Running Head: SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME 1

Sociological Theories of Crime

Name

Institution
SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES 2

Introduction

In modern times, criminology has been a matter of keen interest for many researchers.

Addressing the factors surrounding crime has been a matter of great academic curiosity for the

last century. As a result, academics have formulated many theories in a bid to explain the

phenomenon of crime. The theories of crime and delinquency have veered from biological and

psychological factors as David Zembroski (2011) points out. These influence these theories hold

cannot be undermined. As Peyrot, M., & Burns, S. L. (2001) point out, the sociological theories

used play a big role in determining the choice which jurors make.

There are a number of theories that explain crime and delinquency. The first theory is

Merton’s theory of strain theory and control theories. Next, we have Shaw and McKay’s theory

of cultural transmission. In addition to that, differential association theory is another attempt of

trying to explain crime. Moreover, delinquent subcultures theory, social control theory and

conflict theories have been formulated as a way of explaining crime in the society. Strain Theory

and Control Theories

Durkheim’s theory of strain theory and control theories is one of the first theories that

attempt to explain the phenomenon of crime. According to Durkheim, crime is not only a factor

of an individual but a factor of the collective group.

These theories like preceding biological theories, place crime in a context of the

degradation of the society and the division of labor. Durkheim noted that, the division of labor

brought about a significant differentiation. In societies where the division of labor is high, then

the society is less cohesive as compared to societies where the level of labor division is low.

Societies with less division of labor had more mechanical cohesiveness (p. 242).
SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES 3

As societies urbanize and there is more division of labor, the intimacy of small families is

often lost. As a result, people’s lives became very unpredictable and controlling them also

became a problem. This unpredictability led to the breakdown of norms therefore leading to a

society susceptible to crime and lawlessness.

Cultural Transmission Theory

Another theory that attempts to explain crime is the cultural transmission theory that was

developed by Shaw and McKay. According to this theory, urban growth distributes people and

crime spatially (Zembroski, p. 244). The rate of crime is usually very high in areas of high

transition rates and lower in neighborhoods where increasing wealth coincides with the

proximity from the central business district.

This study suggested that the culture of the neighborhood and its ethnicity were crucial in

preventing crime. Moreover, disorganized communities were responsible in transmitting criminal

behavior. This can explain the name of the theory since the study concluded that disorganized

neighborhoods facilitated criminal traditions to be transmitted through generations.

Differential Association Theory

In 1955 Sutherland and Cressey improved on the theory of Shaw and McKay and came

up with another theory that attempted to explain crime. Their theory was called The Differential

Association Theory.

This theory paid attention to the importance of differential social organization and how it

affected the orientation of social groups. According to Sutherland, criminal behavior is learned

through social interactions. However, opportunities that crime differ from opportunities that are

unfavorable to crime for a person who has embraced the culture of crime.
SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES 4

Differential association theory explained why any individual was attracted to crime and

why the rates of crime were higher in certain sectors of American society. Sutherland concluded

that deviance was the consequence of socialization and learning values of subculture that

supports attitudes and behaviors that the mainstream culture rejects (Sutherland & Cressey,

1955).

Controversially, Sutherland’s Differential association theory was applicable to all classes

of society. Moreover, it tried to account for the crimes by a person of authority and influence.

Sutherland also created the term white collar crime.

Strain Theory

Merton analyzed the individual patterns and how to achieve societal goals during anomic

conditions. He identified five types of adjustment as “modes of individual adaptation” (D.

Zembroski p.245). These were conformity, retreatism, ritualism, rebellion and innovation, a form

of acceptance of the goals but rejection of the means.

Of these modes of individual adjustment, innovation has received the most attention in

the study of crime and delinquency Merton also asserted that innovation was most responsible

for crime. Criminal behavior was significantly affected by the assimilation of cultural emphasis

without equally internalizing the institutional norms.

Criminal behavior and the variety in modes of adaption is not uniform across society.

Moreover, since realistic opportunities for advancement are scarce, the greatest pressures

towards crime are exerted on the poor. It is also crucial to note that differences between anomie

and situations of diminished opportunities usually lead to corresponding modes of adaptation,

such as innovation. In essence, anomie occurs when societal emphasis is on achievement or

culturally prescribed goals at the expense of norms that govern the means to achieve those goals.

Strain theory explains how anomie results in crime because of the different modes of

individual adaptation. According to Merton (1968), the relationship between anomie and strain

theory can be seen in the following observation, ‘‘A cardinal American virtue is ambition’ and it

promotes a cardinal American vice of ‘deviant behavior’’’ (p. 200).

Delinquent Subcultures

Cohen combined Sutherland and Merton’s theory to explain how delinquent subculture

arise and how to define them. Cohen noted that the subcultures often arise in urban slum areas

that support crime committed without a rational reason. He also notes that delinquent subcultures

emerge due to class differences in parental aspirations, child-rearing practices, and classroom

expectations (D. Zembroski, 247).

Moreover, Cohen believed that youths from lower-class youths are drawn toward

delinquent subcultures and gangs because of the low status they have been accorded in society. If

a child’s family occupies the lower strata in the social structure, it is highly likely that the child

will encounter problems in the future. For instance, lower-class families lack access to the

socialization patterns, values, and education of the middle class.

According to Cohen, delinquent youths came from less fortunate backgrounds and

embraced values that provide both the chance to gain the status. Moreover, they derived

satisfaction of rejecting respectable values they deem beyond their reach. Furthermore,

delinquent subcultures try to establish requirements which children of lower status can meet.

(Cohen, pp.121, 133).

They learn to reject the middle-class goals and norms and replace those standards with a

set of contrary values to gain worth (Shoemaker, 1996). Finally, these subcultures can be

transmitted across generations. This may be as a consequence of discontent with one’s status and

the promise of alternative forms of attainable values, worth and success (Cohen).

Social Control Theory

Hirschi’s 1969 book on the causes of delinquency is highly esteemed. Hirschi critiqued

the previous theories on delinquency. However, he takes a different approach to other writers

before him when he explains why people do not engage in criminal acts and why they conform

to social norms.

He then proceeds to state that there are four social bonds which lead to conformity. These

bonds include attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. The first bond which is

attachment, is usually strong in families. Family attachment is one of the strongest deterrent to

criminal behavior and delinquency. The second bond is commitment. Commitment is the extent

to which self-interest is harmonized to a society’s moral code. Common aspirations and

ambitions, are perceived as deterrents to crime. For instance, an individual with greater ambition

has more restraint and adheres to social norms than someone with less ambitions and aspirations.

Involvement refers to the amount of time invested in a particular set of activities, such as

homework that reflects the values of conventional society. When someone has invested his time

and energy in activities acceptable by the society, he will have little time and opportunity for

crime. Finally, belief is the extent of approval and consent to certain morals of a given society.

When someone believes in the values of a given society then, he will abide by their rules.

Control Theory
SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES 7

According to crime is a product of conflicts over the distribution of resources and the

illegitimacy of such a distribution, especially as it impacts the poor and the groups that seek to

organize and bring conflict out into the open (Turner, 1975).

Though there is a sense of interdependence in social systems, conflicts of interest exist as

a result of unequal distribution of scarce resources, particularly power. Such distributions of

resources and conflicts exist in all societies.

Hidden conflicts of interest usually lead to open and violent conflict among social groups

in a system. These conflicts often polarization between the dominant group and the less fortunate

ones. The more the polarization, the more the violent conflict.

A violent conflict leads to a change how scarce resources are shared. This reorganization

also creates situations where the dominant group and the less fortunate have conflicting interests.

This also leads to more conflicts that are inevitable.

References

Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys: The culture of the gang. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press

Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York, NY: Free Press

Peyrot, M., & Burns, S. L. (2001). Sociologists on Trial: Theoretical Competition and Juror

Reasoning. American Sociologist, 32(4), 42-69.

Rock, P. (2002). Sociological theories of crime. The Oxford handbook of criminology, 3.

Sutherland, E. H., & Cressey, D. R. (1955). Principles of criminology. Philadelphia, PA:

Lippincott.

Turner, J. H. (1975). Marx and Simmel revisited: Reassessing the foundations of conflict theory.

Social Forces, 53(4), 618–627.

Zembroski, D. (2011). Sociological Theories of Crime and Delinquency. Journal Of Human

Behavior In The Social Environment, 21(3), 240-254.

doi:10.1080/10911359.2011.564553