CFE Exam Quiz 29

Many courses in criminology are built around the fundamental premise that crimes are particular sorts of behavior and best understood as the product of operant conditioning.

According to Skinner, human behavior should be approached scientifically. Instead of worrying over men’s souls or arguing about what makes up the Self, behaviorists would deal with what people do. By analyzing people’s actions, the behaviorist could then alter or direct any behavior for the greater good of all. On the other hand, the theory of Freud is referred to the unconscious drives to explain human behavior.

According to Skinner’s behavioral studies, punishment suppresses the behavior and is the least effective way of making a person understand that he is/has done something wrong.

The social structure theories will be used in order to know that why do many Central American countries typically have high rates of homicide while Hong Kong’s homicide is low. Moreover, this theory is also used when we want to know why is the crime rate in Japan so much lower than in the United States.

It is to be noted that positive reinforcement presents a positive stimulus in exchange for the desired response to anything. The positive stimulus can be any kind of reward that should be given as a positive outcome as the response of a particular behavior.

It is to be noted that social structure theories concentrate on the kinds of societies that generate particular levels of crime. As a group, social structure theories suggest that forces operating in the lower-class areas of the environment push many of their residents into criminal behavior. Similarly, they argue that people living in equivalent social environments seem to behave in a similar, predictable fashion.

It is to be noted that the employees indulge themselves in doing fraud because they are somehow underpaid according to their performances. They also have less financial assistance in many conditions as well as they are not appreciated as much as they should by their partners.

It is to be noted that strain theories are a branch of the social structure theory. Strain theorists view crime as a direct result of the frustration and anger people experience over their inability to achieve the social and financial success they desire.

It is found that employees that undergo the situations involving fraud, they are more likely to produce a positive outcome in their performance by using the non-punitive approach that includes behaviors other than punishment.

The nonpunitive approach specifically covers the approach that does not involve punishment in any way. It is related to the programs and other facilities to improve the working of the employee rather than punishing him and leaving a negative impact on him and his behavior.

It is to be noted that dealing with high-stakes criminals will remain difficult, despite our understanding of their behavior. Not just because the amounts of money and the networks of action are so complex, but because the conditioning is so intense.

Self-control is a behavior that is guided by conditioning in the same way any other action would be. “Self-control” as a behavior is shaped by “variables in the environment and the history of the individual.”
Understanding why people do certain things allows us to go beyond a simplistic insistence that criminals “control themselves.” We will instead have to consider how this control can be conditioned, preventing the behavior directly when possible, but ultimately relying on each individual having adequately absorbed the principles of self-control.

It is to be found that the reason why people decide to obey the laws and regulations have two different perspective
Instrumental Perspective
Normative Perspective

It is found that according to the instrumental perspective, people weigh the pros and cons of compliance with the law and act accordingly. In other words, they choose to obey the law because they fear punishment for noncompliance. A person exemplifying the instrumental perspective might exceed the speed limit, thinking that the benefit of saved time outweighs the risk of the potential speeding ticket. These types of individuals are unlikely to rob a bank, though, considering that success is doubtful and the penalty is steep.

It is noticeable that normative behavior is related to just and moral. It is more preferable over the instrumental perspective. Likewise, it is more concerned with treating the case justly regardless of losing and winning the case. On the other hand, the perspective that focuses on the outcome of his case and is less concerned with procedures is the instrumental perspective.

The study did show that legitimacy is related to compliance. Participants who attributed greater legitimacy to authorities were more likely to obey the law, for instance. This does not prove a causal relationship, though. The results of the study were analyzed to account for demographic and sociological factors. This “regression analysis” suggests that legitimacy has a significant effect on compliance, regardless of the other factors.

According to the social process theory, Criminality is a function of individual socialization and the social-psychological interactions people have with the various organizations, institutions, and processes of society.

Representativeness relates to those parties whose concerns are affected throughout the allocation process.

It is to be noted that, correctability involves the checks and balances provided in the system, which allow unfair decisions to be corrected, such as the appeals process.

People’s views on procedural fairness are affected by two factors: background characteristics and prior views. Race, education, income, sex, age, and political views are the most important background characteristics. Whereas, Prior views, formed perhaps from past experiences, carry more weight than background characteristics.

Classical criminology, based on the philosophical principle of utilitarianism, has its roots in the belief that human beings are rational and calculating creatures and, therefore, do things to avoid pain and produce pleasure.

I. People have free will, which they can use to elect to engage in either criminal or noncriminal behavior.
II. Criminal behavior will be more attractive if the gains are estimated to be greater than the losses.
III. The more certain, severe, and swift the reaction to crime, the more likely it is that the penalties will control the behavior.
IV. Moreover, penalties, which are too severe, serve no purpose, since they are needlessly excessive for the deterrence they seek to achieve

Utilitarianism remains a much-favored approach to crime, with its assumption that offenders will calculate potential gains and losses before they decide to disobey the law. Corporate sentencing guidelines, for example, are based almost totally on the idea of classical criminology, mandating that monetary penalties be calculated at a level that will induce companies to conclude that breaking the law is not fiscally appealing.

There are several major difficulties inherent in the theory, though. The first is that many people do not stop and add the gains and losses of lawbreaking before they engage in it. Second, the impact of penalties can up be very different for different people; the thought of a week in prison might be awful to one person, but a piece of cake to another. Third, it is very difficult to know whether the penalty will result from the behavior; most offenders optimistically assume that they will not be caught

Routine activities theory, a variation of classical theory, holds that both the motivation to commit crime and the supply of offenders is constant.

There are three important elements that influence crime:
I. The availability of suitable targets, such as companies and individuals
II. The absence of capable guardians, such as auditors and security personnel
III. The presence of motivated offenders, such as unhappy or financially challenged employees

Biological theory continues to evolve, with theorists seeking to locate genetic distinctions between those who break the law and those who obey it. In their book, The Bell Curve, Richard Herrnstein, and Charles Murray argued that low intelligence and crime are intimately connected and that low intelligence (as measured by I.Q. scores) is genetically transmitted.

It is found that Social learning theories hold that criminal behavior is a function of the way people absorb information, viewpoints, and motivations from others, most notably from those with whom they are close, such as members of their peer group. Social learning theorists believe that all people have the potential to commit the crime if they are exposed to certain kinds of circumstances. \>. So, too, will a person raised with attitudes that favor criminal acts respond by committing such acts, and the person raised and living in an environment where criminal activity would be unthinkable will avoid crime; crime might not even occur to him as a solution to whatever problem is confronting him

Cognitive theories stress inadequate moral and intellectual development as lying at the root of criminal acts. There are also personality theories, which illustrate the belief that traits such as extroversion are responsible for a significant amount of crime.

Integrated theories draw from choice theory, biological theory, and psychological theory. One such argument is put forward by James Q. Wilson and Richard J. Herrnstein in their book Crime and Human Nature. Wilson and Herrnstein maintain that, while criminal activity is a choice, this choice is heavily influenced by biological and psychological factors. They also explore social factors. The factors include family life, schools, and gang membership.