The Techniques Of Neutralization

The Techniques Of Neutralization In 1957, Gresham Sykes and David Matza developed a theory that explained delinquent behavior through techniques of neutralization. Sykes and Matza developed five different techniques to help them explain their theory. This literature review provides background information on the Techniques of Neutralization and looks at each one specifically. Over time, several studies have been done to better explain and test out these techniques. Also included are critiques of Sykes and Matzas Theory. Overview The Techniques of Neutralization were developed to explain juvenile delinquents and why they committed crime (Moyer 2001). Its believed that they reject the values and goals of society and form goals and values of their own. Delinquents accept the values of being allowed to take the easy way out. Society believes in an individual taking steps to better themselves in non-criminal ways to succeed. The criminal subcultural sees this as a struggle and tends to shy away (Moyer 2001). The criminal believes in low achievement and dropping out. The control theories is the umbrella which most believe these techniques should fall under, however, theorist believe that this was used to criticize Hirschis Social Bond Theory. Other theorists saw this as an extension to Hirschis theory. What Sykes and Matza intended to do was to clarify what was meant by definitions favorable to law. Their initial plan was not to develop a theory of control (Moyer 2001). Using this as a building block, Matza later developed another theory that we now know as Drift Theory. Sykes and Matza outlined five different techniques. Each technique provided what theorists believe to be excuses or responses to delinquent behavior. These techniques became important in lessening the effect of control on these individuals and an important part of the criminal behavior. Denial of Responsibility This technique allows an individual to deny any right to being involved in an act (Sykes and Matza 1957). Usually they are reacting to an outside source whether it be another person or a situation that has affected them. They will often say that their reaction was beyond their control. (Moyer 2001; Akers and Sellers 2004) Denial of responsibility can actually be explained through other theories. The theories that formed from the Chicago School could use this and say that where an individual lives or comes from can help explain why he or she has resulted to deviant behavior. (Moyer 2001) Denial of Injury An individual in this situation will say that their action yielded no victim, therefore their crime was victimless (Sykes and Matza 1957). Their argument is that no one or nothing was harm in the act of their crime. As a society we view victimless crimes as things like prostitution and drug use. The government tends to constitute morals instead of basing it on the fact that these acts can actually hurt people. Delinquents see this as an opportunity to act out. These individuals may also play a part in other criminal activities such as tagging or vandalism and stealing. They feel that no one is harmed by these crimes, so it is alright to commit them. Denial of the Victim This technique could be tied the denial of injury, but its a bit different in the fact that individuals will argue that the victim had it coming (Sykes and Matza 1957). Usually this act is a result of retaliation against something the victim did to egg on the offender. Hate crimes are an example crimes that can be explained by this technique. (Moyer 2001; Akers and Sellers 2004) Some theorists argue that rape or sexual assault can be used to show denial of victim. On most college campuses, drinking is a huge problem that often results in rape or assault (Piacentini, Chatzidakis, and Banister 2012). College females are seen as weaker individuals to prey on when they are intoxicated. The males in this situation take advantage of this. This criminal act could happen within the party scene or when the individual leaves. The male would argue that she was drunk and was asking for it. (Moyer 2001; Akers and Sellers 2004; Piacentini, Chatzidakis, and Banister 2012) Another example of this technique would be your average club or bar right. Most individuals who go into bars, go there to drink. Lets say a couple goes to a bar, they sit down and a man starts to hit of the female companion. Hes obviously drunk, but the boyfriend sees this guy as a threat and nicely asks him to stop. The drunk male begin to mouth off at the boyfriend. The boyfriend becomes heated and punches the drunk male in the face causing an uproar at the bar that results in the cops being called. When the cops arrive, the boyfriend says that the drunk male had it coming, as he was the one who started the situation in the first place. However, this is most often the situation in any fight. (Piacentini, Chatzidakis, and Banister 2012) Appeal to Higher Loyalties Appeal to high loyalty crimes usually occur when something big is at stake (Sykes and Matza 1957). This is a common technique used by the government. However, as far as delinquents are concerned, this is used to explain crimes committed while involved in a gang. Juveniles see the gang as their family. Their goal is to fit in, so they often say that they owed this to the gang to defend their reputation within it. (Moyer 2001; Akers and Sellers 2004) This technique could also be used to explain a theft of some sort (Shigihara 2013). There is a single mother of three who works at in retail. One of her children suffers from severe allergies, but she doesnt have enough money to afford the medication. Before this mother leaves work on a certain occasion she sneaks a bottle of medicine into her purse. Consequently, this woman gets caught by the manager who has seen her in the act. When this woman is question, she states her situation and tells the manager that she had to do it for her child. She has then attempted to appeal to higher loyalties (Moyer 2001). Condemnation of Condemners This technique is one of the most complicated, but more cleaver. It allows the delinquent to shift the attention from themselves to the individual who is convicting them (Sykes and Matza 1957). They usually tend to focus of the acts or behaviors of others so that there is a shift in action and attention. (Moyer 2001; Akers and Sellers 2004) Condemnation of condemners can be used in court cases a lot. The offender could be allowed to shift focus on the wrongdoings of the police or any other individual who played a part in their behavior. Racial profiling would make for an example. Law enforcement officials have a target that they have their mind set on. Anyone who so slightly resembles that individual is usually targeted by officers. Maybe an individual is in the wrong place at the wrong time. If this individual is taken in, they could argue that the police officials were profiling him or there was no evidence that could or would link him to anything. Review of Literature and Studies According to Costello, Sykes and Matza created that the notion of an oppositional subculture was unlikely because delinquents seem to display guilt or shame (2000). They typically have some ties to what we know as conformist society. Sykes and Matza believe that these neutralizations are extensions of legal defenses to crimes (Costello 2000). These techniques allow the delinquent to see them as valid, but they tend to be denied by the society around them. The studies and empirical research that has been done to study this theory was provided mixed results (Schafer and Knudten 1977). Most studies show that those who use neutralization techniques tend to have weak bonds and are more likely to be deviant (Costello 2000). Agnews longitudinal analysis of violent behavior show that neutralization has more effect on violence among those who condemn the behavior, thus supporting Sykess and Matzas argument that states neutralization is a result of internalized constraints to behavior that require these neutralization techniques (Costello 2000). As far as current research goes, there are several arguments. One is although there is research that show a relationship between neutralization and deviance, the relationship is usually weak (Costello 2000). Another argument is that an individual uses the techniques as a way to protect his or her self-esteem because of the ties they have to the society (Costello 2000). None of the evidence found for any of these presents clear and strong support. There was a study done that looked at men in a Tennessee prison. Most of these individuals came from poor background. They were all grouped into different categories based or the attachment to the society in which they came from. Several crimes were looked at and then each individual was asked if they had been involved in any of those particular crimes. At the end of the study, they found that each individual used at least one technique of neutralization to defend their act. (Copes 2003) Critiques One of the main arguments against this theory is the fact that it doesnt explain how society tolerates the use of the techniques (Moyer 2001). Sykes and Matza explained how to use the techniques, but they failed to explain whether certain individuals would be more accepting (Moyer 2001). There may be some members of a society or group that will be either more lenient or harsher as a result of the use of these techniques. However, we are unaware of these individuals because this theory has failed to mention it (Rankin 2011). The biggest criticism of this theory is that it is not a theory at all (Moyer 2001). Sykes and Matza said themselves that the research and evidence to support this theory was rare (Sykes and Matza 1957). They actually admitted to the fact that this was more of an addition to a larger more general theory. This is how Matzas Drift Theory came about (Akers and Sellers 2004). The actual goal of this research was to explain how individuals who commit crimes still see themselves as law-abiding citizens (Sykes and Matza 1957). As we now look at the techniques as a whole, theorists believe that this is best categorized not as a theory but as steps to creating a control theory (Moyer 2001). Conclusion The techniques of neutralization has been turned into what is believed to be building blocks to a greater theory. They have taken a look at the ways that criminals, delinquents especially, explain or rationalize their behavior. Even in todays world, we see evidence of these techniques being used. Sykes and Matza have developed these techniques that will not only be used by criminals, but also by those who may represent these criminals as justifications for committing these crimes.

To Kill A Mocking Bird :: To Kill a Mockingbird Essays

Proposals: To examine the character of Atticus Finch as a hero in Harper Lees’ â€Å"To Kill a Mockingbird. â€Å"To kill a Mockingbird†, an acclaimed novel, by Harper Lee is recognised throughout the world. Having read her novel, which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1960 soon after its publication, I was compelled to consider the novel in greater depth but was particularly intrigued to examine the character of Atticus Finch as a hero. Maycomb, a fictional town in the Southern States of America plays host to the novel during the period of 1933-1935. â€Å"To Kill a Mockingbird† follows a lawyer and his family prior to and during a legal case to defend a black male, Tom Robinson, charged of raping a white female, Mayella Ewell. This occurs in a very white orientated town. Atticus Finch, Attorney and father of two children only plays a brief part in the opening chapter but as this epic novel progresses so does his importance. It becomes apparent that Atticus Finch, arguably the novel’s main character, is extremely well respected in Maycomb by the majority of its residents. If someone expresses a dislike towards him he will still try to do his â€Å"best to love everybody†. Atticus is a man of extreme integrity and some say that it is through his mouth that Harper Lee expresses her own morality, an opinion that I share. He represents a true gentleman; his conduct is always courteous despite any provocation whether privately or publicly. This is enhanced by the very carefully selected word choice. Atticus is able to use language stylishly when appropriate but he can also communicate very simplistically such as when in a moment of crisis he can talk straightforwardly, for example to Jem and Scout, to enhance understanding. Atticus is a devoted family man; he manages to care for his children without the help of their mother, who died. Harper Lee gives Atticus a very â€Å"modern style† re garding parenting (in comparison to other families in the 1930’s i.e. principally he was a single parent). This could perhaps be a reflection on Atticus’s opinion that everyone has the right to be an individual and because of this we should not be judged. He is one person in a select few who feel that coloured people should be able to have the same standard of living as their white counterparts. Atticus is open to all opinions and will accept each individual for their own beliefs regardless of whether or not these differ from his own.

Being Rebellious Gains Nothing: Romeo and Juliet Essay

In Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare, there are occurrences that cause the two lovers to rebel against various things which can prove disastrous in the end. Romeo and Juliet is a play where two lovers are caught in the middle of family feuds and even though they have to sneak around, they will stop at nothing to be together. They both go against basic rules that are set by their families, the law, and their own judgment. They will do anything to be together and do not realize the consequences of their actions. Although Romeo and Juliet believe they should do whatever they have to do in order to be together, their rebellion against family, laws and rules, and personal judgment proves foolish in the end because it causes their tragic deaths. Throughout their lives, Romeo and Juliet have been controlled by their families and in order to be together, they end up rebelling against their families wishes which contributes to their deaths. Juliet’s parents only want what is best for her. While they want her to get married to a nice man, she wants no part in the marriage because she wants to be with Romeo. Her parents do not know that she wants to be with Romeo; all they know is that she is being obstinate about marrying the nice man they have picked for her. Juliet says, â€Å"He shall not make me there a joyful bride! †(3. 5. 122). She is talking to her parents about how she refuses to get married to Paris, the man they want her to marry, but she will not tell them why all she says is that she does not want to be married. Once her father hears this, he is beyond furious and tells Juliet that if she does not agree to get married he will kick her out and even if she is homeless on the streets he will just walk past her. Even after her father says this, Juliet is still persistent about being with Romeo when she says, â€Å"I’ll to the Friar to know his remedy/ if all else fail, myself have power to die† (3. 5. 254-255). She would rather die to be with Romeo and give up everything she has ever had in her life, than just go along with her parents’ wishes. Juliet betrays her parents when she fakes her own death, and she does all of this because she wants to run away with Romeo. If Juliet had not of rebelled against her families’ wishes, she would have most likely been married to Paris, not dead. Romeo and Juliet are willing to do anything to be together, even though in the end some of the choices made to rebel against the law cause their tragic deaths. The Capulet and Montague families are continually involved in fights and recently the Prince told them if they were even in another fight, whoever is involved will be killed. After this proposition is made, Tybalt starts a fight where Romeo ends up killing Tybalt. This fight violates the Prince’s rule and Romeo did not want to kill family even though he could not tell anyone he was family. The Prince’s rule is clearly stated when he says, â€Å"Three civil brawls bred of an airy word/ by thee, old Capulet, and Montague,/†¦if ever you disturb out streets again, your lives shall pay the forfeit of the peace†( 1. 1. 91-99). Over the past weeks there have been three fights between the Montagues and Capulets and the Prince says whoever is in the next fight will pay; Romeo is ironically trying to stop a fight because of the rule and ends up breaking the law and betraying Juliet by killing a member of her family. Killing Tybalt not only breaks the law, but also means that he will be on the run and unable to see Juliet. Romeo goes on the run because Benvolio says, â€Å"Romeo, away, begone! / the citizens are up, and Tybalt slain/ stand not amazed. The Prince will doom thee death/ if thou art taken. Hence, be gone, away†(3. 1. 138-141). Benvolio is single handedly telling his friend to break the law and flee the scene, which just encourages Romeo to sneak around and see Juliet. No one wants Romeo to get hurt or get in trouble because he is just trying to break up a fight, but what no one knows is that if he is on the run he cannot see Juliet either. Because of Romeo being banished, he can no longer see Juliet unless they sneak around, lie, and try to run away; if they had followed the rules in the first place they might not have been in this debacle. Romeo and Juliet thought they were in love and would do anything to be together; ultimately trying to be together leads to their unfortunate deaths. The biggest thing Romeo and Juliet rebel against, which leads to their deaths, is their own judgment. They both know in their minds that what they are doing is not right, but the feeling of love, true or not, overrides their personal judgment. Romeo and Juliet make comments on how rash and quick their decisions are, but often contradict themselves later. They know the risks of their relationship, but they think they are in love and nothing can stop them. Romeo says, â€Å"Then love-devouring death do what he dare,/ it is enough I may but call her mine†2. 6. 7-8, but Friar Lawrence replies, â€Å"these violent delights have violent ends†(2. 6. 9). Romeo does not care what happens to him and even though he knows in the back of his mind the results will probably not be good he still just wants Juliet. All he cares about is making Juliet his no matter what the costs are or no matter what he thinks. Even though Friar Lawrence says this ambition to make Juliet his may have a terrible end, Romeo does not care at all. He does not care what happens and his carelessness may have ended up killing him and Juliet. Juliet is the same as Romeo and does not listen to herself. She says, â€Å"It is too rash, too unadvised, too sudden†2. 2. 125 but several lines later, Juliet says, â€Å"if that thy bend of love be honourable/ thy purpose marriage, send me word to-morrow† (2. . 151-152). She knows that she does not want or need to get married, yet somehow Romeo convinces Juliet that they need each other with his poetic way of speaking and even though she clearly knows this is an immediate and unreasonable decision she still says she will marry him. In the back of their minds they know what is right, but choose to do what they want to do instead. Throughout their relationship, Romeo and Juliet make many quick decisions that go against their personal judgment and most likely cause their terrible deaths. Romeo and Juliet rebel against many things in their relationship that include families, laws and rules, and personal judgment which cause their deaths. Even though Romeo and Juliet are kids and may have actually been in love, they made poor decisions regarding how to deal with their relationship. Juliet completely rebelled against her parents’ wishes of her getting married to Paris and would rather die than marry Paris. Romeo and his friends ignore and blatantly disregard laws and rules put in place to keep order in their town. Finally, Romeo and Juliet both go against their own personal judgment; they both know what the right thing to do is, they just choose to do what they want. Romeo and Juliet both die stupidly in the end of the play all because they were trying to sneak around, rebel, and disregard other people and their wishes or rules. In the end of the play all it took for two teenagers to die is sneaking around and trying to rebel against others; so in the end, everyone knows what the right thing to do is whether they like it or not and not doing the right thing can cause even worse events to happen.

Free Essays on Not A Glass Act

Do you believe everything that you read? Well, maybe you shouldn’t. After writing the article â€Å"Hack Heaven†, it has been discovered that Stephen Glass, a young writer from The New Republic has been making up quotes, people, places, events, and sometimes whole stories. Glass knew how to deceive his editors since he was one once himself. He wrote phony notes, made phony websites, and phone numbers. Stephen Glass, who graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, started working at The New Republic in 1995. The lying started when he was writing a story for The New Republic shortly after he began working there. During an interview with Glass he said, â€Å"Like a stock graph, there’s going to be exceptions in this. But the general trend of the stories is that they started out with a few made up details and quotes. And granted a few too many, of course. But a few. And then they progressed into stories that were completely fabricated. Just completely made up out of whole cloth.† â€Å"Hack Heaven† was about a 15 year old, Ian Restil, who hacked into a software company called Jukt Micronics and was then offered a job by the company with the help of his agent, Joe Hiert. The article also said that there was a radio advertisement in Nevada asking â€Å"Would you hire a shoplifter to watch the cash register? Please don’t deal with hackers.† After reading the article, Adam Penenberg, a writer at Forbes Digital, tried to trace Jukt Micronics. He didn’t find a website, a record of the company ever paying taxes, and it wasn’t listed under any of California’s area codes. There was no evidence of the company ever existing. Forbes notified Charles Lane, the executive editor for The New Republic from 1997-1999, and told him that they were having a hard time proving every fact. Lane then told Glass that he needed a list of all of the sources and how to reach them. Glass returned with the phone numbers and e-m... Free Essays on Not A Glass Act Free Essays on Not A Glass Act Do you believe everything that you read? Well, maybe you shouldn’t. After writing the article â€Å"Hack Heaven†, it has been discovered that Stephen Glass, a young writer from The New Republic has been making up quotes, people, places, events, and sometimes whole stories. Glass knew how to deceive his editors since he was one once himself. He wrote phony notes, made phony websites, and phone numbers. Stephen Glass, who graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, started working at The New Republic in 1995. The lying started when he was writing a story for The New Republic shortly after he began working there. During an interview with Glass he said, â€Å"Like a stock graph, there’s going to be exceptions in this. But the general trend of the stories is that they started out with a few made up details and quotes. And granted a few too many, of course. But a few. And then they progressed into stories that were completely fabricated. Just completely made up out of whole cloth.† â€Å"Hack Heaven† was about a 15 year old, Ian Restil, who hacked into a software company called Jukt Micronics and was then offered a job by the company with the help of his agent, Joe Hiert. The article also said that there was a radio advertisement in Nevada asking â€Å"Would you hire a shoplifter to watch the cash register? Please don’t deal with hackers.† After reading the article, Adam Penenberg, a writer at Forbes Digital, tried to trace Jukt Micronics. He didn’t find a website, a record of the company ever paying taxes, and it wasn’t listed under any of California’s area codes. There was no evidence of the company ever existing. Forbes notified Charles Lane, the executive editor for The New Republic from 1997-1999, and told him that they were having a hard time proving every fact. Lane then told Glass that he needed a list of all of the sources and how to reach them. Glass returned with the phone numbers and e-m...

Saying Best and Worst in Spanish

Saying Best and Worst in Spanish Best and worst as adjectives are usually expressed in Spanish using mejor (plural mejores) and peor (plural peores), respectively, preceded by a definite article (el, la, los or las). A few examples: el mejor presidente, the best presidentel mejor ejemplo, the best examplela mejor cmara, the best cameralos mejores estudiantes, the best studentsel peor libro, the worst bookla peor excusa, the worst excuselas peores pelà ­culas, the worst films The definite article is dropped when mejor or peor follows a possessive adjective: mi mejor camisa, my best shirtnuestras mejores decisiones, our best decisionstu peor caracterà ­stica, your worst quality Like most other adjectives, mejor and peor can function as nouns:  ¿Quà © coche es el mejor? Which car is the best?He comprado muchas computadoras, y à ©sta es la peor. I have bought many computers, and this one is the worst. When mejor or peor is functioning as a noun, lo is used as the definite article when mejor or peor refers to no particular noun. In such cases, lo mejor frequently can be translated as the best or the best thing; lo peor frequently can be translated as the worst or the worst thing. A few examples: Lo mejor es olvidar. The best thing is forgetting.Lo mejor es que me voy a casa. The best thing is that Im going home.El amor es lo mejor de lo mejor. Love is the best of the best.Lo peor es cuando haces una pregunta y nadie responde. The worst thing is when you ask a question and nobody answers.Vi lo mejor y lo peor de la humanidad. I saw the best and the worst of humanity. In phrases taking the form the best/worst ... in the ..., the in typically is translated using de: lo mejor coche del mundo, the best car in the worldel mejor presidente de la historia, the best president in historyel peor libro de toda la existencia humana, the worst book in all human existencelas peores pelà ­culas de la serie, the worst movies in the series

Health organization case study Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Health organization case study - Essay Example This is aimed at further personalizing health care, not to mention the enormous effect of trending innovations that continue to ensure patient satisfaction such as from receiving medical attention from the comfort of their homes. United Healthcare prides itself in the latest technologies in diagnosis, treatment and data handling (storage and processing) (United Healthcare, 2015). This will ensure better quality health care and faster service to reduce ‘crowding’ and ‘overwhelming’ situations. With appointments much easier to make and health related information readily availed to patients who can access them easily, prevention is fast becoming a major ally in further enhancing the United Healthcare’s readiness to addressing the health care needs of its citizens in the next 10 years. The main strategy to ensure United Healthcare’s sustained network growth is to become and retain its spot as the best destination for health care for various ailments. United Healthcare has additionally invested in new, fast, easy and personal technologies and innovations that make access to health care easier to persons in any parts of the country, or globe. These include resources such as myuhc.com, Health4Me mobile application, my Healthcare Cost Estimator, myClaims Manager and Your 24-Hour Nurse which among other things, enable patients/ users to receive answers to their questions, receive health tips and advice, book appointments with doctors, print IDs, estimate health care costs, view and pay claims, access claim forms, locate a pharmacy and change mailing preferences (UnitedHealthcare Online, 2015). United Healthcare also plans to build more hospitals and clinics that will compliment the over 5,600 such facilities already present all over the country in bids to aid its network growth and enhance patient satisfaction (reach). The organization also continues to enter agreements with businesses to

Contemporary Issues in Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words - 2

Contemporary Issues in Management - Essay Example Management is simply the process of organizing and coordinating all activities in all business organizations in order to achieve defined goals and objectives (Newton, 2005). Contemporary organizations are very different from traditional organizations in so much ways. In contemporary organizations, the leadership style applied is mostly the democratic leadership style. This is a style that gives organization’s employees to participate in all almost if not all decision making situations. Employees of an organization are the most vital resources that an organization possesses since they contribute significantly to the success of the organization in the achievement of organization’s goals and objectives. The managers of Tesco Company for example are aware of this and this is why they mostly prefer the democratic style of leadership. The managers involve employees in decisions making situations such as setting of organization’s goals and objectives, setting policies a nd code of conduct that must be adhered to in the organization and designing plans to achieve organization’s goals and objectives and much more. In Tesco Company for example, the management is responsible for developing a competitive advantage that will enable the organization compete effectively in its respective market. The knowledge and skills of reflexive managers and employees’ ideas are vital to the development of an effective competitive advantage in organizations. Democratic leadership exercised by leaders in a contemporary organization gives employees opportunities to share their ideas with the organization’s managers on the business can develop a good competitive advantage. Parker (2000) argues that employees in contemporary organizations are always highly skilled and educated. Most contemporary organizations perform exceptionally well in their respective market and therefore employ employees who are highly productive in the market. The