Criminal Behaiours - Social Psychological Explanations: Differential Assocation Theory

Question 1

When describing this explanation, what are the 5 components to describe

Answer 1

• what is it
• what is learned
• who is it learned from
• how is it learned
• the 9 key principles

Question 2

Describe what it is

Answer 2

• Created by Edwin Sutherland (1939)
• He says that offending behaviour is entirely explained by social learning from factors in your environment
• You learn through observing and then imitating them. You are socialised into a life of crime
• The concept is that people vary in the frequency in which they associate with others who have more or less favourable attitudes towards crime, and these attitudes inevitably influence their own attitudes and behaviour.
• So if you mix with people who have favourable attitudes towards crime, you will be influenced by them and have a positive attitude towards crime, and so will commit crime
• Sutherland believed that it’s possible to develop a formula that could predict if someone would turn to crime based on:
  1) Frequency
  2) Duration
  3) Intensity (what you do together)

Question 3

Describe what is learned

Answer 3

1) Pro-criminal attitude: You have learnt an attitude that views crime as acceptable and desirable
2) Types of crime: You have learnt certain types of crime are desirable (perhaps parents have done it and so you view it as acceptable). Peers view violence and murder as bad, however also view drugs as okay → so you won’t commit one crime but then you will do the other
3) Method: If friends are burglars, you may learn methods of stealing such as picking locks or cracking safes. You learn from your peer group how to do the crime

Question 4

Describe who it is learned from

Answer 4

• Attitudes and behaviours are learned from intimate personal groups, such as family or peer groups. It can’t be from a stranger
• You can also learn it from the wider neighbourhood. It depends on what the community feels about crime. If they are pro-crime, you can learn from them. E.g. if in an area where everyone opposes crime, there will be lower crime rates.

Question 5

Describe how it is learned

Answer 5

• Sutherland suggests that the frequency, length and intensity of such association will determine the degree of influence. He doesn’t specify the actual mode of learning, but it is likely done by direct and indirect operant conditioning
• Direct operant conditioning: where you directly have been punished/rewarded. E.g. you stole a cookie and have to sit on a naughty step which discourages the bad behaviour. Equally though, a sibling may praise you for bad behavior and you so could be more likely to repeat the behavior
• Indirect operant conditioning: role models are the ones doing the behaviour. E.g. a friend steals cookies and gets away with it and receives praise and reinforcement from the peer group and THEY are reinforced, not you. And so to receive that sort of praise, you repeat THEIR behaviour because you have been vicariously reinforced. This could happen from watching films or seeing celebs on TV
• Social groups also establish norms, which are what behaviours are seen as ‘normal’ to do. If crime is perceived as normal = more likely to commit crime.

Question 6

Describe the 9 key principles

Answer 6

1) Criminal behavior is learnt
2) It’s learnt by association
3) The association is with intimate personal groups
4) What is learnt is the techniques, motives, rationalizations and attitudes
5) This learning is directional – either for or against crime
6) If the number of favorable attitudes outweighs unfavourable ones then a person becomes an offender
7) The learning experiences vary in frequency and intensity for each person
8) Crime is learnt through the same process as any other behaviour
9) General ‘needs’ (e.g. for money) is not a sufficient explanation for crime because not everyone with those needs turns to crime.

Question 7

When evaluating the explanation what do you talk about

Answer 7

:)
- supportive research
:(
- methodological issues
- can’t account for all types of crime

Question 8

Write a paragraph for the strength of having supportive evidence

Answer 8

P: strength is that there’s supportive research that demonstrates how associations with interpersonal groups can link to criminal behvaiour
E: Akers et al surveyed 2,500 adolescents in the US and found most important influence on deviant behaviour (like drinking and drug behaviour) was from peers. Differential association, differential reinforcement combined to account for 68% of the variance in marijuana use and 55% of alcohol use
T: The large sample increases the generalisability, which is therefore a strength as the evidence clearly shows how deviant criminal behaviour is learn from our personal intimate groups.
COUNTER: research lacks historical validity as these behaviours (although illegal in 1979) are now legalised in many parts of the US and are no longer criminal behaviours. So cannot say that differential association leads to criminal behaviour

Question 9

Write a paragraph for the weakness of the explanation having methodological issues

Answer 9

P: weakness is that it’s difficult to test scientifically, so it heavily relies on correlation.
E: Cox et al argues that it’s challenging to measure the number and strength of associations or to determine what ratio of favourable to unfavourable influences leads to criminal behaviour.
T: Therefore this is a weakness as it undermine the empirical reliability and validity of the theory as we can’t operationalise and measure precise mechanisms accurately or establish a cause and effect. Therefore limiting the theories utility in practical interventions as there’s no way to manipulate the “balance” of how much someone is influenced.

Question 10

Write a paragraph for the weakness of the explanation not being able to account for all types of crime

Answer 10

P: weakness is that it won’t explain all types of criminal behaviour. SLT is confined to “smaller” crimes rather than violent/impulsive offences like rape or murder. Additionally it won’t explain why offences are committed by younger people
E: Newburn found 40% of offences are committed by individuals under 21.
T: Therefore this is a weakness because it only offers a partial explanation of criminal behaviour, failing to account for age-related patterns in offending or impulsive emotionally driven offences.
HOWEVER: That said, ONS found that in England + Wales there was 500 homicides compared to 400,000 burglaries in 2014. So smaller crimes do make up majority of offences, meaning the explanation is still somewhat useful.