Additional Exam Questions & Lecture Material

Below are the exam questions that will be included on the midterm exam. Be sure to pay attention only to the two questions from your section.

220A

1. Identify and briefly describe 2 of the four elements of Hirschi's Social Bonding theory. (4pts)
2. What were the two main types of psychological theory of criminal behavior that I briefly presented in class? (2pts)

220B

1. How did Prof. Akers suggest we modify the old saying, "birds of a feather flock together," to make it fit Differential Association theory better? (1pt)
2. Briefly describe how the handout on "Saints and Roughnecks" fits labeling theory. (2pts)


In the remainder of this blog post I will state the passages I quoted in class yesterday on labeling theory and then provide the lecture notes I had planned to cover before the midterm exam. I'll hit some of the highlights of these notes tomorrow in class. And don't forget, tomorrow is also showtime! SINGING THE THEORIES.

Passages on Labeling theory: Howard Becker in his book, The Outsiders, describes the crux of the theory: "One of the most crucial steps in the process of building a stable pattern of deviant behavior is likely to be the experience of being caught and publicly labeled as a deviant. Whether a person takes this step or not depends not so much on what he does as on what other people do...being caught and branded as a deviant has important consequences for one's further social participation and self-image."
Prof. Akers in criticism of labeling theory: "People are labelled as delinquent, criminal, homosexual, mentally ill, drug addicts, child molesters, and so on largely on the basis of overt acts they have committed or are believed to have committed. Therefore, the deviant behavior itself is prior to and forms the basis for the stigmatizing label. The behavior creates the label more than the label creates the behavior; and subsequent deviant behavior continues the label more than the label continues the behavior."

And now back to where we left off in my lecture notes:

F. Back in the 1970s the labeling thesis did have some impact on criminal justice policy, inspiring so-called "juvenile diversion programs"-- avoid labeling juvenile offenders and thereby locking them into a life of crime. Unfortunately, studies of such diversion programs have not demonstrated much effectiveness in stopping juveniles from continuing to commit crimes.
(Nonetheless, I believe avoiding the criminal justice system, prisons especially, when possible makes sense (eg. drug courts). Most nonviolent offenders and drug abusers need help more than punishment and the stigma attached to it.)

G. Labeling theory may have been a product of its time -- it became popular in the 1960s to criticize the criminal justice system, to see it as part of the problem (which I believe was important to recognize). But by the late 1970s, it was beginning to be rejected as a more conservative mood took hold.

H. Despite the strong criticism, Prof. Akers (among others) does see some promise in Braithwaite's revision. Finally, Akers fairly, and very broadly, identifies the principal strength and weakness of labeling theory:
"The principal strength of labeling theory is that it calls attention to the unintended consequences of social control. Its principal weakness is that it essentially ignores primary deviance and seriously underestimates the influence that other variables have on behavior in the first place and continue to have on its future occurrence."
__________________________________

Social Disorganization Theory

A. This theory originated at the University of Chicago in the 1920s and it is closely associated with a broader theoretical perspective known as "urban ecology" that developed there around the same time.

1. The urban ecologists developed various models to describe the city, its growth and development. They identified certain "natural areas" or zones, some of which had distinctly higher rates of criminal behavior. Why?

2. The social disorganization theorists contended that these high crime areas were characterized by a variety of indicators of social disorganization. For example, an especially crime-prone area was the so-called "zone of transition" -- an area near the commercial core which was changing from residential to commercial. It was characterized by physical decay, poor housing, incomplete and broken families, high rates of illegitimate births and an unstable (transient) heterogeneous population -- all indicators of social disorganization. (Similar to "rooming house area")

a.) Other characteristics identified in later versions of the theory (Sampson & Groves, 1989): lack of informal friendship networks, low participation in organizations, etc.

3. Normal people trying to cope with these destabalizing, abnormal conditions tend to get involved in criminal behavior.

4. This is the first truly macro theory we've covered, placing the blame on social conditions and focusing on rates.

B. They also contended that rapid industrialization and urbanization caused this social disorganization which, in turn, undermined social control exercised through traditional social order and values.
(In some ways, I see these theorists as the 1920s and 30s version of the so-called "moral majority" of the 1980s, a group which stressed the breakdown of traditional morality, decline of the family, secualrization of society (even urbanization), etc. as giving rise to high rates of crime and deviance.)

C. Certainly, things have changed in our cities and inner cities. If anything, conditions have deteriorated even further in our inner cities especially and crime rates are higher, even if they have declined somewhat in recent years, as brought out in books such as William Julius Wilson's The Truly Disadvantaged. Yet, there is some basis to question this theory,as Prof. Akers observes ---
"To what degree the relationship between inner-city residence and crime is a result of social disorganization remains uncertain...."

"Often the research does not carefully measure social disorganization..."

"The very fact that crime and deviance are high within an area is itself sometimes used, tautologically, as an empirical indicator that the area is socially disorganized...."

Furthermore, even in those areas characterized as the most disorganized, only a minority of youths and an even smaller minority of adults are involved in crime. And this is not to mention potential racial or class bias in police practices which may inflate the degree of crime in these areas.

1. Another problem with social disorganization theory, raised many years ago by a prominent American sociologist, C. Wright Mills, was the problem of bias. In an essay entitled, "The Ideology of Social Pathologists" (late '30s), he suggested that these social disorganization theorists had a strong anti-urban bias because of their small-town, religious upbringing, which they assumed to be the basis of social order.

D. Despite its apparent bias, among other problems mentioned, I believe social disorganization theory makes some sense and it suggests the need to address poor social conditions in order to address the crime problem. (this point comes through loud and clear in Michael Massing's book, The Fix, about the drug problem.)

_________________________________

Anomie/Strain Theory

A. Like social disorganization theory, this is basically a structural or macro theory which provides an explanation of the concentration of crime in lower class urban areas and among lower class minorities, as well as the overall high crime rate in America.

B. Although the term "anomie" derives from the work of Emile Durkheim, Merton gave it a different twist. He defined it as follows: "Anomie is the form that societal malintegration takes when there is a dissociation (or disjunction) between valued cultural ends and legitimate societal means to these ends."

C. This condition of anomie (or means-ends disjunction), Merton argued, was endemic to American society.(Indeed, one could argue today that the gap is as wide as ever between the so-called "haves" and "have nots".)

1. We have a strong emphasis on success in a monetary or material sense, but not an equally strong emphasis on socially approved means, i.e., getting ahead at any cost is a preoccupation. And the disjunction between means and ends is perpetuated by continuing economic and social inequality.
(This comes out in David Callahan's book, The Cheating Culture, where he describes a winner-take-all society where rewards are great for the few and most others struggle just to get by which contributes to what he calls "trickle-down corruption.")

2. So, those groups which are blocked from legitimate means to material success feel the pressure, strain more than others and are more likely to resort to illegitimate means.

D. Acutally, Merton identified five "modes of adaptation" to this strain, not all of which are criminal or deviant:

1. Conformity: one accepts the situation; strives for success through conventional, legitimate channels. Basically, the system works for you.

2. Innovation: this is the primary criminal response. You accept the goal of success but take advantage of illegitimate means to achieve it (i.e., create your own, or innovate). This is engaged in principally by the lower class.
(But I believe, as does the author of The Cheating Culture, David Callahan, this could apply to middle or upper classes -- depends on how you define success, what circles you run in, what "making it" means to you, which obviously is going to vary from person to person. Look for the handout from this book, pp. 172-173)

3. Rebellion: you reject both the means and ends, or reject "the system" (capitalism) altogether and seek to overthrow it.

4. Retreatism: this is the escapist response. Person gives up on both the goals and means; turns to drugs or alcohol. Much to be said for this mode of adaptation as well as innovation.

5. Ritualism: (most unusual term) Person gives up on the struggle and lowers his expectations to the point where they can be satisfied through conventional means. (This is considered "deviant," or abnormal, although in many ways it seems like a very rational rsponse.)

E. By the 1950s, Merton's theory was widely accepted and believed to be especially relevant to delinquent subcultures. But there were modifications. For example:

1. Albert Cohen (1955) developed a similar theory based on "status deprivation" (rather than material deprivation). The frustration, then, is felt over being deprived of status in conventional society as measured by conventional standards of dress, speech, etc.. So, not being accepted in conventional society, lower class delinquents react negatively to these middle class standards of behavior. They turn them on their head -- become aggressive, obnoxious, malicious out of status frustration (again, not necessarily material).
(Sort of the way the Roughnecks reacted to their label which placed them outside conventional society.)

2. Cloward and Ohlin pointed out that one must consider differential access to illegitimate opportunities. More likely to react to the strain of being blocked from legitimate means by taking the illegitimate path if it is available. (eg., access to the drug trade in some inner city areas.)

F. Research on this theory offers mixed support. Looking at official figures, the inverse relationship between social class and crime does appear to hold up, espcially considering serious offenses. There is less of a difference when considering minor offenses.

1. There is even a mixed picture when we consider the relationship between unemployment and crime -- citing a couple studies from the 1980s, Prof. Akers observes: "... there is little evidence that unemployment motivates people to commit criminal acts. Moreover, crime is as likely to affect employment as vice versa." (especially these days with employers' use of drug testing.)

2. Focusing just on the "social structural correlates" of crime such as social class, poverty, unemployment, racial heterogenity, there is some fairly strong evidence for the influence of such factors. And this is seen as consistent with Merton's anomie theory.
(Although one could still point out, this does not help us to sort out why only some individuals, and far from the majority, who live in these conditions get involved in crime.)

Concluding comment about macro theories:

Despite some of the problems we've seen with both social disorganization and anomie theories (our two macro theories), I would endorse the general policy implications that Prof. Akers well describes:
"The ultimate policy implications of any structural theory is that basic social changes need to be fostered to remove the criminogenic features of economic, political, and social institutions of society. The clear implication of anomie theory, for instance, is to promote the integration of cultural goals and socially approved means, and the redistribution of opportunites in the class system."
(The Cheating Culture draws a similar conclusion.)

1. Several, mostly piecemeal, projects along the above lines have been launched over the years (eg., Job Corps) with limited results. But in many cases they have suffered from political infighting, limited funding, etc.

_______________________________________

So, this brings us, more or less, to where I'd like to be. In class tomorrow I will highlight some of the points made in these lecture notes and hand out a copy of pp. 172-173 of The Cheating Culture which contains a great description of Merton's theory. Looking forward to seeing and hearing what you came up with interms of "singing the theories."