Deviance and Differentiation (From Theoretical Integration in the Study of Deviance and Crime: Problems and Prospects, P 199-212, 1989, Steven F Messner, et al, eds. -- See NCJ-118940)

• NCJ Number: 118948
• Author(s): R F Meier
• Date Published: 1989
• Length: 14 pages
• Sale Source: California Correctional Peace Officers Assoc
• Publication Type: Research (Theoretical)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.

Annotation

This paper examines the issue of micro and macro analyses of deviance and suggests preliminary work that is necessary before efforts are made to integrate these different analyses.

Abstract

The suggested strategy advocates more attention to basic sociological concepts and the development of more adequate metatheory and derivative unit theory, so that more adequate micro and macro analyses of deviance can be generated. Only then should the issue of theoretical integration be considered. Micro analyses place the meaning of crime in social psychological properties of individual actors. Macro analyses of crime, on the other hand, focus on features of social structure that influence crime among individual and collective actors. Wagner (1984) distinguishes between two kinds of theory, unit theory and metatheory. Metatheory serves as a general orientation, a framework from which unit theories can develop. Unit theories are more specific and testable, in part or totally. If deviance is in some sense a core concept in sociology, theorizing about deviance should be significantly related to theorizing about other social processes. One way to address the disjunction between deviance theory and sociological theory is to link deviance theory with wider concerns in sociological theory; for example, there is a close relationship between the nature of social inequality and social deviance. This connection can be seen by comparing the meaning of social differentiation, social stratification, and social deviance.