Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory posits that, particularly during childhood, individuals can learn new information and new modes of behaviour by watching other people interact with their environments. As Stephen W. Verrill summarises, the theory is used to explain “minor forms of juvenile offending and substance use” in the developed world, though it has partially accounted for broader offences, including “illegal computer behaviour”, “intimate partner violence” and “digital piracy” (2008, p. 2). Social learning has applications for violent offending, particularly among children and young people, and could be used to help to generate theories of violent young offending in fragile states.

While its foundational concept seems relatively straightforward, social learning theory provides the backbone of much criminological study, in terms of understanding both criminogenic risk factors and elements of social control. It establishes that children and young people learn about

120

168

drug use and other commodities through association with peers, that children learn aggression and violent modes of behaviour from their families, communities and school environments, and that people learn to conceptualise morality and “right and wrong” from general modes of behaviour common to their societies.

Figure 58 Social Learning Theory and the Learning of Violent Behaviour Through Observation

Such theories of social learning are associated with Albert Bandura, who officially pioneered the idea in 1973. In its contemporary form, social learning theory is also connected with Ronald L. Aker's theory of differential reinforcement and association (1977). This theory posits that “The primary learning mechanism in social behaviour is operant (instrumental) conditioning in which behaviour is shaped by the stimuli which follow, or are consequences of the behaviour”, rather than by behaviour itself (Akers et al, 1979, p. 637-638). Social learning is a type of mimicry, whereby behaviour is observed and copied by onlookers based upon its consequences, rather than upon the actions of which that behaviour is comprised. It is the combined observation of action and consequence that determines the type of behaviour learned by the observer (See Figure 58).

In this way, “Social behaviour is acquired both through direct conditioning and through imitation or modelling of others' behaviour” so that “Behaviour is strengthened through reward (positive reinforcement) and avoidance of punishment (negative reinforcement) or weakened by aversive stimuli (positive punishment) and loss of reward (negative punishment)” (p. 638).

This thesis argues that, within fragile states where both social and military violence are generally widespread, children and young people readily observe the reward of violent behaviour committed by those who are more socially and physically powerful than they are, without witnessing those individuals receiving any immediate punishment because state and law enforcement capacities are too weak to detect such offences. This has led to the emergence of a new glorification

169

of violence within Yemeni society among young people and new generations in particular121. In this way, children are pressured into learning aggressive and antisocial modes of behaviour through the observation of such behaviour in adults and other children without any negative consequences, whereby the perpetrators of violence are readily and frequently rewarded for their actions with physical and economic gains. As Akers summarises: “Whether deviant or conforming behaviour is acquired and persists depends on past and present rewards or punishments for the behaviour and the rewards and punishments attached to alternative behaviour” – a statement that provides the entire basis of differential reinforcement.

Social learning also ties into other forms of social control. In particular, it has been proposed that social learning is strongly reinforced by communal constructions of right and wrong, so that if important individuals who exert a strong social influence on children and young people openly and directly reject a form of antisocial behaviour, this may, in some cases, be sufficient to stem delinquency in individuals, despite the perceived benefits of aggressive behaviour models. Likewise, delinquent peers who perceive criminal behaviour patterns as necessary or positive can reinforce the negative effects of social learning by providing another form of reward for antisocial behaviour – increased social standing for individuals within groups.

This method of entrenching harmful behaviour patterns is most commonly observed in the developed world within gang culture, where criminal activity is used by children and young people to generate “street cred” and rise to higher organisational levels within criminal networks (Simon Harding, 2011). In Yemen, it may also be associated with protecting tribal interests, defending property rights, or protecting family reputations, as it is in cases of violence committed against the state, violence committed through the resolution of land and water disputes, and violence committed in the pursuit of justice and honour killings respectively. It is found that retributive violence in Yemen is highly prevalent, where revenge killings are seen as socially acceptable in a range of criminal circumstances (Stakeholder Interview, Ministry of Justice, 17 August 2011). In this way, “Behaviour is said to be reinforced when repeated episodes are met with a response by others that influences the actor to engage in the behaviour again under similar circumstances” (Teresa Vigil Bäckström et al, 1994, p. 149). Social learning theory may be viewed as contradicting deviance theory, however both theories actually work relatively nicely in tandem. It should be noted that, while deviance theory analyses criminal behaviour patterns and the construction of criminal identities as a product of the broad social rejection of offenders through labelling, social learning refers to the acceptance of such individuals within criminal sub-groups or oppositional cultures buried inside larger societies.