Techniques of Neutralisation: The use of Excuses by Thieves and Juvenile Delinquents
The definition of crime in any given society is governed by the prevailing values of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and the legislations that act as formal sanctions to deter offences. Previous understandings of delinquent subcultures (see Cohen 1958) suggest that crime occurs when individuals develop moral codes that directly oppose the beliefs of dominant society. The works of Skyes and Matza (1957), and Cromwell and Thurman (2003) suggest an alternate explanation of deviancy, with specific reference to juveniles and retail theft, in explanations referred to as Techniques of Neutralisation. In accordance with this theory, individuals are able to ‘drift’ in and out …show more content…
The research of Albert Bandura (1971, p. 2) provided an explanation of learning as being more than “the product of directly experienced response consequences”. Instead, he proved that behaviours could be taught through observation alone, and that social interactions influenced actions irrespective of positive or negative reinforcements. Bandura applied his observations of learned behaviours in social settings to the development of beliefs and values, finding that “modelling variables may function as potentially influential determinants of moral judgements” (Bandura 1969, p. 279). Psychological learning theories account for the way that deviant beliefs and values are developed; Cohen’s (1958, p. 20) notion of the delinquent subculture describes this as happening “through a process of communicative interaction among children”. Whilst social learning theories explain the development of either dominant or deviant moral codes, it does little to address the ‘drift’ between behaviours as observed by Matza (1964). As previously mentioned, juvenile delinquents are aware of the moral codes of both their supposed criminal subculture, and of dominant society. Knowledge of what prevails as ‘right’ over is displayed in post-offence emotions of guilt and shame (see Tagney, Stuewig & Hafez 2011; Skyes & Matza 1957 and Ferrer et al. 2010). Remorseful feelings may be used as a mediator of the two conflicting codes, wherein individuals learn to employ various justifications of their behaviours “to protect their self-concept” which allows them to partake in non-consistent criminal behaviour (Taylor 2016 p.
The definition of crime in any given society is governed by the prevailing values of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and the legislations that act as formal sanctions to deter offences. Previous understandings of delinquent subcultures (see Cohen 1958) suggest that crime occurs when individuals develop moral codes that directly oppose the beliefs of dominant society. The works of Skyes and Matza (1957), and Cromwell and Thurman (2003) suggest an alternate explanation of deviancy, with specific reference to juveniles and retail theft, in explanations referred to as Techniques of Neutralisation. In accordance with this theory, individuals are able to ‘drift’ in and out …show more content…
The research of Albert Bandura (1971, p. 2) provided an explanation of learning as being more than “the product of directly experienced response consequences”. Instead, he proved that behaviours could be taught through observation alone, and that social interactions influenced actions irrespective of positive or negative reinforcements. Bandura applied his observations of learned behaviours in social settings to the development of beliefs and values, finding that “modelling variables may function as potentially influential determinants of moral judgements” (Bandura 1969, p. 279). Psychological learning theories account for the way that deviant beliefs and values are developed; Cohen’s (1958, p. 20) notion of the delinquent subculture describes this as happening “through a process of communicative interaction among children”. Whilst social learning theories explain the development of either dominant or deviant moral codes, it does little to address the ‘drift’ between behaviours as observed by Matza (1964). As previously mentioned, juvenile delinquents are aware of the moral codes of both their supposed criminal subculture, and of dominant society. Knowledge of what prevails as ‘right’ over is displayed in post-offence emotions of guilt and shame (see Tagney, Stuewig & Hafez 2011; Skyes & Matza 1957 and Ferrer et al. 2010). Remorseful feelings may be used as a mediator of the two conflicting codes, wherein individuals learn to employ various justifications of their behaviours “to protect their self-concept” which allows them to partake in non-consistent criminal behaviour (Taylor 2016 p.