Strain Theory and Crime: Five Scholarly Perspectives

Introduction

Strain theory is a widely discussed topic across public discourse, psychology, and scholarly criminology. Academic search engines are filled with reports, studies, and summaries of strain theory in all of its forms, functions, and offshoots. This paper covers five peer-reviewed works pertaining to strain theory and its variants. The true genesis of what leads some people to become criminals, what leads some people to become victims, and how some people transcend both throughout their lives is the subject of rigorous study. While a complete answer to what causes some people to offend may never be known, certain patterns and trends have been established, and several of those are summarized here.

Victimization and Juvenile Delinquency

One dimension of strain theory involves examining direct and vicarious violent victimization, particularly as a framework for understanding juvenile delinquency and its causes. An estimated 1.7 million children per year experience some form of victimization. A substantial body of research explores the linkage between victimization and delinquency; however, the literature becomes considerably thinner when it comes to vicarious victimization. As the term implies, vicarious victimization occurs when a child is not directly harmed but is instead exposed indirectly to violence — such as witnessing abuse directed at family members or friends. Studies examining the victimization-delinquency relationship, such as those by Sampson and Lauritsen (1990) and Schreck (1999), tend to focus primarily on direct criminal involvement. Factoring in ancillary and indirect victimization is difficult to quantify and measure in terms of effects and causality.

Nevertheless, it is widely accepted that exposure to stressors such as raised voices, witnessed abuse, and proximity to criminal or otherwise harmful environments is not conducive to healthy development. At least one study examining both direct and vicarious victimization found that the presence of both — directed at and in front of a single child — produces a compounding effect. A child who falls victim to this "dual victimization" will tend to experience worse outcomes than one who experiences only one form of victimization (Lin, Cochran, & Mieczkowski, 2011).

Strain, Coping, and Socioeconomic Status

Other work in the field of strain theory has examined the correlations between strain, coping strategies, and socioeconomic status simultaneously. One such study found that the common effects and outcomes associated with strain theory appear to persist across all levels of socioeconomic status. This held true regardless of the coping strategies employed or their outcomes. Alcohol-related misconduct and abuse were found to be relatively consistent across groups, despite the well-documented linkage between alcohol use and various forms of deviance.

That said, the research also observed that certain coping mechanisms tend to predominate at different socioeconomic levels. For example, someone living in poverty would tend to cope in ways that differ markedly from someone in an upper-middle-class setting. The critical observation is that both groups cope — but they do so differently — and the overall outcomes are roughly equivalent regardless of class or wealth. Many researchers have suggested that poverty is an antecedent to crime, and that economic hardship is more likely to lead to offending when it is present. However, while this may explain individual cases, it does not hold as a universal pattern across the existing body of scholarly research (Botchkovar, Tittle, & Antonaccio, 2013).

Conclusion

The challenging aspect of strain theory — and of virtually any sociological theory — is that predicting trends and outcomes based on certain factors can be hit or miss. However, trends and expected outcomes generally do not deviate far from established norms when examining the broader picture. Individuals born into and exposed to violence and abuse are more likely to perpetuate that cycle, both by victimizing others and by continuing to be victimized themselves. This is not to say that people cannot break these patterns, either before they take hold or after. However, addressing the contributing factors of strain theory early — before or as they emerge — will always produce better and more lasting results than purely reactive interventions.