NCJ Number
49080
Journal
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND PENOLOGY Volume: 6 Issue: 2 Dated: (MAY 1978) Pages: 105-120
Date Published
1978
Length
16 pages
Annotation
A CRITIQUE OF THEORIES OF DEVIANCE WHICH ASSIGN AN ETIOLOGICAL ROLE TO SOCIAL CLASS IS PRESENTED. IT IS SHOWN THAT SUCH THEORIES SUFFER FROM BOTH CONCEPTUAL AND EMPIRICAL AMBIGUITIES.
Abstract
BOTH ANOMIC AND LABELING THEORIES OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY, WHILE VARYING IN THEIR PERSPECTIVE, PLACE LOWER CLASS STATUS IN AN IMPORTANT EXPLANATORY ROLE. FOR MERTON, POSITION IN THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE BRINGS CERTAIN PRESSURES TO BEAR ON THE INDIVIDUAL. THE LOWER CLASS INDIVIDUAL IS SUBJECTED TO STRUCTURAL STRESSORS, ORIGINATING IN THE LACK OF LEGITIMATE OPPORTUNITY TO ACHIEVING GOALS. FOR COHEN, STATUS COMPETITION FAILURE, WHICH IS MUCH MORE FREQUENT IN THE LOWER SOCIAL LEVELS, LEADS TO ADJUSTMENT PROBLEMS AND NOT INFREQUENTLY TO CRIME AND DELINQUENCY. SIMILARLY, CLOWARD AND OHLIN SUGGEST THAT THE INDIVIDUAL IS LED TO DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR AS A RESULT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN EGALITARIAN EXPECTATION AND ACTUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR ATTAINING SUCCESS. FOR MILLER, DEVIANCE IS EXPLICABLE IN TERMS OF A CONFORMITY WITH LOWER CLASS NORMS WHICH ARE AT VARIANCE WITH THE DOMINANT MIDDLE CLASS NORMS AND WHICH CONSEQUENTLY DEFINE THE LOWER CLASS INDIVIDUAL AS DEVIANT. FOR QUINNEY, CRIMINAL STATUS AND CRIMINAL DEFINITIONS ARE THE RESULT OF CLASS-BASED SOCIAL CONFLICT; CRIMINAL DEFINITIONS DESCRIBE BEHAVIORS WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE INTERESTS OF THOSE SOCIETAL SEGMENTS WITH THE POWER TO SHAPE PUBLIC POLICY. BECKER AND TURK, LIKEWISE, BASE THEIR RESPECTIVE THEORIES ON THE RELATIVE POWERLESSNESS OF THE LOWER CLASSES AND THEIR GREATER VULNERABILITY TO LABELING. WHILE MOST SOCIOLOGISTS AGREE THAT SOCIAL CLASS HAS TO DO WITH HIGHER AND LOWER LEVELS OF STRATIFICATION, THERE IS LITTLE CONSENSUS AS TO THE BASIS OF THIS STRATIFICATION. USE OF THE TERM SOCIAL CLASS OR SOCIAL STATUS THUS LACKS CLARITY AND PRECISION, PROVIDING ONLY A ROUGH INDICATION OF STRATIFICATION AND RESULTING IN AMBIGUITY WHICH MAKES FOR BAD THEORIZING. THIS AMBIGUITY ALSO CARRIES OVER INTO RESEARCH EFFORTS, WHERE CONFLICTING DEFINITIONS AND OPERATIONALIZATIONS OF SOCIAL CLASS HAVE IN MANY CASES PRODUCED CONFLICTING RESEARCH FINDINGS. AN ADDITIONAL PROBLEM IN MUCH CLASS-ORIENTED RESEARCH INVOLVES PROBLEMS OF MEASURING DEVIANCE AND DELINQUENCY, AND BIASES RESULTING FROM RELIANCE ON OFFICIAL REPORTS. IN FACT, SELF-REPORT STUDIES OF DELINQUENCY TEND TO CONTRADICT THE ASSUMPTION THAT DELINQUENCY IS PRIMARILY A LOWER CLASS PHENOMENON. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THOSE WHO HAVE IMPLEMENTED THE NEBULOUS CONCEPT OF SOCIAL CLASS IN THEIR THEORIES AND RESEARCH SHOULD EVALUATE AND RECONSIDER THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS UPON WHICH THEIR WORK IS BASED. INCLUDED ARE 55 REFERENCES. (JAP)