Differential Association Theory
Sutherland (1924)
Differential association (2)
Strength of differential association theory
+ This theory is able to account for crime within all sectors of society. While Sutherland (1924) recognised that some types of crime such as burglary, may be clustered within inner-city, working class communities, it is also the case that come crimes are more prevalent among affluent groups. White-collar is a feature of middle-class social groups.
+ Sutherland was successful in moving the emphasis away from early biological explanations of crime and those explanations which saw offending as being the product of individual weakness or immorality. Differential association theory draws attention to the role of dysfunctional social circumstances and environments in criminality.
+ Differential association theory offers a more desirable and realistic solution to offending behaviour than the biological solution (eugenics) or the morality solution (punishment)
Weaknesses of differential association theory