which is to explain crime and criminal behavior. 4. 1.3 About Me: Okay, So before we go on, I thought it might be helpful if you got the chance to know a little bit more about me and what makes me competent to teach this course. So I am market. I am a criminologist and university senior researcher, and I've always been fascinated by the question of wide people commit crime and how we can prevent crime from happening. I used to want to be a police officer when I grew up, but that didn't ever really happen on day. Instead, I started learning about criminology about 20 years ago in college when I was studying public policy, and after that, I went on and got my PhD in criminology. Over the course of the past decade or so, I've completed many chronological research studies and published in the top journals in the field. I've taught courses in university, and I have advised or done research for governmental institutions and NGOs, like the World Health Organization in the U. S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, among others. My own research focuses mostly on victims of crime and on the question of how people develop criminal behavior across the life course. But I'm basically interested in every sub field within the fascinating domain off criminology. Hopefully I can transfer some of what I've learned to you. I'm excited to get started, and I hope you are too. 5. 1.4 Course Assignment: Okay, So before I give you a brief overview of the rest of the course, I'd like to give you the course assignment. Namely, I like to ask you to do some research on a case study off somebody who committed a crime. If you can't think of an example, few free to take the case of someone you can find enough information on online or in books and write down that story the case that he doesn't necessarily have to refer to a Siri's gates any less serious case will also do Well. You should have information on is what happened and the circumstances of the crime and the person who committed the crime so that you can get an idea of the background of the crime and how it came to happening. The first police. The assignment has two parts. Part one is writing down the case study, which you can start with right away if you like to. And then when you go through the modules in the scores, you can think about which of the explanations that will cover in the course. Well, think your case study best. So in part two of the assignment, the question is, what is the best explanation for why that person in your case study committed a crime? I want you have figured that out. You can add that to the case study, explaining why that explanation fits best for that particular case study and that you can go ahead and submit your course assignment at the end of the course. I'm looking forward to seeing it. 6. 1.5 Course Program: Okay, so in this course will be going over a crash course in criminology, and we'll talk about the most common explanations for criminal behavior. And just so that you can have an idea of what is coming up, I'll give you a quick overview off. The things that will be covering in the first module after the introduction will look at how characteristics of our bodies can explain crime. And we'll look at the question of whether people can actually inherit crime from their parents. We'll cover things like how our genes play a role, but we'll also look at a couple of other factors and examples like, for example, how pollution is associated with criminal behavior. Next, we'll have a look at the criminal mind and how psychological factors play a role in crime. We'll cover things like personality and also mental disorders and psychopathy, and we'll look at a case study of a serial killer, namely, the case of Eileen War knows well, then go on and have a look at how people use their own free will and make decisions about whether or not they'll commit crime. We'll talk about what some of the proves and cons of committing criminal behavior are, and we'll check out some cool examples, like the effects of certain police strategies and also how burglars big targets in the module after that will look not so much as individuals, but groups and group behavior like youth groups and criminal gangs. And we'll also see an example of genocide and explain how genocide can happen in the next module will talk not so much about why people commit crime about why some people don't commit crimes. So we'll flip the question. And we'll see, among others, how hard and defenders can actually turn their life around and how surprisingly, Facebook can actually help to reduce crime. The topic. Answer. That is all about how some people get the label, that they're offenders and that label in itself can put them on a pathway towards crime. And we'll talk about an example from a group of hippies in London. So so far, all of the modules are about people about individuals and about groups in the next module will shift the focus and talk about places some neighborhoods of high crime, whereas other neighborhoods do not. Why is that the case? We'll also examine how cleaning up a city might just reduce crime and how the design off cities end of houses is related to crime. And I've included an exercise in here where you can find out how safe your own houses and finally will cover how wanting the things that you can't have can lead to criminal behavior . And we'll talk about how being born on one side of town kill me to a very different life compared to being born on the other side of town. All right, so that's the course programme. In a nutshell. To make things as engaging us possible, I've included a ton of examples and major studies and a full list, and links to those studies are in The resource is list, which you'll find in this module. And I want to make clear from the outset that this course is not about coming up with excuses or apologies for criminal behavior, but about explanations, which is obviously a big difference. Now the majority of criminal logical research takes place in the US, but I've tried to include studies from all five continents and especially starting in module five. I've included several studies and examples that are not from the US or from Western Europe . It's the same thing when it comes to gender. More studies have been done on male offenders, but I've also included studies that also focus on females. So let's wrap up this introductory module with a quick conclusion and then move on to the body and how it is associated with criminal behavior. See you there. 7. 1.6 Summing Up: Okay. So summing up in this module, we have seen how diverse definitions of crime can be. How criminology is a diverse and milk multidisciplinary field with many different influences and how there are different ways to explain crime. And we will be looking at each of these theories each of these different ways to explain crime in turn in the rest of the modules. 8. 2.1 The Body and Crime: so biological explanations of crime focus on how physical features off our body are related to whether or not we commit crime. The early ideas of this school of thought have become pretty controversial by now, to say the least. These early criminologists, for example, in Italy applied Darwin's evolutionary theory ideas to crime in this time, and I'm talking about the 19th century. It was believed that offenders were inferior humans who displays features of an earlier stage off human evolution. It was said that these people could be recognized through physical abnormality, such a strong jaws and large foreheads and long arms. So what these early criminologists, for example, Low Ambrosio did was that they studied how offenders looked, meaning their faces, their bodies, her large. Therefore hat was whether or not they will left or maybe right handed and things like that . Nowadays, thes ideas have become outdated, biased and flawed. And instead of physical abnormalities of body parts, biological explanations focused much more on other factors now, and one of the most studied areas is how genes affect crime. So these studies try to answer the question. To what extent do our genes influence whether or not we commit crime. In other words, to what extent is crime heritable? To answer that question, what researchers have done is conducts so called twin studies. The idea here is that if people have the same genes, they should be more alike in criminal behavior than people who do not have the same genes. And to test that, one can compare identical twins who share the same genes with fraternal twins. So twins who are not identical and who basically are like other siblings except that they come from their mother's same pregnancy. Identical twins have almost the same genes. Fraternal twins, non identical twins are just like other siblings, and they share only about half of their genes. So if there is a genetic explanation for crime, one would expect identical twins. So the guys in this picture to be much more alike in their criminal behavior than fraternal twins, the women in this picture. So that is what researchers have done. They've looked at whether identical twins are more alike when it comes to criminal behavior than fraternal twins. And let's look at an example in the next section 9. 2.2 VIDEO: Example: Is crime heritable?: So let's look at an example of a twin study in Virginia. In that study, more than 2000 twins were interviewed, about half off the twins were identical twins, and the other have was non identical or fraternal twins. The researchers then try to tease out to what extend The twins were similar in their anti social behavior, including things like violence and theft, and whether the similarities or differences were due to genes or simply to growing up in the same environment. And here's what they found for the males. They found that 38% of the anti social behavior was accounted for by genes. It was almost the same for the females 40%. This is similar to what other studies have found, namely, that anti social behavior seems to be around 40 to 60% heritable. Interestingly, it looks like genes have a larger influence, in some cases than in others. For example, the influence of jeans on delinquent behaviour appears to be larger in adolescence than it it is in childhood. So among Children, genes seem to play a smaller role when it comes to delinquent behaviour that later on in their teens also the influence of jeans on aggressive and violent offending is larger than it is a non aggressive, offending such a step, so antisocial behavior can partly be explained by genes. But these numbers also mean that anti social behavior is in large part due to other factors , and we'll look at some of these in the rest of the course. 10. 2.3 The Brain, Heart, and Hormones: So in the last section we saw how genes can influence criminal behavior. But besides genes, research on biology and crime has looked at other biological explanations for criminal behavior as well. Such explanations focus on certain body parts and body functions such as the brain, the heart and hormones, and I'll go through several of them here. The first of these focuses on the bring People who are involved in crime or other forms of anti social behaviour can have deficits in certain brain regions, for example, in brain regions that inhibit impulsive behavior. That means that people who have thes deficits are less able to regulate their behavior when they are in attempting situation, For example, they see someone's phone lying around somewhere. They are more likely to act on the impulse and to steal the phone, whereas somebody else who does not have these deficits may feel the same impulse but may not act on it. Second, offenders have also been found to have more deficits in other abilities than other people, such as a lower I Q, which can in turn increase the likelihood of committing crime. A low resting heart rate has also been associated with criminal behavior a low resting harder, it means that you have a hard rate off, say, lower than 60 beats per minute. But what counts as a low resting heart rate varies by age. The idea is that people with low hard rates need very simply, said Mawr excitement to feel more aroused. So in order to bring these arousal levels up, they may engage in criminal behavior. Hello, Hard rate may also mean that people are not afraid of punishment. Another biological factor that can contribute to committing crime is hormone imbalance. One example is testosterone, which you've probably heard off as being a sex hormone. Males have much higher levels off testosterone than women, and most of the time, but not always. Males also show higher levels of violence, and so a higher level of testosterone has been associated with criminal behavior. And finally, health issues in early life, such as birth complications and mother smoking and alcohol consumption during pregnancy have been related to the delinquent behaviour. So in some, these are some by allowed biological factors other than genes that can influence whether or not people commit crime 11. 2.4 VIDEO: Example: Can Exposure To Lead Increase Crime?: Okay, let's look at an example of how another health issue can increase crime, namely at lead poisoning. Lead poisoning has been associated with a host of health problems, and it can have especially severe consequences for the bring for brain development. There are several ways in which people can get exposed to high levels of lead, for example, through air pollution, food, water or household products that contain lead for criminology. Lead is important because it has been linked to criminal behavior. And as an example, let's look at a large study on the relation between lead exposure and crime in ST Louis in Missouri, the researchers in this study obtained information on almost 60,000 kids in the city. They got their addresses and also information on the blood level. Blood lead levels off these kids because the kids have been tested by the health department in the city. Why did they look at the blood levels of Children and out of adults? That was because Children are especially vulnerable to let levels, and so these data were optimal. What the researchers found was that city areas with high levels of lead exposure had higher levels of crime meaning higher levels of gun crime, assault, robbery and homicide, then areas with lower lead levels. Now you're probably thinking that areas with high lead levels may have other characteristics that may be responsible for these differences in crime rates. For example, these areas may be disadvantaged areas that are poor that have more single headed households that have higher rates of unemployment, for example. But the researchers accounted for those factors, meaning that the differences in crime rates that they found between these areas could not have been due to those factors. So in some, it looks as though there is an association between let levels in urban areas and the level of crime in those same areas. And the reason behind this is likely that lead absorption affects the brain and can improve , can impair impulse control and reduce intelligent. And these, as I discussed before, may increase criminal behavior. 12. 2.5 Summing Up: Okay, so we've come to the end of this module in this module. I've talked about biological factors that influence crime, how genes impact criminal behavior, how the brain, the heart and hormone imbalances effect crime and how pollution such as lead exposure can affect crime and criminal behavior in the next module will focus not so much on how the body may affect criminal behavior, but on the mind, namely on the psychology of crime. 13. 3.1 Personality, Plus EXERCISE: in this module will look at different ways in which psychology effects crime will discuss how mental disorders and psychopathy are related to criminal behavior. And as you'll see, there is sometimes overlap with biological factors. But we'll start out with personality in everyday life, and when we look at other people, we often characterize them in certain ways. Some people are extroverted and outgoing. Other people are more introverted and shy. Some people are seen as typical leader personality, whereas other people are seen as more supportive team members. Some people are set to have a great personality without it really being clear what that means, and often what we say things like That's just why am we refer to our personality based on the type of person we think somebody is. We expect certain behaviors off them. We might not expect a shy person to speak up in public, and we might not expect an extroverted person to sit at home by themselves. Personality is thought of is very pervasive, and it is not uncommon for employers, for example, to have employees take personality tests before they hire them. Before I jump into the question of how personality types are related to crime, it's necessary to talk a little bit about personality and how there are different personality types. So before I continue, I want to ask you to read yourself and take a brief personality test. This link This address takes you to a webpage where you can click on the start button. I'm not affiliated with this website, but it has very useful tests, and that's why I chose it. Feel free to pause the video here, complete the test. It's anonymous, and it should take you around 3 to 8 minutes to complete and then when you're done, will continue. Okay, so by now you've probably done the test. At the end of the test, you should have received your results. So let's briefly talk about how to interpret the results. Here are the results off a hypothetical person. All of the items that you answered belonged to one off five personality traits. These air called the Big Five, and we'll talk about those in a second. Your results are twofold. First, for each of the five personality traits, you received a raw score. Those are the collard Bard's. Second, the table gives you a score percentile, and this indicates what percent of other people you scored higher than so for this person. The raw score for extra version seems to be not very high, and that is confirmed in the score percentile because it shows that he or she scored higher on extra version than only 16% of people who also took the test. On the other hand, he or she scored high on emotional stability because this person scored higher than 84% of other people. All right, so let's talk a little bit about what these five factors factors actually mean. Let's start with openness, intellect or imagination. This reflects the extent to which people are open to new ideas and new adventures. People with high openness are thought of as curious, imaginative and creative. On the other hand, people who cling to traditional ideas and habits and who are not so much into new ideas they are thought off as low on openness. Then there is conscientiousness, people who are high on conscientiousness. They are organized, they prepare well, they pay attention to detail and they do not procrastinate. On the opposite end of the spectrum, people who are Lohan Conscientiousness are not so organized but more spontaneous. They might be seen as messy, and they don't finish that tasks. That's that one is extra version. This is a dimension that is pretty well known. Extroverted people like being around other people and talking to people. And they have lots of friends and enjoy making new friends introverted people. On the other hand, they are more quiet. They feel comfortable when they're alone, and they feel energy drained when they have to socialize a lot. There's also agreeableness. People who are high on agreeable knows they care about other people, their focus on cooperating with other people. And they enjoy helping others. People who are low on agreeableness. On the other hand, they are not really interested in other people, and they're much more focused on competition with other people than on how to help people. And the last one is neuroticism or emotional instability. People who are high on neuroticism are usually less stable emotionally, meaning that they experienced things like anxiety and mood swings. They worry a lot and they get upset easily. People who are low on emotionality. On the other hand, they can handle stress well. They don't often feel depressed, and they're generally more relaxed than worried. That's remember all five elements off the Big Five. You can take the first letters of each, which spells the word ocean or canoe if you prefer. So let's now look at the question of whether personality type is related to crime. 14. 3.2 VIDEO: Example: “Types of People” and Crime: The idea behind personality based explanations of crime is that people who commit crime have certain personality characteristics. Number of studies have shown that personality type is indeed related to crime, meaning that if a person has certain personality characteristics, they are more likely to commit crime than people who do not have those particular personality characteristics. More specifically, it looks like some of the personality traits of the Big Five that we saw in the pre fuse lecture are related to criminal behavior. In other words, having these particular Big Five trades make people more likely to commit crime, whereas having other Big Five traits make people less likely to commit crime. And we'll see for each of these five trades, which those are, and we'll start with conscientiousness. People who are more conscientious generally show less anti social behavior. If you remember, Conscientiousness is the trade that refers to having self discipline to control impulses, into think before acting, so vice versa. People who have less self discipline have less control over their impulses and don't tend to think as much before they act. They have a higher risk of showing anti social behavior, then agreeable news agreeableness refers to caring about other people and cooperating with other people when it comes to crime. It was found that people who are more agreeable generally show less anti social behavior. Vice versa. People who are less agreeable generally show more anti social behavior. Why is that so? Well, people who are agreeable are relatively helpful and considerate, which doesn't align as much with committing crime. And finally, for neuroticism, it looks like things can go into both directions. Neuroticism is a really complex one. On the one hand, people who are less emotionally stable, maybe mawr impulsive, and so they may get into trouble more easily. But people who are less emotionally stable also tend to be more afraid, which can prevent them from committing crime. So the answer is not as straightforward here. Neuroticism seems to be related to criminal behavior. But whether neuroticism increases or decreases the risk that somebody will commit crime can really depend on the measurement of neuroticism. It could be related to mawr impulsive behavior, but also to more fear. Now, what about extra version and openness? The results are not as robust hair, either. They are not related to criminal behavior or there is only a small effect. So it looks like the association between extra version and an anti social behavior and between openness and criminal behaviour is relatively weak. So overall there is considerable evidence that personality type is indeed related to criminal behavior. People have certain personality characteristics have a higher risk of committing crime than other people. And, more specifically, agreeableness, conscientiousness and neuroticism have the most robust effects in the next lecture will go through another way in which psychology effects crime, namely, will talk about mental disorders. 15. 3.3 Mental Disorders and Crime: a number of years ago, there was a Hollywood movie called Primal Fear, and in that movie Richard Gere played a defense attorney who got a case with a stuttering altar boy, and that altar boy was played by Edward Norton. Now at one Norton. Norton's character was accused of murdering the archbishop, and one of the defining moment in that movie was when his character suddenly transformed into another person. So he changed from a stuttering boy to a new GREss it and dominant person. And that indicated that he had an identity disorder where he had multiple personalities. And because of that, this order, his character in the end, was found not guilty by reason of insanity, and he was placed in a mental hospital. Now, if you haven't seen the movie, here's a spoiler alert at what Norton's character turned out in the end to have staged the whole thing. So he doesn't in fact, have a new identity disorder. But I wanted to start this section with that movie because it's a useful example of how mental disorders could affect crime. So when it comes to psychological explanations off crime, it's about how some people experience a nor non normal development. For example, if a child is abused or experiences some other type of trauma that may impair a normal functioning in a normal development off the child's behavior and psychology. And it may actually set kids on a pathway towards developing, for example, on antisocial personalities, order and a long term, persistent criminal career. In other words, criminal behavior, maybe an expression, often internal, psychological issue research has found that there is indeed a link between violent behavior and mental disorders. But the question is, why is that the case? Now? Mental disorders may include things like paranoid psychotic symptoms schizophrenia, and it appears that there are at least two reasons. Two pathways. How mental disorders are linked to violence. First, some of these mental disorders are characterized by delusional beliefs, and these may make people feel like they're threatened. And they may react with violence to these perceived threats and believes. But there is also another pathway, and that is that people with mental disorders are exposed to much more stressful life events than other people. Now, stressful life events may include things like losing their job, seeing household members move out, getting into financial problems and in general getting less social support from other people. And because of thes stresses and the lower social support, they may resort to violence to solve the problems that they face to end this section. I think it's important to say that indeed, mental disorder is are higher among people who commit crime than among people who do not commit crime. But at the same time, it's important to know that many people with mental illnesses live in the community without any problems. So even though there is this link between mental disorders and violence, it is not the case of this applies to everybody with a mental disorder. 16. 3.4 VIDEO: Case Study of Psychopathy and Aileen Wuornos: so we've already seen that personality type and mental disorders are linked to criminal behavior. As the last topic in this module, I'll talk a little bit about psychopathy, which is a personality disorder. The term cycle path is fairly watch bread and used often in the popular media. Think, for example, of the movie American Psycho, where a Christian Bale plays an investment banker who seems to be very successful and who has a life that appears to be very hip and trendy but who secretly has a second life full of assault and cold blooded murder. Psychopathy is characterized by several things. First, a low empathy for other people, meaning having little regard for the feelings of others and not having close bonds with others. Second, having low guilt and remorse, and third, having a sense of fearlessness and not being responsive to punishment. Psychopathy is associated with the most severe and chronic anti social behavior, and the causes for it have been studied, and what's been found is that genes and dysfunction in certain brain regions, which I talked about in the previous module on biology, seemed to have a considerable influence on psychopathy. But there are also social factors, such as having had parents who used harsh parenting techniques that plea rule. Canadian psychologist Robert Hare has developed a psychopathy checklist, which is called the PCL, are psychopathy checklist. Revised hair is a copy of that list. It contains 20 items, so it's a little difficult to see here all of the items on this screen. But if you can see it properly, no worries. I've included the list in The resource is for this section, and you're welcome to check it out there. For each of these items, one assesses whether that characteristic is not present here in the first column off the three somewhat present or definitely present in an individual for not present, one would enter a score of zero for somewhat presence. One would enter a score of one and for definitely present a score off to. So, for example, the first item here is a glibness or a superficial charm. If this is definitely present in a person, the score for this item would be to if it's not present zero and somewhat present a one same thing with the second characteristic egocentricity. One enters the score and then one continues with the entire list of characteristics so you can see prove nous to boredom. Here number three about a lot of pathological lying and deception Number four, lack of sincerity number five here lack over more so guild Sorry, Number six here and the list goes on and on when one has completed all of the items, then you some of the responses across all 20 items. So in that way, the maximum score across all of the items would be 40 because the maximum score per item is too. And then, uh, two times 20 makes 40 people who score more than 25 to £30 points. They are sent to display psychopathy. Why's it 25 to 30? So the score is 25 in the UK and 30 in the U. S. So in the UK, people who score more than 25 points are set to display psychopathy in the US People who score more than 30 points are set to display psychopathy, a really life example of someone for whom the PCL art was completed. His Eileen Warner's She was a serial killer who was the main character in the movie monster , where she was played by Charlie Stare in. Her story has been analysed by scientists. So let's talk a little bit about what they found out so that her pathway into becoming a serial killer becomes clear. So she was born in Michigan, and her background was one of significant deprivation. Her parents were two teenagers who got divorced around the time that she was born and her father was absent. He was an alcoholic who was sentenced for raping a young girl, and he committed suicide in prison. Her mother was also an alcoholic, and she left her baby. Eileen warn us with her grand parents, who were also alcoholic and emotionally and physically abusive. Already, when Eileen Warners was a child, she started to show behavioral problems such as fighting, stealing and setting fighters. And she also had a low I. Q. She became pregnant at age 13 and was forced to give up her son for adoption. Then, when she became an adolescent, she started drinking, running away, using drugs, panhandling and prostituting herself as a prostitute. She was sexually and physically abused by her clients, and she was arrested for a range of crimes. During that time, she also tried to commit suicide multiple times that had many short term relationships at age 34. Warn Us killed seven men over a one year period. Her victims were all middle itch men, and they were all killed with a firearm afterwards, Warn Us said that she killed them because she wanted to rob them and she wanted to eliminate them as potential witnesses. She was executed by lethal injection in 2002. Three Experts Court Warner's on the PCL R checklist that you just saw, and they reached the conclusion that she scored 32 out of 40 points. She also met the criteria for anti social personality disorder, which is characterized by a lack of regard for moral values and for the feelings of other people. And she was also diagnosed with borderline personality disorder, which is a mental disorder where people have extreme variations in moods, emotions and behavior regarding the factors that could have cost the diagnosis off psychopathy and mental disorders. In the case of Warner's thesis, psychiatrists who studied her case think that thes diagnosis were likely caused by her traumatic childhood and the physical and sexual abuse that she experienced as I mentioned in the previous section. These can disrupt normal human development. Also, they concluded that there may have been a genetic influence towards violence that she may have inherited from her father and that that may have contributed to her choice to murder other people. And some. This case study shows how psychopathy can be related to committing serious violence crimes in this case murder. 17. 3.5 Summing Up: Okay. So in this module, we focused on the psychology of crime. We started out with an examination of how personality is related to criminal behavior. Then we saw how mental disorders can be related to crime. And finally we talked about psychopathy, and it's potential causes. 18. 4.1 "The Calculating Criminal", Plus EXERCISE: so people have long been interested in the sources of evil, if only to prevent evil from happening is probably one of the reasons why I first got into criminology and perhaps also why you got this course in this section. I'll talk about the classic school, but just so that you understand where this school comes from. Al talk briefly about what came before that before the classic school came along, people long relied on religious beliefs and explanations. In the Middle Ages, it was believed that crime and deviance were associated with sin. It was believed that because people were all the image of God, they were unable to sin. So if somebody committed a crime, it was thought that he or she must have been possessed by demons or by the devil or involved in witchcraft or sorcery and so on. Also, the punishments for rule breakers were pretty cruel. I have added a picture of a pillory here, but torture, corporal punishments and the death penalty were used frequently and what was seen as normal punishment back then, what nowadays be seen as very cruel and unacceptable. Back then, states claimed that they had the moral authority to torture people because they acted in the place of God when they practiced thes punishments. What's interesting is that these harsh punishments partly had a symbolic meaning. One was dealing with the devil or some supernatural power, people thought. But people also saw differently about violence back then. What we think of as violence today was not necessarily considered to be violence back then . So we've gotten a lot more sensitive to violence over time. Things started to change around 17 50 when metaphysical discussions pushed aside this type of paranormal thinking. And these radically new discussions were based on logic and rationality. And that is where the classic school comes in. The founders off these new ways of thinking, such as CIS, our bakery A and Jeremy Bentham. They are long gone, but they're still very relevant today. They believe in the concept of free will that people have the free will to make rational choices about how they want to approach life and the actions that they want to take. People weigh the benefits of crime and the cost of crime, and then they make a rational decision about whether or not to commit a crime so you weigh those costs and benefits, and then you look at which way more. The idea is that people will always try to maximize the amount off pleasure in their lives and minimal minimize the amount of pain. So if crime brings them pleasure and benefits and the pain of committing a crime is low, they will go ahead and commit the crime. On the other hand, if the pain or the cost that comes from committing a crime is higher than the pleasure or the benefit, then a person will not commit the crime. Let's make this a little bit more concrete and take the example of theft and, more specifically, stealing an expensive watch. Please feel free to pause the video hair, take a piece of paper or maybe open a new note on your computer or phone and go ahead and make a list of the benefits and the costs off theft. What are the things that could make? Stealing an expensive watch worthwhile? That doesn't have to be just material gain, but also consider things like maybe emotional factors and what could be the negative consequences off it. So go ahead, feel free to pause the video hair and take a minute or so to write down your thoughts on this. All right, now that you've made the list, let's go ahead and make a list here so Seth can have several benefits. For example, you'll be ableto own something off material value that would otherwise cost you money to get. Also wearing an expensive watch may get you admiration or status among your friends, cause they might really like the watch but stealing something. And by that I mean the actual act of stealing may also provide you with a feeling of excitement. Furthermore, perhaps it's not just watching the wearing the watch that will get you admiration among your friends, but maybe they will. You will tell them how you got it, and they will admire you because of how daring you are. Okay, so that's a list of some of the potential benefits. Now let's look at some of the potential costs. One might get caught by the police, which is a fairly obvious crossed your parents or your spouse could find out and reject you . Maybe your friends, they might not admire you when they find out how you got the watch, but instead they might not want to be your friend anymore. It might be the same thing with other types of crime, for example, with violence that might come with the same costs as stealing an expensive watch in terms of the benefits of violence, some offenders have said that it provides them with a feeling of excitement or off power. Even if it's just for a moment, it might also provide the opportunity to redirect any frustration that they may have. This is what is called the heat honest IQ calculation. On one side we have the things that bring us joy or reward or advantage, and on the other side we have the potential costs of behavior, and people will always try to maximize pleasure versus pain. Now, when people are trying to decide whether or not they're going to do something, for example, whether or not they are going to commit a crime, they calculate, which weighs heavier the benefits of committing that crime or the costs. Another term that is used often when people talk about the classic school is utility, which is a difficult words for a well being. People's goal in life is to maximize their well being. They want to be happy and satisfied. In other words, they want to be well. People will always try to maximize that sense of well being or their utility. And how do they do that by maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. So as you can see hair, the scale here on this slide shows it, in this case, the pleasures of crime way heavier than the costs of crime. So that would mean that somebody would go ahead and commit a crime. So how can we actually reverse this scale so that the cost way heavier than the benefits and so that people won't commit crime? The answer off the classic school on this is pretty clear. Namely, we have to make sure that the punishment for committing crime outweighs the benefits of crime. Now, to be sure, that data doesn't mean imposing severe sentences. In fact, one of the innovations at that time off this classic school was that these people argue that the sentence should always be proportional to the seriousness of the crime more than that was not necessary or justified, according to them, and that actually became the underlying foundation for all of the modern penal systems. Instead, off severe punishment, a punishment is most likely to prevent a crime, they said. If it is certain. So when you commit a crime, you know for sure that it will be punished when it's swift. The punishment will follow quickly after you commit the crime and proportional. So the punishments should be serious enough, but not cruel, because severe punishment punishments aren't necessary or useful, and the state doesn't have the right. So in some, all people have certain goals and problems, and they have the choice to get to these goals through legal and illegal means. And according to the idea of the classic school, if people commit crime, it means that the costs of crime are smaller than the rewards. 19. 4.2 VIDEO: Example - Can Police Activities Reduce Crime?: So let me give you an example of how the costs and the negative consequences off crime can influence whether or not people decide to commit crime. An obvious negative consequences of crime is being called by the police, and there have been a number of interesting studies that have looked at the question off. Do a does more police presence in an area lead to less crime. These studies have focused on so called hot spot policing. Hot spots are places where a lot of crime takes please, and these hot spots exist in many cities. For example, in Seattle, it was found that 45% off ST segments accounted for 50% of crimes in that city. Now the idea of hot spot policing is that police activities are focused on those hospitals , for example, through increased patrolling. And there have been a number of studies now that have shown that house spot policing is effective in reducing crime at hot spots. An example is a study that was conducted in Philadelphia, and what they did there was make a map of crime in the city, and they found 81 violent crime hot spots. Those were fairly large hot spots. One hot spot was about 22 American football fields in size. The researchers then arranged for some of these hot spots to get extra police focus and for other hot spots to not get this extra police focus so that they could compare the two. What did extra police focus mean? These areas got extra foot patrol? The police developed tactics together with the community to solve longstanding crime problems, or the police focused extra attention on repeat offenders violent offenders in the area. When that was all set up, the researchers studied whether or not the hot spots that received more police focus at lower crime rates than the hospitals that did not receive more police focus. And here's what they found. The extra police activities in the hospitals reduce violent crime by 42% and violent felonies, which a serious vinyl crime by 50% compared to the areas that did not receive extra police focus. So it looks like this was an effective strategy. Interestingly, it was found that this was primarily due to the police giving extra attention to repeat violent offenders in the hot spot areas. For example, officers made frequent contact with with them made small talk serves arrest warrants for offenses that these offenders had recently committed and things like that. In case you were wondering whether hospital policing means that crime just moves around the corner, there is evidence that that does not happen. So it appears that hot spot policing can in fact reduce crime. So in some, increasing police activities means of the certainty of getting caught increases. And this can reduce crime so it looks like crime may bring certain benefits. But if the costs increased, such as the certainty of punishment, the cost benefit, skilled flips and people may decide not to commit a crime. 20. 4.3 Rational Choice and Routine Activities: So these ideas from the classic school seemed to be fairly clear. If I want to do something, I think of the costs and of the benefits, and then I make a rational decision. If the costs of crime are larger than the benefits, I don't commit a crime. But if the benefits are larger, I may decide to commit a crime. The thing is that these ideas maybe a little bit too optimistic. I don't usually estimate all costs and benefits of a behavior before I make a decision, and neither do a lot of people. People don't think everything through listing all of the possible proves incomes before they act and sometimes behaviorist pretty spontaneous and maybe not so rational. So instead of saying that behavior is fully rational, it's more realistic to see that people have limited or bounded rationality. This is the idea of rational choice theory. We all make our choices based on our own capacities, habits and and perceptions. Maybe I see something as a benefit that you don't see us a benefit and so we'll both end up doing different things. Nevertheless, we both use our own brains and our own perceptions to make a cost benefit calculation, however crude that maybe so in every situation. We make our own choices based on our limited rationality. And central in that idea is that we try to maximize pleasure and minimise any pain. Now, according to the ideas of rational choice theory, offenders are not necessarily evil. They made use off opportunities. When they see an opportunity where the benefits of committing a crime are larger than the costs, they might go ahead and commit the crime, so it doesn't really require any dramatic experiences to create a crime. Instead, crime happens all the time because opportunities can exist everywhere. And that is where the idea of routine activities theory comes in. Routine activities theory can be seen as a sub field of rational choice theory, and it talks about what elements of situations play a rule when offenders make decisions about crime that sounds fairly theoretical. So let's look at a diagram at all times. There are probably people in our society who have Whitton, who have an increased likelihood to commit a crime. For whatever reason, these are called motivated offenders, but they don't always commit a crime. They may be motivated to commit a crime. But there are other elements about the situation that helped them in decisions. Namely, are there people around who can prevent the crime, so called guardians? And are there potential victims around? If these three elements come together, so motivated offender, a suitable target and a lack off guardians, that is when crime happens to make that a little bit more concrete. Let's look at a classic study on this. This was a study that was done in the 19 sixties and the 19 seventies, when wealth was increasing in welfare states, but at the same time crime rates were going up, which was a surprise. Back then, it was thought that crime should decrease because people were getting wealthier. But that was not the case, and it was discovered that in this time period, not only had wealth increased, but there were also more opportunities for crime, namely, people owned Mawr, expensive and movable goods like cars and TV's, which were also interesting for offenders. So there were more attractive targets around, and people were also spending less time at home. It was no longer just the men who were going to college and to work, but the females, too, and people were also starting to go on vacation. So all in all homes were more often empty, and that meant that there were less people at home to keep an eye on the neighbors and on the street. In other words, the things that make life enjoyable may also be the things that open up opportunities for offended Aires routine activities. Theory is focused on that idea of how opportunities drive crime. If a motivated offender is confronted with a situation where there is a suitable target and no guardian, that is one crime occurs. 21. 4.4 VIDEO: Example: How Do Burglars Choose Their Targets?: so I want to show you an example of how rationality and routine activities play a role in crime. And to do that, I'll talk a little bit about burglary and how burglar select targets. The idea here is not so much that burglaries are committed fully rationally, that they're all saw through and that offenders consider all possible options that they have. Some burglaries are planned and others are not. But there is a pattern to burglaries, and I'll go through some of these patterns first. Inner city neighborhoods have more burglaries than suburban and rural areas, and there are also more burglaries in deprived areas. One of the reasons for this is that the residents in these areas tend not to keep as much of a NY on their area, and they may not try to prevent crime in their neighborhood as much. I'm generalizing here, of course. In other words, guardianship is low in these areas, meaning that burglars have a low risk of being caught second. Within these deprived areas, burglars prefer the most prosperous targets, meaning the richest looking houses. These are the most suitable targets because it looks like the people who live here have more money, and so they have mawr things in their house that are of value. Or at least that's what's thought. Third houses that are located at major thoroughfares are more likely to get big by burglars than, for example, dead end streets or call the socks. The reason for that? Maybe that offenders are more familiar with major thoroughfares, but another advantage of them is that they offer more exit routes to get away. Houses have the corner off a block are also more likely to be burglarized than houses in the middle of a block. Similarly, detached and semi detached houses have a higher risk and terrorist properties and flats. Again, these houses may offer mawr exit routes. Also, when houses are occupied or when they seem occupied, they are less likely to be chosen by burglars. So, for example, if the lights are on in the house and there is a car in the driveway, it looks like the residents might be home. And if the residents air home, you might get caught. Finally, if a dwelling is accessible. So, for example, if the doors or the windows are open, then that makes things easier for the burglar. It takes last time to get in less trouble. And so the amount of work that somebody has to do to get into the house houses less plus, the risk of getting caught might be lower now, once a burglar is inside the house, they prefer items that are valuable, small and easy to carry. For example, cash, jewelry and portable electronic devices such a cell phones, cameras and audio and video equipment. So in some, these are some of the characteristics of housings that burglars may take into consideration when they choose a target within that framework off limited rationality, of course. 22. 4.5 Summing Up: all right, we have come to the end of this module where we have looked at how crime can have costs and benefits, how certain swift and proportional punishment may deter crime, how offenders choose opportunities that maximize pleasure and minimizes pain. And how the convergence off a motivated offender, a suitable target and a lack of guardians creates opportunities for a crime in routine activities theory. So let's move on to the next explanation of crime in the next module. See you there. 23. 5.1 Crime as Learned Behavior: welcome to Monjo five, where it's all about learning crime in groups. Now we'll start out with the example of gang violence, which is a fairly well known phenomenon in the popular media and in the public profile. Gang violence is often associated with things like gangster rap, the murder of well known rappers and with delinquent groups like the Cribs and the Bloods in the US. But gang violence is definitely not just an American phenomenon. It also occurs in other countries and will take an example from Brazil. Here in Brazil, youth gangs have been said to be among the most diverse and violent groups in Latin America . Sometimes the most vulnerable use may end up in such gangs, and an example of vulnerable youths are street Children. For many street Children in Brazilian cities, they are away from their families, and their peers on the streets can become almost like a new sort of family For them. Often times, these kids may stick together, and in some cases they may steal together and use drugs together. Life on the streets for these kids is very difficult, and in order to survive and stay alive, some of these groups of kids resort to crime, for example, they may be hired by larger organized crime groups or larger gangs to commit crime. But group dynamics may also play a role, and it's thes group dynamics that we're focusing on in this module within these groups to you, to learn many things from each other, many everyday things. But they may also learn criminal behavior from each other. Sometimes they can earn self respect and status within that group by committing the most risky and the worst crimes. And because they're away from their family, it's vital for them to be accepted within their new family off piers. And so group dynamics can play an important role in motivating some of these use to commit crimes. Let's look at another example, which is from Dhaka in Bangladesh, similar to the example that I just gave from Brazil. Vulnerable use hair in this city also sometimes join groups on the streets for both companionship, but also to survive in these difficult circumstances. These groups may get involved in offending, such as sometimes pickpocketing or shoplifting, committing robberies together or selling drugs. Sometimes they are hired by larger gangs or organized crime groups to carry out crime. But again, within their groups, the use can learn from each other and gain respect and status from each other by being tough. So, so far in the other modules, we've looked at explanations for crime that all focus on the individual. So how do individuals make choices? What influence do biological characteristics play? What are the psychological characteristics that contribute to making choices? And in this section will start to look at groups how interactions between people can drive criminal behavior. Now, just to make sure what I'm not just talking about vulnerable use like in the examples that I showed before, it's more in general about the role of group dynamics and social processes that can lead to crime. Now, the idea behind social process explanations for crime is that people who commit crime, they are basically like everybody else. It's not the different personalities or biological makeup that makes them commit crime. Instead, they just learned different things than other people. So instead of learning conventional norms like why and how one should obey the law, they learned to commit crimes. And so in that sense, criminal behavior is the same as many other types of behaviour inhabits, namely, people can learn it from each other. One of the best known social process explanations for crime is differential association theory by at one Southerland, it says that criminal behavior is learned in groups, so in interaction with other people and especially learning criminal behavior in intimate groups is important. The most important intimate groups are family and friends like piers in the example of the gangs earlier. But they can also include people like authority figures, and we'll see an example of that in the next section. It's important to know that it's not just the criminal behavior like how to commit a crime that is learned. So not just a technique off, for example, how to commit a burglary instead. It's also the attitudes towards crime that are learned. Attitudes towards crime are things like excusing crimes like saying he or she deserved it or that's just me and believes, like believes, that committing crime is okay. You're even a good thing within groups. Use can also learn these attitudes from each other, and they can also learn how to excuse crime from each other, and also that will talk about in another section. And finally, when Mawr When somebody has mawr attitudes and believes that are in favour off committing a crime than attitudes and beliefs that are against committing a crime, then that person will be more likely to commit a crime. So people who learn that it is okay to commit a crime, that it's excusable or maybe even a good thing they are much more likely to commit crime than people who learn that one should always obey the law. 24. 5.2 VIDEO: Case Study of the Rwandan Genocide: In April of 1994 President Habyarimana of Rwanda was killed when his private plane was shut down. The minority ethnic group off the Tutsi was blamed for the assassination, and within a few hours the authorities who were off the ethnic group off the hoodoo, ordered that all of the Tutsi in the country be killed. In the three months after these, around 800,000 people, both Tutsi and moderate who do were killed. Investigators have estimated that around 75% of all to team men, women and Children marijuana were killed in that time. The Rwandan genocide stands out as one of the most gruesome atrocities in history, not only because the large number off people who were killed but also because of the excessive cruelty with which it was done. What has also been shocking to many is that many law abiding citizens were involved in a torture, rape and killing off their fellow citizens. Some investigators have estimated that 25 to 30% of the adult population was involved in the killings. Researchers who have studied the Rwandan genocide and who have interviewed people who participated in the genocide have come to the conclusion that genocide is group behavior. In the case of Rwanda, it was not so much the pure ethnic fear and hatred between the ethnic groups that caused the killings, but that it was the politicization of ethnicity and group behavior that played a large role . So let's look at how group behavior and dynamics contributed to the Rwandan genocide. First of all, the killings took place almost solely in groups. Groups were anywhere from 10 to 100 people. The killing was often done by a small number of group members, whereas the other people stood by, alluded how looted houses got rid of bodies and cheered on the killers. The killer groups were relatively well organized, which is different from many ordinary delinquent groups. They will lead by military trained people, and they operated on orders of the authorities. As is common in groups, people learned from each other how to do certain things. For example, people were taught how to loot, how to stand guard, how to shoot and how to kill by other group members. What has also been said is that most people who committed killings during the genocide appeared to be what people call normal people. Now the question is, of course, why did so many people join these killer groups? Some of these people were forced to join the killings. Others just followed the crowd or joined willingly. Now, why would people want to join these groups? It looks like people have different reasons for joining. Some were driven by hate and resentment, although this seems to be only a small part. Some were driven by opportunism, the opportunity to gain something, namely getting ahead in terms of Korea or getting material things and money. Some believe that the country was in danger because the to see were being accused of murdering the president, and so they felt that it was their duty to participate in the killings. There was also an element of feeling forced. If people refused to participate in the killings, they could be killed themselves, and that created an atmosphere of terror and violence. But besides this atmosphere of terror and violence, many of the group members also wanted to belong to the group. They felt group pressure to participate in the killings, otherwise they would be rejected by the group. The feeling off belonging to agree provided a kind of a group spirit, and this is a common motivation for many types of behavior. People in general are sensitive to peer pressure. They want to be long. They want to adapt to group norms and be a good group member. And so groups have a large influence on the behavior off the individual group members so people can commit genocide because they don't want to be rejected by the group. As mentioned, the killings were also characterized by a lot of cruelty. And this is another thing that group Dynamics played a ruling inside of groups. There's often competition as to who is the best or most successful group member. There are a wanton killer groups. The most successful, learned and respected grew members were the ones were the toughest and who killed the most . Also, because thes groups have so much power and could kill people, they felt invincible. Excessive violence became the new group. Norman people adapted to that. They wanted to belong to the group and once groups cross a certain line, there are very few ways to control them and to prevent violence from getting out of hand and becoming extremely cool. So In sum, the Rwandan genocide was group behavior. What killings were committed in groups and where group dynamics played an important role in motivating people to kill and to use excessive violence even when the people who killed used to be regular, law abiding citizens. What is more, many of the hoodoo perpetrators did not really share the belief that the toots he needed to be killed. And so, in order to belong to the group and to justify the killings, they started using what we call neutralization techniques, and that is what will turn to next. 25. 5.3 “It’s Not That Bad”: Neutralizations for Crime: as I already mentioned. Learning crime in groups does not just include the techniques for how to commit a crime. It also includes how to neutralize and rationalize crime. Now, rationalizing crime is something that occurs after you've committed a crime. So someone has committed a crime and then afterwards tries to come up with reasons why he or she did it. He or she tries to rationalize it, neutralization for crime or something different. They are things that can come before committing a crime or while committing a crime. So before one commits a crime or while one is doing it, one is trying to think of ways to excuse it and those excuses, then make it okay for people to commit the crime. Now, news realizations come in different forms, and I'll go through several of them. For example, the denial of responsibility, which means saying or thick thinking things like, I couldn't help it. I was drunk or I'm not responsible. They made me do it. The denial of harm, which includes saying things like it's not that bad. The victim didn't get injured or to neutralize stealing, saying things like, well, big supermarkets. They have so much money. It won't really hurt them if I steal something. The denial of victim, for example, saying it's their own fault or they deserved it. The condemnation off the condemned Neri's, which basically is emphasizing how the people who judge you might also do unethical things Sometimes. So one would say things like, Well, everybody has a bad side in them or even police officers do bad things Sometimes the appeal to higher loyalties saying things like, I did it for my family so one would emphasize how one didn't do it for oneself. The claim off relative acceptability, which means emphasizing how the things that you did are not as bad as the thing somebody else did. For example, what I did is not so bad. Look at what he or she did now. The idea with these neutralization for crime is that people who commit crime agree that committing crime is wrong. They agree with the values of society that people should not commit crime. And so, in order to make it right for them to commit crime to keep a good identity about themselves , they used the's neutralization techniques to make it okay to neutralize. There criminal behavior and to reduce their feelings of guilt about what they what they're about to do or are doing. As an example of how these techniques are being used, let's look at an example from Hong Kong. In this study, the researchers conducted in depth interviews with juvenile delinquent who had been caught shoplifting, and about half of them were girls, and half of them are boys. One common that I should make about interviews and neutralization techniques is that interviews usually come after the crime. So interviewers ask people what happened and why they committed a crime. So it is pretty difficult afterwards to know for sure that what somebody says also played a role before the crime or whether it is something that they came up with after the crime. But going back to the study in Hong Kong, the use who were interviewed said that they felt internal constraints about stealing, meaning that they were afraid they'd get caught. They felt that stealing was bad, or they were worried about what their parents would say if they found out that they were actually going to steal something. And so to overcome these constraints to keep a good identity about themselves. They use neutralization techniques, and here are some of the things they said. Somebody said what's not like I'm robbing somebody, which is the claim of relative acceptability. What I'm doing is not so bad is what somebody else is doing or what I could do. It doesn't matter if I take one item. It's such a big shop, the denial of harm and won't really harm the Storify. Still something. The denial of responsibility. I really wanted to buy a gift for my friend's birthday, but my mom didn't give me the money. I did it because she did not give me money. So this person tries to displace the responsibility for the crime to somebody else, namely their mother. And finally, the appeal to higher loyalties. I didn't do it for myself, so emphasizing that this was something that they did so that somebody else might benefit from it. Summing up These are some of the neutralization techniques of these adolescence used for neutralising shoplifting 26. 5.4 VIDEO: Example: How Men and Women Neutralize Their White Collar Crimes: So far, I've talked mostly about violent crimes and theft. In this section, I'll do something different and look at a brief example of white collar crime. White collar crimes are things like health insurance fraud, identity theft, false corporate reporting, falls, bank loans and text violation Bernie made of. It's probably one of the best known white collar offenders of all time. He committed the largest financial fraud in the history of the US, which was estimated at almost $65 billion. He was ultimately sentenced to 150 years in prison. And here is what he allegedly said when asked about his victims. Fuck my victims. People just kept through. And money at me as we'll see Made off isn't the only white collar offender who used neutralization techniques to neutralize their crime. I'll show you the results of an interesting study where American researchers interviewed 40 offenders, 20 of them were men and 20 were women, and they were all convicted for white collar crimes. It turned out that every single one of these 40 people justified or excuse their crimes in some way, and I'll show you a couple of examples. Here is an example of a male offender, he who used the appeal to higher loyalties. I guess when I was committing my ax, I believe that maybe I was doing some of this for my family. I wanted to have the time in the financial security to be around my family, to make sure I would be there for my Children. So I guess family also subconsciously played into why I did what I did. It all boils down to power and greed and decisions you make in life. In my case, my family was part of my decision making for why I did what I did. Here's another example for denial of injury in my mind. As I made money with new clients, I was going to put back the money that I had taken from other clients. In my mind, I was only borrowing the money, so it was OK because I was going to put it back. One of the female offenders placed the blame on the victim. The family that I was working for was a close family friend. It was my best friend's parents and they had a whole lot of money and they weren't paying me a whole lot of money, and I had no health insurance. I had no vacation time. I couldn't afford car insurance. They didn't hold our taxes. So every April, I'm getting this $5000 text bill, and I guess I feel like I kind of snapped, you know, at the same time, I was expected to run with their crowd socially, I couldn't afford to. I was shopping and doing their personal errands and being sent to these ritzy boutiques to buy $600 dollar lampshades, whereas I couldn't even afford to fix my car when the radiator broke. And basically, I just started using the credit cards for my own purposes and shopping and buying things that I wanted that I couldn't afford. When I realized that there were people with less employees, working less hours, getting work evaluations, making more money, I think that was my I've had enough. So in the first example, the offender used the appeal to higher loyalties, neutralization by referring so how he was doing it in part for his family. The second example. Waas of denial of injury because the offender was telling himself that he was only borrowing the money, and then the third example was where the offender placed the blame on the victim. So in some, it looks like neutralization techniques are used by these offenders to excuse their crimes while at the same time keeping a good identity of themselves. 27. 5.5 Summing Up: Okay, so we've come to the end of module five on crime, a social behavior, and let's briefly sum it up. So we saw that crime can be learned that there is an important rule for group dynamics and social processes when it comes to motivating people for criminal behavior, and that it's not just the techniques of how to commit a crime that I learned, but also attitudes, rationalizations and neutralization ins. And then, finally, in the last section, I discussed how men and women neutralize white collar crimes in the next section. The question won't be as much why some people commit crime, but why some people do not commit crime, so see you there. 28. 6.1 Believing in Social Bonds: in this sixth module will discuss social control Explanations for crime, which are very popular among criminology, is the idea what social control explanations for crime is that the question is not so much . Why would some people commit crime? But why would some people not commit crime? The idea being We are all potential offenders. There are temptations all around us, and so why don't we all act on those temptations and commit crime? So in this module will look at two explanations for crime to social control explanations. The 2nd 1 is self control, and the 1st 1 which will move to first is social bonding. The basis for social bonding theory is that people who are attached to society have too much to lose by committing crime. They might risk their relationship with their parents with their friends, maybe with their partner and with people at school or work. And so the bombs to these to the people around them, to conventional society, they prevent crime. In other words, thes social bonds are too strong for them to risk getting involved in crime. In a way one could say that the social bonds work as informal social control, which simply means that there are people who are watching you and who will hold you accountable when you do something that is wrong. So what is the social bond? It consists of several elements. The 1st 1 is attachment. So in order to have a social bond to somebody, one has to be attached to them. One has to care about other people and about their expectations off us. We have to have close ties with them. The 2nd 1 is commitment. One has toe have a willingness to follow through on the promises that 1 May to other people . The third element of a social bond is involvement. Involvement basically means that one is taking part in what is called conventional meaning non delinquent activities. For example, if you spend a lot of time volunteering, you won't have that time available to commit crime. And finally there is believe, which is that one has to believe that the values of society that one shouldn't commit a crime, for example are in fact correct and should be obeyed Now. The stronger each of these four elements is the smaller the chance that somebody will commit a crime and Although people are naturally motivated to commit crime, it is thes bombs the social bonds with other people around us that keep us from doing it. Notice that there is a link with learning explanations. Social Lorne learning explanation of crime, which we discussed in the previous model. Because both are based on the idea that crime is caused in interpersonal relationships, in relationships with others, whether it's through learning or a social bond. I mentioned a couple of times that social bonds are about bonds to conventional society. That means that it is important that one has social bonds with people who are not offenders and who believe in the values off. Confront conventional society meaning not committing crime, for example. And this is actually a very important element because what a lot of studies have found so far is that having parents or friends who commit crime actually results in a higher likelihood that a person will commit crime. So it is very important that the social bonds are with people who are not committing crime 29. 6.2 VIDEO: Example: Can Offenders Turn Their Life Around? Age-Graded Social Control: One of the interesting things about social bonds and attachments is how they change across different life stages. When you're a young child, your bonds air, usually with your parents. Then when you go to school, you may start to bond with teachers, and you may start to form friendships and close ties with your peers. Then, when you leave school, you might start dating and have a relationship with somebody you like quite a bit and whom you may marry. And around that time you may also find a job, and you and your partner may have Children who are new persons in your life that you form attachments with. In other words, bonds and informal social control vary by age, so informal social control is age graded in their classic book on criminal careers and age graded informal social control, Laub and Sampson tell the story of the life course of Leon, who was a juvenile delinquent in his younger years. Leon grew up in a poor neighborhood in Boston with alcoholic parents who often neglected their kids. He did poorly in school, quit after seventh grade, and he said he committed 19 crimes around that time. He was arrested three times for breaking and entering. In other words, Leon seem to be on a pathway to becoming a persistent offender. But he didn't become a persistent offender. He became a law abiding citizen who worked all his life, became a homeowner and started traveling when he retired. So what happened? He said that his turning point came when he met his wife. He said that she straighten him out, insured When people get married or something similar happens when they get a job, they invest time and energy into these new relationships. They have a lot to lose by committing crime and risking these relationships. Also, spouses and colleagues can provide social support, and in addition to that, people will have less opportunity to commit a crime. Having a job means that you have much less time to commit crime. And after work, you may. You have to make sure that you get up again the next morning. So having a job also ensures that your downtown downtime it spend responsibly. Likewise, being married usually requires you to spend time with a spouse, perhaps sitting on the couch at home, instead of being on the street with friends. But how much can new social bonds like marrying and getting a job? Reduced crime? Let's look at some numbers. A study in Finland looked at the question off whether marrying, having a child and finding a job let persistent offenders to stop committing crime. And they found the following getting married or cohabitating led to a 10% reduction in the number of new convictions. Having Children reduced the number of new convictions by 15%. And if offenders both got married or cohabitating and became new parents, this resulted in 22% fewer new convictions, getting a job meant of 40% reductions in new convictions. Note that these particular percentages may be specific to Finland or to hear Europe in general, cohabitating very normal in your almost like a marriage. Plus, the Nordic countries have very supportive family policies in other countries become an apparent maybe more stressful. But the finding that life changes, like getting married and getting a job can lead offenders to stop committing Crime is something that has been found not just in Finland but in various countries. So in some, it appears that these can be life transforming experiences that can turn hardened delinquent into law abiding citizens. 30. 6.3 Self-Control and Crime: In 1990 an important book for a criminology was published by God friends. And in Hershey. It said that crime was just one outcome of a more general problem that they called low self control again, The idea is that all people are motivated to commit crime, but this time it's not so much the social bonds that keep them from doing it. It's self control that keeps people from doing it. Having a low level of self control can lead to a host of things, including things like smoking, drinking, alcohol, having accidents and also committing crime. So according to self control theory, low self control leads to high crime, and high self control leads to low crime. But what is low self control? People who have a low level of self control? They are not as interested in long term achievement. They are more impulsive. They're focused on the here and now and on what they can get right now and not in a couple of years. They are also relatively risk seeking and reckless look rather than cautious. In addition, they often prefer simple tasks instead of task that requires diligence and persistence, and they tend to prefer physical activities over cognitive ones. In other words, they prefer doing instead of thinking there are also set to be relatively indifferent to the needs of others and instead more focused on their own needs and wants. And finally, they get relatively easily frustrated and angry. I've made the balloons off impulsivity, a risk seeking bigger here, because research suggests that these two are the heart of low self control. The other balloons are also characteristic of low self control, but it looks like impulsivity and risk seeking are the core off low self control. As you can see, there is some overlap with the personnel of the explanations that we talked about in the psychology module four. And some have indeed called self self control of personality trade. When the question with personality treats is, of course, can they be changed in this case? Can one change his or her level of self control? If that is the case, if one can change that level of self control, then that would mean that if we can increase our level of self control that we may be able to reduce crime as well. On the other hand, if We cannot change the level of self control that we may not be able to reduce crime well , according to the authors, thesaurus for low self control and high impulsivity lives and inadequate child rearing more specifically, not adequately monitoring what a child does and not punishing his or her deviant behavior. So according to self control theory, one can actually teach Children to have self control and not act impulsively so in order to prevent crime. There is a heavy emphasis here on adequate child rearing by parents, but there is now more and more evidence that self control can also be changed after early childhood. And that means, of course, that there is a potential for crime prevention later on in life with well, and we'll see an example of that in the next section. 31. 6.4 VIDEO: Example: How A Facebook Friend Can Help Reduce Crime: One of the things that is interesting about self control and impulsivity is that there is evidence that it can be changed. And if people's level of self control can be changed. That is promising for a crime prevention, of course, because it means that criminal behavior can potentially be changed, too. A nice example from the Netherlands among high school students shows that this can be done using Facebook now having low self control and being impulsive generally means that people are focused on the here and now on what they can get right now. In this moment, they're less concerned with the future and how things will look like in the future. Now what these researchers try to make people realize is that there is more than just a here and now that there is in fact a future and that what they do now can actually influence their future. The idea was that if people have a better sense off the future, they won't be as impulsive because they will realize that what they do now has consequences . In the case of crime, they might see that doing something illegal can get you into trouble in the future in order to achieve that, they what the researchers did is that they created a Facebook personal page for each of the students. Then they uploaded pictures off the students on that profile that were not the current pictures off the students. Instead, they took thes current pictures and changed them so that they looked like the students were 15 years older. So these were their future Selves. They were seeing their future, namely themselves in about 15 years. Then the students became Facebook friends with their future Selves. And what happened next was that half of thes use started to receive daily messages from their future self. Here is an example of such your message. Imagine what you do on a day like today in exactly three years from now. Think, for example, of your activities that day whom you meet your work, family, sports, hobbies and stuff. So what happens here is that youths are actually communicating with the future, namely with their own future and Selves, and they're also made to think about the future, what they'll do in the future. Here are the results The researchers found that students who received messages from their future Selves had a clearer images image off the future. In other words, they realized that there was a future that it's not just to here and now that counts now. The big question, of course, is. Did that also mean that use committed less crime? What the researchers found was that that was indeed the case. The students who received these messages from their future Selves were less involved in delinquency afterwards, then the students who did not receive these messages. These are promising results, of course, because they suggest that impulsive behavior can be changed and that, as a result of that, delinquency can also be reduced. 32. 6.5 Summing Up: okay, that wraps up this module in this module, we focused on control explanations and more specifically on the question of how having social bonds and attachments to conventional society, such as law abiding family members and friends, can keep somebody away from crime. Also, we focused on how social bonds can change over the life course and that things like marrying, having Children and getting a job can change hardened criminals into law abiding citizens. We saw how low self control and impulsive behavior can lead to criminal behavior. And, finally, how impulsive behavior can be changed in the next module. We move will move on to another interesting topic, namely, the question of whether punishment can lead to crime. So not dust crime Lee to punishment. But the other way around. Can punishment lead to crime? I'll see you there 33. 7.1 Labeling: We Are What Others Think We Are: A couple of years ago, a colleague of mine and myself interviewed a persistent offender. This was someone who had spent a lot of time in prison and who had committed many crimes, especially theft. When he talked about how he got into crime, he mentioned that he had stolen something. At the beginning of his criminal career, he got caught and his parents responded by saying that he was now a criminal because of what he did, and by way of punishment, they would no longer support him. He said that it was then calling him a criminal that did something to his self identity. He thought to himself, Well, if they think that I'm a criminal, then I might as well be one. According to him, that was the real start of his extensive criminal career. And that is exactly how labeling theorists explain crime. We are what other people think we are, if others think we are offenders and that's what we think we are, and as a consequence we start behaving as offenders. The idea is that almost everyone can commit a first crime, and that many people do. Committing crime is fairly widespread, and many of these crimes may not be very serious and mostly infrequent, at least according to labelling theorists. That changes when other people, such as parents, peers neighbors but also be police response to a person's misbehavior by labeling that that person as a criminal or deviant. It is the reaction of other people after the initial crime that can lead to a stable pattern off criminal behavior. So in the example that I just gave, the man that I interviewed had been tagged as a criminal by his parents. So if that's sticking stigmatisation, the disgrace of being labelled a criminal that leads people to self identify as a criminal or an offender that is an individual who is labelled as a criminal will tend to conform to the judgment and is therefore likely to commit crime in the future. Without that stigmatization, criminal behavior would remain to be sporadic. Or at least that's the idea of this approach. So the process works like this. Primary acts of deviants lead to a person being labeled or stigmatized, which in turn leads tomb or criminal behavior, which is also called secondary deviance. The secondary deviance would not have occurred if a person hadn't been labelled a criminal . Now remember that in the example of the interviewed offender and the man said that two things happened. First, his parents labeled him a criminal, and then they said they would no longer support him. So on top of being labeled, the criminal offenders may be given less opportunities and resources. Here's another example, Let's say an adolescent is called breaking a rule. The people around him or her may now start to see this youth as a criminal, and they punish him or her for it. He or she may not be invited to. Social activities may be left out when school counselor select kids for opportunities and maybe rejected by friends. This may motivate the youth to seek out delinquent peer groups because these are the only ones left for him or her now to be friend, which puts this youth further on a path towards delinquency. So again we see a mechanism whereby stigmatisation or labelling offenders can leave to more crime 34. 7.2 VIDEO: Example: On Hippies and Marihuana: not all studies that have tested labelling theory have been able to prove that it actually works in the way it was originally proposed. But there are good examples of studies that have found evidence for labelling, and one of these is a study in Notting Hill in London. In that study, the researchers studied a group of marijuana users in the 19 sixties. This was a group of people that consisted of hippies who casually and occasionally used marijuana. Marijuana use was only a small part of the hippie culture. There were a lot of other things that these people consider to be important and to be a part of their culture. But something happened that made them change this view. And what happened was that the police started to see these hippies as dirty, scruffy and promiscuous drug addicts. They were a group that was very different from the rest of society. Namely, they were drug addicts. Hippies didn't really see themselves that way at all. But due to this reaction of the police, the group started feeling like they were no longer a part of society that they were actually deviance. They started to turn their back on society, and they retreated into their own deviant subculture. Substance use became very important to them and, in fact, a central part of their culture. Using drugs became like a self identity, something that set them apart from the rest of the world. So, as you can see, their self identity changed quite a lot. More and more, they became an isolated group. They did not allow non drug users into their group anymore because letting outside us in could lead them to get arrested for drop position. Plus contact with non drug users was not in line with their newly chosen deviant self identity, where drug use were so important. So they're they're norms and values became mawr and more deviant and drug use became a central part of their subculture and like a symbol of defiance. In other words, the police reaction to the hippies transformed how they saw themselves and how they saw drug use. They no longer felt like they were a part of regular society, and they retreated into this own deviant subculture that reflected their new self identity . So in a way, they became how the police saw them 35. 7.3 Repairing The Damage: Reintegrative Shaming and Restorative Justice: so the labeling process that I just described can be seen as a fairly destructive process because it causes a rift between those people who are labeled as criminals and the rest of society. But there may be a way to actually reconnect those who enabled by society with society. So going back to the example at the beginning of the module, the parents of the offender labeled him as a criminal and stopped supporting him. What if one could actually turn this labelling into something positive? What if one could accept that a person has on something wrong, but that this is only a part of them? A lot of? Instead of alienating people who commit crime, one could recognize that they did something wrong and then they would be welcome back into the community and repair some of the damage that they've done. In other words, instead of inflicting harm on the offender, there could be a process that try to reintegrate the offender into society and their repair some of the harm that the crime is cost. Such processes do in fact exist, and they're called re integrative shaming, and they also work in this way. There is a conference where all people who are affected by the crime come together. Then there is a deliberation phase in which all people who are affected decide what the offender should do to repair the damage, and that then allows the offender to show remorse and then reintegrate them into society. That approach has been especially influential in Australia and New Zealand, but it's also been applied in other countries. Offenders are confronted with the consequences off the crime that they've committed. They accept responsibility for what they've done, and they are given the opportunity to show that they are not bad people. And then they commit to the process in which they are reintegrated back into society, for example, by completing community service. So in that way, a kind of restorative justice is performed in which the relationship between the offender is the victim's and the community is repaired. So what are the effects of these conferences? They seem to be largely positive. Victims who participate in these face to face restorative justice programs are more satisfied with the process afterwards than victims whose crimes are processed through traditional criminal justice approaches. Offenders who attend restorative justice programs also report higher satisfaction compared to traditional criminal justice approaches, except when the conference takes place after when their sentence has already taken place. Offenders are also more likely to comply with the with any restitution agreements compared to a court ordered restitution, so these effects are largely positive now. The question is also whether these programs can reduce crime. Do conferences result in less re offending among offenders? Overall, it looks like offenders who participate in restorative justice programs are somewhat less likely to commit new crimes. There was a recent study that looked at the effectiveness off such restorative justice conference. They included 10 experiments in the U. K Australia and the U. S. And then they investigated whether the conferences resulted in less new offensive among the offenders, and the answer was positive. They found that restorative justice conferences resulting in less crime. More specifically, they estimated that beast and experiments that they looked at resulted in 7 to 45 fewer new convictions or arrests, and that it was particularly effective in reducing violent crime and especially for adult offenders. No off course. Organizing these conferences and completing this entire process costs money, so the question is. Are these processes actually cost effective? These researchers found that for every $1 or pound or any other currency spend on restorative justice conferences anywhere from $3.70 to $8.10 in cost of crime was prevented . In other words, these conferences seem to be highly cost effective. 36. 7.4 VIDEO: Case Study of a 12-Year-Old Girl and Family Group Conferencing: in this section, I'll talk about a 12 year old girl and her family who participated in a restorative justice programme. More specifically, the girl and her family participated in a family group conference, which is based in part on the traditions off the Mahdi. The indigenous people of New Zealand. Family group conferences have been used in the criminal justice system in New Zealand for a long time. For about 30 years. They bring together the youth use family, extended family and professionals like social workers. These people are all brought together to discuss what happened and what is next. In the first stage of the process, Child Protection Services informs the family and the extended family off their concerns. The family then discusses things on its own and comes up with potential solutions to address the concerns. And then at the final stage, the family presents the plan that they've come up with to the practitioners. And when everybody, including the youth, agrees the plan is accepted. The idea here is that families get a greater say in child protection and juvenile justice issues. But family group conferences have spread outside of New Zealand to, and I will show you an example a case study from the UK to get an idea of how such a process is experienced by the people who actually go through it, because it can be a fairly intense process, since it brings together ah lot of people and makes issues quite public within that group of people. So the child in this case was a 12 year old girl who was referred to the project by this by her school. The school was concerned about her bullying behavior and stealing the girl lift together with both of her parents and two siblings and going into the conference. So being confronted with the rest of the family and with the caseworkers, the parents felt positive about it, they said. I felt well prepared that it was in my control. The interview will also talk to the girl and asked her, How did you feel about the meeting When you went into the room? The girl said, All right. It was a bit funny at first, a bit weird, but I got used to it. So the format off the conference, the setting in which it took place even though it can be quite different to what people are used to. Turned out to be okay for this family. The interview and then asked the girl about the reason why the family group conference to place. She understood what it was about seeing that it was about my stealing. I didn't really want to steal, but I didn't know what was going on inside my head, the interviewer asked. You wanted to stop stealing, and the girl said, Yeah, Police said I was on my last chance. If I'd stool again, I would have been in those police on those things the interview and then asked what the conference did for her. Whether it had been useful. It all, the girl said. It helped me not to steal. It helped me not to hang around with those people who are smoking, nicking and stuff like that, The interviewer asked. Do you think you will ever steal again? And the girl said, No, no, I never did it. After the meeting, the interview also as the mother, the mother, about the results of the conference, what it had done for them, they asked, Is there anything that you wish had been achieved? The mother said I think it all did. He's got to the stage where I can have a conversation with her. Before the conference, I couldn't. She's doing okay in the school and at home, so she's getting there. It's a slow process, but she's getting there. The conference was really good for us. She is not stealing anymore. It was the stealing and the school. The school is fine. Interviewer asked. She's better now, the mother said. Yeah, the interviewer said. Out of 100% and the month, the mother asked. You answered about 60. She still has her moments when she has her tantrums, the interview asked. How do you feel about the future? And the mother answered, I think it's going to be a good one. The mother mentioned that the conference not only benefited the girl, but also the family and the parents, she said, whereas before it was like because she was doing things, it was always me and her father. That was arguing. We were constantly at each other, so now we are not. We have disagreements, but we can sit down and talk about it, talk it through, get a solution to the problem so This case study is an example of how people may experience restorative justice processes. For this girl, it looks like the outcome off the process was positive and contributed to her stopping stealing. The researchers who did this study conducted a couple of more of these case studies and across those case studies, they concluded that the families and their Children were generally well prepared for the meetings. However, when going into the meeting, some families and petitioners were somewhat overwhelmed by the amount of people that were present there, making it a little bit of a daunting experience. Sometimes for some families, it felt like because so many people were there. Everybody cared about their child. One problem in some of these cases seems to be that the things that are in the plan that everybody agrees that on at the end of the meeting do not always happen, for example, that people stop holding to youth accountable. But overall, the results of this study were positive about the way in which families experience family group conferences 37. 7.5 Summing Up: all right, so we have come to the end of this module and this module was focused on labeling and how on how being punished by other people for criminal behavior can lead to people feeling stigmatized and how the stigmatisation and labeling can lead to people committing more crime. And finally, we saw how labeling someone as a criminal can be turned around so that they are reconnected to society in the next module will shift the focus from people to places. And we'll try to answer the question of how places can generate crime, so I'll see you there. 38. 8.1 Crime In The Neighborhood: Social Disorganization: So far, I've talked about how personal characteristics of people and their relationships with others can affect crime. This module will take things a little further by looking at how places can affect crime. If you think about the town where you live, there are probably areas that are considered to be better than others. Now the word better usually refers to things like the people who live there or what goes on in those places and how much crime there is. But what is it that makes those areas better than others and have less crime than others? Here you can see an example of a crime map off the city off Chennai. In India, this map displays rates off snatching, which is seizing and stealing something in each area of the city. The boundaries of each area are shown, as you can see in each area has a color varying from white to dark ray. The white areas experience very low to no snatching, but the darker the color gets, the more snatching that area experiences. So what you can see here is that there are large differences in the number of snatchings per area. Some areas have much higher rates than others. So what causes that? There is another example, this time from the city of each chose a Brazil. I hope I pronounce that correctly so in the same way as the member of Chennai, the colors hair indicate the number of crimes in that area. This time, it's the total crime rate, not just snatchings that is displayed. The like yellow colored area have little crime, but the dark brown area has the highest crime, so the the darkest colored area is downtown, where a lot of people gather. And so there may be lots of opportunities there. And as we're discussing, module to opportunities can lead to crime. But there are also some areas, as you can see, such as those in the north that have relatively high crime rates. So again, as you can see, there can be quite large differences in the number of crimes per area, and the question is what this means. Why do certain areas have higher crime than other others? Are there perhaps certain area or neighborhood characteristics that affect how much crime there is in a certain area or a neighborhood? The idea that crime is affected by neighborhood characteristics was one of the main ideas of the famous Chicago school in the 19 twenties and the 19 thirties. They observed that the number of delinquent was much higher in some neighborhoods than in others. And they also observed that crime levels remained high in high crime neighborhoods even when the original population that lived there moved out or eventually died. So this prompted the question. Why do some places have much more crime than others? And that led to the development off social disorganisation theory? And what the researchers of the Chicago school found out is that in part, these differences between areas exist becomes because some areas have mawr social problems , which means that the residents of those areas are less capable off having control over what happens in their neighborhood and off preventing crime there, in other words, and we've already discussed this term in Module six on social bonds. They have lower informal social control, meaning that neighborhood neighbors don't look out for each other and their neighborhood. So what are some of these social problems in these areas? Many of these areas have poverty, poverty does a lot of things, and one of those is that it promotes a sense of powerlessness, which in turn means that residents don't feel empowered and strong enough to intervene when they see or hear off crime in their area. Housing instability, meaning lots of people, people moving in and out of the area. If there is high turnover, there is little opportunity to build social ties between neighbors. And that, in turn, means that neighbors don't really get the opportunity to start to trust each other and trusting each other is vital for fighting for a common good, such as preventing crime together. There is often a high level of ethnic heterogeneity and that often but not always means that residents have different values and cannot really communicate effectively with each each other to achieve a common goal, such as protecting their neighborhood against problems like crime. And consequently there is a lack of social cohesion, high levels off poverty, housing, instability and ethnic heterogeneity kill me to a low level of social cohesion in an area meaning that people don't feel that they are united and that they can achieve something together. When there is a lack of social cohesion. There is little informal social control, which means that the residents don't feel motivated to protect their neighborhood. Finally, disorder. Some areas have a high level of disorder. There is litter graffiti. There are vacant or deserted houses. People are drinking in public or selling or using drugs. And maybe there are teenagers or adults hanging around and causing trouble. Two outsider signs of disorder conveyed the message that nobody really feels responsible for an area which invites offenders because they think that nobody will stop them. Also, it leads the residents off the area to retire from public space because they feel powerless . So in some, if a neighborhood has a low level of social off informal social control, the residents and especially the youth off a neighborhood aren't really monitored, and they are therefore almost given the opportunity to develop delinquent behaviour and delinquent subcultures. Plus, outsiders from other areas are and stopped, or at least they feel that they are and stopped to commit their crimes in that neighborhood , either 39. 8.2 VIDEO: Example: Does Litter Cause Crime? Plus EXERCISE: as I mentioned in the previous section, disorder in an area can increase crime. This is known as broken Windows theory. The idea off this theory is that this order, so things like broken windows, litter and abandoned houses invite more disorder and, ultimately, crime. This idea is pretty popular, and in the mid 19 nineties it was adopted by New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who launched a major city clean up to increase the quality of life and reduced crime there . But does it actually work like that? Does disorder increase crime that was tested in a very interesting study in the Netherlands . The researchers in that study carried out several experiments in which they added signs off disorder to public areas. And then they watched whether people who visited those areas were more likely to break rules there. I'll briefly discuss two of the six experiments that they conducted in the first experiment , the researchers sought out an alleyway that was used to park bicycles In one version off the alleyway, the walls were clean, but in the other they were covered with graffiti. As you can see, there was also a very visible sign saying that graffiti was not allowed. The researchers then hung a flyer on the handlebars off the bikes that were parked there. And then they started observing. They found that in the clean alleyway, 33% off the people who came to collect their bike their flu through the flyer on the ground or hung it on another part bicycle, which is considered littering. On the other hand, in the alleyway, with the graffiti on the walls, 69% of the bike owners littered. So it seems that this order, in this case graffiti you let two more disorder, namely littering so disorder could lead to more disorder. But can this order also lead to crime? The researchers addressed that question in a second experiment. In that experiment, the researchers prepared an envelope that visibly contained five euros, which is about $5. 70. They then hung the envelope out off a meal box. In one version of the meal box. It was clean, and the ground around it was also clean. In the second version, the mailbox was either covered with graffiti without litter on the ground, or the ground was covered in litter. But there was no graffiti when there was no graffiti and no littering 13% off. Passersby stole the envelope with the five euros in it. When the mailbox was covered in graffiti, 27% stole the envelope, and when the ground around the mailbox was littered 25%. Still, the envelope so almost double the amount of people stole the envelope when they saw signs of disorder. So in some, it looks like signs of disorder can lead to more disorder and even to criminal behavior. That implies that the early removal of this order maybe a promising way to prevent crime. So here's an exercise to try this at home. Watch if there is a difference in the behavior of your household members. When your house is need entirety versus when it's disorganized and messy, do they tend to become messier themselves to and do they become Tidier after the house has been cleaned 40. 8.3 Designing Out Crime: as we just saw changing the environment can actually reduce crime. That idea ISS further built on in the concept of crime prevention through environmental design. In short, sipped it sit that is based on rational choice theory, which we discussing module to. And it focuses on the idea that changing our built environment can reduce the opportunities for crime. In other words, it focuses on how we can change buildings, cities and communities so that people will not commit crime there. That is an interesting angle from which to look at crime and crime prevention because it implies that if we change our environment, we can change people's behavior. And in order to do that, what the sick that method does is that it looks to design. So how can we design buildings, communities and cities so that we can reduce crime, and also so that we can make people feel safe in our communities? There are several ways in which one can use design elements to keep out crime and make residents feel safe, and I'll show you a few of these examples and ways. First, there is the idea of territoriality, namely putting barriers between public semi public and private spaces that is assumed to promote people's sense of ownership of that area. Owners are then thought to be more protective off their space and not allow outsiders to be in it. That is done through assigning species a clear purpose, uh, for example, through the use off subtle paving pattern symbolic barriers or signs, and those things then provide clear boundaries off different types of space. In the first picture here, you can see that there are offenses and low walls that give a sense of territoriality. In the second picture, the house is on an elevated piece of land, which makes it clearly different from the sidewalk around it and in the third picture hair . If you look closely, you'll see that the pavement changes once you're on the property off the house. Now. At the same time, those barriers may act as excess control to prevent the link wins from gaining access orm or in general, it may convey the message that in this space, people are looking out for each other and their neighbors, leading to an increased risk of apprehension. You can see a few examples off that in the pictures here Also, there's natural surveillance, which means increasing the opportunities for residents to observe what's going on outside. That may include, for example, the policeman of Windows in the first picture or street lighting in the second, but also things like trimming overgrown bushes and trees. If offenders feel like they're being watched even in, if in reality they're not, they may be less likely to commit a crime. Natural surveillance can also include the presence off passersby, because, of course, they can observe what's going on around them so one could design streets so that more pedestrian and bicycle traffic passes. By. Then, there's image management, which refers to making sure a space looks well kept. We've already seen examples off this in the previous section, but here are some more pictures showing well kept houses, in this case in Cape Town and the Netherlands, there's also an element off target hardening, like using locks and cameras and things like that. There is some discussion over this, whether it really belongs to sipped at the disadvantage off. It is that some residents and communities go to the extreme with target hardening, creating islands of Waldon houses that are not accessible to anyone anymore that might even lower the sense of community. For example, a study in Ghana found that many residents there had adopted target hardening measures such as high walls, metal burglar proved windows and doors and security doors, and that created secured islands, which in the long run actually weakened the social cohesion in the neighborhoods there. Now, to make this a little more concrete, let's look at an example off a house with and without septet features. Here is a picture off a poorly maintained house that was used in a study in Perth. In Australia, As you can see, natural surveillance here is low. You can look through the windows to see what's going on outside. There are places where the link wins could hide if they needed to, and the entire picture screams that this house is not occupied. And so there are no people in it that will keep an eye on the street. The image management is also poor, the houses poorly maintained. There's graffiti and the windows are boarded up in terms of territoriality. There seems to be very little sense of ownership around this house. The entrance is not clear and In other words, there's no sense here that someone exerts control over this house that access control there . As you can see, there is access to the rear off the property on the left side of the of the house. No, there is a picture off the same house six years later. In this case, natural surveillance is much higher. You can look through the windows to see what's going on outside. There are no places or less places where delinquent could hide if they needed to, and it gives the feeling that it is occupied. Image management is also much better. The house looks well maintained. The entrance is clear, there's no graffiti, and the windows are no longer a boarded up. In terms of territoriality, there seems to be a much larger sense of ownership, and in terms of access control, there is no longer access to the rear off the property. The researchers who used these pictures showed them to 180 people, and then they asked them how likely they thought it was that illegal behavior occurred at this property, things like squatting, vandalism, graffiti, burglary and drug dealing. Overall, the respondents said that they thought it would likely or very likely that illegal behavior occurred at the poorly maintained house and that it was not likely at the well maintained house. In addition, people felt much safer around the well maintained house. Only 13% of the respondents from the general public said that they would not avoid walking past the bet looking house. So this one, at the same time 88% said the same about the well maintained house. So 88% said that they would not avoid walking past this version of the house. So in some, it looks like the sip tug features may be relevant for fear of crime and perceptions of crime. 41. 8.4 EXERCISE: How Secure Is Your Home?: Okay, let's do an exercise, namely, to have a look at your own house and street and rated according to sip that principles. So how Maney sip that elements does your own house have? Here is a symptom checklist that you can use to raid your house. You can find the full Jekyll ist in the resource of section. If for some reason your house cannot be rated, feel free to pick another house in your street or perhaps pick the house of somebody you know. As you can see, this sipped Odjick checklist contains a number off sip that elements here in the left column for each ship that feature, you can enter zero if your house does not have that feature and the one of your house does have that feature. So, for example, for the first item here, if you're out house has windows looking out to the street, you can add a one here in the first rule. If your house does not have windows looking out to the street, you can add a zero there for the second item. If there are no places where potential offenders could hide, then you enter a one behind it. If there are places where potential offenders could hide, then you enter a zero. As you can see, there are items for surveillance for image management, territoriality and excess control slash target hardening. So you go through the whole list, and then when you reach the bottom, you sum up all of the numbers. So all of the zeros and ones that you have entered and then you take that some and divided here in the last row by 0.17. So, for example, if you score a 10 and you divided by 0.17 you got a 58.8. So that means that your house would have 59% off the septet features, So feel free to take the checklist from the resource is in this module and completed for your own house or for another house in your street or off someone you know 42. 8.5 Summing Up: in this module. We have looked at the influence off our environment on crime, on how crime rates vary by city area or in my neighborhood, how social problems and social disorganization can contribute to this. How disorder and literate can cause crime. And, finally, how city design can keep out crime and make residents feel safe in the next module. The final module, in terms of content will discuss how having goals or desires that are out of reach can result in crime. 43. 9.1 Strains and How They Can Lead to Crime: in this module. The last one in terms of content in this course will have a look at how strains and stress can result in criminal behavior. Well. Consider two types of explanations for criminal behavior that are closely related, namely strain theory and then general string theory, which builds on strain theory. What they have in common is that they both look at how certain types of stress can lead to crime. But to start out, please imagine that you want to have what the middle class in your country has. You want to have a nice house, two cars, a good source of income, 2.5 kids in some degree of respect from others. Now also imagine that you grow up in a deprived environment. You are raised by a single mom who doesn't have much money, and you don't have any other family members who could finance a college education for you or offer you a job. In other words, you want the middle class dream, but you don't have the opportunities Now. Imagine that there are opportunities in your environment to make a living with criminal behavior. Maybe you could make money selling drugs or committing burglaries. Which path will you choose? What? You try to get your education through legal means, Or would you choose committing crimes and get wealth instead? Is that way a situation like that has been called strain, and the example that is often cited is from the U. S. But it can be applied more generally in the U. S. There is this concept of the American dream, where it is assumed that through hard work, anyone can become successful. But the problem is that not everybody has the same opportunities to achieve the American dream, and that creates friction or string. If that is a structural problem, a state of anomie or normalised nous occurs, and mawr and more deviants occurs. People start to feel frustrated because light moves. Other people, they want the American dream. But unlike other people, they don't have the opportunities to have it. And one way to solve the stream, like in the example, is to commit crime. So people try to achieve the American dream, even if they can't get there in the usual way, for example, by going to college. So instead they try to get there by committing crime In that sense, delinquency is sometimes considered to be a normal response to abnormal conditions. People are confronted with a problem and committing crime souls that problem for them. Note here that in many societies around the world, it's not just individual people who may experience this frustration of wanting to have a certain status but not having the opportunities. There are many groups, especially lower class youth who experienced intense frustrations because society does not give them many chances to achieve the goal off status and wealth, and one way for them to get what they want is to commit crime, and we'll see an example of that in the next section. 44. 9.2 VIDEO: Case Study of Gangs in Medellin, Colombia: so we've seen that strain can lead to crime, and I want to show you the results. Often interesting study that was done in made again in Colombia and it showed house trained is friction between opportunities and desires can lead to crime. In that study, the starting point was that many meals in Colombia and maybe in other countries to have a vision of what masculinity means off what it means to be a really man. They want social status, material wealth, attractive women in some degree of status among other people. But that ideal can play out very differently, depending on the situation that men are born ing. For example, the researcher in this study tells the story off how he spends two consecutive nights in very different environments. The first night he was in a wealthy part of town where successful man have well paid executive jobs, come from a good family drive a nice car where expensive designer clothes and have a gorgeous wife or beautiful female friends. The next night he was in a poor neighborhood where successful men own a fast motorcycle. They were expensive sneakers and jeans and are likewise surrounded by attractive women. So in both neighborhoods, successful male identity and what that looked like in reality was similar. The differences lie in the different opportunities that these men have more specifically in the rich neighborhood, the successful images that off a businessman in the poor neighborhood, the successful image is that of a gang member, the man who do not have the opportunity to become a successful businessman. They still want to be seen as a successful man, and they will consider different ways off gaining that status. In this environment, one such way was becoming a gang member. Successful bank stirs become role models for kids in those areas. They look up to them. And here is what one of the men who became a gang member at age 14 said. Run these neighborhoods. The chances of you becoming a professional, a lawyer and a doctor are really slim around here, people paying the houses of the rich. The difference between the two is huge. Kids around hair and my A government gang members because they drive about in luxurious cars. With pretty girls, you can go to university, get a degree by a car, a house in all that you don't have any opportunities to get that stuff. Honestly, you gotta think how you can get it if now you're going to be poor, your whole life, your whole life, a poor man. So the gang, for a lot of these men, is like a way to get status women and wealth, which is difficult for them to get otherwise. In other words, this is an example of strain theory and of how being born on a particular side of town or in a particular class can cause very different opportunities. Being born in a poor environment means having a different opportunity structure than being both born in a richer environment and to still achieve their goals, even what they're born. In an environment with few opportunities, some people may start to commit criminal behavior. 45. 9.3 Anger, Negative Emotions, And Crime – General Strain Theory: so a lack of opportunities paired with middle class goals can cost string. But there are more situations that can cause string. So yes, a rift in society where there are different classes and where classes compare each other, compare themselves with each other can cost train. But one can take things much smaller. Just looking at your more successful friends can bring about frustrations that you may want to do something about. Moreover, there are many more sources of stress or strain than just that frustration that results from not being able to get what you want. For example, there is also the loss of something that one values, for example, the loss of a loved one. The break up with a girl or a boyfriend getting fired or being suspended from school and also having negative things done to you by others can cause considerable stress, for example, being abused by one's parents, being bullied by peers or being the victim of a crime so strange strains can be fairly broad. And at some point, Robert Agnew, who proposed general strain theory, said that strange refer to events and conditions that are disliked by individuals. These forms of stress all lead to emotional responses, such as feeling frustrated or being angry. And this leads to the need to take some type of corrective action. Corrective action could take different forms. Some people may start using drugs in response of something that happened to them or to feeling depressed or frustrated. But especially when stranger stress causes people to feel angry, they may respond to stress by committing crime. Consider, for example, the case of a girl was abused by her family. She grows up and harbors a lot of anger because of the way she was treated and the way she had no control over what happened to her and as a way to release some of her anger and exert control over her life. She may start stealing or assaulting other people, so that would be a case where inexperienced source of stress release anger and in turn, to crime, which is in line with general stream theory. 46. 9.4 VIDEO: Strain and Anger in Asia: One of the things that's interesting about General Strain theory is that it talks about how emotion and specifically anger is related to crime. As you'll recall, experiencing stress or strain can lead people to feel angry, and that anger, in turn, can lead people to commit crime. In this section, I want to briefly talk about culture to show you how this idea off strain leading to negative emotions and to crime condemned for between cultures. Because it looks like not all people experience anger in the same way. And specifically, it looks like people in different cultures may experience anger in different ways. For example, people from Asian countries seem to think differently about anger than people from Western countries. A study about this topic compared anger between Americans and ethnic Tibetans who were partly living in South India. The researchers interview late Tibetans, Tibetan clerics and a group of Americans about what they thought off anger, and the idea here is not so much to contrast thes two particular backgrounds with each other. So Americans versus Tibetans. And it's also not about how 1 may be better than the other. It's more about how people from different countries can experience anger in different ways and how they may differ when it comes to their views on anger. Here are some of the things that this study found compared to the Americans, that the better teams viewed anger as a bad thing much more often. 41% of Americans said that anger is a bad thing. On the other hand, 83 to 88% off Tibetan lay people and clergy said that anger is a bad thing. So more than double the amount of people from the Tibetan group said that anger was a bad thing compared to the Americans. Furthermore, 43% of Americans said that anger can lead one to violent or illegal acts. In contrast, only 3 to 10% of Tibetans feel that that was the case. So a lot more Americans related anger to crime than Tibetans, and the difference is quite large. The participants were also asked about situations in which anger could be a good thing. 44% of Americans said that anger can be good as a response to injustice, which can be interpreted as a form of strain. At the same time, only 3 to 5% off Tibetan said that a year can be good as a response to injustice. That's again a fairly large difference between how Americans view anger and how Tibetans do . Here is what one of these a better lay persons a meal said about anger. Many rumors will circulate if one gets angry when one gets angry, many unhappy incidents will occur for oneself and for others to the results will only be bad for both sides. This is why it is a cause of unhappiness. So this person sees anger mainly as a negative thing. Here is what an American had to see about anger. I think it is appropriate for a person to feel angry if they have been hurt or see someone else being hurt or any kind of injustice. And it the injustice may not be personal and maybe structural. I think it's legitimate to feel anger even when you feel hurt, and you know that you shouldn't That's human. So this person saw anger as relatively permissible that it was more appropriate. These are interesting findings because they provide an interesting angle for looking at strain and stress. It looks like different people in different cultures and experienced anger in very different ways. And so people from different cultures may respond differently to strain. In some cultures, people may be more likely to feel angry and become delinquent after experiencing stress and strain that in other cultures. This is still an area where research is ongoing. But I wanted to show it to you as an example of how research is trying to understand how people see anger. And it has important implications for criminology because it means that we need to take into account culture when looking at how strain effects criminal behavior. 47. 9.5 Summing Up: all right. In this module we focused on strings and on stress, and we saw how having a lack off opportunities. But middle class dreams may lead people to resort to illegal ways to still achieve their dreams. That was strained theory. We also saw how losing something or someone or experiencing negative events can cause negative emotions and how negative emotions can lead to crime in general strain theory. And finally we looked at how there are differences between cultures in the way emotions and strains are experienced and how they may lead to crime. In the next module will wrap up this course with a brief, concluding section, so I'll see you there. 48. 10.1 Conclusion: Okay, We've come to the end of this course. I hope you got something out of it. It wasn't an easy course. We covered a lot of ground going through the most common explanations for crime. And I hope I was successful in making things a little bit more practical by including examples, case studies and actual research studies and their findings. If you're interested in more fascinating criminal logical effects and findings, I have a blogger at criminology web dot com that you're welcome to check out. Please feel free to let me know about any thoughts or comments that you may have and about your course assignments. Off course. You can leave any comments in a discussion area. If you want to talk about things that you've been observing or if you have any questions, I'd be happy to respond. So in closing, I like to say thank you for joining me and following this course. I'd love it if you would leave a review. I hope you enjoyed it. I certainly did, and hopefully see you again