Learning theories and labeling theories are still valid and being scientifically tested and expanded. Deviant sources of influence have been demonstrated to be one of the most robust predictors of crime. Research indicates that deviant association with friends, best friends, siblings, co-workers, gang members, romantic partners, indirect ties, and university roommates can explain why individuals participate in criminal behavior (Capaldi et al., 2008; Duncan et al., 2005; Fergusson et al., 2007; Hashimi et al., 2021; Haynie, 2002; Haynie et al., 2005; Kissner & Pyrooz, 2009; Payne & Cornwell, 2007; Piquero et al., 2005; Rees & Pogarsky, 2011; Rowan, 2016). However, learning theories have been critiqued for the fact that, although learning is universal, the bulk of what learning theories represent and explain is derived from white frames of reference and samples.

Relatedly, research on labeling theory finds that informal labels from the community and our close contacts may have more influence on our behavior (Tibbetts, 2015). Some of those labels may negatively impact social bonds and also contribute to criminal behavior. Marginalized people and people of color may be more vulnerable to informal labels and the broken bonds that follow due to stereotypes that associate criminality with marginalized groups (Bernburg, 2019). Although the scientific rigor in testing labeling theories has improved in the early 21st century, critics contend that labeling theories are too vague and lack adequate explanation of, especially, primary deviance.

Subcultural theories have been heavily critiqued for various reasons. Women and girls are essentially left out of the equation (a critique you will see again in Chapter 8). Also, especially regarding juvenile delinquency and juvenile gang membership, these theories do not really explain why most people age out of crime (more to come on this topic in Chapter 7). These theories have also been critiqued for offensively assigning negative values to already marginalized populations. It is important to critically evaluate historical oppressive power structures when studying the working-class and marginalized groups, which not all subcultural theories initially did. We will explore this topic more in Chapter 8.

Check Your Knowledge

Licenses and Attributions for Modern Application: How is it Relevant Now?

Open Content, Original

“Modern Application: How is it Relevant Now?” by Jessica René Peterson licensed under CC BY 4.0.

“Modern Application: How is it Relevant Now? Question Set” was created by ChatGPT and is not subject to copyright. Edits for relevance, alignment, and meaningful answer feedback by Colleen Sanders are licensed under CC BY 4.0.

Open Content, Shared Previously

The first paragraph of “Modern Application: How is it Relevant Now?” is adapted from:

• “Moving Past a Monolithic Approach to Learning Theory” Introduction to Criminology by Dr. Zachary Rowan and Michaela McGuire, M.A. is licensed under CC BY 4.0, except where otherwise noted. Modifications by Jessica René Peterson, licensed under CC BY 4.0, include taking one claim from this section and incorporating it into the text.
• “Research in Learning Theories” Introduction to Criminology by Dr. Zachary Rowan and Michaela McGuire, M.A. is licensed under CC BY 4.0, except where otherwise noted. Modifications by Jessica René Peterson, licensed under CC BY 4.0, include taking one paragraph from this section and incorporating it into the text.