criminology
social control
Start
durkheim's theory of social control
- Social Control: Crime must be kept in check by social institutions- such as education and religion- that strengthen social solidarity and maintain order.
- Socialization: These institutions socialize individuals to internalize rules, values, and norms, which reduces the need for direct coercion.
- Anomie and Social Control: However, in times of rapid social change, or a lack of appropriate bonds, old norms weaken, which can lead to anomie. This state of reduced social control causes higher deviance.
CASE STUDY: NIKOLAS CRUZ
FAMILY
SCHOOL
Nikolas' combination of social isolation and concerning online activity also support Durkheim's theory, as his isolation would have meant that he lacked appropriate social connections to encourage conformity to the rules and laws of society. His online activity may have contributed to this, as he may have been encouraged by online communities to believe in deviant moral codes and values rather than socially accepted ones.
Nikolas underwent severe family disruption as his adoptive mother died shortly before the attack. This shows that his connection with his parental figures was weakened, as his mother being dead meant that she was no longer there to reinforce social norms and values. According to Durkheim's theory, this lack of connection increased the likelihood of Nikolas committing crime.
Nikolas also had a poor attachment to school figures and peers, as he had limited educational commitment and therefore little incentive to attend school. This means that he lacked a connection to his schoolmates and teachers, which increases his likelihood of committing crime according to Durkheim's theory, as he would not have cared to confrom to the values of the school as an institution.
APPLICATION OF THEORY
Overall, we can understand that, according to Durkheim's theory, Nikolas' crimes were due to the rise of anomie, the breakdown of social integration, reduced social control, and the failure of boundary maintenance. This means that as Nikolas' social bonds were weak, shared values no longer effectively guided him when making decisions, which meant that he did not feel bound by traditional societal constraints. As his bonds were weak or severed, he was free to act in selfish or antisocial ways without fear of breaking societal boundaries.
conclusion
In conclusion, Nikolas' case strongly supports Durkheim's theory, as he lacked appropriate bonds to discourage him from committing crimes, in all areas of his social life. In response to the question, it is likely that a lack of social connections increases the likelihood of crime. However, we should also acknowledge that there are many other factors, such as biology or individual differences, that may have contributed to Nikolas' crimes, and we should take a holistic approach to understanding why crimes occur.
Durkheim's theory of social control
Maryam Nasiha
Created on February 10, 2026
Start designing with a free template
Discover more than 1500 professional designs like these:
View
Winter Presentation
View
Hanukkah Presentation
View
Vintage Photo Album
View
Nature Presentation
View
Halloween Presentation
View
Tarot Presentation
View
Vaporwave presentation
Explore all templates
Transcript
criminology
social control
Start
durkheim's theory of social control
CASE STUDY: NIKOLAS CRUZ
FAMILY
SCHOOL
Nikolas' combination of social isolation and concerning online activity also support Durkheim's theory, as his isolation would have meant that he lacked appropriate social connections to encourage conformity to the rules and laws of society. His online activity may have contributed to this, as he may have been encouraged by online communities to believe in deviant moral codes and values rather than socially accepted ones.
Nikolas underwent severe family disruption as his adoptive mother died shortly before the attack. This shows that his connection with his parental figures was weakened, as his mother being dead meant that she was no longer there to reinforce social norms and values. According to Durkheim's theory, this lack of connection increased the likelihood of Nikolas committing crime.
Nikolas also had a poor attachment to school figures and peers, as he had limited educational commitment and therefore little incentive to attend school. This means that he lacked a connection to his schoolmates and teachers, which increases his likelihood of committing crime according to Durkheim's theory, as he would not have cared to confrom to the values of the school as an institution.
APPLICATION OF THEORY
Overall, we can understand that, according to Durkheim's theory, Nikolas' crimes were due to the rise of anomie, the breakdown of social integration, reduced social control, and the failure of boundary maintenance. This means that as Nikolas' social bonds were weak, shared values no longer effectively guided him when making decisions, which meant that he did not feel bound by traditional societal constraints. As his bonds were weak or severed, he was free to act in selfish or antisocial ways without fear of breaking societal boundaries.
conclusion
In conclusion, Nikolas' case strongly supports Durkheim's theory, as he lacked appropriate bonds to discourage him from committing crimes, in all areas of his social life. In response to the question, it is likely that a lack of social connections increases the likelihood of crime. However, we should also acknowledge that there are many other factors, such as biology or individual differences, that may have contributed to Nikolas' crimes, and we should take a holistic approach to understanding why crimes occur.