One afternoon at work, Natalie received a phone call from her daughter’s teacher. It seemed that Brandi had got into trouble, and Natalie would need to meet with Brandi’s teacher and the school principal. Natalie could not imagine what the trouble could be. Brandi was a straight-A student, played soccer, and was part of the school band. She also helped out with chores at home. On the way to the school, Natalie decided she would not jump to conclusions but would hear Brandi’s side of the story. Then, she would let Brandi have a piece of her mind! At school, Natalie met the school principal; Brandi’s teacher; and a crying, red-eyed Brandi. Brandi and two other girls had stolen a pack of cigarettes from a teacher’s purse and were caught smoking in the woods behind the school. Worse, one of the other girls had stolen the teacher’s prescription medication, though Brandi said she did not know anything about that. The principal and teacher said that this was a serious breach of trust and was against school policy. They knew Brandi and were “shocked” that she was involved in this activity. In private consultation with Natalie, they said that Brandi was involved with the wrong crowd, but there was still time to intervene before she developed a pattern of bad behavior. Natalie left the meeting angry with Brandi, but also feeling guilty and responsible. She had been working extra hours and was often busy with her schoolwork. Perhaps she had neglected Brandi or missed important warning signs. She would ground Brandi, but more importantly, she would pay much closer attention to whom she befriended and where she went. Natalie decided she would establish a schedule where she would help the girls’ do their homework. Natalie felt tired. After all the years of guidance and parenting, how could “two stupid tweens” undo all her hard work? She felt she had worked hard teaching Brandi and Jenny how to make good decisions and to know right from wrong. She worried what the next ten years would bring. She pondered the possibilities of other peer influences, alcohol, drugs, and boys. Research differential association theory and social learning theory as applied to criminal behavior and crime using the textbook, the University online library resources, and the Internet. Select two scholarly, peer-reviewed articles for use in this assignment. Based on the scenario, your readings and research, respond to the following: How could Brandi’s behavior be explained using differential association theory? How could Brandi’s behavior be explained using social learning theory? What are the strengths and limitations of these two theories as applied to this example? Be sure to support your responses using the selected resources. Write your initial response in 4–6 paragraphs. Apply APA standards to citation of sources. .

1. One afternoon at work, Natalie received a phone call from her
daughter’s teacher. It seemed that Brandi had got into trouble,
and Natalie would need to meet with Brandi’s teacher and the
school principal. Natalie could not imagine what the trouble
could be. Brandi was a straight-A student, played soccer, and
was part of the school band. She also helped out with chores at
home. On the way to the school, Natalie decided she would not
jump to conclusions but would hear Brandi’s side of the story.
Then, she would let Brandi have a piece of her mind!
At school, Natalie met the school principal; Brandi’s teacher;
and a crying, red-eyed Brandi. Brandi and two other girls had
stolen a pack of cigarettes from a teacher’s purse and were
caught smoking in the woods behind the school. Worse, one of
the other girls had stolen the teacher’s prescription medication,
though Brandi said she did not know anything about that. The
principal and teacher said that this was a serious breach of trust
and was against school policy. They knew Brandi and were
“shocked” that she was involved in this activity. In private
consultation with Natalie, they said that Brandi was involved
with the wrong crowd, but there was still time to intervene
before she developed a pattern of bad behavior.
Natalie left the meeting angry with Brandi, but also feeling
guilty and responsible. She had been working extra hours and
was often busy with her schoolwork. Perhaps she had neglected
Brandi or missed important warning signs. She would ground
Brandi, but more importantly, she would pay much closer
attention to whom she befriended and where she went. Natalie
decided she would establish a schedule where she would help
the girls’ do their homework.
Natalie felt tired. After all the years of guidance and parenting,
how could “two stupid tweens” undo all her hard work? She felt
she had worked hard teaching Brandi and Jenny how to make
good decisions and to know right from wrong. She worried what
the next ten years would bring. She pondered the possibilities of
other peer influences, alcohol, drugs, and boys.

2. Research differential association theory and social learning
theory as applied to criminal behavior and crime using the
textbook, the University online library resources, and the
Internet. Select two scholarly, peer-reviewed articles for use in
this assignment.
Based on the scenario, your readings and research, respond to
the following:
How could Brandi’s behavior be explained using differential
association theory?
How could Brandi’s behavior be explained using social learning
theory?
What are the strengths and limitations of these two theories as
applied to this example?
Be sure to support your responses using the selected resources.
Write your initial response in 4–6 paragraphs. Apply APA
standards to citation of sources.