Unlock Secrets: Edwin Sutherland Theory Explained Simply

Differential association, a core concept within edwin sutherland theory, explains how individuals learn deviant behaviors through interactions. The American Sociological Association, a professional organization, has extensively studied Sutherland’s work and its impact on criminology. Chicago School of Sociology, a pioneering academic movement, significantly influenced Sutherland’s development of this theory. Consequently, understanding crime requires a close examination of edwin sutherland theory, particularly its principles regarding cultural transmission and learning processes, as shown by the work done by the Chicago School of Sociology within the American Sociological Association, using differential association as the core component to explain.

Understanding Edwin Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory

This article aims to provide a comprehensive yet straightforward explanation of Edwin Sutherland’s differential association theory, a cornerstone in criminology. We will break down the theory’s core principles, examine its strengths and weaknesses, and explore its relevance in contemporary society.

The Core Principles of Differential Association Theory

The Edwin Sutherland theory, fundamentally, proposes that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with others. This isn’t a matter of simple imitation; rather, it involves a complex process of absorbing values, attitudes, techniques, and rationalizations.

The Nine Propositions: Outlining the Theory

Sutherland articulated his theory in nine core propositions, each contributing to a deeper understanding of how criminal behavior is acquired.

1. Criminal behavior is learned. This is the bedrock of the entire theory. Criminality isn’t inherited or the result of individual pathology alone; it’s a learned behavior.
2. Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication. This learning occurs through communication, whether verbal or non-verbal, with other individuals.
3. The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs within intimate personal groups. The strongest influence comes from those closest to us – family, friends, and close acquaintances. This emphasizes the significance of peer influence and social circles.
4. When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (a) techniques of committing the crime, which are sometimes very complicated, sometimes very simple; (b) the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes. Learning encompasses not only the how-to of crime (techniques) but also the justification and reasoning behind it.
5. The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of legal codes as favorable or unfavorable. This focuses on the individual’s perception of laws. If someone encounters more definitions favoring violation of the law than obeying it, they are more likely to engage in criminal behavior.
6. A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law. This is the core principle of differential association. The balance of pro-crime and anti-crime definitions determines behavior. Think of it as a weighing scale; whichever side has more influence tips the scale.
7. Differential associations may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity. Not all associations are created equal. Frequency refers to how often the association occurs. Duration signifies the length of the association. Priority relates to how early in life the association takes place. Intensity represents the prestige or emotional attachment to the source of the association.
8. The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning. Criminal learning is not fundamentally different from learning any other skill or behavior. The same principles of association, reinforcement, and modeling apply.
9. While criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values, it is not explained by those general needs and values since non-criminal behavior is an expression of the same needs and values. Criminals and non-criminals may share similar goals (e.g., financial security), but they choose different paths to achieve them. The theory explains how they choose those paths, not why they have those needs.

Example Scenario: Applying the Propositions

Imagine a young person, Alex, who grows up in a neighborhood where petty theft is commonplace. Through interactions with friends (intimate personal group), Alex learns techniques for shoplifting (technique of committing the crime) and hears rationalizations like "the store won’t even miss it" (motives, drives, rationalizations). If Alex hears these justifications more frequently than messages emphasizing the importance of honesty and the law, they are more likely to engage in shoplifting (excess of definitions favorable to violation of law). The earlier Alex is exposed to these pro-crime messages, and the closer they are to the individuals sharing them (priority and intensity), the stronger the influence.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Theory

The Edwin Sutherland theory has had a significant impact on criminological thought, but it’s not without its limitations.

Strengths

• Emphasis on Social Environment: The theory highlights the crucial role of social interactions and environmental factors in shaping criminal behavior, moving away from purely individualistic explanations.
• Broad Applicability: The theory can be applied to a wide range of crimes, from petty theft to white-collar offenses.
• Heuristic Value: The theory has spurred extensive research into the social learning of crime and deviance.

Weaknesses

• Difficulty in Testing: Measuring the "excess of definitions" favorable to crime is challenging. Quantifying and comparing these definitions empirically can be subjective.
• Causality Issues: It’s difficult to definitively prove that differential association causes criminal behavior. It’s possible that individuals already predisposed to crime seek out associations with like-minded people. This is the selection effect.
• Ignores Individual Differences: The theory primarily focuses on external influences, potentially overlooking the role of individual personality traits, biological factors, and personal experiences that might also contribute to criminal behavior.
• Vagueness: Some critics argue that the theory is too vague and lacks specificity, making it difficult to apply in practice.

Edwin Sutherland Theory in Contemporary Society

Despite its limitations, Edwin Sutherland theory remains relevant in understanding crime today. It is often used to explain:

• Gang Membership: Individuals are often drawn into gangs through social connections and learn criminal behaviors within the group.
• Corporate Crime: Employees may learn unethical or illegal practices from colleagues and superiors.
• Cybercrime: Individuals may learn hacking techniques and justifications for engaging in cybercrime through online communities.

The theory underscores the importance of addressing social environments and promoting pro-social values to prevent crime. By understanding how criminal behavior is learned, we can develop more effective strategies for crime prevention and intervention.

So, there you have it—the gist of edwin sutherland theory broken down! Hopefully, you found this helpful and can now see how it applies to understanding criminal behavior. Keep exploring, and maybe even chat about it with others. Who knows what you’ll discover next?