SELF-CONTROL THEORY VERSUS SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY

This article is written by Anjali Bajaj of 2^nd Year of Gopaldas Jhamatmal Advani Law College, Bandra, Maharashtra, and an intern at Legal Vidhiya.

ABSTRACT

This article delves into the relationship between social control theory and self-control theory, with a gist of the central concept of control. Control theories of crime aim to explain the factors that regulate human behavior in an attempt to understand why individuals follow the rules of society. One particular explanation that has stood the test of time is the social control theory presented by Travis Hirschi in 1969. The article examines how Hirschi’s criminological career relates to social control theory (Hirschi, 1969) and self-control theory (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). It also highlights the evolution of scholarly ideas by focusing on Hirschi’s intellectual development. The connection between social control and self-control theories is a matter of some debate among commentators in the field. However, the impact is most feasible in the case of parental supervision, where the disapproval of loved ones is the overpowering sanction. The article also identifies the main similarities between the two theories, including an emphasis on family attachment, a concern with overstating the influence of social factors, and a rejection of theoretical integration. Nonetheless, the article argues that the position of the two theories is based on fundamentally different principles, specifically regarding the core concept of control. Despite the differences and inconsistencies between the theories, there is no inherent incompatibility between social and self-control theories. They can be used simultaneously to provide a more comprehensive understanding of delinquency and criminal behavior. In this article, we will discuss the general elements of these theories, compare their similarities and differences, and explore the need for improvements in them.

KEYWORDS

Crime, Delinquent Behavior, Self-Control, Social Control, Deviant Behavior, Impulsive Actions, Self-Restraint, Theoretical Integration, Influences, Deterrent against Deviant Behavior.

INTRODUCTION

Crime is an inevitable aspect of our world that cannot be eradicated, regardless of the strictness of laws. Many people often question the reasons behind criminal behavior and whether it is inherent. Sociologists Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi attempted to answer these questions through their theories of “Self-control” and “Social Control.” The concept of social control and self-control is a significant attribute in the field of sociology, with a complex and controversial history.

Criminology has two prominent perspectives, namely Self-control theory and Social Control Theory. They both aim to explain the causes of criminal behavior and the factors that prevent individuals from engaging in unlawful and malicious activities. Social control theory is defined as the ability of an individual or group of individuals to regulate themselves in a systematic manner based on the social norms and moral beliefs of society. It is a kind of pressure or influence that society exerts on individuals or groups to conform to its standards. On the other hand, self-control is a considerably new concept that refers to an individual’s ability to resist the temptation of immediate gratification or benefit and avoid engaging in deviant behavior. Self-control is a form of self-restraint that aims at individual good, while social control work towards securing social good. In other words, self-control is a part of social control.

H.C. Brearley writes that there should be a difference between social control theory and self-control theory, although the two are closely akin. Social control refers to the individual’s attempt to control the behavior of others according to his wishes while self-control refers to the individual’s attempt to control his behavior in accord with some previously developed ideal, goal, or purpose. Understanding the interplay between individual traits and societal influences is crucial for comprehensively addressing criminal behavior in India.

BIRTH OF SELF CONTROL AND SOCIAL CONTROL THEORIES

Travis Hirschi is a prominent scholar in the field of criminology, largely because of his “Social Control Theory”. Travis Hirschi, in 1969, created the “Social Control Theory” which is also known as “Social Bond Theory”. After two decades, he joined Micheal Gottfredson to produce the Self-Control Theory.

WHAT IS THE SELF CONTROL THEORY

Self-control is described as the ability to forego acts that provide immediate or near-term pleasures and benefits but that also have negative outcomes for the actor and as the ability to act in favor of longer-term interests. An individual’s level of self-control can be shaped by early family or caregiver behavior. Once established, differences in self-control affect the likelihood of delinquency in childhood and adolescence and crime in later life. When an individual practices control over their actions, thoughts, impulses, and emotions, it is termed self-control. This control is not imposed by external factors, but rather, it is an act of one’s own will and self-awareness. Self-control can be motivated by personal goals, ideals, or purposes, as well as the interests of others. For instance, if someone quits drinking to improve their health, they are practicing self-control for their benefit. However, if they do so to help their financially unstable family, they are practicing self-control for the benefit of their loved ones.

The self-control theory of crime is a concept in criminology that describes why few individuals commit crimes (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). As per this theory, individuals who have a deficiency in self-control are more likely to be involved in criminal activities. People with low self-control are impulsive, shortsighted, and unable to reject or delay gratification. They are habitual to seek immediate rewards, even if it results in breaking the law. The theory stresses that early socialization and the development of self-control in childhood are essential. People who did not receive effective parenting before the age of 10 years tend to have low self-control or the power to quit the acts that give immediate pleasure (Gottfredson, 2017) than those who had good parenting. Proper parenting involves taking care of children, keeping an eye on their behavior, and holding them accountable for any wrongdoing. Hence, those who grow up without this kind of parenting are more likely to engage in criminal activities. In simpler terms, the self-control theory of crime puts forward the idea that a lack of self-discipline is the fundamental reason behind criminal behavior.

According to self-control theory, criminal behavior is not an inherent trait of individuals, nor is it a result of socialization. Instead, it proposes that people vary in their level of self-control and their attention to the controls in their environment that deter criminal activities and delinquency.

Illustration

• A, a teenager with low self-control who frequently engages in delinquent behavior. He often skips school, engages in petty theft, and has a history of violent outbursts. A’s impulsivity and inability to resist immediate temptations are indicative of low self-control. In this case, A is charged with burglary and assault. The prosecution presents evidence of A’s low self-control, highlighting his history of impulsive behavior and previous criminal activities. The defense argues that A’s actions are a result of his lack of self-control, and he should be rehabilitated rather than punished harshly. The court considers self-control theory in its sentencing decision and orders A to undergo counselling and anger management programs to address his self-control issues.

WHAT ARE THE KEY ELEMENTS OF SELF CONTROL THEORY

• Parental Upbringing

The self-control theory of crime revolves around the idea that an individual’s upbringing and parenting play a crucial role in shaping their behavior. According to this theory, children who grow up with ineffective parenting that lacks monitoring and discipline tend to develop low self-control, which can eventually lead to criminal activities.

• Stability Over Time

Self-control is a stable trait that persists from childhood into adulthood.

• Impulse Control

The core concept of self-control theory is impulse management. High self-control individuals can resist impulsive actions, delay gratification, and prioritize long-term goals over immediate desires.

• Risk Aversion

People with strong self-control are less likely to engage in risky or criminal behavior because they weigh potential negative consequences more heavily than short-term benefits.

• Simple Offenses

Self-control theory explains that individuals with low self-control are more likely to commit impulsive, spur-of-the-moment crimes like theft or vandalism, rather than elaborate, planned crimes.

• Resilience to Peer Pressure

Individuals with strong self-control are less likely to succumb to peer pressure and are more likely to make decisions based on internal values and long-term goals, rather than external influences.

• Age and Maturity

The theory proposes that self-control develops with age and maturity, leading to improved impulse control and responsible decision-making.

WHAT IS THE SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY

Social Control Theory is a prominent perspective in criminology that seeks to understand why individuals conform to societal norms and values, what is expected in society, and what factors prevent them from engaging in criminal behavior. Developed primarily by Travis Hirschi in the 1960s, this theory focuses on the mechanisms and institutions that influence an individual’s inclination to follow the law and maintain a pro-social, law-abiding lifestyle. In other words, macro social institutions such as religion, law, and the education system work together to maintain order in society.

At its core, Social Control Theory explores the question: “Why do most people not commit crimes?” Unlike some criminological theories that concentrate on the causes of criminal behavior, such as strain theory or social learning theory, Social Control Theory examines the factors that prevent or inhibit individuals from deviating from established social norms and engaging in unlawful activities.

The theory posits that individuals are naturally inclined toward criminal or deviant behavior, but they are restrained by various social bonds and controls within society. These bonds and controls act as a form of “social glue” that discourages people from engaging in criminal acts. Social Control Theory asserts that it is these social bonds, rather than the absence of motivation to commit crimes, that explains why most people do not engage in illegal activities.

Illustration

• X is a young woman who excels in school, has a close-knit family, and is actively involved in community organizations. Social control theory would suggest that X is less likely to engage in criminal behavior because her strong social bonds provide her with a sense of belonging and social reinforcement for conforming to societal norms. In this case, X is charged with shoplifting. However, her attorney argues that X’s strong social bonds and active participation in her community demonstrate her commitment to following the law. The defense presents character witnesses who testify to X’s positive contributions to society. The court considers social control theory in its decision and opts for a more lenient sentence, emphasizing rehabilitation and community service rather than incarceration.

ELEMENTS OF SOCIAL BOND – BY HIRSCHI 1969

• Attachment

Attachment refers to the emotional connections, bonds, and relationships with other people and social institutions. These attachments can be personal and emotional, and they play a critical role in shaping an individual’s behavior. In Social Control theory attachment is one of the four main elements of social bonds, the others being commitment, involvement, and belief. The theory posits that people with strong bonds to others and institutions are less likely to engage in criminal activities. When someone has no emotional connection or attachment to anyone in society, theoretically, they are free to commit crimes without fear of repercussions. However, the fear of letting down or causing harm to these attachments acts as a potent deterrent against deviance.

• Commitment

Commitment refers to the contribution and dedication of an individual toward achieving life goals and aspirations. These goals include academic achievements, career growth, a stable and happy family life, appraisal, and active community involvement. Hirschi, a prominent criminologist, noticed that individuals are less likely to commit crimes when they are afraid to lose something. A potential offender would calculate the benefits and costs of crime. If a person has contributed significant time and effort in achieving some goals, they stand to lose a lot if they engage in criminal activity. It makes them less likely to commit crimes since they could lose their property, freedom, money, reputation, and as well as their life.

According to the theory, individuals with a high commitment to conventional goals are less likely to engage in criminal activities because doing so would put their progress toward achieving these goals at risk. The fear of undermining their commitments is a powerful deterrent against deviant behavior.

• Belief

Belief in the context of Social Control Theory refers to an individual’s acceptance and internalization of conventional social norms, values, and moral principles. These beliefs act as a moral compass that guides behavior in a pro-social direction. Individuals with high moral beliefs may experience guilt when contemplating or engaging in criminal behavior, which deters deviant acts.

According to the theory, individuals with high belief systems emphasize the importance of obeying the law and respecting societal norms are less likely to engage in criminal activities. These beliefs serve as a deterrent by instilling a sense of right and wrong.

• Involvement

Involvement refers to an individual’s participation in lawful and constructive activities that are considered socially acceptable. These activities include education, work, sports, hobbies, community service, and other pro-social pursuits. If a person is heavily involved in these activities, then they have less time and energy to think about committing delinquent acts. They would also be heavily involved in social networks and hesitate to engage in criminal activity. On the contrary, some people may spend less time doing conventional activities, experience detachment from society, and thus be more likely to commit a crime.

According to the theory, individuals actively involved in pro-social activities are less likely to engage in criminal behavior. Their involvement in these activities is a deterrent by keeping them occupied and focused on lawful pursuits.

KEY SIMILARITIES OF SELF CONTROL THEORY AND SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY

• Emphasis on family attachment

Both theoriesemphasize the importance of family attachment in reducing delinquent behavior. Family attachment is considered a protective factor. A strong bond with one’s family is a deterrent to criminal behavior. Individuals who value their relationships with family members are less likely to engage in activities that could harm those relationships.

• Concern with overstating the influence of social factors

Both theories are concerned with overstating the influence of social factors in explaining delinquent behavior. Both self-control Theory and Social Control Theory caution against overstating the control and impact of a single aspect (individual or social) on criminal behavior. They advocate for a balanced perspective that acknowledges the interaction between personal characteristics and social factors, recognizing that both play a role in shaping whether an individual engages in criminal activities.

• Rejection of theoretical integration

In the concept of both theories, despite their different approaches, reject the notion of theoretical integration The idea of the mixture of multiple theories to explain criminal behavior is not allowed under these theories. The reason for this rejection is that both theories are self-contained and parsimonious. These theories give internally consistent explanations, principles, and concepts for criminal activities without including elements from other theories.

• Long-Term Orientation:

Both theories acknowledge the significance of having long-term perspective. According to the self-control theory individuals with low self-control tend to prioritize immediate gains over future consequences. Conversely, the Social Control Theory posits that a commitment to traditional goals arises with an emphasis on future benefits.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN SELF-CONTROL THEORY AND SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY

• Individual V. Societal Factors
• Self-control theory emphasizes individual traits and internal factors as the primary drivers of criminal behavior.
• Social Control Theory emphasizes the role of external factors, such as social bonds and relationships, in deterring criminal behavior.
• Causation
• Self-control theory suggests that a lack of self-control is established early in life and remains constant, leading to criminal behavior.
• Social control theory suggests that individuals are deterred from criminal behavior when they have strong social bonds and external constraints.
• Protective Factors
• The main protective factor in Self-control theory is the level of self-control an individual possesses. High self-control acts as a barrier against criminal behavior, while low self-control increases the risk of delinquency.
• Protective factors include attachment to family, commitment to education and work, belief in societal norms, and involvement in pro-social activities. These factors create a stake in conformity, deterring individuals from criminal involvement.
• Policy Implications
• Interventions based on Self-Control Theory often focus on improving self-control skills through counselling, education, and skill-building programs. These interventions target individuals with low self-control.
• Policies and interventions based on Social Control Theory often involve strengthening social bonds, community programs, and support systems to promote attachment and commitment to conventional values. They aim to create an environment that discourages criminal behavior.
• Case Law Comparison
• Self-control theory is relevant for repeat juvenile offenders who demonstrate poor impulse control.
• Social control theory can be seen in laws and policies aimed at deterrence, such as the death penalty for heinous crimes.

NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT

Self-control theory and social control theory have made valuable contributions to our understanding of criminal behavior. However, these scientific theories are not perfect and have some limitations. There are areas where there is a need for improvement.

SELF-CONTROL THEORY

• Cultural Sensitivity

The self-control theory should be culturally sensitive to ensure its applicability. The theory has been formulated within Western contexts, which may overlook cultural intricacies and factors leading to criminal behavior. Adapting the theory to account for cultural variations in self-control and impulsivity could enhance its effectiveness.

Complexity of Crime

• Critics often argue that self-control theory oversimplifies criminal behavior by solely attributing it to low self-control because crime is a complex issue caused by multiple factors. Therefore, a better understanding of criminal behavior requires studying the interplay between self-control and sociocultural factors such as poverty, caste, and regional disparities.
• Developmental Aspects

The theory posits that self-control is developing over time. Although it suggests that low self-control inculcated in childhood remains stable, interventions aimed at improving self-control during adolescence and adulthood should include addressing criminal behavior among individuals who may not have had low self-control in childhood.

SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY

• Contextualization

Social control theory requires the acknowledgment of variations in social bonds across communities and regions to apply to diverse cultural landscapes.

• Inclusivity:

In India, where social structures and norms can be highly rigid, the theory should also consider individuals who may not conform to conventional values due to societal inequalities, discrimination, or other factors. It should explore how these individuals experience social control differently.

• Modernization:

Social control theory was developed at a time when family, school, and workplace were central institutions. In modern India, new institutions and online communities play significant roles. The theory should evolve to encompass these contemporary influences on social bonds.

CASE LAW

Sampson v. California – 2006

In the case, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the use of parole supervision as a form of social control for individuals released from prison. The Court argued that close monitoring and supervision of parolees could reduce the likelihood of recidivism by reinforcing social ties and responsibilities.

Gurmit Singh v. State of Punjab – 1996

Gurmit Singh was convicted of the assassination of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. During the trial, it was argued that Gurmit Singh’s association with extremist groups had influenced him to commit the crime. The prosecution emphasized how Gurmit Singh’s radicalized social connections had played a pivotal role in his decision to assassinate a prominent political figure. This case showcases the influence of social bonds and external factors on criminal behavior. It underscores how an individual’s association with a particular social group can lead them to engage in criminal activities, aligning with the principles of social control theory.

It’s important to note that in all the above cases that may reflect elements of self-control theory and social control theory, the Indian legal system typically doesn’t explicitly frame cases in terms of these theories. Instead, legal arguments and judgments often revolve around the specific facts of the case, relevant statutes, and constitutional principles. These theories provide a theoretical framework for understanding criminal behavior, but their direct application in legal cases can be challenging to establish explicitly.

Roper v. Simmons – 2005

In this case, the US Supreme Court answered the question of whether it is constitutional and valid to punish individuals who committed crimes when they were below the age of 18. The decision of the court to abolish the death penalty for juveniles relied, in part, on research supporting the idea that minors or adolescents have a lower level of self-control, making them less culpable for their actions.

Rajesh Kumar V. State of Haryana – 2011

In this case, the accused, Rajesh Kumar, was charged with theft. During the trial, it was observed that Rajesh had a history of impulse control issues and was unable to resist the temptation to steal. The defense argued that Rajesh’s criminal behavior was a result of his low self-control, which was established during his upbringing. This case presents the concept of low self-control as a factor contributing to criminal behavior. Although not explicitly citing the theory, the original text suggests a link between impulse control and criminal behavior.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

About – Self-Control Theory

In India, a recent study held in 2020 examined the relationship between self-control and substance abuse among young adults in an urban area of West Bengal (Das & Das, 2020). The study found that low self-control was positively associated with substance abuse among young adults. This study results in the self-control theory’s assertion that individuals with low self-control tend to engage in deviant behavior.

State V. Reifenstuhl Case

In this case, the defendant was charged with burglary and theft. The defendant’s criminal behavior is due to his history of drug addiction and low self-control. The defendant used his low self-control as a defense against sentencing. However, the court rejected and upheld the defendant’s sentence, stating that his low self-control did not excuse his criminal behavior.

About – Social Control Theory

In India, a recent study held in 2021 observed the relationship between social bonds and delinquent behavior of juveniles in Delhi (Singh & Ahmad, 2021). The study suggests that strong social bonds, particularly with parents and teachers, can deter delinquent behavior in juveniles, providing support for the social control theory.

State of Maharashtra v. Khan Noor Mohd. Yusuf – 2019

In this case, the Bombay High Court emphasized the importance of positive social relationships in deterring crime. The court held that rehabilitation measures, such as education and skill training, should be employed in dealing with offenders to promote positive social relationships and prevent recidivism. This decision reflects the principles of social control theory and highlights the need for holistic rehabilitation measures in the Indian legal system.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Criminal law is a manifold field that needs to understand and address the causes of criminal behavior. Two prominent theories of Travis Hirschi and Michael Gottfredson that attempt to elucidate delinquent and criminal behavior are the Self-Control Theory and the Social Control Theory. Self-control theory and social control theory provide valuable insights into the complex issue of criminal behavior. They consider the subject from various perspectives. While self-control theory draws the importance of an individual’s internal traits and self-discipline, social control theory indicates the role of external social bonds and connections in deterring criminal behavior.

Social Control Theory and Self-Control Theory both are highly applicable in criminal law, as they influence how cases are understood and sentences are determined. By considering these theories, the legal system can more effectively address the root causes of criminal behavior and develop more efficient strategies for prevention and rehabilitation. Despite some differences and inconsistencies between the two theories, they complement each other well, and inter-relationships are unavoidable. At present, there is no indication of inherent incompatibility.

REFERENCES

• Fujia Sun, “Social Control Theory of Crime” – www.simplyphychology.org.

• Charlotte Ruhi “Self-Control Theory of Crime” – www.simplyphychology.org.
• Hirschi, Travis (1969) Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Gottfredson, Michael R. and Travis Hirschi (1990) A General Theory of Crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• https://lawaspect.com/social-control-theory-vs-self-control-theory/ – last visited 17^th September, 2023.
• https://www.differencebetweenarticles.com/psychology/difference-between-social-control-and-self-control-psychology/14284  – last visited 18^th September, 2023.
• https://indiankanoon.org / – last visited 18^th September, 2023.
• Deepshikha, “Social Control Theory vs Self-Control Theory” – last visited 19^th September, 2023.
• Claire Taylor, “Theoretical Criminology”, Volume: 5 Issue: 3, NCJRS, 369 (369-388), 2001.
• images of social bond theory – Bing images  –  last visited 29^th September, 2023.