Challenging traditional criminology: White collar crime and social class theory

Criminology Critique

The central aim of the author's intent in this chapter is to illustrate the reasons why traditional theories concerning the relationship between lower social classes and crime are incorrect. This is pursued through the example of white collar criminality.

The question addressed is: "Is it true that criminal behavior is a result of lower social class upbringing?" The hypothesis is that criminality is not necessarily associated with lower social classes, that there are other forms of criminality that are not addressed in traditional theories and current opinion.

The study uses data relating to white collar crime in the U.S. To illustrate the point. The information illustrates how the factors associated with crimes carried out by lower classes such as theft and similar offences do not hold for the white collar criminals. Information is also given as to why white collar criminals are often not included in analysis involving criminology.

Inferences

The main conclusions to be drawn from the data are that many of the current theories relating to causality of criminal behaviors may be untrue as it is based on evidence which is biased.

Concept

In order to understand the author's reasoning the concept of white collar crime must be understood. It is important to understand how the legal processes related to white collar crime are often different, and how this affects the data on which current theories are usually based.

Point-of-View

Overall, while I believe that the author is right in the majority of the arguments presented, I believe that the two different types of crime discussed are completely different, with different motivations. Therefore I do not believe that white collar crime should impact as significantly on theories based on street level crime as the author suggests.

Chapter 34

Purpose

The central aim of the author's intent is to demonstrate the principles of differential association which lead to development of criminal behavior.

Question

The question which is addressed is: "How does the theory of differential association explain the process of learning criminal behavior?" The hypothesis is that there are 9 components to the differential association theory that will lead to development of criminal behavior. This general principle is that organizations will either lead to the development of criminal behavior or anti-criminal behavior based on the behavior of the organization itself.

Information

The information which is presented is a breakdown of the nine components of the differential association theory. Each of these is presented with an example of how this leads to criminal behavior and justification for the reasoning.

Inferences

The main conclusions to be drawn from the information are that if a child grows up in an environment where criminal behaviors are promoted they will develop criminal behaviors themselves. If a child grows up in an environment which is anti-criminal in outlook, they will be anti-criminal. The environment extends beyond the family to friends and neighborhood. Neutrality has no effect on development of criminal behavior.

Concept

In order to understand the authors reasoning it is important to understand the concepts of behavior development, i.e. how observation of a behavior leads to development of that behavior. It is also important to understand the dynamics in various groups to understand why behaviors may be imitated from some sources and not others.

Assumptions

The author is working on the assumption that there are no other factors which develop criminal behavior. For example the assumption is that if criminal behavior develops then the criminal will undertake criminal activity at any possible opportunity. The theory does not explain why some children grow up in an environment which promotes crime and yet does not develop these behaviors and vice-versa.

Implications

If the reasoning of the author were to be accepted it has serious implications with regard to child rearing. For example it implies that any children of known criminals are to become criminals themselves. This has implications as to fitness for parenthood of many adults. It also has implications for prejudice as it implies that any child growing up in a neighborhood which is troubled with crime will develop into a criminal also.

Point-of-View

While I accept the point of the author that the attitudes towards crime in the environment in which a child develops are crucial in determining future behavior, I believe that there are many other factors which are involved in the development (or not) of criminal behavior.

Chapter 35

Purpose

The central aim of the author's intent is to demonstrate how reinforcement acts on differential association to produce criminal behavior.

Question

The main question which is being addressed is: "How does reinforcement impact on criminal behavior forming under differential association?" The hypothesis is that reinforcement is necessary if differential association is to result in criminal behavior.

Information

The information which is presented is how reinforcement pertains to each element of the differential association theory in forming criminal behavior. The information includes the reasons why the differential association theory will not lead to criminal behavior alone.

Inferences

The main conclusions which are gained from the information are that the exposure of a child to a pro-crime environment will not lead to development of criminal behavior alone. If reinforcement of criminal behavior is present, however, then criminal behavior will develop.

Concept

The main concepts which must be understood to follow the author's argument are the differential association theory and the concept of reinforcement and how it works.

Assumptions

The author works on the assumption that differential association does lead to criminal behavior. There is still no explanation as to how other factors may affect the response to exposure to criminal environments, or reception of reinforcement.

Implications

The implications to the research are particularly pertinent in preventing crime in environments which are not favorable. For instance the essay implies that even children who are raised in pro-criminal environments may be prevented from developing criminal behaviors if the reinforcement received is anti-crime.

Point-of-view

Overall, I think that the argument of the study is a far more convincing approach than differential association alone. There are still other factors which I believe may affect the situation, however.