Forensic: A Psychological Theory Of Offending: Differential Association

Front 1

Who created the Differential Association theory and what other theory is it similar to?

Back 1

Edwin Sutherland
Social learning theory

Front 2

What are the processes that create a criminal, accoring to the theory?

Back 2

Learning attitudes towards crime
Learning of specific criminal acts

Front 3

What did Sutherland say could be used to calculate whether someone was to become a criminal or not?

Back 3

Frequency, intensity and duration of exposure to deviant behaviours and attitudes.

Front 4

What are the attitudes, described by Sutherland, that need to be weighed up for use to predict future criminality?

Back 4

Pro-criminal attitudes
Anti-criminal attitudes

Front 5

What is the basis of the differential association theory?

Back 5

That criminal behaviours occur due to socialisation processes, interactions and the aquisition of criminal behaviours and ideas from pro-criminal peers

Front 6

How is the differential association theory different to the social learning theory?

Back 6

The SLT focuses on the role of one role model and vicarious or dirent reinforcement in the development of a behaviour. The individual imitates their role models behaviours. The DAT however believes that behaviours are learnt from watching multiple peers performing a task por through direct tuition- rather than direct or indirect reinforcement from the role model.

Front 7

Evaluation: What did Farrington find and does it support the DAT or not?

Back 7

411 males from inner city London. All deprived. Lontitudinal study from 8-50. Between 10-50, 41% of ppts had committed at least one criminal offence. The most criminally active years were those of 19-28.
Interviews with ppts and parents were carried out to assess behaviour, home life, schooling and if they'd committed any crimes they were not caught for.
Yes it's in support of the DAT

Front 8

Evaluation: what did Osborne and West find in their research, does it support the DAT?

Back 8

Fathers and their sons in jail. 40% of fathers in jail had a son who was also convicted of committing a criminal offence. Showing peer influence has an impact on criminality.
It can be argued the findings don't support the DAT as it is unclear whether biology or socialk factors caused both father and son to become criminals, showing the DAT is an incomplete theory

Front 9

Is the research deterministic? Why/why not?

Back 9

Yes. It ignores the role of individual differences in the development of and acceptance of criminal behaviours. The theory also ignores biological and cognitive explanations for criminal behaviours.
It fails to explain why some people exposed to more pro-criminal attitudes don't always become criminal
(ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINISM)

Front 10

Can the theory be described as scientific? Why/why not?

Back 10

No.
It is difficult to calculate the number or pro/anti criminal attitudes an individul has been exposed to, especially when the two types arent explicitly obvious. You can't see the point where one is more than the other, making the theory subjective and unreliable

Front 11

What crimes can/can't the theory help describe?

Back 11

The theory describes petty and white collar crimes- such a vandalism and robbery but can;t be used to explain serious crimes such as murder and rape.

Front 12

What did Akers find that supports Sutherlands theory?

Back 12

They found that 55% of male and female adolescents in the US drank alcohol and 68% smoked weed due to their peers