Provide An Argument For Or Against The Use Of Integrative Theories. Determine Whether These Theories Clarify Or Confuse Our Explanations For Crime.

Criminology and penology have undergone diverse developments in terms of determine the causality of crime during the past decades . More criminologists atomic number 18 now open to red-hot views and ideas and ar no longer hindered or confined to the merits and limitations of a single shoal of thought as compared with another . Criminologists have adopted integrating theories or consolidative /multi-disciplinary approach in the pursuit and better understanding of the factors that precede and in consequence , lead to the perpetration of crimesThis approach in seeing crime is not exactly a sunrise(prenominal) set but it is a concept that has gained wider acceptance in the past twenty years after the pioneering and individual studies of Robert K . Merton , Edwin H Sutherland and Albert K . Cohen (Messner , Krone and Liska , 1989 . Even though skeptics dissemble that following integrative theories in studies cause confusion , specially in terms of form of substance , since integrating methodologies are diverse its subject could either be detailed or general /broad in scope . But the really nature of the integrative theory that is so prone to attacks by skeptics is its strongest and most enduring qualityGregg Barak (1998 ) discoursed that integration theory is involved in bridging opposite but comprehensive models / theories producing a synthesized and cohesive school of thought . Confusion and dilution of ideas could be avoided with a conscious sudor in determining the best methodology to tackle a chosen subject . Barak (2002 ) discussed the different ways of seeing integration and integrating bodies of theories and knowledgeAs mentioned earlier , there are a change of ways to discuss a subject It could either be specific or extensive . For example , a criminologist could study a single form of criminality (i .e . juvenile criminality or rape ) or a broader issue (i .e . forcefulness against women and homosexuals using theories on sociology , economics , law , biological and pagan etc , as foundations of studyIntegrating bodies of theories could be constructed in a positivist or modernist manner .

Under the positivist method , studies could be watchful through structural , conceptual or by soaking up . Structural incorporates the strongest components of existing theories and models to come up with a new format . Under this type of methodology , Braithwaite (1989 ) suggested that a side-by-side integration is a more stable layout , especially for sequencing components of the study - outcomes are dependent on the results preceding it . Conceptual methodology brings unneurotic different theories and demonstrates how these different theories could achieve degree of results at varying levels of analysis Assimilation on the other hand , unites different theories into large frameworks , regardless of the interaction of the theories with one anotherModernist constructions are disconnected into three methodologies - socio-micro model , socio-macro model and micro-macro model . The socio-micro model deals with the categorizing sets or groups of people and their behavior towards the enactment of crime . An example of this model was discussed by Wilson and Herrnstein (1985 ) in their book , Crime and Human character , claiming that there is a connection between criminality , biota , familial traditions , education and mass media . The socio-macro model...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper