Differential association theory

• Outline differential association theory

  In 1924 Sutherland suggested that offenders learn their behaviour through experiences and interactions with other offenders, similarly to the social learning explanation of behaviour. When a person socialises with a group they are exposed to their values and attitudes towards the law e.g pro-crime,anti-crime. Sutherland argued that if the number of pro-criminal attitudes the person comes to acquire outweighs the number of anti-criminal attitudes,they will go on to offend. 
• strengths of differential association theory?

  Farrington 2006 found that risk factors in boys from south London becoming offenders was; convicted relative, poverty, and low educational attainment.

  can be generalised to most types of crime. everyone has a social circle which influences their behaviour and views. These social circles can hold pro-crime or anti-crime views. 

  practical applications - preventative measures in schools and prisons, by blaming the environment as opposed to the individual creates a more positive outlook on offenders and disproves the eugenics point of view. 
• weaknesses of differential association?

  Farrington’s findings cold be biological (genetics) E.g. if the family had the defective MAOA gene causing lower serotonin levels.

  ignores individual differences as it assumes that associating and interacting with criminals is enough to cause criminal behaviour, taking a deterministic view.

  frequency and intensity of exposure to criminal attitudes is hard to objectively measure, meaning that conclusions would lack validity. even if a self report technique was used it would suffer from bias and memory decay from recall.