Objective Strain Theory

There is a range of environmental and individual factors that influence the emotional reaction to subjective strain. The potential utility of distinguishing between subjective strain and the emotional reaction to strain is highlighted by Broidy and Agnew (1997). They argued that males and females often differ in their emotional reaction to subjective strains. Although both males and females may experience anger, the anger of females is more likely to be accompanied by feelings of guilt, depression, and

By applying both classical and strain theory to the crime problem of drug trafficking we can identify and compare their strengths to evaluate which theory is more useful in explaining this crime. Starting with Classical theory, this theory holds some strengths in relation to this crime problem, namely, it’s easy applicability/transferability and the clear definiteness of their answers. Classical theory is able to provide definite answers and solutions to drug trafficking (i.e. it was individual A who committed the crime, the law violated in response to this crime is this, and the violation of this law carries the pre-determined punishment of this) without having to apply consideration for such variables as mitigating circumstances since the

Strain Theory was originally introduced by Emile Durkheim then being studied and improved by other theorist such as Robert Merton (1983) and a few others leading up to 1992 when Robert Agnew studied the strain theory and molded it into his own version known as General Strain Theory. In 1938 Merton’s theory states that society puts pressure or unrealistic goals in people’s mind’s and through lack of means and the inability to obtain those goals, such as buying the larger house with the white picket fence, and not having the means to reach it. This eventually leads those individuals to commit crimes.

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

The General Strain Theory (GST) states that people who commit crimes are pressured into them by negative emotions that result from a variety of life strains. Negative emotions cause them to feel in a negative way and thus creating pressure on them to act in a variety of ways, with crime and violence being one possible response. GST has been explored among many different populations, but what has not been explored was its ability to predict crime of murder. The present study focuses on the role that negative emotions play in producing different types of criminal activity and involvement,

Strain theory is described as the cause of crime due to the social class or environment in which a person grows up in. In our society, people strive to obtain wealth, education, materialistic possessions and power. Due to the environment lower social class people are born into, they are unable to obtain these aspirations through legal means. Feelings of frustration lead to strain and can cause these people to resort to external and illegal means to obtain these resources or lead them to abusing drug substances in an effort to feel better.

A source of this strain that could have led to an influx of violent crime could be unemployment, without a job or work a person is more likely to commit a crime, even a violent one. The cause of manufacturing factories shutting down and moving overseas could cause “deprivation [due to] family disruption” (Siegel & McCormick 2016, pg. 221) from the loss of a job. Other evidence pointing to general strain theory being a cause of the violent crime rate is “subcultures blam[ing] others for their misfortunes, including aggressive illegal acts” (Siegel & McCormick 2016, pg. 221). However not everyone reacts to strain/stress the same way, and while some people do not commit antisocial behaviour there are some that do with recidivism more likely. Those who are more likely to commit another crime have distinctive traits which “ include having a difficult temperament, being overly sensitive or emotional, having a low tolerance for adversity, and having poor problem-solving skills. [They are also] linked to aggressive and antisocial behaviour, seem to be stable over a person’s life cycle.” (Siegel & McCormick 2016, pg. 222). In other words people who have these traits are shown to be more likely to have aggressive and antisocial

Robert Agnew is known for his general strain theory. The theory explains that the basis of people getting involved in criminal activity is because of strain. If someone becomes upset, frustrated, depressed, or mistreated they will turn to crime in order to deal with the feelings. Yet, not all people turn to crime in order to deal with strain or stressors. There are different ways to measure strain. Subjective strains are those strains that are disliked by particular person or group. This approached is aimed at how the person reacts to the way they are treated. The second approach is called the objective view. During this approach the researches will as individuals how much they would dislike a specific event. Strains come in three major

Rather than deriving from economic goals-means that Robert Merton concluded was the only source of strain in his Anomie Theory, Agnew believed strain caused crime in the absence of adequate coping mechanisms. In that, he proposed different types and sources of strain. Types of strains included relative deprivation; a strain that is caused by constant frustration that results from feelings of inadequacy, which produces aggression and can lead to violence; and stressful life events, which is the major type of strain Lenny experienced. Agnew also listed sources of strain that an individual may experience. Failure to achieve positively valued goals, presentation of negative stimuli, removal of positively valued stimuli, and disjunction of expectations and achievements are all potential sources of strain for an individual. Lenny’s deviance stems from the last two, disjunction of expectations and achievements and removal of positively valued goals. With the sources of strain in place, Agnew offered two outcomes, either the individual would adapt to the strain with conformity or crime. In Lenny’s case, he didn’t commit typical crimes, but his actions were deviant in his escape from

There are many stresses that society can put on an individual such as poverty, broken families, racial discrimination, low education opportunities, and low employment. One of the theories that expanded on this is called general strain theory. General strain theory focuses on stress that is not connected to financial success and instead focuses on an individual’s

This theory has two other categories that the others do not which are, presentation of noxious stimuli, and removal of positively valued stimuli. This theory predicts that if an individual shows signs in those categories of strain it can lead them to stress and frustration, which will eventually lead to committing crimes and deviance. Agnew stated that if an individual found a way to cope with their frustrations, then it will not necessarily lead to criminal behavior, but for people who did not find a healthy way to relieve stress or anger it is more likely to participate in criminal behavior. The goal was to keep individuals from using antisocial and negative coping. The model shown in chapter seven easily sums up the general strain theory, the three categories of strain leads to strain and frustration, anger and other negative emotions and the lack of coping mechanisms, which will eventually lead to criminal behavior.

Strain theory assumes that criminals share the same goals as non-deviant people (ex. Getting rich, providing for your family), and that the main distinguishing factor is that criminals lack the legitimate means to pursue those goals. Instead, they pursue illegitimate pathways to achieve those goals: some typical examples would be someone living in poverty that steals bread in order to be able to feed their families, or someone wanting to be rich but being unable to find employment, so they take up drug dealing. The actions of the criminals make them deviant, but on a fundamental level, their interests don't differ greatly from a law-abiding citizen. I recognize that strain theory is a theory with a limited scope: for one matter, it doesn't

There are two types of the Modern Strain Theory, General Strain Theory and Institutional Anomie Theory. General Strain Theory (GST) was developed by Robert Agnew in 1992. This micro-level theory tries to explain why individuals who feel strain commit crime. Agnew claims there are three sources of strain, the first is the failure to achieve goals, it is based off Merton 's strain just explained a little different. Merton says the disjunction between culture and structure leads to failing to achieve the American Dream. Agnew makes it more general and talks about achieving any goals, not just the American Dream. The second source is the removal of positive stimuli, having something good taken from you. For example if you are dating someone

Role strain occurs when an individual cannot meet all of the requirements of a role therefore causing stress for an individual. Role strain can be caused by a variety of issues. The article states that males and females deal with role strain in numerous ways. Men are more likely to deal with the strain by committing crimes because women cope with strain in different ways. The difference between the ways in which males and females deal with strain could be affected by standard gender role expectations.

Your research is almost like mines except you seek to find out the relationship between benefit/offending , while mines look to try and understand if general strain theory causes individuals to do offensive deeds.