Differential association

• Sutherland attempted to develop a set of scientific principles that could explain all types of offending
• Who is the main person associated with differential association?

  Sutherland
• Sutherland believed there were clear cause and effect links between the backgrounds of people who become criminals and those who do not. Social experiences should clearly predict criminal behaviour
• Sutherland's theory was designed to ignore race, class or ethnic background
• Crime is learned through interactions with significant others
• Offending behaviour is acquired through the process of learning- learning occurs through interactions with significant others that the child associates with, such as family and peer group
• 'Differential' association refers to the degree to which a person associates with individuals- they spend time with some people more than others, most especially the 'significant others'
• Criminality arises from two factors:

  • learned attitudes towards crime
  • learning of specific criminal acts
• Crime occurs if exposure to pro-crime values outweighs anti-crime values
• When a person is socialised into a group they will be exposed to certain values and attitudes- this includes values and attitudes towards the law, some of these will be pro-crime, some will be anti-crime
• Sutherland argues that if the number of pro-criminal attitudes the person comes to acquire outweighs the number of anti-crime attitudes, they will go on to offend
• Differential association theory proposes that it should be possible to mathematically predict how likely it is that an individual will commit crime- the prediction is based on our knowledge of the frequency, intensity and duration of an individual's exposure to deviant and non-deviant norms and values
• In addition to being exposed to pro-criminal attitudes, the would-be offender may also learn particular techniques for committing crime. For example, how to break into someone's house through a locked window or how to disable a car stereo before stealing it
• Sutherland's theory can account for why so many convicts released from prison go on to offend. It is reasonable to assume that whilst inside prison inmates will be exposed to pro-criminal attitudes and also learn specific techniques of offending from more experienced criminals which they can put into practice upon their release
• Reoffending may be due to socialisation in prison
• Strength of differential association theory: explanatory power

  The theory can account for crime in all sectors of society. Sutherland recognised some crimes (e.g. burglary) are clustered in working-class communities, but others are prevalent in affluent sections of society. Sutherland was particularly interested in corporate crime and how this may be a feature of middle-class social groups who share deviant norms and values. It is a strength of this theory that it can help our understanding of different types of crimes
• Strength: Sutherland's overall contribution to criminology

  Sutherland moved the emphasis away from early biological accounts of crime (e.g. Lombroso's atavistic theory) and those that pointed to individual weakness or immorality. Differential association draws attention to the fact that dysfunctional social circumstances and environments may be more to blame for criminality than dysfunctional people. This approach is more desirable than others because it offers a more realistic solution to the problem of crime instead of eugenics ( biological solution) or punishment ( morality solution)
• Limitation: alternative explanations

  Sutherland suggested family attitudes are crucial in determining whether an individual turns to crime- supported by studies showing that criminal behaviour runs in families. However, evidence that criminality runs in families could also be explained by a genetic influence, rather than by environmental or nurture influences. This makes it hard to draw any conclusions from data about crime running in families.
• Limitation: overly determinist

  Not everyone exposed to criminal influences commits crime. Differential association theory may stereotype people from impoverished backgrounds as 'unavoidably criminal'. The theory suggests exposure to pro-criminal values is enough to produce offending in those who are exposed and ignores the fact that people may choose not to offend despite such influences. Ultimately, this indicates that differential association theory may be environmentally determinist