Social Evaluation - Differential Association Theory

Question 1

Evaluate major contribution…

Answer 1

Changed people’s views about the origins of criminal behaviour, which marled an important shift from ‘blaming’ individual factors to pointing to social factors, which has important ‘real-world’ implications

Sutherland introduced ‘white-collar crime’ highlighting transgressions against the law committed by responsible and high social status individuals, where non-violent crimes can be best explained by DAT

Question 2

Evaluate supporting evidence…

Answer 2

Ostern and West (1979) found that 40% of sons whose father had a criminal conviction, committed a crime by the age of 18, compared to 13% of sons of fathers with no criminal convictions

Ronald Akers et al (1979) conducted a survey of 2,500 male/female adolescents in the US to investigate drug and drinking behaviour, where the most important influence was peers; differential association, differential reinforcement, and imitation combine to account for 68% and 55% of the variance respectively

Question 3

Evaluate methodological issues…

Answer 3

Data collected is correlational and doesn’t show cause and effect

Cox et al (2014) stated that theory isn’t testable and that it is not clear what favourable : unfavourable influences would tip the balance

Question 4

Evaluate how it can’t account for all kinds of crime…

Answer 4

Social learning influences are confined to ‘smaller’ crimes, meaning that differential association is only a partial account of offending behaviour

DAT also can’t explain why most offences are committed by younger people, with Tim Nowburn (2002) found that 40% of offences are committed by under 21s

Gisli Gudjonsson and Jon Sigurdsson (2007) stated that desire for risk was a key factor in crime