What Causes Crime: The Strain Theory

People have always sought to discover what causes crime. Ever since the appearance of philosophy there have existed theories of what can push human beings to commit criminal acts. It was not until the appearance of sociology as a science that people have began to study crime scientifically and to design complex theories as to what may cause this behavior. Often times socio-economic status is quoted as a potential reason for crime. There are several major theories of crime but strain theory is one of the most commonly used for explaining crime with the help of a socio-economic element. There are several strain theories but the most important are Robert K. Merton’s original strain theory and Robert Agnew’s general strain theory.

Strain theory originates in Emil Durkheim’s anomie theory. In 1897 Durkheim said that as societies progressed and transition from lawlessness to enforced law, strain would appear as a result from the inadequate regulation of society (O’Connor, 1). Structural strain is caused by inadequate regulation on the society level that influences an individual to perceive his or her needs differently. Individual strain occurs when the individual searches for ways to accomplish his or her needs (Orcutt, 1).

Durkheim’s theory of anomie was the starting point for Robert K. Merton’s strain theory. Merton rejected Durkheim’s claims that strain resulted from a breakdown in societal structure, and actually theorized that present societies are stable. Instead Merton focused on the modern cultural goals in relation to the institutional means of achieving those goals. He states that the most important goal in society is to achieve wealth. In order to achieve this goal society created several institutionalized means or rules. Merton says that the problem arises when the need to achieve a goal overshadows the importance of using the institutionalized means or rules. Crime is a result of individuals being more interested in achieving the cultural goal – wealth, than in respecting the laws (Merton, 672). Merton places some of the blame on society, stating that societies place high emphasis on wealth and low emphasis on the rules by which wealth should be achieved. In his view the social class most affected by the inability to use societal norms to achieve goals is the lower class. Ever since 1938, when he first published his theory, sociologists and scholars have used Merton’s strain theory to explain crime as it relates to lower socio-economic classes and other types of minority populations.

Merton has further developed his theory to include five adaptations or types of strain. Conformity occurs when people attempt to achieve the cultural goals by using the institutionalized means. Most people are conformists according to Merton, and that is what keeps the stability of society (Merton, 673). Innovation takes place when individuals stride to achieve the higher goal, but do not respect the rules or the institutionalized means. In ritualism individuals have abandoned all hope of advancing in society and achieving the higher goal, and instead they keep what little they have by respecting the rules. Retreatism occurs when people abandon all goals and all ties to society, becoming isolated and not respecting the rules. According to Merton this is the rarest type of strain. The fifth adaptation is Rebellion and in this category individuals reject all the goals of society and the rules or means of achieving them. In this category the individuals seek to replace the goals and the norms and rules of society with their own (Merton, 674).

Merton’s strain theory works well to explain why disadvantaged classes of individuals commit crime, but however the theory cannot be applied to the general population. There have been several attempts to modify strain theory in order to generalize it and the most important of these modern strain theories is Robert Agnew’s general strain theory. Agnew argues that emotions not goals play an important part in an individual’s decision making process. He states that negative relationships with other individuals produce negative emotions such as anger, and hatred. The strain or frustration resulting from these emotions leads to crime (Agnew, 48). This theory is not a psychological attempt to define crime, rather it is an attempt to better understand strain and how the though process behind crime occurs.

Robert Agnew’s theory has modernized the general strain concept allowing scholars to apply the theory to very diverse types of crimes and socio-economic classes. In “Can general strain theory explain white-collar crime?” Lynn Langton and Nicole Piquero successfully apply the general strain theory to explain white collar crime and the motivation behind these middle class criminals (Langton et al, 1). Merton’s theory of strain was only successfully applied to minority groups such as the poor or juveniles.

Modern strain theories are very important tools to explain the mechanism that causes individuals to commit crime. Robert Merton explained crime as a result of the frustration of not being able to achieve one’s goals by using set rules. Robert Agnew modernized the theory describing crime as a result of negative emotions resulting from negative relationships with individuals. Both theories are popular in sociology and in criminal justice today and they help us better understand the crimes that occur around us, in society, every day.

References

Agnew, Robert. 1992. “Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency”. Criminology. Ames, IA: Blackwell Publishing. Vol 30, Pg 47-87.

Langton, Lynn, and Piquero, Nicole L. 2007. “Can general strain theory explain white-collar crime? A preliminary investigation of the relationship between strain and select white-collar offenses”. Journal of Criminal Justice.Atlanta, GA: Elsevier, Inc. Vol 35, Issue 1, Pg 1-15.

Merton, Robert K. 1938. “Social Structure and Anomie”. American Sociological Review.Columbus, OH: OhioStateUniversity. Vol 3, Pg 672-682.

O’Connor, Tom. 2007. Strain Theories of Crime, MegaLinks in Criminal Justice.Fort Campbell, KY: Austin Peay StateUniversity. http://www.apsu.edu/oconnort/crim/crimtheory11.htm

Orcutt, James D. 2002. The Anomie Tradition, Explaining Rates of Deviant Behavior. http://deviance.socprobs.net/Unit_3/Theory/Anomie.htm