Critisms

• The SLT only focuses on the role of nurture. ignoring the role of nature n explaining criminal behaviour. Some Psychologist have argued that there is a "criminal gene" , and that without an inherited tendency to commit crime ,people cannot learn to be criminals. It might be that nurture and nature have to interact before someone becomes a criminal.
• The theory does not explain how criminal behaviour started in the first place. Even if we accept that each generations of criminals has earned its behaviours from the previous generation ,there has to be a time where criminal behaviour first started. The SLT does not tell us about the origins of criminal behaviour.
• The theory does not account for people who turn to crime ,even though they have not been exposed to criminal role models. Evidence suggest that there are individuals from law abiding families with good upbringings who unexpectedly commit crimes .In some cases, this is better explained by nature ;some of these offenders may have parts of the brain that do not function normally.
• If the SLT is correct then it should be easier to reduce crime .If criminal behaviour is strengthened through reinforcement ,then it should be reduced by receiving punishment and seeing others being punished .However many people still commit crimes despite seeing the negative consequences or reoffend after being punished themselves. This might suggest its in their nature to be a criminal; it is something that cannot be changed and therefore not learned.
• SLT assumes that people learn behaviour in similar ways by observing and imitating others, but individuals vary greatly in how they process, interpret, and respond to observed behaviours. Factors like personality traits, previous experiences, and cognitive abilities. It thereby lacks generatability .
• SLT does not consider biological influences, such as genetic predispositions, brain chemistry, or hormonal effects on behaviour. For example, certain behaviours may be influenced by innate factors rather than just by observing others. And thereby too reductionist.