ure both provide support of each approach and find an absence of support for each of the approaches. Further, within the general area of the control of social behaviors, the several different approaches to such control which have been advanced cannot be divorced from one another. Again, existing studies in the literature both provide support and find an absence of support for each of the several approaches. One school of thought holds that stiff penalties should be levied against offenders, both as a deterrent to repetition of the behavior by the offenders and as a deterrent to non-offenders (Goldberg-Ambrose, 1989, pp. 949-955). This approach, while highly popular among the general public and conservative politicians is not supported by most sociologists (Kerstetter, 1990, pp. 267-313).
Sociologist Ronald Akers proposed a social learning explanation for violent criminal behavior (Bernard, 1991, p. 233). This theory explains violent behavior as a manifestation of operant conditioning. Research has related a propensity to engage in criminal misconduct to a number of different factors (Blumstein & Cohen, 1987, pp. 985-991). Prominent among these factors are the following: (1) low measured IQ, (2) parental criminality, (3) disruptive family situation, (4) lower social class, (5) low income, (6) high unemployment, and (7) drug and alcohol abuse. Not all of these factors are relevant to an offender, however, the circumstances associated with these factors should be assessed by criminal justice personnel in deciding what action to take in a specific case, and not the fact, as an example, that an offender has a low measured IQ and is unemployed.
The United States has an epidemic of family violence (Arbetter, 1995, pp. 6-12). The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) found that only about half the women who suffered domestic abuse between 1987 and 1991 reported the incidents to the police (Bureau of Justice Statistic
...