Merton's Strain Theory

This particular work will consist of a critical theoretical review and a comparative analysis on two criminological theories. For the comparison I have chosen Marx’s theory of crime and Merton’s strain theory of deviance. My critical comparison analysis will emphasise the central concepts and arguments within both theories and how each theory explains crime. The analysis will then explore modern day studies in which have stemmed from these theories as well as explore the many similarities and differences between these two theories. Exploring the strengths and weaknesses in both approaches and concluding that although both theories are

Strain theory and New Deviancy Theory (NDT) are mirror images of those above. Strain theory understands human nature to be socially constructed, where, committing a crime is produced by society not from individual instincts, favouring a deterministic perspective but also recognising that individuals rationalise from inside their determined position to achieve their aspirations. However, methods of innovation, ritualism, retreatism, or rebellion are not included under human rationality. Combining voluntaristic and determinacy is a main feature in NDT, although, they argue that while individuals are born free, they lose their agency in societal frameworks that manage behaviour; the state. The problem with this is that it ignores class conflict and therefore denies the basic causes of crime.

Each of these three contemporary sociological theories of crime are similar in that they focus mainly on crime in poor or disadvantaged areas. This focus is obvious with social conflict theory and social disorganization theory but not as much with rational choice theory although it is there. With rational choice theory the concept of what is to be gained

Why do people commit certain crimes? Crimes are committed for many different reasons by people, but there is category of people who commit crimes in response to a State in which is biasedly against them and is posed to create some sort of statement and in many instances poverty can contribute to crime. Lets take the instance that if someone has grown up in a situation of poverty and is in a hopeless situation some individuals given those circumstances will turn to crime to get out of their poor conditions. Some may argue it is not an excuse because they are many who are poor who do not commit crime but on the contrary there are also many who are rich that do commit crime and get away with it due to their power or legitimacy. So we see that clearly if the conditions are bad or poor for somebody chances are that they is a higher possibility that some of those people might be involved in crime. There are some determinants that factor out in this consideration which is depending on the area and environment the individual surrounds themselves around with, there is a saying that “you are a product of your own environment”, due to this proposition the poor people get lack of opportunity to network with wealthy and educated individuals up in the hierarchy. They can only resort to the streets because of their environment, these people grew up in poverty and all around them is gang-affiliates, violent and drugs. The norms is that society considers

"When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in, he has no choice but to become an outlaw," (Kazi, 2017). The modern societies around the world put a high importance on preventing criminal activity and rectifying behavior that leads to crime. In an ongoing struggle against corruption, many sociologists, and psychologists have done in-depth research to understand what is the cause of crime in our society. Initially, in 1893, Emile Durkheim first came up with the idea called Anomie Theory to explain why offenses take place in our communities. Durkheim reported that crimes took place in our society because there was a lack of ethical norms and social standards within our communities (Walsh, 2018).However, almost half a century later, Robert K. Merton developed Merton's Strain Theory to thoroughly explain why some people in our society are more likely to commit crimes than the others who don’t. Merton’s Strain Theory argues that corruption not only occurs in our communities because we lack norms in our society, but are also caused by the strains that are present among us as individuals which influence people to commit the crime. In his explanation, people will resort to achieving success through illegitimate means when they are blocked from acquiring success through legitimate means (Walsh, 2018). After studying the classical strain theories, I think that Merton’s Strain Theory explains street crimes such as robbery, theft, assault, and drug dealing better than

In the 1950’s, Cohen (1955) took Merton’s theory of crime further by focusing on gang delinquency within the working class demographic. Cohen used the central idea of the anomie theory but narrowed its focus on this particular subculture and elaborated it in order to explain the characteristics of gang delinquency.

Brym, R.J., & Lie, J., & Rytina, S. (2010) Deviance and Crime. Sociology: Your Compass for a New World. 3rd Canadian Edition. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Toronto: Nelson

The aim of this essay is to compare, contrast and evaluate two sociological theories of crime causation and two psychological theories of crime causation.

On December 14, 2012 a very deadly and upsetting incident happened in Newtown, Connecticut. The murderer was later revealed as Adam Lanza. He was a 20 year old man who had been said to have been diagnosed with a sensory integration disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder. For Lanza, growing up could be considered arduous. He had been in and out of treatment for multiple said “diagnoses” and other undiagnosed “problems”. He also took medication for his supposed OCD. His parents often would mistake his odd behaviors as a simple childhood or teenage stage. Before the school shooting, Lanza had killed his mother by lethal force at her Newton house. Lanza had shot 6 children and 20 adults fatally. After all was done, Lanza had committed suicide by shooting himself in the head.

Throughout the years, the association between a criminal offense and a criminal have become more relevant. Although there are many theories that try to illustrate the concept of why crimes happen, no theory has a profound influence of understanding an individual’s nature, relationship, development, and a society itself (Coleman & Ganong, 2014). To further explain, “theories of crime are defined in relation to modernity, spanning their development from the enlightenment to the present, with the advent of postmodernism” (Miller, 2012, p. 1798). In other words, theories of crime are an approach to understanding an individuals behaviour and actions in their environment, society, and themselves that may lead to crime. Nevertheless, within this paper, it will be comparing the case of

The second theory I would like to discuss is the Strain theory. The strain theory basically states that crime breeds in the gap, imbalance, or disjunction between culturally induced aspirations for economic success and structurally distributed possibilities of achievement. The theory assumes fairly uniform economic success aspirations across social class and the theory attempts to explain why crime is concentrated among the lower classes that have the least legitimate opportunities for achievement. It is the combination of the cultural emphasis and the social structure which produces intense pressure for

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

This theory posits that criminal behavior is a result of disorganization and strain. This theory also seeks to explain, “how people living in deteriorated neighborhoods react to social isolation and economic deprivation. ” This theory advocates the view, that, as a result of these conditions, the lower socioeconomic class individuals form a separate and distinct sub culture whose values, norms and rules are the polar opposite of the society’s. Cohen’s Delinquent Subcultural Theory and Cloward and Ohlin’s Theory of Differential Opportunity will be used under the umbrella Cultural Deviance Theory of Crime to explain juvenile involvement in gangs with relation to Trinidad and

Some members of delinquent gangs may be the sole carriers of a particular subculture in a particular location, and some are shared. For example conflict subcultures are shared by rival fighting gangs among whom individual and group status involves values related to defense of turf and reputation and norms loyal of these values. Some subcultures oriented to theft and other forms of property crime which they are connected with a particular group. Some property crime involves more organizing and planning in order to succeed. Other crimes such as mugging may involve only one person who shares the same subculture as the larger group. In an article by Terry William’s it states that delinquent subcultures contain elements of both youth and adult cultures. It also stated that to speak of youth culture is to symbolize a subculture of the larger adult-dominated and institutionally defined culture (1989). Many of criminal subculture shares a symbolic relationship with their customs, manly the people

This book attempts to conduct research in order to extend the field of criminology, not any other matter. Sutherland was attempting to bring attention to an area of criminal behaviour that criminologists had not previously studied. At this time, theories of criminal behaviour placed a large emphasis on poverty being the cause of crime or on other social conditions and personal traits which