1968
DOI: 10.2307/799834
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Opiate Use, Addiction, and Relapse

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1971
1971
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The most notable exception to the diminislhed attention to general explanations of deviant behavior is a form of social learning theory developed first by Robert L. Burgess and Ronald L. Akers as differential association-reinforcement theory (Burgess and Akers, 1966;Akers et al, 1968) and elaborated on later by Akers (1973;. As the name which Burgess and Akers originally chose to apply to this theoretical perspective makes clear, it was constructed as a revision of Edwin H. Sutherland's differential association theory (Sutherland, 1947;Sutherland and Cressey, 1974) in terms of general behavioral reinforcement theory (Skinner, 1953;1959;Bandura and Walters, 1963;Bandura, 1969;Staats, 1975).1 Social learning theory as a general perspective in deviance is part of a larger move toward incorporation of modern behaviorism into sociological theory (Homans, 1961;Burgess and Bushell, 1969;Kunkel, 1975;Hamblin et al, 1971;Emerson, 1969;1972;Kunkel and Nagasawa, 1973;Burgess and Nielsen, 1974;Chadwick-Jones, 1976; for reviews of the relevance of behavioral theory for sociology see Friedrichs, 1974;Tarter, 1973).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most notable exception to the diminislhed attention to general explanations of deviant behavior is a form of social learning theory developed first by Robert L. Burgess and Ronald L. Akers as differential association-reinforcement theory (Burgess and Akers, 1966;Akers et al, 1968) and elaborated on later by Akers (1973;. As the name which Burgess and Akers originally chose to apply to this theoretical perspective makes clear, it was constructed as a revision of Edwin H. Sutherland's differential association theory (Sutherland, 1947;Sutherland and Cressey, 1974) in terms of general behavioral reinforcement theory (Skinner, 1953;1959;Bandura and Walters, 1963;Bandura, 1969;Staats, 1975).1 Social learning theory as a general perspective in deviance is part of a larger move toward incorporation of modern behaviorism into sociological theory (Homans, 1961;Burgess and Bushell, 1969;Kunkel, 1975;Hamblin et al, 1971;Emerson, 1969;1972;Kunkel and Nagasawa, 1973;Burgess and Nielsen, 1974;Chadwick-Jones, 1976; for reviews of the relevance of behavioral theory for sociology see Friedrichs, 1974;Tarter, 1973).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is these phenomena, particularly initiation, which we assume are culture-bound, and may merit ideographic explanation based on analysis of the setting of drug use. Of course, this does not deny that ideographic causal processes may in turn be explained nomothetically as instances of more general learning mechanisms (Wikler, 1965;Akers, Burgess, and Johnson, 1968); ideographic theory is concerned with identifying and explaining the specific stimulus and reinforcement components in a particular social and cultural environment. We shall first set forth and justify the "relative deprivation-differential anticipation" theory in terms of a few gross dimensions and ethnographic impressions, then describe our efforts to test this view by sibling comparisons.…”
Section: Theory Testedmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Social learning theory offers a reformulation of DA theory [9][10][11]; Akers et al propose the following pattern of social processes leading to (or away from) deviant behavior:…”
Section: Theoretical Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%