Psychological explanations: Differential Association Theory

Question 1

Who came up with the differential association theory and when ?

Answer 1

Sutherland in 1939

Question 2

What does the differential association theory explain?

Answer 2

How criminal behaviour is learnt rather than inherited

Question 3

What approaches does this theory link to ?

Answer 3

Behaviourism and social learning theory

Question 4

Summarise the differential association theory to explaining criminality

Answer 4

• Criminal behaviour is learnt rather than inherited
• Its learnt through associations with others who we have a close and personal relationship with and you learn attitudes and techniques from them
• Everyone’s associations are different as some have more pro-crime where as others have more anti-crime
• When pro-crime attitudes outweigh anti-crime attitudes then criminality will occur
• If your pro-crime attitudes and techniques are reinforced you continue committing crime
• We can mathematically predict the likelihood that someone will commit a crime if we know the frequency, intensity and duration of pro-crime attitudes and anti-crime attitudes they are exposed to

Question 5

How did Sutherland give his theory a scientific basis ?

Answer 5

He developed a set of scientific principles that could explain all types of offending which is :

• The conditions which are said to cause crime should be present when the crime is present, and they should be absent when the crime is absent

His theory was designed to discriminate between individuals who become offenders and those who don’t, regardless of their class or ethnic background

Question 6

How does Sutherland’s theory explain reoffending rates ?

Answer 6

Inside the prison, inmates will learn specific techniques off the others who are in there as they may be more experienced etc and they will use these once they’ve been released. This learning could occur indirectly by observational learning and imitation or directly through tuition of offending peers

Question 7

Strengths of the differential association theory

Answer 7

P- Practical application
E - We can use this theory to predict the likelihood that someone will offend as if their family members are offenders or their peers commit criminal acts then there’s a higher chance they too will commit crime
E - This means we can put in early intervention for those more likely to commit crime and outline the consequences of their actions if they decide to imitate these people (expose them to more anti-crime attitudes). Similarly, things like not putting first time prisoners in the same place as experienced offenders may help to reduce re offending rates once they leave.
L - Therefore, this theory can be used to predict how likely it is someone will commit a crime so interventions can be put in place to stop this or reduce reoffending
H- However, this could lead to a SFP if people around you think your going to commit a crime

P - Supporting evidence
E - Farrington - conducted a longitudinal study on the development of anti-social and offending behaviour in 411 males living in a deprived area of London. This began when they was 8. He found that between the ages 10 and 50 41% of the sample committed at least 1 offence and found the biggest risk factor between 8-10 for later offending was family criminality.
E - This shows that when the children are brought up around family members who had pro-crime attitudes then it is more likely that they too will commit a crime when they are older. Meaning they may have learnt criminal attitudes and techniques off them, causing them to commit crime.
L - Therefore, this supports the differential association theory as it shows how when people who you are close to have pro-crime attitudes your more likely to imitate this and even learn techniques from them and turn to offending, therefore, supporting the idea that criminality is learnt.
H- 41% is still quite low so they’re must be other factors

Question 8

Weaknesses of the differential association theory

Answer 8

P - Lacks cause and effect
E - This is because we don’t know for certain if it is the socialisation from family members that leads to crime or whether this could be down to other factors such as genes.
E - This is because Sutherland suggests that an individual is more likely to commit crimes when those who are close to them like their family have pro-crime attitudes however, this could be supporting the biological explanation as if could be explained by inherited genes from family members. Similarly, those who may have a criminal predisposition through genes may seek out others with criminal values like themselves which explains why their friends too also have these pro-crime attitudes
L - Therefore, it may lack validity as no cause and effect can be established and it may be supporting the biological explanation so it isn’t an accurate reason as to why people commit crimes

P - Not a full explanation
E - It suggests that everyone who is surrounded by more pro-crime attitudes than anti-crime attitudes will commit crimes however it fails to explain why not everyone will.
E - This means that it doesn’t account for people exposed to more pro-crime attitudes but don’t commit crime meaning that this theory still needs more development to explain this,
L - Therefore, a weakness of the differential association theory is that it does not account for all responses to socialisation as not everyone exposed to more pro-crime attitudes will commit crime