Forensics- Psychological Explanations: Differential Association Theory Flashcards
Differential Association Theory
What is differential association theory?
•It proposes that individuals learn:
• Values
• Attitudes
• Techniques
• Motives
for criminal behavior through association and interaction with others.
What is the scientific basis of the theory?
•Developed by Edwin Sutherland (1924), the theory aims to establish scientific principles explaining all types of offending.
•Sutherland emphasized that:
•The conditions causing crime must be present when crime occurs.
•These conditions must be absent when crime does not occur.
•The theory applies universally, regardless of race, class, or ethnicity, and explains why some individuals commit crimes while others do not.
How is crime learned as a behavior?
• Criminal behavior is acquired through the processes of learning, similar to any other behavior.
• Learning occurs through interaction with significant others, such as family and peers.
What are the two factors that lead to criminality?
- Learned attitudes toward crime.
- Learning specific criminal acts.
What role do pro-criminal attitudes play in offending?
•Socialization into a group exposes individuals to pro-crime and anti-crime values.
•Sutherland’s Argument:
•If pro-criminal attitudes outweigh anti-criminal attitudes, the individual is likely to offend.
•The learning process for criminality is the same as for learning conformity to the law.
Can criminal behavior be predicted?
Differential association suggests that offending likelihood can be mathematically predicted based on:
1. Frequency of exposure to deviant norms.
2. Intensity of these interactions.
3.Duration of exposure to deviant values.
How are specific criminal acts learned?
•Offenders may learn specific techniques of committing crimes, such as:
• Breaking into houses.
• Disabling car stereos before theft.
• Crime may “breed” in certain groups and communities as individuals observe or are taught these techniques.
How does the theory explain reoffending?
•Prison Environment:
•Inmates may learn criminal techniques from experienced offenders in prison.
•These skills are often put into practice upon release.
Learning occurs through:
•Observational learning.
•Direct tuition from criminal peers.
Evaluation
What is the explanatory power of differential association theory?
•A significant strength is its ability to explain crime across all social sectors.
• Example:
• White-collar crime (coined by Sutherland) highlights how deviant norms exist within middle-class and corporate environments.
• Crimes like burglary are more clustered in working-class communities.
How does the theory shift the focus of criminology?
•Moves away from:
•Biological explanations like Lombroso’s atavistic theory.
•Morality-based explanations that blame individual weaknesses.
•Instead, the theory highlights the role of dysfunctional social circumstances and environments in causing criminality.
•Offers a more realistic solution to crime than biological or moralistic approaches.
What are the difficulties in testing the theory?
•Measuring key components is challenging:
•The number of pro-criminal attitudes a person has been exposed to.
•The point at which pro-criminal values outweigh anti-criminal ones to trigger offending behavior.
•These limitations undermine the theory’s scientific credibility, as it does not provide a satisfactory method for testing its predictions.
Alternative Explanations in Differential Association Theory
What is the role of family in influencing criminal behavior?
•Sutherland highlighted the family’s response as crucial in determining an individual’s likelihood to offend.
•If the family supports criminal activity and portrays it as legitimate or reasonable, it strongly influences the child’s value system.
What evidence supports this idea?
Of alt exclamations
1.Offending behavior often runs in families.
•Example: Farrington et al. study highlighted intergenerational crime as a key finding.
2.Mednick et al. (1984) study:
•Boys with criminal adoptive parents but non-criminal biological parents were more likely to offend compared to boys whose biological and adoptive parents were both non-criminal (14.1% vs. 13.5%).
This emphasizes the family’s social influence over genetic factors.
Do all individuals exposed to criminal influences offend?
•No. Not everyone exposed to criminal influences commits crimes.
What are the individual differences ignored by the theory?
•Sutherland stressed analyzing cases individually, but the theory risks:
•Stereotyping individuals from impoverished or crime-ridden backgrounds as “unavoidably criminal.”
•Overlooking the fact that individuals can choose not to offend despite exposure to pro-criminal values.
