Differential association - AO3

Question 1

What is a strength of differential association?

and counterpoint

Answer 1

• P: Strength = it changed the focus of offending explanations at the time it was published
• E: Sutherland successful in moving emphasis away from early biological accounts of offending such as atavistic and theories that explains offending as being the product of individual weakness or immorality
• E: Differential association draws attention to the fact that deviant social circumstances and environments may be more to blame for offending than deviant people
• L: Desirable as it offers a more realistic solution to the problem of offending instead of eugenics or punishment

COUNTERPOINT:
May stereotype individuals based on their background, ignores the fact that people may choose not to offend despite such influences

Question 2

What is a second strength of differential association?

Answer 2

• P: Strength = theory can account for offending within all sectors of society
• E: Whilst Sutherland recognsied that some types of offences (burgulary) may be clustered within inner city working class communites, some are also clustered around affluent groups
• E: White collar (coporate offences) and how this may be a feature of middle class social groups who share deviant norms and values
• L: Not just lower class who commit offences and that the principles of differential association can be used to explain all offences

Question 3

What is a limitation of differential association?

Answer 3

• P: Limitation = difficult to test the predictions of differential associations
• E: Sutherland aimed to provide a scientific mathmatical framework within future offending behaviour which could be predicted and predictions must be testable - cannot be operationalised
• E: Theory is built on the assumption that offending behaviour will occur whne pro-crime values outnumber anti-crime ones. Without measuring these, we cannot know at what point the urge to offend is realised and offending career is triggered
• L: Theory does not have scientific credibilty