Differential Association Theory: Crime is a Social Skill (Apparently)

What is Differential Association Theory?

Differential association refers to the process through which individuals learn behaviors, values, and motives for criminal activity by interacting with others.

Proposed by Edwin Sutherland in 1939 and revised in 1947, this theory suggests that criminal behavior isn’t innate but rather a learned social construct. Think of it as learning to ride a bike — except here, the bike is crime, and your coach is your neighborhood law-breaker.

Sutherland’s 9 Commandments of Crime (The Theory’s Key Points)

1. Crime is Learned
Criminal behavior isn’t inherited; you’ve got to pick it up from others.

• Example: You don’t wake up one day knowing how to hack into bank accounts — it’s a skill you “acquire.”

2. Communication is Key
Crime is learned through communication, not osmosis.

• Example: If your “mentor” whispers the finer points of burglary to you, congratulations — you’re learning.

3. Close Circles Matter
Most learning happens within intimate groups like friends, family, or colleagues.

4. Techniques Included
Learning crime means mastering techniques (hello, cybercrimes) and rationalizations (“The government wastes our taxes anyway.”).

5. Definitions of Laws are Influential
People develop definitions of legal codes as either favorable or unfavorable.

• Example: “Shoplifting isn’t bad if the store is a mega-corporation, right?”

6. Favorable Definitions Lead to Crime
Crime happens when pro-crime definitions outnumber anti-crime definitions in your brain.

7. Learning Varies by Intensity and Frequency
The more frequent and intense your interaction with criminal influences, the better “trained” you become.

8. Same Learning Mechanisms
The process of learning crime is no different from learning any other skill — practice makes perfect.

9. Motives Don’t Explain It All
Both criminals and law-abiding citizens are driven by similar needs, like money or respect.

Why It Works: Social Influence is Everything

Sutherland’s theory hinges on the idea that our social environment profoundly influences us. Frequent exposure to pro-criminal ideas, particularly during formative years, increases the likelihood of criminal behavior.

Practical Examples of the Theory

• Corporate Crimes:
  Think of a junior employee in a corrupt organization. Over time, they may adopt the company culture of bribery and fraud.
  Case Study: Harshad Mehta learned the art of financial manipulation from peers before engineering the infamous securities scam.
• Gang Culture:
  Joining a gang as a teen often leads to learning criminal activities like theft or drug dealing.

Critiques of the Theory

1. Lacks Consideration of Individual Traits

• People have unique personalities, yet the theory treats everyone as equally moldable.
• Critique: Why do siblings exposed to the same environment sometimes choose completely different paths?
• According to Tappan, Sutherland has ignored the role of personality or role of biological and psychological factors in crime.

2. Oversimplifies Behavior:

• Sutherland’s critics argue that not all crime can be explained through learned behavior. What about crimes driven by desperation, mental illness, or impulsiveness?
• According to Elliot, Sutherland’s theory explains the systematic crimes but not the situational ones.

3. Fails to Address the Origins of Crime:

• If crime is learned, where did the first “teacher” learn it? It’s the “chicken-or-egg” dilemma of criminology.
• According to Cressey, Sutherland does not fully explore the implications of the learning process itself as it affects different individuals.

4. Empirical Issues:

• Measuring abstract concepts like “intensity” and “frequency” of associations is nearly impossible.
• According to Glueck, an individual does not learn the very behaviour from others and may have learnt naturally.

Differential Association Theory’s Modern Relevance

In today’s world, the theory extends beyond gangs and petty crimes to sophisticated scams like cybercrime, corporate fraud, and even political corruption.

• Example:
  Watching TV shows like Breaking Bad might not make you a criminal, but constant exposure to glorified law-breaking could subtly change your attitudes toward crime.

Why it’s Still Important

Despite its flaws, Sutherland’s theory underscores three critical points:

1. Social Factors Matter:
   Criminal behavior is often rooted in social contexts, not just personal traits.
2. Crime is a Learned Skill:
   Just as we learn languages, we also learn crime.
3. Criminal and Non-Criminal Behavior Share Similar Drives:
   At their core, both are motivated by needs like money, respect, or survival.