06-Hagan-45315.qxd 8/27/2007 5:37 PM Page 145 CHAPTER 6 SOCIOLOGICAL MAINSTREAM THEORIES Major Sociological Theoretical Approaches in Sutherland’s Theory of “Differential Association” Criminology In the News 6.1 CAP Index, Inc.., Crime Vulnerability Anomie Theories Assessment Emile Durkheim and “Anomie” Miller’s “Focal Concerns” Merton’s Theory of Anomie Matza’s “Delinquency and Drift” Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory (GST) Social Control Theories Subcultural Theories Reckless’s “Containment” Theory Cohen’s “Lower Class Reaction” Theory Hirschi’s “Social Bond” Theory Cloward and Ohlin’s “Differential Opportunity” Theory Gottfredson and Hirschi’s “General Theory of Crime” Social Process Theories John Hagan’s “Power-Control” Theory The Chicago School Developmental and Life Course (DLC) Theories Shaw and McKay’s “Social Disorganization” Theory Farrington’s “Antisocial Potential” (AP) Theory Crime Files 6.1 Designing Out Crime Sampson and Laub’s “Life Course” Criminality Positive criminology accounts for too much delinquency. Taken at their terms, delinquency [crime] theories seem to predict far more delinquency than actually occurs. If delinquents were in fact radically different from the rest of conventional youth . Then involvement in delinquency would be more permanent and less transient, more pervasive and less intermittent than is apparently the case. Theories of delinquency yield an embarrassment of riches, which seemingly go unmatched in the real world. —David Matza, Delinquency and Drift (1964) he early classical, biological, and psychological traditions in criminology theory were similar in their relatively T conservative view of society (the consensus model) as well as in their search for the cause of crime in either lack of fear of deterrence, defective individual genetics, or the psyche. The individual criminal was the unit of analy- sis. The only departures from this deviant behavior approach to criminality were found in the writings of the eco- nomic theorists (Marx and Bonger) and the ecologists (Quetelet and Guerry). Economic and ecological theories constitute the groundwork for the preeminence of sociological approaches to criminological theory beginning in the 1930s in the United States. Societal conditions, groups, social disorganization, and conflict have become addi- tional units of analysis. Crime is perceived as a status (definition) as well as behavior (pathology), and sociological criminology in general takes a more critical stance toward the society itself as generator of criminal conduct. 06-Hagan-45315.qxd 8/27/2007 5:37 PM Page 146 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Major Sociological Theoretical Approaches in Criminology Table 6.1 is a more detailed outline of the sociological theories that were briefly presented in Table 4.1, Major Theoretical Approaches in Criminology. These include mainstream sociological theories: anomie, social process, social control, and developmental and life-course theories. Discussion will begin with the mainstream tradition and the views of late nineteenth- century sociologist Émile Durkheim and the “anomie theories” that he inspired. Other representa- tives of this approach are Robert Merton, Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin, and Albert Cohen. Anomie Theories Émile Durkheim and “Anomie” The writings of French sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) were in sharp contrast to the Social Darwinist, individualist, and psychological and biological positivist theories dominant in the Table 6.1 Major Theoretical Approaches in Mainstream Criminology (Sociological)* Theoretical School Major Themes/Concepts Major Theorists Sociological “crime reflects consensus mode” Mainstream Anomie Theory “anomie (normlessness) lessens social control” Durkheim “anomie (gap between goals and means)creates Merton deviance” “differential social opportunity” Cloward and Ohlin “lower class reaction to middle class values” Cohen Social Process “social disorganization and social conditions” Shaw and McKay “routine activities” Cohen and Felson “crime is learned behavior, culturally/subculturally Sutherland transmitted” “local concerns of lower class” Miller “subterranean values, drift techniques of Matza neutralization” Social Control “containment theory” Reckless “social bonds weakened reducing individual stakes in Hirschi conformity” “low self-control and self-interest” Gottfredson and Hirschi Developmental/ “antisocial potential” Farrington Life Course “longitudinal studies” Blumstein “life course criminality” Sampson and Laub *See Table 7.1 for other theoretical approaches in criminology. 146 06-Hagan-45315.qxd 8/27/2007 5:37 PM Page 147 CHAPTER 6: Sociological Mainstream Theories late nineteenth century. The works of Durkheim represented a return to the thinking and orienta- tion of the statistical/ecological theories advocated by Quetelet and Guerry, an approach that had been preempted by the popularity of Lombroso and the early biological positivists. In his works—which included The Division of Labor in Society (1964), originally published in 1893, and Suicide (1951), first released in 1897—Durkheim insisted on the primacy of groups and social organizations as explanatory factors of human misconduct. As we said in Chapter 1, he viewed crime as a normal phenomenon in society because group reactions to deviant actions assist human groups in defining their moral boundaries. In his doctoral dissertation, The Rules of Sociological Method (1950), which was completed in 1893, Durkheim defined the sociologists’ role as that of systematic observers of “social facts,” empirically observable group characteristics that impact on human behavior. Durkheim’s analysis of suicide clearly demonstrated his hypothesis of group influences on individual propensity to suicide. In Suicide (1951) he identified several types, which included: altruistic (“selfless” suicide), egoistic (self-centered suicide), and anomic (suicide due to “anomie” or a state of normlessness in society). The latter concept is Durkheim’s principal contribution to the field of criminology. The term anomie appeared in the English language as early as 1591 and generally referred to a disregard for law (Fox, 1976, p. 115). Anomie, literally from the Greek “without norms,” as used by Durkheim involves a moral malaise; a lack of clear-cut norms with which to guide human conduct (normlessness). It may occur as a pervasive condition in society because of a failure of individuals to internalize the norms of society, an inability to adjust to changing norms, or even conflict within the norms themselves. Social trends in modern urban-industrial societies result in changing norms, confusion, and lessened social control over the individual. Individualism increases and new lifestyles emerge, per- haps yielding even greater freedom but also increasing the possibility for deviant behavior. The close ties of the individual to the family, village, and tradition (what Durkheim calls “mechanical solidarity”), though confining to the individual, maintained social control. In modern societies (characterized by “organic solidarity”) constraints on the individual weaken. In a theme that would influence many later criminological theories, Durkheim viewed anomie in modern societies as pro- duced by individual aspirations and ambitions and the search for new pleasures and sensations that are beyond achievement even in times of prosperity (Durkheim, 1951, p. 256). This notion of anomie would influence a number of criminological theories, constituting a theoretical school of thought within mainstream or conventional criminology that began with the work of Robert Merton in the late thirties and continued with Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin and Albert Cohen in the post-World War II period. Chronologically preceding these later develop- ments in the anomie tradition was the work of “the Chicago school” of sociology and another major approach—the social process school of thought. These theories were less concerned with the origin of crime in society and concentrated instead on the social process (learning, socialization, subcultural transmission) by which criminal values were transmitted to individuals by groups with which they were affiliated. Merton’s Theory of “Anomie” As part of the jointly sponsored American Society of Criminology and Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences’ “Criminology and Criminal Justice Oral History Project,” Robert Merton described how he developed some of his theories (American Society of Criminology, 2004). He was interested in examining “what is it about our society and cultural institutions, not just individual characteristics such as feeblemindedness, that causes deviance?” There is a dysfunction between the American dream (a cultural value) of success and social structure (means of achieving). Class and ethnic 147 06-Hagan-45315.qxd 8/27/2007 5:37 PM Page 148 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY structures provided differential access. Merton wanted to look at deviance in addition to conform- ity in society and explain differential rates. Functionalism had concentrated on positive functions of things, and so he wanted to explore their dysfunctions. Robert Merton’s theory of “anomie” first appeared in 1938 in an article titled “Social Structure and Anomie.” Modifying Durkheim’s original concept, Merton (1957, pp. 131–94) viewed anomie as a condition that occurs when discrepancies exist between societal goals and the means available for their achievement. This discrepancy or strain between aspirations and achievement has resulted in Merton’s conception