Edwin H. Sutherlands Differential Association - Research Paper Example

Edwin H. Sutherland’s Differential Association Abstract The paper deals with the Differential Association theory developed by Edwin H. Sutherland, who is considered to be a Father of American Criminology. Biographical overviews, as well as considerations about the basic theoretical points of the theorists are considered further on. Key words: the Differential Association theory, behavioral patterns, social environment, cultural transmission, juvenile delinquency.   Introduction Edwin H. Sutherland’s life started on August 13, 1883 in Gibbon, Nebraska. This talented theorists and criminologist lived till 1950. His life and educational experience occurs in Canada and America. At first he studied at Grand Island College and then he continued his education at Sioux Falls College in South Dakota (Crawford, 2009). After graduation from college, he entered graduate school at the University of Chicago and received his doctorate degree. At this point his attention was shifted from history to sociology and he was interested in studying crime. Human behavior, as suggested by Sutherland is determined by social influence or behavioral templates and not genetic or personal features. According to Sutherland, the society and the people around future criminal are responsible for his future misdeeds. After teaching at the University of Minnesota (1926 and 1929) he was considered to be the greatest criminologist of the country. Sociology as the science was positioned by Sutherland as a scientific complex tool, directed on social problems control and prevention. In other words, the main theoretical developments by Sutherland concerned crime prevention. Such famous books as the Professional Thief (1937), the third edition of Principles of Criminology (1939) were written during that period. The Differential Association Developments 1939 is worth-mentioning as it was a really remarkable year for Edwin H. Sutherland. The great theorist, sociologist and criminologist developed his theory of Differential Association that became well-known and widely used. The concept of Differential Association can be interpreted in the following words: the criminal behavior is obtained from social templates of behavior or in the process of social interaction with people around the potential criminal. An offender is formed by the people around him and the society he lives in. Modern society is characterized by inequality and this is the main reason of criminal behavior. The initiators of the Chicago School were greatly respected by Sutherland and he took into account the development by Shaw and McKay, theorists of the school (The Chicago School I: Park & Burgess. "Social Ecology"). Juvenile delinquency was developed by Sutherland on the basis of their concepts and until now this theory is very popular among the modern theorists of criminology. Crime causation is developed with respect to Sutherland’s differential association concept. The ecological and cultural transmission theory of Chicago School was appreciated by Sutherland and he claimed that crimes occur because of unfavorable social environment (The Chicago School I: Park & Burgess. "Social Ecology"). The symbolic interactionism theory and the developments of Chicago theorists in the field of culture conflict were also taken into account by the criminologist. Both individual’s criminal behavior and the developments of social groups’ crimes were considered by Sutherland on the basis of the abovementioned theories of Chicago School. Jerome Michael and Mortimer J. Adler were other influential theorists for the father of Criminology, Sutherland (Willson, 1983). The patterns of criminological behavior could be different for various individuals. Not only environment of the individuals, but also the greatest values of them are determinant factors for explication of criminal behavior in the potential criminological environment.   In case there is a conflict of values, crime may occur. There are the following basic postulates of the differential association theory: it is possible to learn/borrow the templates of criminal behavior from the environment; criminal behavior is the result of communication with other persons, who are criminals, or who are surrounded by the criminological environment; criminal behavior may be obtained by different participants of intimate social groups; different triggers of criminal behavior and different means of such kind of behavior extrapolation are evident; when an individual obtains perverted values of violation of law, he may become criminal; differential associations are dynamic; criminal behavior learning may interfere with other ways of behavior etc (Garland and Sparks, 2000). Thus, in accordance with Differential Association, different values obtained in the process of social interaction or communication may support or oppose to criminal behavior. In case an individual has an excess of criminal values, he is more open to commitment of numerous crimes. Basically, Sutherland's Differential Association is essential for interpretation of criminal behavior of those individuals, who are exposed to abundant number of criminally favorable values. He just talks about "excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of the law" (Biglan 1995, p. 481). Therefore, Sutherland is more concerned about definitions of crime and the way they exert influence on potential criminals. The key word is “definition”. Thus, juvenile delinquency is developed on the basis of borrowed criminal perverted social or behavioral templates. Nevertheless, the theorist does not explain the way an individual becomes a criminal. There is no set and evident mechanism of “how this happens”. Sutherland, like many other theorists, underlines possible determinant factors of the way an individual may become a criminal, but there is no doubt that social environment and social values are determinant factors of a potential criminal behavior of an individual as the influence of the society can’t be and should not be underestimated. Conclusion With this respect, criminological theory by Sutherland is effective in the modern context of social misbalance: there are many people, who live on the breadline and rich people. In the modern world there is no equal rights democracy struggles for. Rich people have many privileges. A class of oligarchy and a class of poor people are opposed to each other. There is an evident conflict of values nowadays and in spite of the fact that “white collar crimes” occur in the society, crimes committed by “underprivileged” individuals have greater rates and there is a need to explore a basis for a potential criminal behavior among the individuals from a socially unfavorable class. References 1. Biglan, A. (1995). Translating what we know about the context of antisocial behavior into a lower prevalence of such behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, pp. 479–492. 2. Crawford, A. (2009). Crime prevention policies in comparative perspective. Cullompton: Willan. 3. Garland, D. and Sparks, R. (2000). Criminology, social theory and the challenge of our times. British Journal of Criminology, 40(2), pp. 189-204. 4. The Chicago School I: Park & Burgess. "Social Ecology". [online]. Available at: http://www.crimetheory.com/Soc1/Chic1.htm [Accessed 19th September 2010]. 5. Wilson, J. Q., 1983. Thinking about crime. New York: Random House. Read More