The other group of theories that this essay will be examining in relation to shoplifting and other theft offences are the control theories. In contrast to other criminological theories, the control theories try to explain why the majority of people don’t commit crimes (Newburn, 2007, p. 228). Control theories see humans as being driven by needs and desires and that crime is a natural consequence of inadequate controls (Newburn, 2007, p. 228). One of the earliest control theories was Walter Reckless’s containment theory. Reckless argued that there are influences in society that can push people towards crime and that most people resist these influences because of ‘inner containment’ and ‘outer containment’ (Newburn, 2007, p. 230). Travis Hirschi, another control theorist, placed greater influence on social controls, and from this developed social bond theory (Newburn, 2007, p. 231). Hirschi identified four ‘social bonds’ that explain why people conform to rules and don’t normally engage in deviant acts. These bonds are: attachment, commitment, involvement and belief (Newburn, 2007, p. 232). ‘Attachment’ refers to the bonds that develop between family and friends. Those who have a strong attachment will care about what their peers think of them and are therefore more likely to conform (Rankin & Kern, 2005, p. 394). ‘Commitment’ refers to the time and energy that has been invested into particular activities such as education. Hirschi asserted the people ‘weigh up the stakes’ and are less likely to commit an act that may jeopardise the chances for success (Newburn, 2007, p. 232; Rankin & Kern, 2005, p. 394). ‘Involvement’ refers to the idea that that people are less likely to commit delinquent acts of they are heavily involved in non-delinquent ones (Newburn, 2007, p. 232) and ‘belief’ refers to the idea that a strong belief in the law and conventional values will lead to less chance of offending (Newburn, 2007, p. 233; Rankin & Kern, 2005, p. 394).
A control theory proposed by David Matza and Gresham Sykes introduced the concepts of ‘techniques of neutralisation’ and ‘drift’ (Newburn, 2007, pp. 230-231). This theory was developed from Merton’s strain theory but is relevant to control theory as techniques of neutralisation were said to be used to lessen the influence of social and inner controls (Newburn, 2007, p. 230). Matza and Sykes also said that rather than people being either delinquent or non-delinquent, they drifted between the two groups (Newburn, 2007, p. 231). They said that for the majority of the time people are law abiding citizens, but when certain situations arise, techniques of neutralisation are used to lessen the controls being exerted and allow the person to justify committing a criminal act (Newburn, 2007, pp. 230-231).
Both of these sets of theories may help our understanding of shoplifting and other theft offences. Using Albert Cohen’s subcultural theory (Muncie, 2005, p. 427) it could be suggested that some gangs’ value acts of theft such as shoplifting and that status is achieved through the shoplifting of valuable goods. Shoplifting is a criminal offence and is therefore considered as a wrongful act by the majority of society. Because of this, gangs may reverse this view and therefore see shoplifting as rightful. Cohen stated that delinquent subcultures such as criminal gangs form due to ‘status frustration’ which arises due to working class youths being unable to gain status in a society that holds middle class values (Newburn, 2007, p. 197). Cohen also asserted that these subcultures prefer instant gratification and hedonistic acts (Newburn, 2007, p. 197). This may also help explain the act of shoplifting as members of the subculture may prefer to have an item they desire instantly, rather than waiting and earning the money to buy it. Members of the subculture may also derive excitement from the act of shoplifting and therefore commit it for enjoyment rather than for obtaining property. This view is supported by research conducted by Peter Willmott in 1966 (Newburn, 2007, p. 201). Willmott conducted his research in East London and found that ‘status frustration’ was not the cause of delinquent activity. Instead he asserted that delinquent acts were committed for the sake of excitement and as a way of expressing the values of the group (Newburn, 2007, p. 203).
Elements of Cloward and Ohlin’s subcultural theory may also help us to understand shoplifting. Members of the ‘criminal subculture’ that they identified are said to partake in acts that bring financial gain such as theft (Newburn, 2007, p. 198). This delinquent subculture is said to develop when the legitimate opportunity structure is unavailable but the illegitimate structure is (Newburn, 2007, p. 198). The illegitimate opportunities are often provided by local criminals who are specialists and pass on the ‘tricks of the trade’ to other working class youths who are unable to achieve their goals legitimately. Like Cohen’s theory, this too is linked with the working class youths which could suggest that members of the working class are more likely to commit acts of theft (Muncie, 2005, p. 427). Cloward and Ohlin’s theory could therefore be used to suggest that a lack of legitimate opportunities is a reason why working class youths commit acts such as shoplifting.
Overall, it seems that some elements of the subcultural theories can be used to explain why working class youths may partake in shoplifting and other theft offences. The theories however, do not offer any explanation as to why adults or members of other social classes may commit acts such as shoplifting. Cohen, Cloward and Ohlin developed their theories in the USA and so they may therefore not be fully applicable in the UK, as was stated by Willmott (Newburn, 2007, p. 203).
When looking at the control theories, Hirschi’s theory of social bonds may be able to help explain shoplifting. The four social bonds identified by Hirschi are said to prevent deviant behaviour if the bonds are strong (Newburn, 2007, pp. 232-233). However, if the bonds are weak then an individual may be more likely to engage in deviant behaviour. If an individual’s social bond of ‘attachment’ is weak then they are less likely to be concerned with what others think about them and less likely to look for approval from others (Newburn, 2007, p. 232). This may then ‘free’ the individual and allow them to give in to peer pressure or a personal desire to own an item (Rankin & Kern, 2005, p. 394). This may then lead to them committing acts such as theft. An individual with a weak bond of ‘commitment’ may also be more likely to engage in acts of shoplifting. If an individual has not invested time and effort into an activity such as education or employment then they are not going to be constrained by the thought that their actions may jeopardise their goal (Newburn, 2007, p. 232). An example would be that someone who has no desire to get a job may be more likely to commit an act of theft as they do not have to worry about their actions jeopardising their future employment.
The social bond of ‘involvement’ can possibly explain criminality as individuals who are less engrossed in non-deviant activities will have more time to partake in deviant ones such as shoplifting. Hirschi believed that those who are heavily involved in legitimate activities such as employment or education will not have the time or will not feel the need to engage in illegitimate activities (Newburn, 2007, pp. 232-233). This can be linked with the idea that individuals may commit acts of theft for excitement as they may not be involved in any non-deviant activities that can bring excitement. Finally, a weak social bond of ‘belief’ may lead to deviant behaviour as an individual who does not believe in or respect the laws that forbid theft may be more likely to commit acts of theft (Rankin & Kern, 2005, p. 394).
Matza and Sykes theory of drift and neutralisation may help us understand why those who aren’t working class shoplift. They asserted that people drift in and out of deviancy and that they may use ‘techniques of neutralisation’ to achieve this (Newburn, 2007, pp. 230-231). Matza and Sykes believed that in order for someone to commit a deviant act, they had to loosen the controls being exerted upon them (Newburn, 2007, p. 230). They believed that this could be done through techniques of neutralisation. Examples of these techniques can include denying responsibility or claiming that there isn’t a victim of the act (Newburn, 2007, p. 199). The aim is for the individual to convince themselves that what they are doing is right. These techniques could be used to justify shoplifting as an individual may convince themselves that the act is necessary for survival or that the shop they are stealing from is wealthy enough to handle the loss (Newburn, 2007, p. 199). Matza and Sykes also believed that an individual could drift into deviancy if the external controls exerted on them were loosened (Newburn, 2007, p. 231). An example would be during a disaster such as an earthquake as external controls such as the police may break down, therefore opening up opportunities to commit acts of theft such as looting.
Overall, the control theories can be used to explain the causes of shoplifting. The theories offer explanations for why any member of society may partake in the act and also explain why the majority of people don’t. Matza and Sykes theory also offers an explanation for why another act of theft, looting, can occur.
Word count: 2179
References
Cloward, R., & Ohlin, L. (1960). Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York: The Free Press.
Cohen, A. (1955). Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. New York: The Free Press.
Crimestoppers. (2009, November 10). Latest crime statistics. Retrieved May 1, 2011, from Crimestoppers Website: http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/crime-prevention/latest-crime-statistics
Crimestoppers. (2010, January 7). Latest crime statistics. Retrieved May 1, 2011, from Crimestoppers Website: http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/crime-prevention/latest-crime-statistics
Home Office. (2011, April 20). Crime in England and Wales: Quarterly Update to December 2010. Retrieved May 3, 2011, from Home Office Website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/hosb0611/
Home Office. (2011, January 21). Recorded crime data at local authority level. Retrieved May 2, 2011, from Home Office Website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/local-police-recorded-crime/reccrime-la.csv
Muncie, J. (2005). Subculture. In E. McLaughlin, & J. Muncie (Eds), The SAGE Dictionary of Criminology: Second Edition (pp. 427-429). London: SAGE Publications.
Newburn, T. (2007). Criminology. Cullompton: Willan.
Rankin, J., & Kern, R. (2005). Social Control Theory. In E. McLaughlin, & J. Muncie (Eds), The SAGE Dictionary of Criminology: Second Edition (pp. 393-396). London: SAGE Publications.