Social learning theory is both behaviorism and cognitive theories of learning that not only explains how people learn by observing the behavior of others but is influenced by environmental and cognitive factors. Social learning theory is often considered a stepping stone among two completely different theories of learning. Social learning theory associates behaviorism and cognitive theory of learning. People study behavior by seeing others, then acquire their own thoughts and attitudes about that learned behavior. Individuals behave based on what is learned in their environment, an outcome of positive or negative reinforcements. “Although considered a behaviorist theory, social learning theory is a hybrid of behaviorist and cognitive
…show more content…
Sutherland had developed the principle of differential association, given the idea that offenders learn crime from each other, giving the account for how criminal offenders and delinquents learn crime. Sutherland believed that crime is learned through the same method in which all other learning occurs. With the social learning theory, behavior is learned, likewise criminal behavior is learned, and Sutherland explained that some people are more inclined to adopt attitudes and behaviors that are more encouraging to violating the law. “One of the attractive features of differential association theory is that it lends itself to empirical observation. Since it contends that lawbreakers have learned more attitudes and techniques favorable to lawbreaking than attitudes and techniques favorable to obeying the law, researchers can readily construct studies that look at the learning process.” (Fuller pg …show more content…
Sutherland had identified four different factors to examine to understand the learning process for an individual to commit crimes. The four factors Sutherland identified were priority, when a youth is exposed early in life to family members or other peers breaking the law, this will cause that individual to implement criminal mindsets and learn how to commit crimes compared to someone who is not shown as much association to criminal activity early in life. “Young children are more receptive to negative messages because they do not have the experience and knowledge to evaluate antisocial behavior.” (Fuller p. 123) Frequency is the second factory from Sutherland for researchers to examine, and according to Sutherland, the more you hear a message, the more you are likely to believe the message is true. Young people that are associated by individuals who give a message that breaking the law is fun, or has positive benefits will have beliefs that crimes is normal and appealing. Reappearance of this negative message could overpower any positive reinforcement from parents or teachers. The third idea that can prohibit crime or justify crime would be intensity, because a message can influence and show the beneficiary a point of view that will send more credibility due to the volume, and passion that an individual will deem more important. Duration is the
Sutherland had developed the principle of differential association, given the idea that offenders learn crime from each other, giving the account for how criminal offenders and delinquents learn crime. Sutherland believed that crime is learned through the same method in which all other learning occurs. With the social learning theory, behavior is learned, likewise criminal behavior is learned, and Sutherland explained that some people are more inclined to adopt attitudes and behaviors that are more encouraging to violating the law. “One of the attractive features of differential association theory is that it lends itself to empirical observation. Since it contends that lawbreakers have learned more attitudes and techniques favorable to lawbreaking than attitudes and techniques favorable to obeying the law, researchers can readily construct studies that look at the learning process.” (Fuller pg …show more content…
Sutherland had identified four different factors to examine to understand the learning process for an individual to commit crimes. The four factors Sutherland identified were priority, when a youth is exposed early in life to family members or other peers breaking the law, this will cause that individual to implement criminal mindsets and learn how to commit crimes compared to someone who is not shown as much association to criminal activity early in life. “Young children are more receptive to negative messages because they do not have the experience and knowledge to evaluate antisocial behavior.” (Fuller p. 123) Frequency is the second factory from Sutherland for researchers to examine, and according to Sutherland, the more you hear a message, the more you are likely to believe the message is true. Young people that are associated by individuals who give a message that breaking the law is fun, or has positive benefits will have beliefs that crimes is normal and appealing. Reappearance of this negative message could overpower any positive reinforcement from parents or teachers. The third idea that can prohibit crime or justify crime would be intensity, because a message can influence and show the beneficiary a point of view that will send more credibility due to the volume, and passion that an individual will deem more important. Duration is the