a.

Strain theory

In sociology and criminology, strain theory states that social structures within society may
pressure citizens to commit crime. Following on the work of Émile Durkheim, Strain Theories
have been advanced by Robert King Merton (1957), Albert K. Cohen (1955), Richard Cloward
and Lloyd Ohlin (1960), Neil Smelser (1963), Robert Agnew (1992), and Steven Messner and
Richard Rosenfeld (1994). Strain may be either:

 Structural: this refers to the processes at the societal level which filter down and affect
how the individual perceives his or her needs, i.e. if particular social structures are
inherently inadequate or there is inadequate regulation, this may change the individual's
perceptions as to means and opportunities; or
 Individual: this refers to the frictions and pains experienced by an individual as he or she
looks for ways to satisfy his or her needs, i.e. if the goals of a society become significant
to an individual, actually achieving them may become more important than the means
adopted.

The Anomie, or Structural Strain Theory states that deviance results from social structure.
Those who do not understand or do not agree with the rules of social structure are confused by
their lack of place in society. Deviance is their way of creating a social role for themselves.
Innovation, ritualism, retreating and rebellion are all identified as deviant means to approve
social goals. Conformity is the only non-deviant, and thus the only socially approved, means
proposed by the theory. Social approval, according to the theory, indicates shared values.

Durkheim's concept

Durkheim argued that deviance is a normal and necessary part of any society because it
contributes to the social order.
 Social integration is the attachment to groups and institutions, while social regulation is
the adherence to the norms and values of the society. Those who are very integrated fall under
the category of "altruism" and those who are not very integrated fall under "egotism." Similarly,
those who are very regulated fall under "fatalism" and those who are very unregulated fall under
"anomie". Durkheim's strain theory attributes social deviance to extremes of the dimensions of
the social bond. Altruistic suicide (death for the good of the group), egoistic suicide (death for
the removal of the self-due to or justified by the lack of ties to others), and anomic suicide (death
due to the confounding of self-interest and societal norms) are the three forms of suicide that can
happen due to extremes. Likewise, individuals may commit crimes for the good of an
individual's group, for the self-due to or justified by lack of ties, or because the societal norms
that place the individual in check no longer have power due to society's corruption.

Durkheim (1858–1917) claimed that deviance was in fact a normal and necessary part of
social organization. When he studied deviance he stated there are four important functions of
deviance.

1. "Deviance affirms cultural values and norms. Any definition of virtue rests on an
opposing idea of vice: There can be no good without evil and no justice without crime".
2. Deviance defines moral boundaries, people learn right from wrong by defining people as
deviant.
3. A serious form of deviance forces people to come together and react in the same way
against it.
4. Deviance pushes society's moral boundaries which, in turn leads to social change.

Merton's strain theory

Robert K. Merton discussed deviance in terms of goals and means as part of his
strain/anomie theory. Where Durkheim states that anomie is the confounding of social norms,
Merton goes further and states that anomie is the state in which social goals and the legitimate
means to achieve them do not correspond. He postulated that an individual's response to societal
expectations and the means by which the individual pursued those goals were useful in
understanding deviance.
 Specifically, he viewed collective action as motivated by strain, stress, or frustration in a
body of individuals that arises from a disconnection between the society's goals and the
popularly used means to achieve those goals. Often, non-routine collective behavior (rioting,
rebellion, etc.) is said to map onto economic explanations and causes by way of strain. These two
dimensions determine the adaptation to society according to the cultural goals, which are the
society's perceptions about the ideal life, and to the institutionalized means, which are the
legitimate means through which an individual may aspire to the cultural goals.

Merton described 5 types of deviance in terms of the acceptance or rejection of social

goals and the institutionalized means of achieving them:

1. Innovation is a response due to the strain generated by our culture's emphasis on wealth and
the lack of opportunities to get rich, which causes people to be "innovators" by engaging in
stealing and selling drugs. Innovators accept society's goals, but reject socially acceptable means
of achieving them. (e.g.: monetary success is gained through crime). Merton claims that
innovators are mostly those who have been socialised with similar world views to conformists,
but who have been denied the opportunities they need to be able to legitimately achieve society's
goals.

2. Conformists accept society's goals and the socially acceptable means of achieving them (e.g.:
monetary success is gained through hard work). Merton claims that conformists are mostly
middle-class people in middle class jobs who have been able to access the opportunities in
society such as a better education to achieve monetary success through hard work.

3. Ritualism refers to the inability to reach a cultural goal thus embracing the rules to the point
where they lose sight of their larger goals in order to feel respectable. Ritualists reject society's
goals, but accept society's institutionalised means. Ritualists are most commonly found in dead-
end, repetitive jobs, where they are unable to achieve society's goals but still adhere to society's
means of achievement and social norms.
4. Retreatism is the rejection of both cultural goals and means, letting the person "drop out".
Retreatists reject the society's goals and the legitimate means to achieve them. Merton sees them
as true deviants, as they commit acts of deviance to achieve things that do not always go along
with society's values.

5. Rebellion is somehow similar to retreatism, because rebellions also reject both the cultural
goals and means, but they go one step further to a "counterculture" that supports other social
orders that already exist (rule breaking). Rebels reject society's goals and legitimate means to
achieve them, and instead creates new goals and means to replace those of society, creating not
only new goals to achieve but also new ways to achieve these goals that other rebels will find
acceptable.

b) Differential association

'Differential Association theory is a criminology theory that looks at the acts of the
criminal as learned behaviors. Edwin H. Sutherland is credited with the development of the
Differential Association theory in 1939.In criminology, Differential Association is a theory
developed by Edwin Sutherland proposing that through interaction with others, individuals learn
the values, attitudes, techniques, and motives for criminal behavior.

The Differential Association Theory is the most talked about of the Learning Theories of
deviance. This theory focuses on how individuals learn to become criminals, but does not
concern itself with why they become criminals.
 As do most social learning theories, Differential Association theory, believes that the
behaviors of an individual are influenced and shaped by other individuals they associate with.
The primary reference group is that of the nuclear family, which the individual lives and grows
up with. It is believed that these interactions formulate the individuals understanding of societal
norms and values. It is then assumed that if the individual is capable of learning what is
acceptable in society, they are also not capable of learning what is considered unacceptable.

Differential association predicts that an individual will choose the criminal path when the
balance of definitions for law-breaking exceeds those for law-abiding. This tendency will be
reinforced if social association provides active people in the person's life. Earlier in life the
individual comes under the influence of those of high status within that group, the more likely
the individual to follow in their footsteps. This does not deny that there may be practical motives
for crime. If a person is hungry but has no money, there is a temptation to steal. But, the use of
"needs" and "values" is equivocal. To a greater or lesser extent, both non-criminal and criminal
individuals are motivated by the need for money and social gain.

The principles of Sutherland's Theory of Differential Association key points:

 Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with others in a process of

communication.

From the moment an individual is born they being to be conditioned as to the norms of
society. They learn gender roles through their interactions with their parents and observations of
gender specific characteristics. Interaction and observations are the same methods of
communication through which criminals learn their deviance. Criminal behavior, Differential
Association theory argues, is more prevalent in individuals who associate and interact with
individuals who exhibit criminal mind sets and behaviors.
  Learning criminal behavior occurs within primary groups (family, friends, peers,
their most intimate, personal companions)

An individuals’ behavior is primarily influenced by their family, since that is the first group
interaction they receive. Additionally an individual’s behavior is influenced by their peer group
(through direct and indirect interaction) and through their intimate relationships with other
individuals.

 Learning criminal behavior involves learning the techniques, motives, drives,

rationalizations, and attitudes.

Surely, just because an individual has a criminal in their primary reference group doesn’t
mean that they’ll partake in criminal behavior. However, it does mean that they a resource into
the criminal rationale. Criminals are not inherently deviant, they learned the deviance. They were
taught to rationalize what they once knew to be unacceptable behavior into acceptable behavior.
For example, many convicted sexual assailants admit that the first time they committed sexual
assault they felt guilty. The guilt comes from their socialization of societal norms that rape is
unacceptable.

 The specific direction of motives and attitudes is learned from definitions of the
legal codes as favorable or unfavorable.

This principle comes into play when considering cultural variations and/or interpretations of
legal codes. In specific, in the United States, there are so many different cultures and each
culture’s interpretation of what is favorable or unfavorable varies. Cultural norms can conflict
with societal norms.

 A person becomes a criminal when there is an excess of definitions favorable to

violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law.

This is the dominant premise for Differential Association theory. The premise that because
an individual associates with more members of a group who favor deviance, than with members
of a group who favor societal norms, that individual is more inclined to act defiantly. Pfohl
writes in his book, Images of deviance and social control, that the likelihood of deviant behavior
could be determined by calculating the difference between favorable and unfavorable
associations (1994).

 Differential associations vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity.

Referring to the contact an individual must have with proponents of criminal behavior; this
principle suggests that there is a varying, but direct, relationship that effects how often, for what
length of time, how important and how intense deviant behavior occurs.

 The process of learning criminal behavior involves all the mechanisms involved in
any other learning.

Accordingly this means that criminal behavior, like any other learned behavior, is not only
learned through observance but through assorted methods as well. For example, coercion and
seduction could lead to acts of deviance. Also, criminal behavior can be credited to acts of
spontaneity.

 While criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values, it is not

explained by those needs and values, since non-criminal behavior is an expression of
the same needs and values.
 This last principle asserts that even those criminals, who rationalize their behaviors as
trying to fulfill basic needs, are not above reproach. Non criminals are subject to obtain the
same general needs as criminals and do so in a non deviant fashion.

Critics/limitations of deferential association

 One critique labeled towards this theory has to do with the idea that people can be
independent, rational actors and individually motivated. This notion of one being a
criminal based on his or her environment is problematic. This theory does not take into
account personality traits that might affect a person's susceptibility to these
environmental influences.

 Additional criticism comes from the theories lack of ability to explain acts of deviance
that aren’t learned and/or are spontaneous. For example, how does one explain the upper
class child who has a law abiding family, is well to do, and has attended private school
their whole life going on a shooting rampage (or less extreme stealing gum from the
grocery store)?

 Another important criticism argued that Sutherland's theory is a "cultural deviance"

theory as a way of showing that it made wrong presumptions about human behavior and
the role of culture in deviant behavior.

 Warr and Stafford (1991:862) studied the mechanism by which delinquency is socially
transmitted. They compared the effect of peer’s attitude and effect of peer’s behavior and
found that delinquency stemmed rather from behavior of peers than the consequence of
attitudes acquired from peers. This means that Sutherland’s assertion that attitude of
peers is major factor of delinquency is incomplete. The attitudes of adolescents indeed do
influent delinquency. "However, quite apart from the attitudes of adolescents and those of
their friends, the behavior of friends has a strong, independent effect on adolescents’
behavior."

Differential association has been subject to a number of other criticisms.

"- is defective because it omits consideration of free will,

- is based on a psychology assuming rational deliberation,

- ignores the role of the victim,

- does not explain the origin of crime,

- does not define terms such as "systematic" and "excess",

- does not take "biological factors" into account,

- is of little or no value to "practical men",

- is not comprehensive enough because it is not interdisciplinary,

- is not allied closely enough with more general sociological theory and research,

- is too comprehensive because it applies to noncriminals, and

- assumes that all persons have equal access to criminal and anticriminal behavior patterns."
(Sutherland, 1974: 82)

c). Labeling theory

Frank Tannenbaum and Howard S. Becker created and developed the labelling theory,
which is a core facet of symbolic interactionism, and often referred to as Tannenbaum's
"dramatization of evil." Becker believed that "social groups create deviance by making the rules
whose infraction constitutes deviance."

Labeling is a process of social reaction by the "social audience,"(stereotyping) the people

in society exposed to, judging and accordingly defining (labeling) someone's behavior as deviant
or otherwise. It has been characterized as the "invention, selection, manipulation of beliefs which
define conduct in a negative way and the selection of people into these categories.

Labeling theory concerns the meanings people derive from one another's labels,
symbols, actions, and reactions. This theory holds that behaviors are deviant only when society
labels them as deviant. As such, conforming members of society, who interpret certain behaviors
as deviant and then attach this label to individuals, determine the distinction between deviance
and non‐deviance. Labeling theory questions who applies what label to whom, why they do this,
and what happens as a result of this labeling.

Key Points/Basic assumptions of labeling theory

 Labeling theory begins with the assumption that no act is intrinsically criminal.
Definitions of criminality are established by those in power through the formulation of
laws and the interpretation of those laws by police, courts, and correctional institutions.

 Deviance is therefore not a set of characteristics of individuals or groups, but rather it is a

process of interaction between deviants and non-deviants and the context in which
criminality is being interpreted.

 Labeling theory, consequently, suggests that deviance is caused by the deviant's being
labeled as morally inferior, the deviant's internalizing the label and finally the deviant's
acting according to that specific label(in other words, you label the "deviant" and they act
accordingly). As time goes by, the "deviant" takes on traits that constitute deviance by
committing such deviations as conform to the label.

 This theory, while very much symbolically-interactions, also has elements of conflict
theory, as the dominant group has the power to decide what is deviant and acceptable,
 and enjoys the power behind the labeling process. An example of this is a prison system
that labels people convicted of theft, and because of this they start to view themselves as
by definition thieves, incapable of changing.

 Once a person is labeled as deviant, it is extremely difficult to remove that label. The
deviant person becomes stigmatized as a criminal or deviant and is likely to be
considered, and treated, as untrustworthy by others.

 Even if the labeled individual does not commit any further deviant acts than the one that
caused them to be labeled, getting rid of that label can be very hard and time-consuming.
For example, it is usually very difficult for a convicted criminal to find employment after
release from prison because of their label as ex-criminal. They have been formally and
publicly labeled a wrongdoer and are treated with suspicion likely for the remainder of
their lives.

Critiques of Labeling Theory

 One critique of labeling theory is that is emphasizes the interactive process of labeling
and ignores the processes that lead to the deviant acts. Such processes might include
differences in socialization, attitudes, and opportunities.
 A second critique of labeling theory is that it is still not clear whether or not labeling
actually has the effect of increasing deviant behavior. Delinquent behavior tends to
increase following conviction, but is this the result of labeling itself as the theory
suggests? It is very difficult to say, since many other factors may be involved, including
increased interaction with other delinquents and learning new criminal opportunities.
 Labelling theory ignores the possibility for rehabilitation because they see the problem of
crime as not lying within the criminal but within society and as such, society should
change.
 There is literarture that shows that the apprehension, processing the placement of a
negative label can be a motivator for change in the individual, something that Harold
Garfinkel termed a 'degradation ceremony' and so the label does not always lead the
deviant to continue in their deviant ways.
d). Rational choice theory of Deviance

In criminology, the rational choice theory adopts a utilitarian belief that man is a
reasoning actor who weighs means and ends, costs and benefits, and makes a rational choice.
This method was designed by Cornish and Clarke to assist in thinking about situational crime
prevention. It is assumed, that crime is purposive behavior designed to meet the offender’s
commonplace needs for such things as money, status, sex and excitement, and that meeting these
needs involves the making of (sometimes quite rudimentary) decisions and choices, constrained
as these are by limits, ability, and the availability of relevant information.

Assumptions and Central Points

Rational choice is based on numerous assumptions, one of which is individualism. The

offender sees themselves as an individual. The second is that individuals have to maximize their
goals, and the third is that individuals are self-interested . Offenders are thinking about
themselves and how to advance their personal goals. Central points of the theory are described as
follows:

 The human being is a rational actor.

 Rationality involves end/means calculations.
 People (freely) choose behavior, both conforming and deviant, based on their rational
calculations.
 The central element of calculation involves a cost benefit analysis: Pleasure versus pain
or hedonistic calculus.
 Choice, with all other conditions equal, will be directed towards the maximization of
individual pleasure.
 Choice can be controlled through the perception and understanding of the potential pain
or punishment that will follow an act judged to be in violation of the social good, the
social contract.
 The state is responsible for maintaining order and preserving the common good through a
system of laws.
 The swiftness, severity, and certainty of punishment are the key elements in
understanding a law’s ability to control human behavior.
Critics /Limitations of rational choice theory of deviance

According to O’Grady (2011) the three main critiques of Rational Choice Theory include:

 Assumes that all individuals have the capacity to make rational decisions
 The theory does not explain why the burden of responsibility is excused from young
offenders as opposed to adult offenders
 This theory contradicts the Canadian Criminal Justice System. This theory does not
support the idea that all individuals are rational actors because of cognitive inability. An
example of individuals who lack a rational mind include those who are Not Criminally
Responsible on Account Due to Mental Disorder (NCRMD).

f). Symbolic interactionism

Symbolic Interaction refers to the patterns of communication, interpretation and

adjustment between individuals. Both the verbal and nonverbal responses that a listener then
delivers are similarly constructed in expectation of how the original speaker will react. The
ongoing process is like the game of charades, only it’s a full-fledged conversation.

The symbolic interactionist perspective of sociology views society as a product of

everyday social interactions of individuals. Symbolic interactionists also study how people use
symbols to create meaning. In studying deviance, these theorists look at how people in everyday
situations define deviance, which differs between cultures and settings.
 The term "symbolic interactionism" has come into use as a label for a relatively
distinctive approach to the study of human life and human conduct. (Blumer, 1969). With
Symbolic interactionism, reality is seen as social, developed interaction with others. Most
symbolic interactionists believe a physical reality does indeed exist by an individual's social
definitions, and that social definitions do develop in part or relation to something “real.” People
thus do not respond to this reality directly, but rather to the social understanding of reality.
Humans therefore exist in three realities: a physical objective reality, a social reality, and a
unique. A unique is described as a third reality created out of the social reality, a private
interpretation of the reality that is shown to the person by others (Charon, 2007). Both
individuals and society cannot be separated far from each other for two reasons. One, being that
they are both created though social interaction, and two, one cannot be understood in terms
without the other. Behavior is not defined by forces from the environment such as drives, or
instincts, but rather by a reflective, socially understood meaning of both the internal and external
incentives that are currently presented (Meltzer et al., 1975).

Herbert Blumer (1969) set out three basic premises of the perspective:

 "Humans act toward things on the basis of the meanings they ascribe to those things."
 "The meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social interaction that
one has with others and the society."
 "These meanings are handled in, and modified through, an interpretative process used by
the person in dealing with the things he/she encounters."

Criticisms

 Symbolic interactionists are often criticized for being overly impressionistic in their
research methods and somewhat unsystematic in their theories.
 It is argued that the theory is not one theory; however, the framework for many different
theories.
 Additionally, due to the theory's lack of testability, some theorists have a problem with
symbolic interaction theory. These objections, combined with the fairly narrow focus of
interactionist research on small-group interactions and other social psychological issues,
have relegated the interactionist camp to a minority position among sociologists, although
a fairly substantial minority