Sutherland's Differential Association Theory

Edwin Sutherland’s theory of Differential Association theory is about an individual learning criminal behaviour through interaction with intimate groups. His theory includes four modalities, which are frequency, duration priority and intensity. Sutherland’s theory is seen

High crime rates are an ongoing issue through the United States, however the motivation and the cause of crime has yet to be entirely identified. Ronald Akers would say that criminality is a behavior that is learned based on what an individual sees and observes others doing. When an individual commits a crime, he or she is acting on impulse based on actions that they have seen others engage in. Initially during childhood, individuals learn actions and behavior by watching and listening to others, and out of impulse they mimic the behavior that is observed. Theorist Ronald Akers extended Sutherland’s differential association theory with a modern viewpoint known as the social learning theory. The social learning theory states that

The focus of this paper will be on two contemporary criminological theories and their application to the crime film, Eastern Promises. The two theories to be discussed, and subsequently applied to the film, are labelling theory and differential association theory. Labelling theory falls under the symbolic interactionist approach, and the primary level of analysis of this theory is micro, as it tends to focus on the effect of labels on an individual’s sense of “self”. The basis of labelling theory is that no act is inherently deviant; it is only when the act is labelled deviant that it becomes so. When someone is labelled as deviant, they begin to see themselves as the label they have been assigned. This can cause the behaviour to happen more frequently, as the individual who has been labelled begins to see themselves as they label they have been given. A criticism of labelling theory is that it lacks empirical validity, and is deterministic. There is no way to effectively test this theory, so there is no way to know for sure how accurate the concept of labelling is and the effect it has on an individual and their propensity towards criminality. This and other aspects of labelling theory will be broken down and discussed later on in the paper.

as a general concept, social learning theory has been applied to the many different fields of social science to explain why certain individuals develop motivation to commit (or abstain from) crime and develop the skills to commit crime through the people they associate with. Social Learning Theory (SLT) is one of the most frequently looked at theories in the criminology field. This theory was introduced by Ronald L. Akers as a reformulation of Edwin H. Sutherland 's (1947) differential association theory of crime meld with principles of behavior psychology (Bradshaw, 2011). Akers retained the concepts of differential association and definitions from Sutherland 's theory, but conceptualized them in more behavioral terms and

Edwin H. Sutherland’s formulation of differential association theory proposed that delinquency, like any other form of behavior, is a product of social interaction. On October 14th, 2002, 17 year old Lee Boyd Malvo was charged by the state of Virginia for two capital crimes: the murder of FBI analyst Linda Franklin "in the commission of an act of terrorism" and the murder of more than one person in a three-year period. Sutherland’s nine propositions of differential association best explains Malvo’s act for the following reasons: (1) Malvo learned how to commit each heinous crime through his social interaction within his intimate group, (2) Malvo learned the techniques to commit each crime through his mentor, i.e. learning the skills

And on the other hand how “Code of the Streets” shows links to the Differential Association and Social Learning theories of crime. The Differential Association (closely related to Social Disorganization theory), developed by Edwin Sutherland, and Social Learning theory, developed by Ronald Akers, both theories of crime are theories that try to explain, at a micro-level, why individuals rather than groups of individuals commit crime (Feldmeyer, Differential Association and Social Learning, 2015).

From birth, our families, friends, and society influenced our choices. We were told what we could and could not accept. The music we listened to, the food we ate, and the clothes we wore were all influenced by someone in our community or household. These experiences from your childhood tend to determine the choices we will make as adults. We are living in a world that approaches life with a black or white perceptive, meaning decisions in life are either morally right or morally wrong. Differential Association Theory is defined as a criminological theory created by Edwin Sutherland that focuses on criminal behavior being learned through association with others (Walsh, 559). The theory focuses on an individual’s life that could lead them to a life of crime.

Aaron Hernandez had a lot to offer. Some might even say he had all that anyone could ever ask for. He had a hidden dark side that didn’t come to light until later while in college. Aaron had both parents until he was 17 at which time his father died and Aaron went into a downward spiral. Aaron was affiliated with a gang called “the bloods.” He went to the University of Florida and was an exceptional athlete there. Aaron was drafted by The New England Patriots at 113 (fourth round) of the 2010 NFL draft.

There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear.

In this paper, I plan to first describe the “Code of the Street” which is a term coined and a book written by Elijah Anderson. I would also summarize and describe two journal articles that test Anderson’s idea of the “Code of the Street” for a more definite explanation. I will tell how the two articles that I have chosen relates to some of the concepts that Anderson talked about in the book. I will then define general strain theory and social learning or differential association theory. Lastly, I will explain how general strain theory and social learning theory or differential association theory explain some of the behaviors that were seen by the individuals in the book published by Anderson. I will point out some of the individual’s behavior and demonstrate whether it may lead to crime or whether the behavior was learned in any way.

Sutherland, both a sociologist and professor, developed Differential Association theory in 1939. Sutherland made a realization that crime happens in all social standings, not just the lower class. According to Sutherland, criminal activity is not inherent but learned. For example, children are not born to be racist but learn racism either through a family member or a close group of friends or acquaintances. Although Differential Association theory is a learned behavior, one needs to mentor someone on how to engage in deviant behavior and also how to have the right motivation and attitude to commit illegal corruption. What is the person undertaking the activity going to get out of the deviant behavior money, approval from friends or a better job? Criminals know that committing a crime is wrong, but they somehow have to rationalize to themselves that its alright because of the guilt they feel. Differential Association theory also states that people committing these crimes are doing it because it's more promising to violate the law than not too. Likewise, just because people commit deviant acts doesn’t mean they will continue to engage in those acts later in life according to

Social learning theory refers to Akers’ theory of crime and deviance. Akers attempted to specify the mechanism and processes through which criminal learning takes place by explaining crime and deviance; he did this in such a way that the likelihood of conforming or deviant behavior based on the influence of an individual’s history of learning was accounted for. This theory was based off Sutherland’s differential association

The limitation of the differential association theory lay in the question: if deviant behaviour is learned and is indeed "contagious", then why do so many in high crime areas, including criminals own siblings not become criminals? . Sociological conceptions, which regard an individual as a hapless victim of pernicious influences, are limited in providing a critical explanation of deviance, as they ignore the role of personal choice .

     Sutherland argued that the concept of differential association and differential social organization could be applied to the individual level and to the group level respectively. While differential association theory explains why any individual gravitates toward criminal behavior, differential social organization explains why crime rates of different social entities differ from each other's. In his fourth edition of Principles of Criminology he presented his final theory of differential association. His theory has 9 basic postulates:

The Differential Association Theory, established by Edwin Sutherland in 1947, explicit the deviance of an individual's behavior and how it is learned through interaction with others or associations. There are several components that play a role in this theory that determines the main causes of delinquency. One of the components of this theory is, a person do not inherently become a criminal, it is a learned behavior. A person cannot decide one day he wants to commit a crime if he is not influence or challenge by others. When someone engages in criminal acts, they are most likely influence in some way that motivates them to commit the crime.