Definition of Sociology

Comte introduced the term “Sociology” for the first time in his famous work “Positive
Philosophy” at about 1839. This new science originally and preferably called “Social
Physics” by Comte but owing to an unfortunate coincidence of the term appearing in the
study of Belgian scientist by the name of Quetelet, Comte was forced, to change the name of
the study into Sociology. The term Sociology is derived from the Latin word Socius, meaning
companion or associate and Greek word Logos, meaning study or science. Thus, the
etymological meaning of Sociology is the science of society. Sociology has been defined in a
number of ways by different sociologists. No single definition has yet been accepted as
completely satisfactory.

1. Emile Durkheim defines sociology as the “science of social institutions”.

2. Kingsley Davis says that “sociology is a general science of society”.
3. Park regards sociology as the “science of collective behaviour”.
4. Max-Weber, “sociology is the science which attempts an interpretative understanding of
social action”.
5. Morris Ginsberg, “sociology is the study of human interactions and inter-relations their
conditions and consequences”.
Nature of Sociology
Sociology, as a branch of knowledge, has its own characteristics. It is different from other
sciences in certain respects. The main characteristics of sociology as enlisted by Robert
Bierstedt in his book “the social order”.

1. Sociology is an independent science: - As an independent science it has its own field,

boundary and method. It is not treated and studied as a branch of any other sciences. The
subject matter of sociology is social relationship. As a science, it has scientific method.

2. Sociology is a social science not a physical science: - As a social science it concentrates its
attention on man, his social behavior, social activities and social life.

3. Sociology is a pure science not an applied science: - The main aim of pure sciences is the
acquisition of knowledge and it is not bothered whether the acquired knowledge is useful in a
particular field or can be put to use in an area.

4. Sociology is relatively an abstract science not a concrete science: - Sociology is not

concerned with particular wars and revolutions but with war and revolution in general, as
social phenomena, as types of social conflict.

5. Sociology is a generalizing not a particularizing science: - It does not study each and every
event that takes place in society. It tries to make generalizations on the basis of the study of
some selected events.

6. Sociology is a general science not a special science: - It is concerned with human

interaction and human life in general. History and Economics etc also study man and human
interaction, but not all about human interaction. They concentrate their attention on certain
aspects of human interaction and activities and specialize themselves in those fields

7. Sociology is a categorical science not a normative discipline: - Sociology confines itself to

statements about “what is not what should be”. It does not make any kind of value judgments.
Sociology as a discipline cannot deal with problems of good and evil, right and wrong and
moral and immoral.

8. Sociology is both a rational and an empirical science: - There are two broad ways of
approach to scientific knowledge. One known as empiricism, is the approach that emphasizes
on experience and those facts that result from observation and experimentation. The other,
known as rationalism, stresses reasons and theories that result from logical inference.

Emergence of Sociology
It is the one of the youngest as well as one of the oldest social sciences. Only recently
sociology came to be established as a distinct branch of knowledge with its own distinct set
of concepts and its own method of inquiry. Since the dawn of civilization, society has been a
subject for speculation and inquiry along with other phenomena which have agitated the
restless and inquisitive mind of man. Even centuries ago, men were thinking about society
and how it should organize, and held views on man and his destiny, the rise and fall of
peoples and civilizations. Though they were thinking in sociological terms they were called
philosophers, historians, thinkers, law-givers and seers. Thus, “Broadly it may be said that
sociology has had a fourfold origin: political philosophy, philosophy of history, biological
theories of evolution and the movements for social and political reforms”. Plato’s Republic,
Aristotle’s Politics, Kaudilya’s Arthasasthra, Manu’s Smrithi are some of the ancient sources
of social thought.

During the middle ages and early modern times the teachings of the church dominated the
human mind and hence most part of the human thinking remained as metaphysical
speculation far away from the scientific inquiry. Intellectuals became more active since the
16th century onwards. Their quest for understanding human society, its nature, socio-political
system and its problems now received new impetus. The literary works of some prominent
intellectuals of this period clearly reveals this urge to understand and interpret man’s socio-
political system. Adam smith’s “Wealth of Nations”, Rousseau’s “Social Contract” and Sir
Thomas Moore’s “Utopia” are some of the examples of such literary works.

Enlightenment of social and political thought paved the way for Revolutionary ruptures in
traditional social relations. From the Renaissance on, Western European societies acquired
modern characteristics, but enlightenment ideas and the American, French and Industrial
revolutions ushered in some of the definite characteristics of modern Capitalist society. The
profound upheaval of the French Revolution, in particular, highlighted some of the problems
and issues of concern to pre-Revolutionary Enlightenment thinkers. These became the
problems and issues of the “new science”, Sociology, at the beginning of the 19th century.
Importance of Studying Sociology
1. Sociology studies society in a scientific way. Before the emergence of sociology,
there was no systematic and scientific way to study human society. The scientific
knowledge about human society is needed in order to achieve progress in various
fields. Sociology isn’t just an abstract intellectual field but has major practical
implications for people’s lives. The best way to make use of it is by relating
sociological ideas and findings to situations in our life.
2. Sociological research provides practical help in assessing the results of policy
initiatives. Sociological knowledge is necessary for understanding and planning of
society. A program of practical reform may simply fail to achieve what its designers
sought or may produce unintended consequences of an unfortunate kind. In the years
following World War II, large public housing blocks were built in city centres in
many countries. These were planned to provide high standards of accommodation for
low income groups from slum areas and offered shopping amenities and other civil
services nearby. However, research showed that many people who have moved from
their previous dwellings to large apartment blocks felt isolated and unhappy. High
apartment blocks and shopping centres in poorer areas often became dilapidated and
provided breeding grounds for muggings and other violent crimes.
3. Sociology has drawn our attention to the intrinsic worth and dignity of man.
Sociology has been greatly responsible in changing our attitudes towards fellow
human beings. It has made people to become tolerant and patient towards others. It
has minimized the mental distance and reduced the gap between different peoples and
communities. Sociology is a discipline in which we often set aside our personal view
of the world to look more carefully at the influences that shape our lives and those of
others. Sociology helps us to know not only our society but also others, their motives,
aspirations, traditions, customs, etc. Sociology emerged as a distinct intellectual
endeavour with the development of modern societies, and the study of such societies
remains its principal concern.
4. Sociology gives us an awareness of cultural difference that allows us to see the social
world from many perspectives. The contribution of sociology is not less significant in
enriching culture. Quite often, if we properly understand how others live, we also
acquire better understanding of what their problems are. Practical polices that are not
based on an informed awareness of the ways of life of people, they have little chance
of success. A white social worker operating in a predominantly Latin American
community in South London won’t gain the confidence of its members without
developing sensitivity to the differences in social experiences between members of
different groups in UK.
5. Sociology can provide us with self-enlightenment – increased self-understanding. The
more we know about why we act as we do and the overall workings of our society, the
more likely we are to be able to influence our own future. Sociology improves our
 understanding of society and increases the power of social action. The science of
society assists an individual to understand himself, his capacities, talents and
limitations. We should not see sociology as assisting only policy makers but help
them to be powerful groups in making informed decisions. Those in power cannot be
assumed always to consider the interests of the less powerful or underprivileged in the
policies they pursue. Self-enlightened groups can often benefit from sociological
research by using the scientific information to respond in an effective way to govt.
policies or form policy initiatives of their own. Self-help groups like alcoholic
anonymous and social movements like the environmental movement are example of
social groups that have directly sought to bring about practical reforms, with some
degree of success.
6. Sociologists concern themselves directly with practical matters as professionals.
People trained in sociology are to found as industrial consultants, urban planners,
social workers and personnel managers as well as in many other jobs. An
understanding of society can also help for careers in civil service, law, journalism,
business and medicine. The various area of applied sociology is coming more and
more into prominence in local, state, national and international levels.
7. The study of society is of paramount importance in solving social problems. The
present world is beset with several social problems of great magnitude like poverty,
crime, family disorganization, communal unrest etc. A careful analysis of these
problems brings forth the root causes. The root cause is mainly the social
relationships. Sociology provides the careful analysis of these problems.

Finally, as prof. Giddings has pointed out “Sociology tells us how to become what we want to
be”. Sociology, in short, has both individual and social advantages. Every science has its own
areas of study or fields of enquiry. It becomes difficult for anyone to study a science
systematically unless its boundaries are demarcated and scope determined precisely.
Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the part of sociologist with regard to the scope of
sociology. It is difficult to determine just where its boundaries begin and end, where
sociology becomes social psychology and where social psychology becomes sociology, or
where economic theory becomes sociological doctrine or biological theory becomes
sociological theory something, which is impossible to decide”.

SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY
There are two main schools of thought regarding the scope of sociology:

(1) The specialistic or formalistic school and

(2) The synthetic school.

(1) The specialistic or Formalistic school

This school of thought is led by the German sociologist George simmel. The other main
advocates of this school are Vierkandt, Max Weber, Small, Von Wiese and Tonnies. Simmel
and others are of opinion that Sociology is a pure and an Independent science. As a pure
science, it has a limited scope. Sociology should confine itself to the study of the certain
aspects of human relationship only. Further, it should study only the ‘forms’ of social
relationships but not their contents. Social relationship such as competition, division of
labour, etc. are expressed in different fields of social life such as economic, religious,
political etc. Sociology should disentangle the forms of social relationships and study them in
abstraction. Sociology as a specific social science describes, classifies and analyses the forms
of social relationships.

Criticism: The views of Formalistic school are widely criticized. Some critical remarks may
be cited here.

1.They have unreasonably narrowed the field of sociology. Sociology should study not only
the general forms of social relationships but also their concrete contents.

2.The distinction between forms of social relations and their contents is not workable. social
forms cannot be abstracted from the content at all, since social forms keep on changing when
the contents change. Sorokin writes, “we may fill a glass with wine, water or sugar without
changing its form, but I cannot conceive of a social institution whose form would not change
when its members change”

3.Sociology is not the only science that studies the forms of social relationship. Other
sciences also do that. The study international law, for example, includes social relations like
conflict, war, opposition, agreement, contract etc. Political science, economics also study
social relationship.

4.The establishment of pure sociology is impractical no sociologist has been also to develop a
pure sociology so far .no science can be studied in complete isolation from the other science
in fact, today more emphasis is laid on inter –disciplinary approach.

(2) The Synthetic school;

The synthetic school of thought conceives of sociology as a synthesis of the social sciences,
not a pure or special social science. Durkheim, Hob House, Ginsberg and Sorokin have been
the chief exponents of this school. The views of Email Durkheim; Durkheim, one of the
stalwarts of this school of thought, says that sociology has three main divisions or fields of
inquiry. They are as follows: social morphology, social physiology and general sociology.

 Social morphology: social morphology studies the territorial basis of the people and
also the problems of population such as volume and density, local, distribution etc.
 Social physiology: social physiology has different branches such as sociology of
religion, of morals, of law, of economic life and language etc.
 General sociology: general sociology can be regarded as the philosophical part of
sociology. It deals with the general character of the social facts. Its function is the
formation of general social laws.
According to Ginsberg, Sociology studies and classifies all forms of social relationship,
studies the relationship between individual and society and the relationship among different
aspects of social life such as economic, political, religious, etc. He divides the scope of
sociology into four main divisions such as social morphology, social control, social process
and social pathology. Social morphology studies the quality and quantity of population, social
group, social structure, and social institutions. Social control studies the mechanisms i.e. both
formal and informal by which society controls the behaviour of its members. Social process
studies different types of interaction like cooperation and conflict. Social pathology studies
social problems of poverty, population, crime etc. According to him the main functions of
sociology is to discover sociological Principles of social life and tries to determine the
relation between different parts of social life.

The main argument of this school is that all parts of social life are intimately inter-related.
Hence the study of one aspect is not sufficient to understand the entire phenomenon. Hence
sociology should study social life as a whole.

Sociology and Other Social Sciences

Social life is very complex. To understand this complex social life it is necessary to study all
the aspects minutely. The factors and elements that influence social life are affected by both
natural and social factors and elements. Hence, the subject matter of science has been
categorized into two parts i.e. natural sciences and social sciences. The subject matter of
natural sciences is the forces of nature where of subject matter of social sciences is social
phenomena. Goal of both these sciences is same i.e. exploring the relationship between the
natural world and the human world. Hence, both are mutually related and influence each
other.

Sociology and Economics

Sociology is mother of all social sciences. Hence, it has close relationship with all social
sciences and so also with Economics. The relationship of Sociology with Economics is very
close, intimate and personal. There exists close relationship between these two because
economic relationship bears a close relation to social activities and relationships. Likewise,
social relationship is also affected by economic relationships. Economic activities to a great
extent are social activities. Hence both are mutually related.

Sociology is a science of society. It is concerned with the association of human beings.

Sociology is the study of human inter-actions and inter-relations their conditions and
consequences. But Economics deals with economic activities of man. It is a science of wealth
and choice. According to Prof.Robbins, Economics is a social “science which studies human
behaviour in relation to his unlimited ends and scare means which have alternatives uses. “It
is concerned with the activities of man such as production, consumption, distribution and
exchange. It also studies the structure and functions of different economic organizations like
banks, markets etc. It is concerned with the material needs of man as well as his material
welfare. However, there exists a great deal of inter-relationship between these two sciences.
Both are interdependent and inter-related with each other. Due to this inter-relationship
Thomas opines that, “Economics is, in fact, but one branch of Sociology. “ Similarly,
Silverman opines Economics is regarded as offshoot of Sociology which studies the general
principles of all social relations. Their inter-relationships are as follows:

Economics takes the help of Sociology. For its own comprehension economics takes the help
of sociology and depends on it. Economics is a part of Sociology hence without the help from
Sociology, Economics can’t understand itself completely. Economics is concerned with
material welfare of man which is common welfare. Economic welfare is a part of social
welfare. For the solution of different economic problems such as inflation, poverty,
unemployment etc, Economists takes the help of Sociology and takes into account the social
events of that particular time.

At the same time society controls other economic activities of man. Economics is greatly
benefited by the research conducted by Sociologists like Max Weber, Pareto etc. Some
economists also consider economic change as an aspect of social change. Economics draws
its generalization basing on the data provided by Sociology. Thus, Economics cannot go far
or develop without the help of Sociology. Similarly Sociology also takes the help from
Economics. Economics greatly enriches sociological knowledge. Economic factors greatly
influence each and every aspects of social life. Economics is a part of sociology hence
without the help of economics we can’t understand sociology properly. Knowledge and
research in the field of economics greatly contributes to sociology.

Each and every social problem has an economic cause. For the solution of social problems
like dowry, suicide etc Sociologists take the help form economics. Marx opines economic
relations constitute the foundation of Society. Economic factors play a very important role in
every aspect of our social life; that is why, Sociologists concerned with economic institutions.
For this reason, sociologists like Spencer, Weber, Durkheim and others have taken the help
from economics in their analysis of social relationships. Thus, both sociology and economics
are very closely related with each other. There are some problems which are being studied by
both sociologists and economics. Economic changes results in social changes and vice versa.
However, in spite of the above closeness, inter-relationship and inter-dependence both the
sciences have certain differences which are described below:

1) Sociology is a science of society and social relationships whereas economics is science of

wealth.

(2) Sociology is a much younger science which has very recent origin whereas economics is
comparatively old.

(3) Sociology is an abstract science whereas economics is concrete in nature.

(4) Sociology is a general social science whereas economics is a special social science.

(5) Sociology is concerned with the social activities of man whereas economics is concerned
with the economic activities of man.
(6) Society is studied as a unit of study in Sociology whereas man is taken as a unit of study
in economics.

(7) Both Sociology and economics differ from each other in respect of the methods and
techniques they use for their study

Sociology and Political Science

As a mother of social science, Sociology has close and intimate relationship with all other
social science. Hence, it has close relationship with political sciences as well. Their
relationship is so close and intimate that led G.E.C. Catlin to remark “Political Science and
Sociology are two faces or aspects of the same figure. “Similarly, other scholars could not
find any difference between the two disciplines. Sociology is a Science of society. It is a
science of social groups and social institution. It is a general science of society. It studies
human interaction and inter-relations their conditions and consequences. Political Science is a
science of state and government. It studies power, political processes, political systems, types
of government and international relation. It deals with social groups organized under the
sovereign of the state. In the words of Paul Junet, “Political Science is that part of social
science which treats the foundation of the state and principles of government. “It studies the
political activities of man. It only studies the organized society. However, their
interrelationship can be known from their interdependence and mutual relationship.
Sociology depends on political science. In the words of Morris Ginsberg, “Historically,
Sociology has its main roots in politics and philosophy of history.” Sociology is greatly
benefited by the books written by political scientists like Plato, Aristotle and Kautilya such as
The Republic, The Politics and Arthasastra respectively. Each and every social problem has a
political cause. Political Science is a part of Sociology. Hence sociology depends on Political
Science to comprehend itself. To understand different political events sociology takes the
help from political science. Sociology draws its conclusions being dependent on political
science.

Any change in the political system or nature of power structure brings changes in society.
Hence Sociology takes the help of political science to understand the changes in society.
Hence both are interdependent. Similarly, political science also depends on Sociology.
Political Science is a part of sociology. To understand the part, it is necessary to understand
the whole. Almost all political problems have a social cause and for the solution of these
political problems political science takes the help of sociology. State frames its rules,
regulations and laws on the basis of social customs, tradition and values. Without
Sociological background, the study of political science will be incomplete.

Political Scientists are largely benefited by the researches and research methods of the
Sociologist. Some consider political science as a branch of Sociology. State is considered as a
social group hence is a subject of Sociology. Besides, there are some common topics which
are being studied by both the subjects. These topics include among other things War,
Propaganda, authority, communal riots and law. With the help of both political science and
sociology, a new subject comes into existence which is known as political sociology. Some
political events like war are also significant social events. Thus, both political science and
sociology contribute to each other. But in spite of their interrelationship and interdependence
both the sciences differ from each other in the following way.

Differences:

(1) Sociology is a science of society and social relationship whereas political science is a
science of state and government.
(2) The scope of sociology is very wide but scope of political science is limited.
(3) Sociology is a general science but political science is a special science.
(4) Sociology studied organized, unorganized and disorganized society whereas political
science studies only politically organized society.
(5) Sociology studies the social activities of man whereas political science studies
political activities of man.
(6) Sociology is a new or young science but political science is an old science.
(7) Sociology studies man as a social animal whereas political science studies man as a
political animal.
(8) Sociology studies both formal and informal relations whereas political science
studies only formal relations.
(9) Sociology analyses both conscious and unconscious activities of man whereas
political science analyses only conscious activities of man.
(10) Sociology deals with all forms of association whereas political science deals with
only one form of association named state.

Sociology and History

As a mother of social sciences, sociology has close and intimate relationship with all other
social sciences. It has close relationship with history, because present society bears symbols
of past. Relationship between the two is so close and intimate that scholars like G. Von
Bulow have refused to acknowledge sociology as a science distinct from history. Sociology is
the science of society. It is a study of systems of social action and their interrelations.
Sociology is a science of social groups and social institutions. History studies the important
past events and incidents. It records men’s past life and life of societies in a systematic and
chronological order. It also tries to find out the causes of past events. It also studies the past
political, social and economic events of the world. It not only studies the past but also
establishes relations with present and future. That is why it is said that “History is the
microscope of the past, the horoscope of the present and telescope of the future. However,
both the sciences are closely interrelated and interdependent on each other. Both study the
same human society. Their mutual dependence led G.H. Howard to remark that, “History is
past Sociology and Sociology is present history,” Both take help from each other. At the
same time, one depends on the other for its own comprehension. History helps and enriches
Sociology.

History is the store house of knowledge from which Sociology gained a lot. History provides
materials sociologists use. History is a record of past social matters, social customs and
information about different stages of life. Sociology uses this information. Books written by
historians like A. Toynbee are of great use for Sociologists. To know the impact of a
particular past event sociology depends of history. Similarly, Sociology also provides help to
history and enriches it. A historian greatly benefited from the research conducted by
Sociologists. Historians now study caste, class and family by using sociological data.
Sociology provides the background for the study of history. Now history is being studied
from Sociological angle. Every historical event has a social cause or social background. To
understand that historical event history need the help from Sociology and Sociology helps
history in this respect. Sociology provides facts on which historians rely on. Thus history and
Sociology are mutually dependent on each other. History is now being studied from
Sociological angle and Sociology also now studied from historical point of view. Historical
sociology now became a new branch of Sociology which depends on history. Similarly
Sociological history is another specialized subject which based on both the Sciences. But in
spite of the above close relationship and inter-dependence both the sciences differ from each
other from different angles which are described below.

Differences:

(1) Sociology is a science of society and is concerned with the present society. But history
deals with the past events and studies the past society.
(2) Sociology is a modern or new subject whereas history is an older social science.
(3) Sociology is abstract whereas history is concrete in nature.
(4) The scope of Sociology is very wide whereas the scope of history is limed. Sociology
includes history within its scope.
(5) Sociology is an analytical science whereas history is a descriptive science.
(6) Attitude of sociology and history differ from each other. Sociology studies a particular
event as a social phenomenon whereas history studies a particular event in it’s entirely.
(7) Sociology is a general science whereas history is a special science

Sociology and Law

Institutions and norms determine the relationships between people and their collective
representations, beliefs, and sentiments. Law, morals and other spheres of the social order are
generated within and by society, that is, they produce and represent the substance of the
social order. Social reality thus has a supra-individual reality with a constraining effect on
individuals. Durkheim asserted that the work of the sociologist is different from that of the
statesman. The essential question he raised concerned the relationships between the
individual person and social solidarity. A historical overview of some of the fundamental
sociological theories of the middle of the 19th to the end of the 20th century would show that
problems related to law have always been present in one form or another and in various
degrees of concreteness within the fields addressed by sociology.

Law is a social phenomenon; however, discussion of law has been and remains monopolized
by legal practitioners and theorists who primarily focus on legal doctrine; they are concerned
to analyse patterns, directions and inconsistencies in judicial thinking and decision making or
in legislation. The enduring emphasis is on analysing appellate cases. Indeed, the sociology
of law is more often taught in law schools by law academics (albeit with a strong interest in
the social sciences and/or social science training) than in sociology departments. For many
sociologists, law is derivative of broader (or more authentic) sociological concerns, for
example social control and deviance, or is treated within other substantive areas such as
labour relations, the welfare state and social policy, bureaucratic organizations and
contemporary family relations.

Law and sociology are often presented as two distinct disciplines and bodies of knowledge.
The development of law and sociology in western societies occurs within different
institutions and bodies of knowledge (as professionally defined). However, they have very
similar subject matters: both are concerned with social relationships, values, social regulation,
obligations and expectations arising from particular social positions and roles, and the
linkages between individuals and society. Almost any aspect of social life can be subject to
legal regulation and judicial statements do have similarities with social theory, and often read
like social theory (Roach Anleu 2009). This paper considers the relationship between
sociology and law, as a cognate discipline, through a discussion of social research into legal
processes and settings, sometimes referred to as empirical socio-legal research. It first
addresses the different meanings of research for social scientists and for lawyers, then
investigates some particular challenges for cross/inter/multidisciplinary socio-legal research,
and identifies the growing demands for empirical analyses of law and legal processes.

Sociology and Criminology

Sociology is the study of social behaviour, systems, and structures. In relation to criminology,
it may be divided into social-structural and social-process approaches. ocial-structural
approaches to criminology examine the way in which social situations and structures
influence or relate to criminal behavior. An early example of this approach, the ecological
school of criminology, was developed in the 1920s and 1930s at the University of Chicago. It
seeks to explain crime's relationship to social and environmental change. For example, it
attempts to describe why certain areas of a city will have a tendency to attract crime and also
have less-vigorous police enforcement. Researchers have found that urban areas in transition
from residential to business uses are most often targeted by criminals. Such communities
often have disorganized social networks that foster a weaker sense of social standards.

Another social-structural approach is the conflict school of criminology. It traces its roots to
Marxist theories that saw crime as ultimately a product of conflict between different classes
under the system of capitalism. Criminology conflict theory suggests that the laws of society
emerge out of conflict rather than out of consensus. It holds that laws are made by the group
that is in power, to control those who are not in power. Conflict theorists propose, as do other
theorists, that those who commit crimes are not fundamentally different from the rest of the
population. They call the idea that society may be clearly divided into criminals and
noncriminal a dualistic fallacy, or a misguided notion. These theorists maintain, instead, that
the determination of whether someone is a criminal or not often depends on the way society
reacts to those who deviate from accepted norms. Many conflict theorists and others argue
that minorities and poor people are more quickly labelled as criminals than are members of
the majority and wealthy individuals.

Social-Process Criminology Social-process criminology theories attempt to explain how

people become criminals. These theories developed through recognition of the fact that not
all people who are exposed to the same social-structural conditions become criminals. They
focus on criminal behaviour as learned behaviour.

Edwin H. Sutherland (1883–1950), a U.S. sociologist and criminologist who first presented
his ideas in the 1920s and 1930s, advanced the theory of differential association to explain
criminal behavior. He emphasized that criminal behavior is learned in interaction with others,
usually in small groups, and that criminals learn to favor criminal behavior over noncriminal
behavior through association with both forms of behavior in different degrees. As Sutherland
wrote, "When persons become criminal, they do so because of contacts with criminal patterns
and also because of isolation from anticriminal patterns." Although his theory has been
greatly influential, Sutherland himself admitted that it did not satisfactorily explain all
criminal behavior. Later theorists have modified his approach in an attempt to correct its
shortcomings.

Control theory, developed in the 1960s and 1970s, attempts to explain ways to train people to
engage in law-abiding behavior. Although there are different approaches within control
theory, they share the view that humans require nurturing in order to develop attachments or
bonds to people and that personal bonds are key in producing internal controls such as
conscience and guilt and external controls such as shame. According to this view, crime is the
result of insufficient attachment and commitment to others.

The sociologist Travis Hirschi has developed his own control theory that attempts to explain
conforming, or lawful, rather than deviant, or unlawful, behavior. He stresses the importance
of the individual's bond to society in determining conforming behavior. His research has
found that socioeconomic class has little to do with determining delinquent behavior, and that
young people who are not very attached to their parents or to school are more likely to be
delinquent than those who are strongly attached. He also found that youths who have a
strongly positive view of their own accomplishments are more likely to view society's laws as
valid constraints on their behavior.