Principles Of Criminology Research Articles

Examining the principles and ethical requirements in determining the extent and scope of criminology

The relationship between moral philosophy and philosophy of law has always been one of the most challenging contemporary philosophical debates. One of the most controversial questions has always been the field of ethics and law in determining and narrowing the limits and scope of criminology, what considerations and moral requirements should be considered and given priority. In other words, philosophers of ethics and law have long sought to discover / construct a morally relevant criterion and basis for defining the boundaries and limitations of legislation and criminology, and to develop and narrow the scope of the legislature's influence and authority in prosecution and criminality. infact, they have designed and codified principles that, in addition to determining and explaining the basis and limitations of the field of punishment and criminology, explain and facilitate the procedures and procedures of legislation and determination and detection of criminal acts and procedures, and from another point of view, Provide justification for legal interference with privacy and individual freedoms. In this research, the most important principles and ethically relevant reasons in determining and delimiting the realm of criminology - with special emphasis on liberal principles and ideas - have been studied. It is worth mentioning that some philosophers in the field of moral philosophy and philosophy of law, while acknowledging the ineffectiveness of the old and classical basic and principles of criminology, have tried to reinterpret the previous principles and in this regard have presented new and revised interpretations. They are specific to paternalism, they also indicate a tendency towards moral legalism and the avoidance of classical utilitarian and liberal presuppositions. The relationship between moral philosophy and philosophy of law has always been one of the most challenging contemporary philosophical debates. One of the most controversial questions has always been the field of ethics and law in determining and narrowing the limits and scope of criminology, what considerations and moral requirements should be considered and given priority. In other words, philosophers of ethics and law have long sought to discover / construct a morally relevant criterion and basis for defining the boundaries and limitations of legislation and criminology, and to develop and narrow the scope of the legislature's influence and authority in prosecution and criminality. infact, they have designed and codified principles that, in addition to determining and explaining the basis and limitations of the field of punishment and criminology, explain and facilitate the procedures and procedures of legislation and determination and detection of criminal acts and procedures, and from another point of view, Provide justification for legal interference with privacy and individual freedoms. In this research, the most important principles and ethically relevant reasons in determining and delimiting the realm of criminology - with special emphasis on liberal principles and ideas - have been studied. It is worth mentioning that some philosophers in the field of moral philosophy and philosophy of law, while acknowledging the ineffectiveness of the old and classical basic and principles of criminology, have tried to reinterpret the previous principles and .

PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINOLOGY

The author considers the conceptual issues of distinguishing the principles of criminology. Analyzing the opinions of various scholars on the issue under consideration, the author disputes the need to use the principles of the criminal process only in forensic science. The proposed three-tier system of principles of this science is proposed, including: 1) general (general scientific) principles natural for both the other sciences and practical activities; 2) private, natural for all forensic science in general. These are actually forensic principles that characterize its basis, directions of activity, and prospects for development. It is within this group of principles that we can distinguish a theoretical and practical aspect; 3) special principles of criminology: principles characteristic only of individual parts of criminology. Without going into the discussion about the system of criminology, let us highlight the principles of the general theory of criminology; principles of forensic technology; principles of investigation and tactics of investigative actions; principles of forensic techniques. The development of an optimal system of principles of criminology makes it possible to increase the efficiency of scientific and practical developments.

Differential social organization, collective action, and crime

This article elaborates and extends Sutherland’s [Principles of criminology (4th ed.), Lippincott, Philadelphia, Sutherland (1947)] concept of differential social organization, the sociological counterpart to his social psychological theory of differential association. Differential social organization contains a static structural component, which explains crime rates across groups, as well as a dynamic collective action component, which explains changes in crime rates over time. I argue that by drawing on George Herbert Mead’s [Mind, self, and society. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Mead (1934)] theories of symbolic interaction and social control, we can conceptualize organization in favor of, and against, crime as collective behavior. We can then integrate theoretical mechanisms of models of collective behavior, including social network ties, collective action frames, and threshold models of collective action. I illustrate the integrated theory using examples of social movements against crime, neighborhood collective efficacy, and the code of the street.

The Principles of Criminology.

The Principles of Criminology.

Violent Crime: Prediction and Control

Violent crime has become a major public concern, threatening many citizens' sense of well-being and involving tremendous national social and economic costs. The various professions involved in the study, rehabili tation, and control of violent offenders feel increasing public pressure to protect society from crimes of violence, primarily by incapacitating the offender. Decisions to incarcerate or release offenders are often based on in dividual predictions of future violent behavior. Recent public policy con cerning career offenders represents an attempt to protect society by evaluating collective probabilities of future violent behavior. This paper examines the growing concern over violent crime, the prediction techniques that have been used to determine the disposition of an offender, the tendency toward overprediction documented by various research studies, and recent public policies enacted to curb crimes of violence. Finally, balancing individual rights and the rights of society in light of public attitude and public policy involves several moral and ethical questions. 1. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1967), p. 18. 2. "Losing Battle against Crime," U.S. News and World Report, Dec. 15, 1974; "Crime in America: One Nation's Journey into Fright," PTA Magazine, April 1974; "Crime Wave," Time, June 30, 1975. 3. Robert Winslow, ed., Crime in a Free Society, 2d. ed. (Encino, Calif.: Dickenson, 1973), p. 157. 4. James Q. Wilson, Thinking about Crime (New York: Basic Books, 1975), p. 7. 5. Winslow, Crime in a Free Society, p. 156. 6. Ibid., p. 48. 7. James Brooks, "The Fear of Crime in the United States," Crime and Delinquency, July 1974, pp. 242-43. 8. Winslow, Crime in a Free Society, p. 157. 9. Ernst A. Wenk, James O. Robison, and Gerald W. Smith, "Can Violence Be Predicted?" Crime and Delinquency, October 1972, pp. 393-402. 10. Wilson, Thinking about Crime, p. 21. 11. Don Gottfredson, "Assessment of Methods," in Crime and Justice, Vol. 3, Leon Rad zinowicz and Marvin Wolfgang, eds. (New York: Basic Books, 1971), pp. 362-63. 12. Michael A. Peszke, "Is Dangerousness an Issue for Physicians in Emergency Com mitments?" American Journal of Psychiatry, August 1975, p. 828. 13. Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald R. Cressey, Principles of Criminology (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1960), p. 135. 14. Jonas R. Rappeport, ed., The Clinical Evaluation of Dangerousness of the Mentally Ill (Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1967), p. 27. 15. Alfred J. Kahn, "Public Policy and Delinquency Prevention," in Crime and Justice, Vol. 3, Radzinowicz and Wolfgang, eds., p. 417. 16. Sheldon Glueck and Eleanor Glueck, Predicting Delinquency and Crime (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 144-49. 17. Gottfredson, "Assessment of Methods," p. 347. 18. Daniel Glaser, The Effectiveness of a Prison and Parole System (Indianapolis, Ind.: Bobbs- Merrill, 1969). 19. Elmer H. Johnson, Crime, Correction and Society (Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1966). 20. Gottfredson, "Assessment of Methods," p. 360. 21. Winslow, Crime in a Free Society, p. 161. 22. John P. Conrad, Crime and Its Prevention (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1970). 23. Daniel Glaser, "The Efficacy of Alternative Approaches to Parole Prediction," American Sociological Review, June 1955, p. 284. 24. Daniel Glaser, "A Reconsideration of Some Parole Prediction Factors," American Sociological Review, June 1955, p. 335. 25. Wenk et al., "Can Violence Be Predicted?" pp. 395-98. 26. Harry L. Kozol, Richard Boucher, and Ralph Garofalo, "The Diagnosis and Treatment of Dangerousness," Crime and Delinquency, October 1972, pp. 371-92. 27. John Monahan and Lesley Cummings, "Social Implications of the Inability to Predict Violence," Journal of Social Issues, March 1975, p. 153. 28. Ibid., p. 155. 29. Ibid. 30. Ibid., p. 153. 31. Kozol et al., "Diagnosis and Treatment of Dangerousness," p. 373. 32. Monahan and Cummings, "Social Implications of the Inability to Predict Violence," p. 374. 33. Norval Morris, "The Future of Imprisonment: Toward a Punitive Philosophy," Michigan Law Review, May 1974, p. 1162. 34. Ibid., p. 1169. 35. Ibid., pp. 1165-66. 36. Ibid., pp. 1169-70. 37. Wenk et al., "Can Violence Be Predicted?" p. 402. 38. Monahan and Cummings, "Social Implications of the Inability to Predict Violence," pp. 160-61. 39. Sutherland and Cressey, Principles of Criminology, pp. 590-91. 40. John Irwin and Lewis Yablonsky, "The New Criminal: A View of the Contemporary Offender," in Crime in America: Perspectives on Criminal and Delinquent Behavior, Bruce J. Cohen, ed. (Hasco, Ill.: F. E. Peacock, 1970), pp. 199-200. 41. Timothy D. Schellhardt, "Experimental Program Musters Legal Forces against Repeat Offenders to Boost Convictions," Wall Street Journal, Aug. 19, 1976, p. 28. 42. Gresham M. Sykes, Crime & Society (New York: Random House, 1967), p. 194. 43. Schellhardt, "Experimental Program," p. 28.

Principles of Criminology, Criminal Law and Investigation. Vol. 1

Principles of Criminology, Criminal Law and Investigation. Vol. 1

Recent Book: Crime in the East: Principles of Criminology, Criminal Law and Investigation

Recent Book: Crime in the East: Principles of Criminology, Criminal Law and Investigation

DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION AND THE REHABILITATION OF DRUG ADDICTS*

Five social psychological principles for the rehabilitation of criminals, formulated in this Journal by Cressey in 1955, have unwittingly been used in a program for rehabilitating drug addicts. Sixty-six per cent of the addicts who stayed in the program for at least three months, and 86 per cent of those who remained for at least seven months, are still not using drugs or alcohol. In 1955 Cressey listed five principles for applying Edwin Sutherland's theory of differential association to the rehabilitation of criminals.' While this article is now frequently cited in the sociological literature dealing with group therapy, therapeutic communities, and total institutions, we know of no program of rehabilitation that has been explicitly based on the principles. major point of Cressey's article, which referred to criminals, not addicts, is similar to the following recommendation by the Chief of the United States Narcotics Division: The community should restore the former addict to his proper place in society and help him avoid associations that would him to return to the use of drugs.2 Cressey gives five rules (to be reviewed below) for implementing this directive to restore, help, and influence the addict. These rules, derived from the sociological and social-psychological literature on social movements, crime prevention, group therapy, communications, personality change, and social change, were designed to show that sociology has distinctive, nonpsychiatric, theory that can be used effectively by practitioners seeking to prevent crime and change criminals. Sutherland also had this as a principal objective when he formulated his theory of differential association.3 Assuming, as we do, that Cressey's principles are consistent with Sutherland's theory and that his theory, in turn, is consistent with more general sociological theory, a test of the principles would be a test of the more general formulations. Ideally, such a test would involve careful study of the results of a program rationally designed to utilize the principles to change criminals. To our knowledge, such a test has not been made.4 As a next best test, we may study rehabilitation programs that use the principles, however unwittingly. Such a program has been in operation since 1958. Insofar as it is remarkably similar to any program that could have been designed to implement the principles, the results over the years can be viewed as at least a crude test of the principles. Since the principles are interrelated, the parts of any program implementing them must necessarily overlap. Synanon, an organization of former drug addicts, was founded in May, 1958, by a member of Alcoholics Anonymous with the assistance of an alcoholic and a drug addict. In December, 1958, Volkman (a non-addict) heard about the two dozen ex-addicts living 129 1 Donald R. Cressey, Changing Criminals: Application of the Theory of Differential Association, American Journal of Sociology, LXI (September, 1955), 116-20 (see also Cressey, Contradictory Theories in Correctional Group Therapy Programs, Federal Probation, XVIII [June, 1954], 20-26). 2 Harry J. Anslinger, Drug Addiction, Encyclopaedia Britannica, VII (1960), 677-79. I Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald R. Cressey, Principles of Criminology (6th ed.; Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1960), pp. 74-80. 4 See, however, Joseph A. Cook and Gilbert Geis, Forum Anonymous: Techniques of Alcoholics Anonymous Applied to Prison Journal of Social Therapy, III (First Quarter, 1957), 9-13. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.124 on Wed, 20 Jul 2016 06:12:04 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 130 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY together in an abandoned store, and she obtained permission of the Synanon Board of Directors5 to visit the group daily and to live in during the weekends. In July, 1959, she moved into the girls' dormitory of the group's new, larger quarters and continued to reside at Synanon House until June, 1960. Cressey (also a non-addict) visited the House at Volkman's invitation in the spring of 1960; for one year, beginning in July,

Recent Book: Principles of Criminology, Criminal Law and Investigation

Recent Book: Principles of Criminology, Criminal Law and Investigation

The Nature and Effectiveness of Correctional Techniques

The criminological and penological literature contains two principal conceptions of The older conception considers as those general systems and general programs used for handling criminals and assumed to be somehow reformative. Thus, imposition of either physical or psychological pain, in any of a variety of settings, continues to be viewed as a general system for correcting criminals. Similarly, one rationale for introducing and maintaining general programs such as probation, parole, and imprisonment has been that these programs are or will be more correctional than the programs used in the past. A newer conception of however, places more emphasis on the specific methods used in attempts to change individual criminals. While descriptions of such methods are by no means as precise as descriptions of medical techniques, an analogy with clinical medicine is made, with the result that utilizing the methods is called or therapy. Thus, within a parole or probation organization, the agents may help offenders find jobs, order them to stay out of saloons, or counsel them on psychological problems of adjustment. Because each of these maneuvers is assumed to have some efficacy in changing criminals into noncriminals, each is viewed as a treatment or technique. Similarly, prisoners may be enrolled in prison schools, ordered to work, given vocational counseling and training, or engaged in individual or group psychotherapeutic interviews. These specific programs also are viewed as techniques. This paper will be devoted to closer identification of these two conceptions of techniques, to discussion of the problems involved in measuring the effectiveness of defined in either the first or the second sense, and to exploration of possible reasons for reluctance to define techniques more precisely. *B.S. 1943, Iowa State College; Ph.D. I950, Indiana University. Chairman, Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles; Research Consultant, California Department of Corrections; Research Advisory Board, California Board of Corrections. Sociologist, Illinois State Penitentiary, I949; Research Associate, United States Penitentiary, Terre Haute, Indiana, 1951; Research Associate, California Institution for Men, 1950-5I; Research in the Wisconsin State Prison and the Wisconsin State Reformatory, I955-56, while attached to the Center for Education and Research in Corrections, University of Chicago. Author, OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY (1953); co-author [with Edwin H. Sutherland], PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINOLOGY (5th ed. 1955). Contributor to sociological, legal, and publications.

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology. 5th Edition.

Principles of Criminology. 5th Edition.

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology.

Principles of Criminology.

Principles of Criminology. By Edwin H. Sutherland. Revised edition. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1939. 651 pp

Principles of Criminology. By Edwin H. Sutherland. Revised edition. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1939. 651 pp

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology. Edwin H. Sutherland

<i>Principles of Criminology</i>. Edwin H. Sutherland

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology

Principles of Criminology