User:Mobleym/sandbox/New Sandbox

Sykes and Matza’s Neutralization Theory in Crime

Sykes and Matza’s Neutralization theory looks at how criminals perceive their choices and rationalize their decisions to commit crime in ways that make it acceptable through their views. Ingram, J. R., & Hinduja, S. (2008). Neutralizing Music Piracy: An Empirical Examination. Deviant Behavior, 29(4), 334–366. Criminals use neutralization to rationalize and defend their actions by using the five neutralization techniques: Denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of the victim, condemnation of the condemners and appeal to higher loyalties. Siponen, M., & Vance, A. (2010). Neutralization: New Insights into the Problem of Employee Information Systems Security Policy Violations. MIS Quarterly, 34(3), 487. In looking at the theory of neutralization research must be done over multiple types of criminal activity. This activity can range from petty crimes through IS security policy violations in the workplace to hardcore street offenders mentality. Topalli, V. (2006). The Seductive Nature of Autotelic Crime: How Neutralization Theory Serves as a Boundary Condition for Understanding Hardcore Street Offending. Sociological Inquiry, 76(4), 475–501. What can be concluded from this research is that Sykes and Matza’s neutralization theory’s five techniques have had an impact on many different types of criminals. These techniques play a role in how criminals are able to rationalize their criminal activity in their minds.

= = Notes = =

Cromwell, P., & Thurman, Q. (2003). the devil made me do it: use of neutralizations by shoplifters. Deviant Behavior, 24(6), 535.

Ingram, J. R., & Hinduja, S. (2008). Neutralizing Music Piracy: An Empirical Examination. Deviant Behavior, 29(4), 334–366.

Siponen, M., & Vance, A. (2010). Neutralization: New Insights into the Problem of Employee Information Systems Security Policy Violations. MIS Quarterly, 34(3), 487.

Topalli, V. (2006). The Seductive Nature of Autotelic Crime: How Neutralization Theory Serves as a Boundary Condition for Understanding Hardcore Street Offending. Sociological Inquiry, 76(4), 475–501.