In control-balance theory, the two types of deviance that are referred to are:

Table of Contents Show

Main proponent
Critical appreciation & relevance
Implication for criminal policy
Primary literature
Secondary literature

This volume puts forth an integrated theory of deviance referred to as control balance; the central premise of the theory is that the total amount of control people are subjected to, relative to the control they can exercise, will affect the probability and type of deviant behavior.

The author conceives of control balance as a continuation or temporary culmination of the collective efforts of previous crime and deviance scholars. In an effort to overcome some of the problems associated with simple theories of crime and deviance, he identifies four features (breadth, comprehensiveness, precision, and depth) that must be incorporated in successful general theories and highlights these features by reassessing the simple theories described earlier. The author also covers two popular methods, invention and elaboration, of building better theory and evaluates the practice and promise of each method against the backdrop of the four features. He advocates theoretical integration as an approach for building general theory, presents a framework for integrating theories, and specifies a central causal process called control balance around which the paradigm for integrating theories can be focused. Finally, consideration is paid to contingencies under which the control balance process is likely to operate with greater or lesser force, the extent to which the control balance process is consistent with current evidence about deviant behavior, and further research necessary to evaluate the control balance theory effectively. 350 references and 5 figures

According to the Control Balance Theory, both the probability of deviant behavior occurring and the characteristic form of deviation are determined by the relationship between the control that a person is exposed to and the control that he exercises himself.

Main proponent

Charles R. Tittle

Theory

The Control Balance Theory has its starting point in the observation that other control theories only consider forms of control that affect an individual from the outside. Charles Tittle’s Control Balance Theory, on the other hand, emphasizes that every human being is not only passively exposed to control, but also actively exercises control over others. The relationship between actively exercised and self-experienced control is important here. Tittle describes this relationship as a ‘control ratio’. This “control ratio” can be either balanced or unbalanced. For Tittle, the type of imbalance affects the specific expression of the deviance it causes. It distinguishes between three states:

If the experienced and the exercised control are in balance, “Control Balance” exists. In this state, deviant behavior is unlikely.
If someone exercises more control than he or she experiences, there is a control surplus. In this state, individuals tend to engage in autonomous forms of crime. This refers to acts of a more indirect nature. There are few direct confrontations with the victim.
If an individual experiences more control than he or she exercises, there is a control deficit. Repressive forms of deviance occur. These are characterized by direct confrontations with the victim.

Tittle assumes that every person strives for the greatest possible degree of autonomy – in other words, wishes to influence the relationship of control in his favour. An imbalance in the control ratio therefore creates a predisposition to deviant behaviour. If there is a control deficit, an attempt is made to compensate this by deviant behaviour. If, on the other hand, there is a control surplus, there is the temptation to extend it even further.

However, a predisposition to deviant behaviour alone is not sufficient for this behaviour to occur.

Two prerequisites must be fulfilled in order for the predisposition to become a motivation for deviance:

An individual must perceive the control deficit or control surplus and recognize that his own control ratio can be influenced by a certain deviant behavior. The deviant behaviour must therefore be regarded as suitable to reduce the deficit or to further increase the surplus.
The individual must experience a negative emotion, especially humiliation. This is perceived as provocation, which in turn justifies deviance.

Deviant behaviour occurs when a motivated individual has an opportunity to act and constraints can be overcome. Such inhibitions can be moral convictions, self-control or fear of punishment.

Tittle links very specific forms of crime to different levels of control ratio, as shown in the table below.

	Control-deficit (Repression)	Control-Balance	Control-surplus (Autonomy)
	strong	medium	small		small	medium	strong
Forms of deviance	„submission“Sexual submission, as a form of oppression of others	„defiance“Disobedience to authorities, strikes	„predation“e.g. theft, assaults, rape	none conformity	„exploitation“e.g. targeted influence on politicians, contract killings, price agreements	„plunder“e.g. environmental pollution by oil companies, arbitrary taxation of dependents	„decadence“torture for sexual satisfaction, sadistic humiliation of others

Tittle integrates several other theories into his Control Balance theory. In particular, he borrowed from Agnew’s General Strain-Theory and Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime.

Critical appreciation & relevance

A big advantage, but at the same time a weak point of the Control Balance theory is its complexity. Unlike most other theories, it is able to explain many different forms of crime. One of the reasons for this is that it integrates other theories and thus provides a framework in which the different factors of effect can be seen in relation to each other.

One problem with Control Balance Theory is that its complexity makes it very difficult to evaluate. Tittles focus on autonomy as a driving motivation of people can also be criticized. He does not take into account that people also have other drives and needs.

Implication for criminal policy

According to Tittle, (social) control only has an inhibitory effect on deviant behaviour if it finds a healthy mediocrity. On the one hand, social structures should be strived for in which social control and self-control can be developed in the sense of Hirschi’s Bond Theory and Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime. This would mean that the classical institutions (e.g. family, school) must be promoted to the extent that they can effectively exercise control over the individual. On the other hand, the theory also implies that this control must be limited. Oppression and steep hierarchies, which distribute power very unequally, should therefore be avoided.

According to the Control Balance Theory it is therefore not enough to address only certain target groups. It must be possible to shape the reality of people’s lives in such a way that as few control deficits and control surpluses as possible arise.