More handpicked essays just for you.
Crime causation sociological perspective
Sociological and psychological explanation of crime
Crime causation sociological perspective
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Crime causation sociological perspective
Social structure theories put emphasis on poverty, lack of education, absence of marketable skills, and subcultural values as fundamental causes of crime. There are a variety of sources of crime data that confirm that crime rates are highest in neighborhoods characterized by poverty and social disorder. Social structure is often linked together with the concept of social change, which often deals with the change of the social structure. It can be viewed that a disadvantaged economic class position is a primary cause of crime. (Siegel, L. J., 2016). Three subtypes of social structure theories can be identified: social disorganization theory, strain theory, and culture conflict theory. The social disorganization theory concentrates on the conditions within the urban environment that affects
Merton that sees crime as a function of the conflict between people’s goals and the means available to obtain them. (Siegel, L. J., 2016). The theory states that society puts pressure on individuals to achieve socially accepted goals though they lack the means, this leads to strain which may lead the individuals to commit crimes. (Merton, Robert (1938). "Social Structure and Anomie". American Sociological Review. 3 (5): 672–682.) It is also believed that these strains can also lead to negative emotions like anger and frustration. These emotions cause pressure for the individual which can result in crime. Some individuals may use crime to reduce or escape from the strain or to lessen negative emotions. One example might be if an individual is unemployed for a long time, they may turn to crime such as theft or drug dealing for a source of income. They may also seek revenge from the person or company who fired them. There are several versions of strain theory and why some are most likely to lead to crime, why others increase crime and some strained individuals don’t turn to crime at
Merton recognised that individuals receive messages from society, which set acceptable behaviours to follow. He noted that a majority of citizens abide the acceptable behaviours, though there are numerous pressures that associate with the American Dream and the importance of the economy, which leads individuals to participate in deviant behaviours. Merton associated criminality and deviance with the American Dream goals, and how people attempt to achieve them, particularly the wealth component (Murphy & Robertson, 2008). Merton argued in 1938 that within unbalanced societies, the discrepancy between success goals and the endorsement of the means to achieve the goals, combined with limited opportunities manufactured the state of anomie. Further, Merton suggested that the anomic conditions in society were likely to tempt strain upon individuals, forming criminal behaviour adaptations. Particularly, the strain theory emphasised that those with high monetary aspirations are likely to innovate, resorting to unlawful activities, with the desire to channel success (Antonaccio, Gostjev & Smith, 2014). The strain theory connects to social causes, linking criminality with selfishness and egoism as the desire to
Two major sociological theories explain youth crime at the macro level. The first is Social Disorganization theory, created in 1969 by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay. The theory resulted from a study of juvenile delinquency in Chicago using information from 1900 to 1940, which attempts to answer the question of how aspects of the structure of a community contribute to social control. The study found that a community that is unable to achieve common values has a high rate of delinquency. Shaw and McKay looked at the physical appearance of the neighborhoods, the average income of the population, the ethnicity of the neighborhood, the percent of renters versus owners, and how fast the population of the area changed. These factors all contribute to neighborhood delinquency.
Both theories by Merton and Agnew are similar because their focus is that social situations and conflicts an individual’s comes in contact within his/her life, may produce crime by emphasizing the a goal of success, much more than the means to achieve it. With Merton’s theory he adopted Durkheim’s concept of anomie to explain deviance. Merton’s theory combined both structural and cultural factors. Merton insists that society promotes goals for their citizens and norms for other’s behavior in attempting to reach these goals. In Merton’s theory people do crime when they are unable to reach or accomplish goals. Merton’s theory also explains how an individual’s social structure prevents an individual from becoming economically fortunate. His theory of modern anomie and strain express that individuals respond to strain in 5 individual ways. Those five ways are conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. On the other hand Agnew general strain theory, feels strain comes from sources other than economic failure. Agnew general strain theory focuses on a few other types of strain and stress. Like the presentation of a negative stimuli, and the loss of a positive stimuli. Agnew feels that this sort of strain leads to a negative state of mind. The emotions like angry, frustration and fear, lead to crime and criminal behavior. One
The proposal of Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory in explaining criminal deviance is based on three concepts. The first concept is that people are not naturally inclined to commit crimes. Rather, their transition towards deviant behavior begins when they experience strain. The second concept is that once strain is present, depending on the severity of the stain, a person becomes victim to their own negative emotions like anger, jealousy, and frustration. Their response to those negative emotions may expedite their transition. The third concept looks at a person’s ability to cope with the strain and negative emotions. If a person has poor coping abilities they tend to become overwhelmed by the strain and the negative emotions they are feeling as a result of strain. Poor coping abilities may cause someone to commit crime in hopes of rectifying their situation. (Agnew, 2011)
According to Robert Agnew, “Strain Theory is based on the idea that delinquency results when individuals are unable to achieve their goals through legitimate channels, achievement or strike out at the source of their frustration in anger”. (Agnew, R. (1985). A Revised Strain Theory of Delinquency. Oxford journals. 64(1).151-166). The norms are violated to alleviate the strain that accompanies failure. When a good look is taken at the theories the strains might not only come from peoples frustrations with acquiring “ The American Dream”, but it becomes a mixture of strains such as economic deprivation, abuse, neglect, or the loss of a loved one. However, most people that experience strains do not commit crimes.
The General Strain Theory scope has an intention of providing a clear explanation for why and why not crime occurs across all levels of society, while maintaining that stress is a major cause of criminal involvement. When people experience negative emotions, such as anger, frustration, or depression, they are in result unhappy and upset, thus experiencing strains or stressors (Ganem, 2010). Crime is then a way of reducing or escaping from these strains, and it is their method of coping with their emotions. According to Agnew, “Strains refer to events or conditions that are disliked by individuals (1992,
Schmalleger describes the social structure as interrelationships among society’s institutions (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 151). It is also the basic foundation that sociologists use to comprehend society. There hasn’t been an agreed upon specific definition of social structure, however there have been numerous people with various concepts of social structure, to include but not limited to S. F. Nade, Ginsberg, Radcliffe Brown, Talcott Parsons, Harry M. Johnson, and MacIver and Page. According to Shelly Shah in the Sociology Discussion, taking all of those concepts into consideration the following five (5) views may be concluded as it relates to the subject (Shah, n.d.).
Therefore, the community has informal social control, or the connection between social organization and crime. Some of the helpful factors to a community can be informal surveillance, movement-governing rules, and direct intervention. They also contain unity, structure, and integration. All of these qualities are proven to improve crime rate. Socially disorganized communities lack those qualities. According to our lecture, “characteristics such as poverty, residential mobility, and racial/ethnic heterogeneity contribute to social disorganization.” A major example would be when a community has weak social ties. This can be caused from a lack of resources needed to help others, such as single-parent families or poor families. These weak social ties cause social disorganization, which then leads higher levels of crime. According to Seigel, Social disorganization theory concentrates on the circumstances in the inner city that affect crimes. These circumstances include the deterioration of the neighborhoods, the lack of social control, gangs and other groups who violate the law, and the opposing social values within these neighborhoods (Siegel,
This theory however as some have argued has emerged from social disorganisation theory, which sees the causes of crime as a matter of macro level disadvantage. Macro level disadvantage are the following: low socioeconomic status, ethnic or racial heterogeneity, these things they believe are the reasons for crime due to the knock on effect these factors have on the community network and schools. Consequently, if th...
Drawing from tenets of Marxist theory, critical criminology believe that crime results from the mode of production by capitalist and the economic structures they have created. Social classes have been divided into two: those whose income is secured by property ownership; and those whose income is secured by their labor. The resultant class structure influences the opportunities of an individual to succeed in life and his propensity to engage in crime. Although it encompasses the macro-economic factors that are rarely included in micro-economic analysis of crime, it does not substitute those macro factors, like unemployment, to micro factors, like being jobless. However, it combines the macro and micro factors in analyzing how micro factors of crime are integrated into the macro structures.
Furthermore, Merton presented a Strain theory, which was a micro-level approach that addressed the strain experienced by individuals who are in Anomie and their response in dealing with the disjunction between goals of success and the means available to attain them (Merton, 1964). As noted in the lecture, when individuals undergo the Strains of society and their interplay between scarce institutionalized means, they adapt in several ways (Conformity, Innovation, Ritualism, Retreatism, Rebellion). Not all adaptations involve crime, however, some adaptations include criminal behavior (Lecture, 2016).
Crime and criminalization are dependent on social inequality Social inequality there are four major forms of inequality, class gender race and age, all of which influence crime. In looking at social classes and relationship to crime, studies have shown that citizens of the lower class are more likely to commit crimes of property and violence than upper-class citizens: who generally commit political and economic crimes. In 2007 the National Crime Victimization Survey showed that families with an income of $15000 or less had a greater chance of being victimized; recalling that lower classes commit a majority of those crimes. We can conclude that crime generally happens within classes.
Strain theories of criminal behaviour have been amongst the most important and influential in the field of criminology. Taking a societal approach, strain theories have sought to explain deficiencies in social structure that lead individuals to commit crime (Williams and McShane 2010). Strain theories operate under the premise that there is a societal consensus of values, beliefs, and goals with legitimate methods for achieving success. When individuals are denied access to legitimate methods for achieving success, the result is anomie or social strain. This often leads an individual to resort to deviant or criminal means to obtain the level of success that they are socialized to pursue. This is the basic premise of strain theory. This paper will explore the evolution of strain theories by first examining their intellectual foundations which laid the foundation for Robert Merton’s theories of anomie and strain. Merton’s strain theory will be discussed in detail including the modes of adaptation that people use when faced with societal strain. Finally, the paper will conclude with the strengths and weaknesses of Merton’s strain theory and an examination of the criminological theories and social policies it has influenced.
Social Disorganization theory talks about how one’s surroundings impacts the risk of crime around them. The Social Disorganization Theory was developed to show how much a neighbors and its surroundings affect people and crime. There are many factors that go with crime according to the Social Disorganization Theory. One major factor is Ethnic Diversity. According to the Social Disorganization Theory, the more diverse urban areas are, the more likely their is to be crime committed. (Social Disorganization, 2003). The ethnicity of the community affects crime because of the lack of communication. If you have language barriers, and people who do not understand each other, they may be some tension resulting in more crime. Social Disorganization
Social network theory has proven to be a powerful tool in the study of social structure and behaviour of wild animals (Krause, Lusseau, & James, 2009; Kurvers, Krause, Croft, Wilson, & Wolf, 2014; Pinter-Wollman et al., 2013). Here, we have shown that high resolution spatio-temporal data of animal movement from acoustic telemetry can be used in combination with social network analysis to access the social behaviour of free-ranging marine animals for which long-term direct observation is otherwise difficult. This approach has demonstrated that wobbegongs will form long-term and/or casual associations with particular conspecifics. Associations between sharks occurred more often than would be expected by chance, and both assortative mixing and space-use correlations