🍒 Criminal Behaviour Social Explanation- Differential Association Flashcards
(23 cards)
Definition of DAT
Q: What is Differential Association Theory (DAT)?
- Proposed by Edwin Sutherland (1939), DAT states criminal behavior is learned through social interactions (not inherited).
- Emphasizes social influence on attitudes toward crime.
Key Principle (Learning vs. Inheritance)
Q: How does DAT explain the origin of criminal behavior?
Principle 1: Criminal behavior is learned, not inherited (rejects biological/personality theories).
What is Learned?
Q: According to DAT, what specific things are learned about crime?
- Attitudes (pro-/anti-crime views).
- Crime types (e.g., burglary acceptable, violence isn’t).
- Techniques (e.g., robbing banks vs. shops).
Who is it Learned From?
Q: From whom do individuals learn criminal attitudes/behaviors?
- Close groups: Family, peers.
- Wider community: Neighborhood norms (“differential social organisation”).
- Non-criminals with deviant attitudes also influence.
- Role models.
How is it Learned?
Q: What processes facilitate learning criminal behavior?
- Frequency/length/personal meaning of associations matter.
- Modes:
Direct operant conditioning (praise/punishment).
Indirect reinforcement (observing successful role models).
Social norms define “normal” behavior.
Principle 1 - Learned Behavior
Q: What does Principle 1 state about criminal behavior?
“Criminal behavior is learned, not inherited.”
Rejects biological theories (e.g., genetics).
Emphasizes social learning from environment.
Principle 2 - Learning Mechanism
Q: How is criminal behavior learned according to Principle 2?
“Learned through interaction/communication with others.”
Includes verbal (e.g., conversations) and non-verbal (e.g., observing) learning.
Principle 3 - Close Groups
Q: Who do individuals learn criminal behavior from?
“Learned in close personal groups (family, peers, friends).”
Wider community (neighborhood) also influences.
Principle 4 - Content Learned
Q: What specific things are learned about crime?
“Techniques (e.g., hacking), motives (e.g., revenge), rationalizations (e.g., ‘They deserve it’), and attitudes (pro-/anti-crime).”
Principle 5 - Directional Learning
Q: What does “directional learning” mean in Principle 5?
“Exposure tilts toward pro-crime or anti-crime attitudes.”
Determines whether someone views crime as acceptable.
Principle 6 - Imbalance Principle
Q: When does criminal behavior occur per Principle 6?
“When pro-crime attitudes outweigh anti-crime ones.”
E.g Peers glorifying theft outweighs parental warnings.
Explains why some with criminal peers don’t offend (anti-crime influences stronger).
Principle 7 - Variable Exposure
Q: How do associations vary according to Principle 7?
“Differs in:
Frequency (how often exposed)
Duration (length of exposure)
Priority (early-life exposure)
Intensity (emotional significance)”
Principle 8 - Same Learning Process
Q: How is criminal behavior learned compared to other behaviors?
“Same process as any behavior (e.g., via reinforcement/modeling).”
No special “criminal learning” mechanism.
Principle 9 - Beyond Need
Q: Why does DAT reject “need” as a cause of crime?
“Not everyone in poverty commits crime → learned attitudes determine actions.”
Contrasts with strain theory. Explains white collar crimes.
Summary
- Learned, not inherited - Criminal behavior is acquired through social interaction, not biology.
- Learned via interaction - Requires communication with others (verbal/non-verbal).
- Close personal groups - Primary learning sources are family, friends, and peers.
- Content of learning - Includes:
Techniques (e.g., lock-picking)
Motives/rationalizations (e.g., “Rich deserve to be robbed”)
Attitudes (pro-/anti-crime) - Directional learning - Exposure tilts toward pro-crime or anti-crime views.
- Imbalance principle - Crime occurs when pro-crime attitudes outweigh anti-crime ones.
- Variable exposure - Associations differ in:
Frequency (how often)
Duration (how long)
Priority (how early in life)
Intensity (emotional importance) - Same learning process - Crime is learned like any other behavior (e.g., via reinforcement).
- Beyond “need” - Poverty/desire alone don’t cause crime; learned attitudes are key.
Exam Tip
Q: What does FLD-CVIPS stand for?
Exam Tip: Use “FLD-CVIPS” mnemonic to recall principles:
Frequency/Length of exposure → Learned content → Directional → Close groups → Variable intensity → Interaction-based → Priority → Same as normal learning.
Evaluation: Major Contribution of DAT
Q: How did DAT shift criminology’s focus?
✅ Moved from biological/personality explanations to social learning.
✅ Introduced white-collar crime (e.g., fraud learned in workplaces). “Respected individuals” also commit crime.
❌ Ignores individual differences (not all exposed to crime become criminals).
Some resist these influences, suggests morality/personality.
Key Study: Sutherland (1939) – Crime as learned behavior. Kohlberg.
Evaluation: Supporting Evidence (Family & Peers)
Q: What evidence supports DAT?
- Osborn & West (1979): 40% of sons with criminal fathers offended vs. 13% without.
- Akers et al. (1979): Peer influence strongest predictor of teen drug use.
❌ Limitations: - Genetic confounds (traits may be inherited).
- Correlation ≠ causation (e.g., poverty links to both crime exposure and offending).
Evaluation: Methodological Issues
Q: Why is DAT hard to test scientifically?
- Relies on correlational data, difficult to establish cause and effect.(Cox et al., 2014).
- do criminals look for criminal peers, or vice versa.
- Cannot measure exact ratio of pro-/anti-crime attitudes needed to offend.
❌ Lacks falsifiability – weak scientific credibility vs. Eysenck’s measurable traits.
Evaluation: Explaining Crime Types
Q: Which crimes does DAT best explain?
✅ Non-violent crimes (theft, fraud) – learned via peers/family.
❌ Fails for impulsive crimes (murder, sexual offenses):
- England & Wales (2014): 500 homicides vs. 400K burglaries.
- Youth crime (Newburn, 2002) may need biological (e.g., impulsivity) explanations.
Evaluation: Overall Strengths
Q: What are DAT’s key strengths?
- Highlights social causes (e.g., gang influence).
- Supports rehabilitation (behavior can be unlearned).
- Explains cultural/class differences in crime rates.
Evaluation: Overall Weaknesses
Q: What are DAT’s key limitations?
- Reductionist: Ignores genes/psychology (e.g., Eysenck’s psychoticism).
- Untestable: No clear measure of “pro-criminal attitude” threshold.
- Incomplete: Can’t explain all crime types (e.g., impulsive violence).
Evaluation: Real-World Application
Q: How could DAT reduce crime?
- Divert at-risk youth from criminal peers (mentorship programs).
- Community interventions to promote anti-crime norms.
Example: Boston Gun Project (1990s) reduced gang violence by targeting peer networks
