Forensics - Differential Association

Question 1

Created a shift in explaining offending behaviour.

+ COUNTERPOINT

Answer 1

Draws attention to impact of environment. Deviant social circumstances can be more to blame. Offers solution, makes explanation desirable.

COUNTERPOINT
Risk of stereotyping. Impoverished, crime ridden background individuals are offenders. Sutherland, offending should be considered on a case to case basis. Explanation states exposure to pro-crime values only can cause offending behaviour. Ignores individual choice.

Question 2

Account for all of offending

Answer 2

Burglary - inner-city, working class communities. White collar crimes - affluent groups in society. Classed as a social norm of middle classed social groups. Differential association isn’t exclusively to lower classes. Can explain all offences.

Question 3

Nature vs Nurture

Answer 3

If family supports offending activity, normalise and encourage it. Likelihood of offending increases.

However offending behaviour is ‘common’ within families can be support for biological explanation as it runs in families.

Question 4

Lacks testability

Answer 4

A scientific, mathematical framework means that future offending behaviour can be predicted. Cannot operationalise DA. Theory assumes pro-crime values outweigh ant-crime. Unable to measure these accurately.