<Li> Delinquents are not immune to the demands of conforming </Li> <P> Although this theory of drift has not been widely supported by empirical tests, it remains a key idea in criminology despite not answering why some conform and others don't . </P> <P> Travis Hirschi adopted Toby's concept of an investment in conventionality or "stake in conformity". He stressed the rationality in the decision whether to engage in crime and argued that a person was less likely to choose crime if they had strong social bonds . </P> <P> Hirschi has since moved away from his bonding theory, and in co-operation with Michael R. Gottfredson, developed a general theory or "self - control theory" in 1990 . Akers (1991) argued that a major weakness of this new theory was that Gottfredson and Hirschi did not define self - control and the tendency toward criminal behavior separately . By not deliberately operationalizing self - control traits and criminal behavior or criminal acts individually, it suggests that the concepts of low self - control and propensity for criminal behavior are the same . Hirschi and Gottfredson (1993) rebutted Akers argument by suggesting it was actually an indication of the consistency of general theory . That is, the theory is internally consistent by conceptualizing crime and deriving from that a concept of the offender's traits . The research community remains divided on whether the general theory is sustainable but there is emerging confirmation of some of its predictions (e.g. LaGrange & Silverman: 1999) </P>

According to social control theory crime is a result of weak or broken social bond