Throughout history, theories have been introduced to explain why deviance occurs and ways in which sociologists can predict it. The most influential theoretical approaches are those of the structural, organization of society surrounding delinquency and centers on why those who commit crimes do so. This approach enables sociologist to explain why crime varies in locations and groups. It focuses process, and critical nature, with sub theories that follow the approach 's main ideals. In this paper, we have chosen a theory from each approach to further explain deviance: general strain theory for a structural approach, control balance theory for a process approach, and labeling theory for a critical approach. These theories will be applied to the Tyson book Blood Done Signed My Name and three major crimes that have been identified within it: homicide, rioting, and stalking.
The structural approach, which is a macro approach, focuses on the social environment, the physical makeup and on the distribution of economic and social resources, relationships and the “social forces external to the individual that affect behavior and attitudes” (Barkan 2015). General strain theory falls under the structural approach. Founded by Robert Agnew, general strain theory encompasses the failure to achieve economic goals and non-economic goals, removal of positive stimuli, and the appearance of negative stimuli (Barkan 2015). Barkan states that, in general strain theory, anger leads to an increased
Strain theories of criminal behaviour have been amongst the most important and influential in the field of criminology. Taking a societal approach, strain theories have sought to explain deficiencies in social structure that lead individuals to commit crime (Williams and McShane 2010). Strain theories operate under the premise that there is a societal consensus of values, beliefs, and goals with legitimate methods for achieving success. When individuals are denied access to legitimate methods for achieving success, the result is anomie or social strain. This often leads an individual to resort to deviant or criminal means to obtain the level of success that they are socialized to pursue. This is the basic premise of strain theory. This
This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.
Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike psychological and biological theories they are mostly macro level theories which attempt to explain rates of crime for a group or an area rather than explaining why an individual committed a crime. (Kubrin, 2012). There is however some micro level sociological theories of crime that attempts to explain the individual’s motivation for criminal behavior (Kubrin, 2012). Of the contemporary
Assess the view that crime and deviance are the products of the labelling process (21 marks)
Another theory that many like to refer to would be social disorganization. This philosophy concentrates more on the circumstances in the inner city that affect crimes. They include, but are not limited to, the destruction of homes and neighborhoods, lack of social control, and the presence of gangs or groups who violate the law (Siegel 2010). Other than this theory, there is such thing as the strain theory. This suggests that crime is brought upon communities and individuals by the overwhelming strain that people are feeling when they aspire to reach their personal ambitions but have no way to grasp them. According to Featherstone and Deflem (2003), strain theorists believe that money and power are spread throughout economic classes unequally. They feel as if this frustration and strain built by individuals who are not able to achieve their goals is what influences a person’s choice to commit a crime. Believing this, strain theorists feel that the youth are certain that the only way to obtain what they desire is to join gangs, because they see other gang members in the community prosper with money. However, it is due to a life of crime and unfortunately, the youth feel as if joining the gang will benefit them in the same way.
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 proposal of Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory in explaining criminal deviance is based on three concepts. The first concept is that people
Agnew agrees with the core idea of classic strain theory. However, after further examination of his very own life and that of those around him, he found that “the perceived inability to achieve success through monetary means or middle class status was not a major stressor conducive to crime,” (Agnew, 2001, p.141). In fact, Agnew stated that the major strains conducive to crime are a bit more immediate in nature. To support this claim, psychological literature on aggression and stress suggest that strain involves more than the “pursuit of happiness” (Agnew, 1992). The loss of positively valued stimuli seems to be a larger contributor to juvenile negligence and delinquency.
Schmalleger describes the labeling theory or social reaction theory as one that sees persistent criminal behavior as a result of not, having the chances for normal conduct that follow the negative responses of society to those that have been labeled as criminals. There is an expectation of a continuous increase in crime that is a direct effect of the label that is attached. The result of negative labels creates limited chances that the behavior would change on behalf of the criminal, due in part to societies stigma placed upon them (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 186). Those theorists responsible for the labeling theory that are discussed in our readings during this weeks assignments are listed as Frank Tannenbaum, Edwin M. Lemert, Howard Becker, John Braithwaite and others. When discussion the concept labeling, one must understand some of the most early descriptions of societal reactions to deviance, this can be found in the 1938 works of Frank Tannenbaum who explained the term, tagging. Schmalleger defined tagging as the process whereby an individual is negatively defined by the agencies of justice. Within tagging Edwin M. Limert, used the terminology of primary and secondary deviance, primary being a deviant act that was undertaken to achieve some immediate issue and or problem that may have arisen in the person life and doesn’t intend for the criminal behavior to continue. Secondary deviance
Sociologists have developed six main sociological theories of deviance. Emile Durkheim’s Anomie theory suggests that people become disconnected from society because they feel that the norms are inadequate examples for behavior. Durkheim said, “We must not say that an action shocks the common conscience because it is criminal, but rather that it is criminal because it shocks the common conscience.” The strain theory by Robert K. Merton suggests that American are geared toward deviance because of a lack of legitimate options to attain the monetary goal that Americans emphasize (Tischler, p. 146). Travis Hirschi posed the control theory which focuses on the importance of the people around you to mold you into a regular lifestyle. He said that there are four main points to why someone will become deviant or not: attachment to others, commitment to conformity, involvement
Deviance can be defined as an absence of conformity to the social norm. Not all deviant behavior is necessarily illegal or harmful to individuals, these behaviors can range from standing in another’s personal space to murdering another individual. In some cases, it can be looked upon as a positive change or a unique and favorable act. Although, considered deviant because it is not the social norm, it still can have a very positive social aspect or lead to social change. Culture and the societies within these cultures have a significant impact on what is considered deviant and what is acceptable or even lawful behavior. The degree of deviance is measured by society’s reaction towards the action and the lawful sanctions that may take
Conflict theory and labeling theory are two similar theories in the world of crime. It has been debated whether or not there is a clear line separating the two theories. By evaluating the two theories, the differences between them can become more obvious and it becomes easier to separate the two. In addition to conflict theory and labeling theory, there is another type of theories that are used to explain crime. These theories focus more on a criminal 's lifetime and how their criminal records have evolved over time. Two of the leading theories in this realm of criminology are Moffit’s theory of life course persistent offenders and Sampson and Laub’s age-graded theory of informal social control. These theories both explain why people commit or don 't commit crime. There are similarities between the theories and also differences. By analyzing all four of these theories, a better understanding can be gained related to crime.
Within the social science field, strain theory has been expanded and advanced by many theorists over the last century. Created by Emile Durkheim in a study surrounding suicide, it quickly adapted to other areas of criminology and sociology. Strain theory can explain many forms of crimes, it cannot account for all forms of crime and deviant behaviour within society. Strain is prevalent throughout many forms of societal life, but not all can be linked to the crimes of which are committed by those within society, it tends to turn a blind eye to some forms of crime of which have not been acknowledged by the theorists. Though explicitly arguing the idea that strain theory does not account for all types of deviance, this will also include the arguments which have been put forward to say that strain theory does account for all kinds of crime.
Introduction: Throughout history there have always been many different theories of crime and why people commit crimes. In the late 1930s a new theory rose to the forefront; this theory was called the anomie theory. Anomie means a lack of ethical standards. The anomie theory was proposed by Roberton Merton. It stated that society, as a whole, generally shares the same goals relating to having success in life; whether that is having a family, wealth, power, or just happiness. Society generally agrees that these are things that are to be sought after. Furthermore, Merton proposed that society, as a whole, also has a list of generally accepted ways to achieve such goals (Merton, 1938). Criminal activity, such as robbery, murder, and corruption, are among the things that are not accepted by society as appropriate means to achieve these goals. Merton’s anomie theory was built upon in 1992 by Robert Agnew who developed the general strain theory. General strain theory argues that when members of society are unable to achieve the general goals that society has set forth, they will, in order to avoid further rejection, further alienate themselves from society. Agnew also argued that if these individuals feel as if their shortcomings were a result of their environment failing them they will likely develop very negative feelings towards society, causing them to
Many laws are enacted to punish criminals and protect individuals from violent deviant actions. Privileged Deviance is economically costly because some powerful individuals attempt to escape the consequences of deviant actions. Deviance occurs through interactions between individuals and groups. The labeling theory discusses the social behavior of how and why individuals continue deviant activity to maintain their identity or label. Thio, Taylor, and Schwartz state “the word interaction deviance is a human activity involving more than one person’s act” (Thio, et. al, 2013, p. 35). The theory suggests individuals reflect on their behavior and how others view their actions. The labeling theory can be linked to the symbolic interaction foundation perspective. Understanding deviance and criminal behavior are addressed through the labeling theory. Thio, Taylor, and Schwartz suggest that the deviant act begins with the hypothesis that no act is essentially criminal. Criminality is recognized by individuals who feel powerful through the design of laws and the interpretation of law enforcement. Deviance is determined by the interaction between deviant and nondeviant actions and how the community interprets the actions. Individuals who adhere to the law and promote acceptable behaviors are the main source of labeling. For example; this may include police officers, courts, or school authorities. Defining specific