How Criminal Behavior is Explained

STRAIN THEORY AND HOW IT EXPLAINS CRIME

Abstract

Strain theory proposes that pressure from social factors like a lack of income or education drives a person to commit a crime. The focus of most strain theories is disadvantaged groups where they struggle to attain common aspirations like realizing the American dream. The inability of these individuals to achieve common goals is considered the driving factor behind the crime. Some stressors increase the likelihood of crime. According to strain theory, crime will only occur when there are not enough legitimate opportunities for individuals to achieve normal success in society. A strain occurs when the goals and the means of achieving those goals are not in line leading the individual to crime. The American dream encourages people to work hard to achieve financial success. However, the means used by the individuals to achieve success are rarely in focus. The result is that people will do everything in their power to ensure they gain the success needed to achieve the American dream.

In reality, highly educated career professionals are admired in the same way thieves are admired for their successful robberies. People even feel bad when a thief is caught, yet they know the thief did an illegal act. Therefore, society mainly focuses on an individual’s success and rarely focuses on the means used to gain that success. Strain theory gives people five ways to adapt: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. The adaptations are individualist, and a person can pick either to overcome the strain they face. In this paper, the focus is on strain theory by Robert Merton, and we have linked the adverse effects of strains on the development of criminal behaviors. The paper has also focused on the criticism of strain theory and its inability to explain white-collar crime fully.

Strain Theory and How It Explains Crime

Social inequality will create a situation where people experience tension or strain between society’s goals, like financial success and their legitimate means of meeting those goals (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). Strain theory is a criminology and sociology theory developed by Robert Merton in 1938. Strain theory states that society will pressure an individual to achieve socially acceptable goals, though they lack the means to achieve those goals. The individual experiences strain that leads them to commit crimes like becoming a prostitute, selling drugs, or stealing to gain financial security. Strain could be structural or individual. Structural strain refers to the processes at the societal level, filtering down and affecting how an individual perceives their needs. Individual strain refers to the pains and frictions experienced by individuals seeking ways to satisfy their needs. Overall, strain theory denotes that if the goals society has placed on an individual become too significant to the individual, how they achieve those goals is not more important than the means adopted to achieve the goals (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). With the focus on achieving the goals, the individual no longer cares if what they are doing is legal or illegal. Care is thrown out of the window, and the individual will do all they can to ensure they meet the goals placed on them by society.

There are different motivators for crime, and strain theory explains them all as being caused by particular tensions experienced by the individual. A person might engage in crime to reduce or escape from the strain they are experiencing (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). For example, a person might steal to reduce financial problems, may engage in violence to stop the harassment they undergo from others, or they might run away from home to escape abusive parents. A person can engage in the crime of illicit drug use to feel better (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

Merton’s Theory

Robert Merton was an American sociologist who indicated society could profoundly encourage deviance. Merton believed socially accepted goals put undue pressure on people to conform and achieve those goals. Merton’s strain theory stems from a vital question he had on why crime rates were so different among different societies (Agnew, 2017). His initial assumption was that there could be deviance where there was a clear difference between how success is defined and the right way to achieve said goals. However, he discovered the United States was the best example of high levels of deviance due to the high social value of achieving monetary success. Employees who have a college degree are respected, and robbers who steal for their money were also admired, demonstrating success is viewed as more vital than the means used to achieve success. The structural organization of the United States was not equal, meaning minority groups struggled to acquire a good education, and when they could, they still struggled to get a respectable living, yet the same high standard for success is placed on everyone regardless of their means to satisfy the standards (Agnew, 2017). These contradictions led Merton to develop the strain theory denoting society’s high reverence for success.

The concept of anomie is described as the imbalance between institutionalized means and cultural goals. Merton argued that this imbalance produces anomie, a strain between the goals and the means producing unsatisfied aspirations.

Strain develops when access to the goals is blocked to entire groups of people, resulting in deviant behavior characterized by retreat, rebellion, innovation, ritualism, or conformity, as outlined by Merton (Agnew, 2017). Crime develops out of innovation. Conformity refers to pursuing cultural goals using socially approved means. When in conformity, the individual follows societal goals using legitimate means. Although the conformists might never achieve the societal goal, they have faith in society and opt to follow the legitimate means of achieving the goals.

A good example is an employee advancing their career by going to school. The employee follows the American cultural value of success using the approved means of education. The hopeful poor is the term used to describe individuals who choose conformity to respond to strain.

Innovation refers to accepting society’s goals but coming up with other ways of achieving them. In most cases, using socially unacceptable means (crime). An innovative individual will share the cultural goals of society, but they will reach those goals using illegitimate means. They focus on achieving success and choose crime to meet the cultural goals placed on them by society. Thieves do share in the cultural goal of obtaining wealth. However, they obtain wealth by breaking the law.

Ritualism refers to using the same socially acceptable means to achieve the less elusive goals (Teijón-Alcalá & Birkbeck, 2019). A ritualist is an individual who has given up on the hope they will achieve the goals approved by society, but they still operate based on society’s approved means. A factory worker who does the same work for years has accepted they will never progress, but they still stay in the same position doing the same work each day is considered a ritualist.

Retreatism refers to rejecting the cultural goals and the means for obtaining them and finding a way to escape. Retreatists have rejected society’s goals and the legitimate means of obtaining those goals and live outside conventions norms. Drug addicts and people living off the land retreat from the societal rule and socially approved means. Retreating is a way of escaping from the reality of life. These individuals are so disinvested in the societal goals that they withdraw from society as their way of rejecting them.

Finally, rebellion refers to rejecting cultural goals and prescribing means for achieving them, then working towards replacing them. Rebels attempt to replace societal goals with their own goals and devise different ways of achieving them. Terrorist organizations are the best examples of rebels who try to advance their goals through violence.

Criminal Activity Explained Through Strain Theory

Strain full conditions and events make people feel bad, which creates pressure for corrective action. It is true for frustration and anger, which energize a person for action, lower inhibitions, and create a desire for revenge. According to Teijón-Alcalá and Birkbeck (2019) strain is most likely to lead to delinquency among those who have poor coping skills and resources. These two factors hold true for most neglected communities with higher rates of crime and illegal activities. Most people who can cope with strain have the financial ability to hire a lawyer or possess verbal skills for negotiating with others (Lee & Kim, 2018). Strain will lead to delinquency among people who have few conventional social supports. Without family and friends to assist in coping with problems, directing assistance, providing advice, and offering emotional support, a person will not manage to cope with the strain they experience in life. When delinquency costs are low and the rewards high, the strain will lead to delinquency (Lee & Kim, 2018). For example, if the probability of a person being caught stealing is low and the reward received from stealing is high, they are most likely to take part in delinquent acts. Another factor is whether the individual blames their strain on the actions of another person. In such a case, it would be assumed that thieves steal because they believe the system is formulated against them, and their lack of money is due to the rich folks not distributing their wealth to the poor. As the system is set up in the United States, the rich tend to get richer and the poor poorer. With such an analogy, a person is likely to blame their lack of finances on the greediness of the rich people, and stealing becomes a justified action for them. The delinquent action is justified by the strain perceived to be caused by the rich individuals.

Money is the driving force in the United States. All people, rich and poor, are encouraged to work hard to make a lot of money. Money is needed to buy many things people want, including the necessities of life. However, the system is not equal for all people. Legal challenges include getting work and receiving the necessary education needed to work in certain fields or industries (Lee & Kim, 2018). It is especially true for poor people, but it still holds true for middle-class people who have lofty goals too. The result is that these individuals will experience strain and attempt to get money using illegal channels like selling drugs, stealing, and prostitution (Lianos & McGrath, 2018). The motivating factor is for them to be as successful as others in society. The means used to get the money is no longer a concern for the individuals. Criminals have reported they only engage in criminal activities because of money. If they had other means of making money, criminals say they would not participate in illegal activities (Thaxton & Agnew, 2018). From this statement, we see crime is more common among people dissatisfied with their financial situation. Pedalono and Frailing (2018) posit the dissatisfaction is high among lower-class individuals and people who indicate they want lots of money. Therefore, the strain of lack of money leads people to participate in illegal activities since they cannot use the legal means to acquire the money they desire.

Crime has also been associated with negative stimuli like child abuse, physical punishment by parents, criminal victimization, negative relations with parents and teachers, neighborhood problems, and other stressful events like divorce (Teijón-Alcalá & Birkbeck, 2019). These conditions increase the likelihood of a child participating in crime. The child could participate in crime to try to escape the negative strains they experience due to these events (Lianos & McGrath, 2018). To avoid being abused by the parents, the child could seek ways to make money to live by themselves and survive the harsh streets. The child can buy food and clothing to keep them safe with the money. Also, the child might join a street gang and start selling drugs since that is the easiest way to make money as a child.

Strain can reduce levels of social control, like how much a person would value conformity and their belief that crime is wrong. When strain comes from mistreatment by those in authority like parents, teachers, police, and employers, it can decrease a person’s stake in conformity and conventional society. Instead of conforming to normal ideas of social controls, strained individuals tend to adopt a system of values that reduce their concern for others and prioritize their self-interest. Therefore, the individual will participate in criminal activities that increase their self-interest without caring about the interests of others. With a focus on self-satisfaction, the individual no longer feels they are doing something wrong and can participate in criminal activities without remorse. Strain will also encourage a person to learn about crime socially. Learning about a crime is due to their desire to overcome their current negative feelings and emotions.

Crime can be used to escape or reduce strain, alleviate negative emotions, or seek revenge against the source of strain (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). Therefore, children abused by those in authority result in crime as their way of escaping, coping, alleviating the strain, or fighting the negative emotions. A child could take drugs as their way of escaping the harsh reality they face at home. To lessen the negative emotions and get a high that numbs their pain, the child will continue using the drugs, and with time they will begin increasing their dosage and frequency. The good thing about strain theory is that it acknowledges that not all people faced with a strain end up being criminals. The classic strain theory focuses on the failure to achieve monetary success or the broader goal of middle-class status. Therefore, crime develops out of a lack of financial freedom brought about by other factors like lack of a job, poor education background, and lack of resources.

White-Collar Crime

White-collar crime can be explained using strain theory too. White-collar crime typically involves economically privileged individuals like corporate executives who commit fraud or engage in insider trading on the stock market. These individuals have financial freedom and have more money than they can ever use in their lifetime, but they will still take part in illegal criminal activities since they want to rise further in class (Robinson & Rogers, 2018). Class refers to rising through the socioeconomic ladder. The executive could be involved in such crimes to increase their wealth and purchase more properties or gain access to an exclusive club. The strain of the executive cannot be compared to that of a person who steals to feed their family. While one is desperate enough because they cannot provide for their basic needs, the other can afford them and are involved in crime for luxurious stuff. Therefore, strain explains criminal activities, regardless of the individual’s social status. The underlying motivator is a deeper desire to achieve something out of reach for the individual, and the only way to get their desire is to participate in a crime. Whatever strain an individual faces can push a person to get involved in crime to over their strain (Robinson & Rogers, 2018). Stealing funds or being involved in insider trading on the stock market will increase their financial independence by increasing their overall wealth.

Innovation allows a person to seek unconventional ways to obtain culturally approved goals. The wealthy executive uses innovation to come up with ways of circumventing the system. Innovation increases their financial status, allowing them to boast to their peers or show off their newest luxurious collection, increasing their admiration. Most people rarely question success regarding how a person has managed to get so much money. Therefore, people tend to look up to those they deem to be doing better than themselves and aspire to be just like them. The result is that those looking up to the criminal or executive try to copy them by participating in illegal activities to increase their wealth.

Individuals from lower social strata tend to use illegal means to try and make ends meet since they have fewer opportunities than those in higher strata to achieve cultural goals (Pedalono & Frailing, 2018). We can understand why crime seems to be primarily associated with individuals coming from poor backgrounds or disadvantaged backgrounds. We tend to wonder why a corporate executive would risk their high social strata and participate in a crime, but the underlying reason is they are seeking far higher strata than they currently have, meaning they are willing to risk it all to experience or move up the ranks.