The main argument is how criminal behavior occurs, whether it is between socially interacting
with people or not. It can also be on how can someone learn criminal behavior or if it appears in
that person's life how is it gonna change their mind Criminal behavior is learned both in
nonsocial situations that are reinforcing or discriminative and through that social interaction in
which the behavior of other persons is reinforcing or discriminative for criminal behavior.
Burgess and Akers' differential association reinforcement theory was an effort to meld
Sutherlands sociological approach in his differential association theory and principles of
behavioral psychology. The differential association theory has nine propositions. Some of the
propositions are criminal behavior is learned, A person becomes delinquent because of an excess
of definitions favorable to violation of law, The principal part of the learning of criminal
behavior occurs within intimate personal groups, Although criminal behavior is an expression of
general needs and values, those general needs and values do not explain it, because noncriminal
behavior is an expression of the same needs and values. The theory does not merely state that
being associated with criminals leads to crime or that being associated with law-abiding persons
leads to conforming behavior. It is the nature, characteristics, and balance of the differential
association that affect an individual’s likelihood of violating the law. More specifically, if a
person is exposed to pro-criminal definitions first (priority), and these definitions increase in
frequency and strength (intensity) and persist for some time (duration), the individual is more
likely to demonstrate involvement in criminal and deviant acts. Imitation is perhaps the least
complex of the four dimensions of Akers’s social learning theory. Imitation occurs when an
individual engages in a behavior that is modeled on or follows his or her observation of another
individual's behavior. Akers has argued that imitation is most salient in the initial acquisition and
performance of a novel or new behavior. Thus, an individual’s decision to engage in crime or
deviance after watching a violent television show for the first time or observing his friends attack
another peer for the first time provides the key social context in which imitation can occur. The
future of social learning theory lies along three paths. First, there will continue to be further and
more accurate tests of social learning at the micro- or process level (i.e., at the level of
differences across individuals), including measures of variables from other criminological
theories, and these studies will use better measures of all of the central concepts of the theory.
Second, there is a need for continued development and testing of the SSSL model, again using
better measures. Third, social learning principles will continue to be applied in cognitive–
behavioral (Cullen, Wright, Gendreau, & Andrews, 2003) prevention, treatment, rehabilitation,
and correctional programs and otherwise provide some theoretical underpinning for social
policy. A question I have is, is it less likely for someone who does interact with people who
have a criminal behavior or mindset to not have the same mindset as them?
