Hirschi Social Control Theory

However, in 1967 he left UC Berkeley for a position at the University of Washington, Seattle in the department of sociology. But he was still working on his dissertation, and, in addition, he had a full teaching load. Finally, he was able to finish it, he titled it “Infraction as Action,” and he showed the final draft to his friend, the sociologist Rodney Stark. Stark, though passed it on to Grant Barnes, an editor at the University of California Press. Within a couple of days, Barnes called Travis Hirschi and told him he would like to publish it as a book. Hirschi agreed and the book that resulted was “Causes of Delinquency,” which came out in 1969. In the meantime, he and Selvin, who co-authored the 1967 book “Delinquency Research: An Appraisal
No other social control theory has been so studied, cited, researched, and critiqued as has been the theory Hirschi presented in his book “Causes of Delinquency.” As was indicated above, Hirschi was profoundly influenced by his reading of Durkheim’s book “Suicide.” To develop his own theory, Hirschi took the Durkheim assumption that we are all animals and “thus naturally capable of committing criminal acts” (Hirschi, 1969, p. ). However, while we are all capable of being criminal offenders, very few of us end up being criminals. Hirschi asks the essential question of why not. His answer is that most humans can be adequately socialized to become tightly bonded to society’s conventions – family, school, and community. And the stronger our bonds to conventional society, the less likely we are to engage in illegal
Hirschi’s theory, advanced in “Causes of Delinquency,” points to social bonds as the critical element determining who is a criminal and who is not. Hirschi sees the delinquent as the person who lacks intimate attachments, commitments to society, and moral beliefs. These are the bonds that tie people to live within the law. As Taylor (2001) points out, “A person is free to commit delinquent acts because his ties to the conventional order have somehow been broken” (p. 372). On the other hand, when the ties are strong, an individual is not free to act outside of the standard rules and conventions. According to his theory, social bonds are made up of four elements: 1. Attachment; 2. Commitment; 3. Involvement; and 4. Moral