differential association

• differential association theory

  • suggested by Sutherland (formula)
  • suggesting offending behaviour can be explained in terms of social learning
  • concept of differential association is that people vary in the amount they associate with people w more or less favourable attitudes towards crime
• what is learned

  • attitudes towards crime (desirable or not)
  • which types of crime are acceptable in their community
  • specific methods for committing crime
• who is it learned from

  • from intimate personal groups eg. family or peers
  • also from wider neighbourhood
  • may not be criminals but still hold deviant attitudes or acceptance of these attitudes
• how is it learned

  • Sutherland suggested frequency, length and personal meaning of social associations determines degree of influence
  • likely to be operant conditioning
• major contribution - changed people views on origins of criminal behaviour

  shift from blaming individual factors to pointing to social factors

  • can be explained w social experiences
  • Sutherland also introduced concept on 'white collar crime' - transgressions of law committed by those seen as respectable (eg. fraud)

  real world implications as learning environments can be changed where genes can't
• supporting evidence

  criminality appears to run in families

  • Osborne and West
  • where father has criminal conviction 40% of sons had committed crime by 18, only 13% of sons w non criminal fathers
  • problem w this evidence - can be explained with genetics
  • has been found that main effect on drinking and drug behaviour from peers

  evidence for theory but effects of genetics can't be disentangled
• can't account for all types of crime

  only a partial account of offending behaviour

  • social learning influence probably limited to smaller crimes
  • however, these 'smaller' crimes account for bigger % of crime
  • contrast - Eysenck's personality theory offers explanation in terms of desire for risk taking behaviour (found to be key factor in crime)

  incomplete explanation
• role of biological factors

  limitation

  • diathesis stress model may offer better account combining both social with vulnerability factors
  • vulnerability - may be innate genetic or early experiences

  may be insufficient explanation alone