Criminology Assignment 2: Sociological Theories of Criminal Behavior

This criminology assignment explores sociological theories of criminal behavior, examining Merton's interpretation of deviance and the impact of labeling theory. It analyzes the causes of crime and deviance from theoretical perspectives like positivism, governmentality, and constructivism. The assignment also delves into Philip Zimbardo's discussion on the psychology of evil, specifically addressing the Stanford prison experiment and the factors that lead individuals to commit harmful acts. The author provides a detailed analysis of how individuals become monsters or heroes. References include Aliyu, Browne, Knutsson, Merton, Zanotti, and Zimbardo.

1Criminology
Running head: CRIMINOLOGY
Criminology
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

2Criminology
Criminology
Assignment 2: Sociological Theories of Criminal Behavior
Part A
Interpretation of Merton’s Statement. The statement was made by taking into
consideration the notion of “literal demoralization”, which signifies “de-institutionalization”. It
can be observed in several groups, wherein the various elements of social structure are not highly
corporate. In this context, Merton’s statement can be interpreted by arguing the normal nature of
‘deviant behavior’. It is apparent that there exist two specific models of cultural objectives as
well as institutional norms, which are analytically separable in nature. These models encompass
culturally described targets as well as interests and regulatory norms to reach these targets within
a definite period of time. As argued by Merton, ‘deviant behavior’ is normal because it tends to
comply with the identified models of cultural objectives along with norms that help in
developing individual adaptation and conformity towards dealing with any societal issue
successfully. In addition, the normal nature of ‘deviant behavior’ can also be determined from its
extreme focus on exaggerated pecuniary (Merton, 1968).
Deviance and Labeling. According to Becker, deviance is argued to be more about the
labeling procedure, or the reaction of others, instead of the personality or the life situation of the
deviant. This is mainly because ‘deviant behavior’ will stay on the primary intensity, if their does
not exist any sort of labeling. It is believed that labeling raises the probability of sustained
‘deviant behavior’ by making symbolic portrayals of values regarding insurgence, disagreement
and even emancipation. Since ‘deviant behavior’ is mainly caused by the reaction of its
underlying environment, it can be related to the labeling procedure (Knutsson, 1978).

3Criminology
The distinctiveness of an individual changes and eventually becomes ‘deviant’ in nature
because he/she is treated in a way, as he/she holds certain features that are attached to the stigma
being placed on him/her. This transformed distinctiveness is then recognized to be attested by
deviant identity (Knutsson, 1978). Thus, labeling is viewed to be a “self-fulfilling prophecy”.
Part B: Short Essay
Crime, Deviance and Three Theoretical Approaches. Based on theoretical or conceptual
standpoints, crime and deviance are really “caused” because ‘deviance’ signifies the
infringement of community norms, which often makes the people to get involved in criminal or
‘deviant’ behaviors. It is apparent that there are many ‘deviance’ forms that eventually signify
criminal actions perform by the people under any specific circumstance. Some of these forms are
identified as “premeditated murder, armed robbery, causing death by dangerous driving,
domestic violence, making a fraudulent home or car insurance claim, anti-social behavior,
pilfering from a local shop, and just being rude and obnoxious” (Browne, 2011; p. 273). It can be
critically commented that crime and deviance are really “caused”, as these prevent the people
from getting matched with lawful as well as conventional norms. As per some sociologists, it
may not be true that people simply choose to engage in unlawful or deviant deeds. This is
because “crime and deviance involve legal and social rules, and what counts as deviant or
criminal will depend on how society defines these rules, and these change between societies and
over time, and there is no act that in itself is ever always regarded as criminal or deviant”
(Browne, 2011; pp. 273-274).
It is suggested that the individuals residing in distinct communities are involved in
performing criminal activities or ‘deviant’ acts due to various critical reasons. A few of these
reasons include poor socialization and deficiency in control by the family members over those

4Criminology
persons who get involved into any ‘deviant’ action. It is noticed that the poor people, young men
falling under the age group of 16-24 years, women and Black people among others are usually
the victims of offense. It is the social interconnected, which makes these people, to choose to
employ in criminal or ‘deviant’ actions (Browne, 2011). Therefore, the nature of both crime and
‘deviance’ is really “caused”, imposing severe impacts not only on the communities but also the
people residing within these communities.
There are several theoretical approaches that deal with the question of free choice. Some of
these approaches are ‘positivism’, ‘governmentality’ and ‘constructivism’. In general, According
to Aliyu, Bello, Kasim, & Martin (2014; p. 81), “positivism could be regarded as a research
strategy and approach that is rooted on the ontological principle and doctrine that truth and
reality is free and independent of the viewer and observer.” This particular theoretical approach
deals with the free choice related question by determining whether any sort of complexity or
intricacy could be addressed as well as mitigated by the way of reductionism and evaluating the
significance of rhetorical approach by focusing on measurement, repeatability, neutrality and
objectivity (Aliyu et al., 2014). On the other hand, as per the observation made by Zanotti
(2013), the theoretical approach of ‘governmentality’ is regarded as such type of an analytical
instrument, which intends to learn the changes that occurred the contemporary government
modalities probable in this present day context. It possesses the most remarkable facet of
exploring governmental techniques or approaches in a critical way within as well as beyond the
state boundaries (Zanotti, 2013).
The ‘governmentality’ theoretical approach is able to deal with the question of free choice
by investigating about “how discursive dimensions of power are manifested in political
imaginaries and political rationalities that guide praxis” (Zanotti, 2013; p. 288). In contrast, the

5Criminology
study findings of Aliyu et al. (2014; p. 85) depicted that “Constructivist assertions or views are
liable to be lacking in any such acknowledgement of empirical understanding that is, grasping by
acquaintance, by gathering, by experienced participation in the attendance of what is present.”
Therefore, based on this notion, it is evident that the theoretical approach of ‘constructivism’
deals with the question of free choice successfully by making empirical understanding of any
recent phenomenon.
Part C: Applied Short Essay
Philip Zimbardo: The Psychology of Evil. The main ideas presented during the
discussion of a psychologist named Philip George Zimbardo raised questions about how people
become monsters or heroes. In the video, Zimbardo mentioned that there exists a demarcation
amid ‘good’ and ‘evil’. In summary, the main ideas of Zimbardo that were presented in the video
included how easy it is for the good people to turn into the bad one. According to Zimbardo, an
evil’s psychology is to promote damage, obliterate or conduct offenses not in favor of
compassion. This eventually affects the good people in terms of physically as well as mentally
by a certain degree. The hypothesis set by the psychologist was that the people at the prisons of
Abu Ghraib cannot be considered as evil in any way because it was the system, which forced
them to be involved in performing unlawful deeds. During the video, it was observed that
Zimbardo showed some vicious as well as striking photos for duration of 1 minute that portrayed
some evil actions. For instance, these graphics portrayed the naked pictures of the prisoners, their
sexual positions and how they were covered in wounds among others (Zimbardo, 2008).
While summarizing the main ideas presented during Zimbardo’s discussion, it can be
critically commented that people become monsters or heroes based on the deeds, which they

6Criminology
perform intentionally or unintentionally. As depicted by the psychologist in the video, it was thus
apparent that most of the individuals do not have the intention to visualize themselves as evil;
rather they are forced to perform evil in a given condition. Zimbardo suggested that there are
certain issues, which make people to conduct evil. These issues can be related to “Bad apples”,
“Bad Barrel-makers” and “Bad Barrel” (TED, 2008). Based on the definitions and the theories
regarding crime covered so far in this course, the treatment or the behavior of the inmates at the
detention centers of Abu Ghraib can be viewed and explained as undoubtedly humiliating and
deplorable in nature. Zimbardo experienced this situation by acting as a proficient bystander for
one of the guards at Abu Ghraib. In this regard, the psychologist strongly believed that the events
took place in the prisons and with the prisoners were systemic, as these involved ill-treatments
and sufferings (Zimbardo, 2008).
In the video, Zimbardo also provided a clear idea about the reasons for abuses that took
place in the detention centers at Abu Ghraib. Since the psychologist acted as the expert witness
at this particular place, he ensured that the abuses happened at Abu Ghraib due to the reason of
the weak systems involved in organizing such prisons. Zimbardi, in the video, talked about the
sufferings of the inmates at Abu Ghraib’s jail and the brutal ways through which they are treated
in the same. The conditions were so severe that the psychologist was bound to speak about the
requirement for introducing strong prison reforms so that future abuses at the detention centers
can be prevented from the base level. Zimbardo made an attempt to relate the situation that he
faced at Abu Ghraib’s detention centers with The Lucifer Effect in order to explore the nature of
evil and its adverse impacts on the underlying communities and the respective members residing
therein. Moreover, the psychologist linked the situation with prosecuting the “Bad apples” who
were involved into neglecting and tormenting the inmates at Abu Ghraib’s jails (Zimbardo,

7Criminology
2008). Thus, from the video presented by Zimbardo, it is apparent that the organizational
systems impose significant impacts in making an individual to perform evil deeds, which had
been apparent from the case of inmates who were imprisoned at the prisons of Abu Ghraib.

8Criminology
References
Aliyu, A. A., Bello, M. U., Kasim, R., & Martin, D. (2014). Positivist and non-positivist
paradigm in social science research: Conflicting paradigms or perfect partners? Journal of
Management and Sustainability, 4(3), 81-86.
Browne, K. (2011). An introduction to sociology. UK: Polity.
Knutsson, J. (1978). Labeling theory: A critical examination. Retrieved from
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/47664NCJRS.pdf
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.
Zanotti, L. (2013). Governmentality, ontology, methodology: Re-thinking political agency in the
global world. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 38(4), 288-304.
Zimbardo, P. (2008). The psychology of evil. Retrieved from
https://www.ted.com/talks/philip_zimbardo_on_the_psychology_of_evil#t-136430