Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Differential Association Theory: A Sociological Explanation of Criminal Behavior, Lecture notes of Criminology

edwin sutherland differential association theory narrates how interacting with other people change views on criminal values. Differential association theory is categorized as criminal predictive theory.

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 03/31/2022

lana87
lana87 🇺🇸

4.4

(18)

318 documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
(D6, T&L IV) Differential Association Theory.
(Expanded to include Differential Identification and Neutralization)
When: 1924 and subsequent editions
Circumstances: depression, WWII:corporate malingering;
specialization of "criminology"
Where: Chicago, later other universities
Who: Sutherland, Cressey, Sykes and Matza
Broad view: Chicago School--ecological perspective, cultural pluralism
Shift from physical, psychological, economic forces to
emphasis on "sociological determinism"; Simmel vs. Marx:
competition --> community versus stratification --> problems.
Approach: "Stagnated at social psychological level" --> learning
emphasis.
Attitude: pluralistic ideals; reform the business for profit culture.
Role: "Criminologists"
Metaphor: Criminal Behavior System: 1. Deviance as interactional
outcome, (2) homogeneous social behavior
Root Cause: (l) learning (2) from others (3) in groups (4)
techniques and (5) motives, (6) as a consequence of favorable
definitions over unfavorable ones (7) because of frequency-
duration-priority-intensity, (8) as in all learning, (9) but
not from same needs as generate non-deviant behavior.
Concepts: "definitions favorable to..."; careers; white collar
crime; victimology; differential identification, techniques
of neutralization.
Variables: subculture, conflict, learning: frequency, duration,
priority, intensity.
Assertion: law is an instrument of conflict; punishment is means
of law and order; (1) subcultures influence crime rates;
(2) social differentiation --> punishment; opportunity is
relevant to crime but not sufficient condition; (3) poverty
per se does not generate crime.
Works: Sutherland--Criminology, 1924; Sutherland and Cressey--same
text through several editions; Sellin: ethnic, racial, national
conflict, 1928, 1938; Sykes and Matza, "techniques of
neutralization."
Data: variety of criminal types and their characteristics;
typological analysis; analytical induction.
Product: theory of crime; taxonomies.
Policy: avoidance of class bias and avoidance of economic determinism
Relationship: reaction to earlier-theories; primitive
statement of social control; neglect of labeling perspective.
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Differential Association Theory: A Sociological Explanation of Criminal Behavior and more Lecture notes Criminology in PDF only on Docsity!

(D6, T&L IV) Differential Association Theory. (Expanded to include Differential Identification and Neutralization) When: 1924 and subsequent editions Circumstances: depression, WWII:corporate malingering; specialization of "criminology" Where: Chicago, later other universities Who: Sutherland, Cressey, Sykes and Matza Broad view: Chicago School--ecological perspective, cultural pluralism Shift from physical, psychological, economic forces to emphasis on "sociological determinism"; Simmel vs. Marx: competition --> community versus stratification --> problems. Approach: "Stagnated at social psychological level" --> learning emphasis. Attitude: pluralistic ideals; reform the business for profit culture. Role: "Criminologists" Metaphor: Criminal Behavior System: 1. Deviance as interactional outcome, (2) homogeneous social behavior Root Cause: (l) learning (2) from others (3) in groups (4) techniques and (5) motives, (6) as a consequence of favorable definitions over unfavorable ones (7) because of frequency- duration-priority-intensity, (8) as in all learning, (9) but not from same needs as generate non-deviant behavior. Concepts: "definitions favorable to..."; careers; white collar crime; victimology; differential identification, techniques of neutralization. Variables: subculture, conflict, learning: frequency, duration, priority, intensity. Assertion: law is an instrument of conflict; punishment is means of law and order; (1) subcultures influence crime rates; (2) social differentiation --> punishment; opportunity is relevant to crime but not sufficient condition; (3) poverty per se does not generate crime. Works: Sutherland--Criminology, 1924; Sutherland and Cressey--same text through several editions; Sellin: ethnic, racial, national conflict, 1928, 1938; Sykes and Matza, "techniques of neutralization." Data: variety of criminal types and their characteristics; typological analysis; analytical induction. Product: theory of crime; taxonomies. Policy: avoidance of class bias and avoidance of economic determinism Relationship: reaction to earlier-theories; primitive statement of social control; neglect of labeling perspective.

Sutherland, Edwin H. and Donald R. Cressey. 1978. Criminology. 10th ed. NY: Harper & Row. (See Traub & Little, 1994, pp. 188-195. There are two complementary procedures which may be used to put order into criminological knowledge: (1) logical abstraction and (2) differentiation of levels of analysis. In logical abstraction, the emphasis should be on search for what criminals (high in blacks, males, urban-dwellers, and young adults) have in common. To sort out the important factors in the analysis of criminal conduct, it is important to hold the level of analysis constant and to pay attention to the chronological order of the introduction of factors. Criminology may develop contemporary ("mechanistic", "situational", "dynamic") or historical ("developmental") explanations of crime. Both are important but situational analysis has not proved entirely adequate (serving mostly to explain opportunities and not the disposition to crime nor the origins of the criminal's definition of the situation as an opportunity). Therefore, we will focus on a developmental theory. (1) Criminal behavior is learned. 2. Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with other persons in the process of communication. (3). The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs within intimate personal groups. (4) When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (a) techniques of committing the crime, which are sometimes very complicated, sometimes very simple; (b) the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes. (5) The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal codes as favorable or unfavorable. (6) A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law. 7. Differential associations may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity. (8) The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anticriminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning. (9) While criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values, it is not explained by those general needs and values, since noncriminal behavior is an expression of the same needs and values. (notes by D.H.B.) Glaser, Daniel. 1956. "Criminality theories and Behavior Images." American Journal of sociology 61: pp-pp. (See Traub & Little, 1985!, pp. 182-199) The outstanding attempt to formulate an integrative theory of criminality is differential assocation by Sutherland. Sutherland's key

economic position of the offender. (notes by D.H.B.) Sykes, Gresham M., and David Matza. 1957. "Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency." American sociological Review 22: 664-670. (See Sykes & Matza, 1994, 203-213) According to Sutherland, criminals and delinquents learn both techniques and motives (with associated rationalizations and attitudes favorable to the violation of law). Cohen viewed delinnquency in terms of a subculture based on conflict or countervailing values and norms (in opposition to middle class culture). However, it should be noted that (1) there is evidence that delinquents exhibit guilt and shame, (2) there is evidence that delinquents show admiration and respect for law-abiding citizens, (3) there is much evidence that delinquents often draw a sharp line between those who can be victimized and those who cannot, and (4) it is doubtful if many juvenile delinquents are totally immune from the demands for conformity made by the dominant social order (as transmitted by the delinquent's family). In short, the theoretical viewpoint that sees juvenile delinquency as a form of behavior based on the values and norms of a deviant sub-culture in precisely the same way as law-abiding behavior is based on the values and norms of the larger society is open to serious doubt. It is our argument that much delinquency is based on what is essentially an unrecognized extension of defenses to crimes, in the form of justifications for deviance that are seen as valid by the delinquent but not by the legal system or society at large. Such "techniques of neutralization" include: (1) The denial of responsibility, (2) the denial of injury, (3) the denial of the victim, (4) condemnation of the condemners, (5) an appeal to higher loyalties. (Roughly corresponding to (1) it just happened without anyone meaning to, (2) it was just a prank--nobody got hurt, (3) he had it coming, (4) the police get by with worse, (5) we were helping our friends.) Techniques of neutralization may not be powerful enough to fully shield the individual from the force of his own internalized values and the reactions of conforming others, for as we have pointed out, juvenile delinquents often appear to suffer from feelings of guilt and shame when called into account for their deviant behavior. And some delinquents may be so isolated from the world of conformity that techniques of neutralization need not be called into play. (notes by D.H.B.)