According to the differential association theory, people learn values, attitudes, techniques, and motives that contribute to criminal behavior through their interactions with other people. A theory of deviance based on learning has been proposed by sociologist Edwin Sutherland in 1939 and revised in 1947, and it refers to a social learning theory. For the past few decades, the theory of the social construction of crime has continued to play an enormous role in the field of criminology.
Key Takeaways: Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory
- It was the sociology professor Edwin Sutherland who proposed differential association theory for the first time as a learning theory of deviance in 1939.
- During the course of one’s interactions with others, the differential association theory proposes that values, attitudes, techniques, and motives for criminal behavior are learned through one’s interactions with other individuals.
- Despite criticism that differential association theory fails to take personality traits into account, it remains one of the most important theories in the field of criminology.
Table of Contents
Origins
As a result of Sutherland’s theory of differential association, the explanations for criminal behavior were many and inconsistent before he introduced this theory. In an attempt to rectify this, law professor Jerome Michael and philosopher Mortimer J. Adler published a critique of the field that argued that criminology had not produced any scientifically-based theories to explain why criminals do the things they do. He viewed this as a call to arms and used rigorous scientific methods to develop a theory based on differential association in order to address this issue.
It is easy to see how Sutherland’s thinking was influenced by the Chicago School of sociologists. A key source of inspiration for him was the work of Shaw and McKay, which investigated how delinquency in Chicago was distributed geographically, and the work of Sellin, Wirth, and Sutherland himself, who found that crime in modern societies was the result of conflicts between different cultures, and Sutherland’s own work on professional thieves, which found that in order to become a professional thief, one must be part of a group of professional thieves and learn from them in order to become a member of the group.
Initially, Sutherland outlined his theory in the third edition of his book Principles of Criminology, which was published in 1939. In 1947, he revised the theory for the fourth edition of the book, which he published the following year. There has been a great deal of research on differential association theory because it has remained popular in the field of criminology for a long time and has sparked a great deal of interest. This theory has remained relevant because of its ability to explain different types of criminal activity, from juvenile delinquency to white collar crime, which is one of the reasons for its continued relevance.
Nine Propositions of Differential Association Theory
Unlike Sutherland’s theory, Sutherland’s theory does not explain why a person becomes a criminal; instead, the theory explains how it occurs. According to him, differential association theory is based on nine propositions that summarize its principles:
- There is a learning process involved in all criminal behavior.
- As a result of interactions with other people, the process of communication enables criminal behavior to be learned.
- Among the most effective ways to learn about criminal behavior is through intimate relationships and groups of people.
- As part of the process of learning criminal behavior, an individual may have to learn specific techniques that can be used as well as motives and rationalizations that may justify criminal activity as well as attitudes necessary to orient them towards such behavior.
- An individual learns the direction of his or her motives and drives towards criminal behavior through the interpretation of the legal codes of his or her area which are either favorable or unfavorable to that specific individual.
- The number of favorable interpretations of the law that support violating it outweighs the number of unfavorable interpretations that oppose it. In such a case, an individual will choose to become a criminal.
- It is important to note that not all differential associations are the same. Depending on how frequently, how intensely, how urgently, and for how long they occur, they can vary greatly.
- Through the process of interacting with others, people are able to learn more about criminal behaviors in a way that is similar to how they learn about any other behavior.
- As a result of generalized needs and values, criminal behavior may be an expression of those needs and values, but they do not explain why people do what they do because other types of behavior also expresses the same values and needs.
Understanding the Approach
Differential association takes a social psychological approach to explain how an individual becomes a criminal by taking a look at his or her behavior. In this theory, it is speculated that an individual will act criminally when the definitions that favor violating the law are greater than those that do not. It would be ideal if definitions in favor of violating the law were more specific. An example of this would be to say, “This store has an insurance policy.”. I think stealing these items would be considered a victimless crime if I were to steal them. Definitions can also be more general, such as, “This is public land, so I have the right to do whatever I want on it.” These definitions motivate and justify criminal activity. There are, however, definitions that are unfavorable to violating the law that push back against these notions. There are a variety of definitions of immorality, such as, “Stealing is immoral” or “Violating the law is always wrong.”.
In addition to this, individuals are likely to put different weights on the definitions they are presented with in their environment, depending on how they were raised. The differences between these definitions will depend on a number of factors, including the frequency with which a given definition is encountered, how early in life a definition was first presented, and how much value is attached to the relationship between an individual and the individual presenting the definition.
There is no doubt that the individual is most likely to be influenced by the definitions provided by friends and family members, but education can also be acquired at school or through the media. In the media, for example, criminals are often romanticized in a positive light. In the case where an individual has a predilection for stories of mafia kingpins, such as the TV series The Sopranos or the Godfather films, exposure to this media may have a negative effect on the individual’s ability to learn because it contains some messages that promote breaking the law. Individuals may be influenced to engage in criminal behavior by these messages if they are influenced by those messages and focus on them.
As well as this, even if an individual has the inclination to commit a crime, he or she must have the necessary skills to be able to carry it out. For example, there can be skills that are more complex and challenging to learn, such as those involved in computer hacking, or they can be more easily accessible, such as stealing goods from stores.
Critiques
In the field of criminology, the differential association theory has been a game-changer since its inception. In spite of this, the theory has been criticized for failing to take into account the individual differences among individuals. Differential association theory cannot explain how personality traits can interact with one’s environment to produce outcomes that cannot be explained by its underlying assumptions. In order to ensure that a person’s environment more closely matches their perspective, they can, for example, change their environment. There is also the possibility that they may be surrounded by influences that do not support the importance of criminal activity and still choose to rebel against these influences by becoming criminals anyway. It is important to understand that people are independent creatures with individual motivations. There is a possibility that they may not learn to become criminals in the way differential association predicts they will in the future.
There is a theory called differential association theory that suggests that people learn the values, attitudes, techniques, and motivations for criminal behavior from their interactions with others. A learning theory of deviance is a theory of deviance that was first proposed by sociologist Edwin Sutherland in 1939 and revised by him in 1947. Throughout its history, the theory has been of immense importance to the field of criminology and has continued to do so.
Key Takeaways: Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory
- It was the sociology professor Edwin Sutherland who proposed differential association theory for the first time as a learning theory of deviance in 1939.
- During the course of one’s interactions with others, the differential association theory proposes that values, attitudes, techniques, and motives for criminal behavior are learned through one’s interactions with other individuals.
- Despite criticism that differential association theory fails to take personality traits into account, it remains one of the most important theories in the field of criminology.
Origins
In the past, there were many and varied explanations for criminal behavior before Sutherland introduced his theory of differential association. The critics of the field, including law professor Jerome Michael and philosopher Mortimer J. Adler, viewed this as a weakness, and they made the argument that criminology had failed to produce any scientifically-based theories to explain criminal behavior. The differential association theory was developed by Sutherland after he saw this as a call to arms and he used rigorous scientific methods to develop it.
There is no doubt that Sutherland was influenced by sociologists from the Chicago School of thought. The work of Shaw and McKay, which investigated the distribution of delinquency geographically in Chicago, was particularly influential on him: he took cues from those two sources. As a result of the work of Sellin, Wirth, and Sutherland himself, which found that crimes were a result of conflicts between different cultures in modern societies, and Sutherland’s own study on professional thieves, which concluded that in order to become a professional thief, one must become a member of a group of professional thieves and learn from them.
The principles of criminology were presented by Sutherland for the first time in 1939 in the third edition of his book Principles of Criminology. As a result, he revised the theory for the fourth edition of the book, which was published in 1947. There has been a considerable amount of research on differential association theory in the field of criminology over the past few decades and it has remained popular in the field. It can be argued that the theory remains relevant because it has the ability to explain all kinds of criminal activity, such as juvenile delinquency and white collar crime, which is one of the reasons for its continued relevance.
Nine Propositions of Differential Association Theory
Unlike Sutherland’s theory, Sutherland’s theory does not explain why a person becomes a criminal; instead, the theory explains how it occurs. According to him, differential association theory is based on nine propositions that summarize its principles:
- There is a learning process involved in all criminal behavior.
- As a result of interactions with other people, the process of communication enables criminal behavior to be learned.
- Among the most effective ways to learn about criminal behavior is through intimate relationships and groups of people.
- As part of the process of learning criminal behavior, an individual may have to learn specific techniques that can be used as well as motives and rationalizations that may justify criminal activity as well as attitudes necessary to orient them towards such behavior.
- An individual learns the direction of his or her motives and drives towards criminal behavior through the interpretation of the legal codes of his or her area which are either favorable or unfavorable to that specific individual.
- The number of favorable interpretations of the law that support violating it outweighs the number of unfavorable interpretations that oppose it. In such a case, an individual will choose to become a criminal.
- It is important to note that not all differential associations are the same. Depending on how frequently, how intensely, how urgently, and for how long they occur, they can vary greatly.
- Through the process of interacting with others, people are able to learn more about criminal behaviors in a way that is similar to how they learn about any other behavior.
- Despite the fact that criminal behavior could be an expression of generalized needs and values, they don’t explain the behavior, since non-criminal behavior expresses the same kinds of needs and values.
Understanding the Approach
Differential association takes a social psychological approach to explain how an individual becomes a criminal by taking a look at his or her behavior. According to the theory, an individual will engage in criminal behavior when the definitions that favor violating the law exceed those that do not. The definitions of what is considered a violation of the law could be very specific. An example of this would be, “This store has insurance coverage. In the case of stealing these items, it is a victimless crime.” This is also a general definition. For instance, “This is public land, so I have the right to do whatever I want on it.” Such definitions are motivating and justifying the act of stealing. It should be noted that definitions that are unfavorable to violating the law tend to push back against these notions. In some cases, such definitions can be as simple as “stealing is immoral” or “Violating the law is always wrong.”.
In addition to this, individuals are likely to put different weights on the definitions they are presented with in their environment, depending on how they were raised. The differences between these definitions will depend on a number of factors, including the frequency with which a given definition is encountered, how early in life a definition was first presented, and how much value is attached to the relationship between an individual and the individual presenting the definition.
There is no doubt that the individual is most likely to be influenced by the definitions provided by friends and family members, but education can also be acquired at school or through the media. It is not uncommon for the media to romanticize criminals, for instance. I believe that if a person enjoys stories about mafia kingpins, such as the TV show The Sopranos or the films The Godfather, the exposure to these media may impact their ability to learn because these media may include messages that encourage breaking the law. Individuals may become more inclined to engage in criminal behavior if they focus on those messages, which could lead to them choosing to engage in criminal behavior.
As well as this, even if a person has the inclination to commit a crime, he or she must possess the skills to be able to carry out the crime. There could be a variety of skills that can be difficult to learn, such as those involved in computer hacking, or they could be simpler and more accessible, such as those involved in stealing from stores.
Critiques
It has been a game-changer in the field of criminology since it was introduced more than a decade ago when the differential association theory was developed. Nevertheless, there has been criticism that the theory does not take individual differences into account, and this has led to criticisms that the theory fails to consider individual differences. A person’s personality traits may interact with the environment in such a way as to result in outcomes that cannot be explained by differential association theory as a result of the interaction between the two. People can change the environment in which they live as an example in order to make it more suitable for the perspectives they hold in order to make it more suitable for the way in which they live. There is also a possibility that they may be surrounded by influences that don’t believe in the value of criminal activity, so they choose to rebel by becoming criminals in spite of these influences. An individual is a self-motivated, independent being who seeks to fulfill his or her own goals. Therefore, there is a possibility that they will not learn to become criminals in the way differential association predicts they will.