The Differential Association Theory

The differential association theory is a theory of criminology developed by Edwin H. Sutherland that attempts to explain why certain individuals commit crime or become criminals. Sutherland refused to believe that criminal behavior was a direct result of biology in the 1920s and 1930s- a time where biological and mental defects were believed to be the main cause of deviant actions. The differential association theory caused a paradigm shift in criminology because it changed the way that people had been thinking about crime and criminals for years. Despite the radical shift in thinking brought about by this theory, Sutherland’s differential association theory was and is still a popular criminological theory.

Edwin H. Sutherland

Sutherland believed that criminal behavior is learned in the same way that all other behavior is learned- by observing one’s social environment and interacting with others. He also believed that anyone, regardless of race, class, or background, could express criminal behavior despite the common assertion that biology was a factor in determining which individuals were more likely to commit crime. This theory was presented in two versions which differed in influence and focus. The first version, created in 1939, was heavily influenced by the Chicago School and focused on the effect that differential group organization has on crime rates. The main point of this version was that the conflict of cultures and people having different values is a major cause of crime because what is deemed appropriate or acceptable to some people is usually not seen as such by the rest of the population. Sutherland got the idea for this first draft of the differential association theory when he, along with several other theorists, suggested that the cause of high crime rates in cities was not from the area itself, but simply because immigrants- whose values and cultural norms differed from everyone else’s- largely inhabited the cities. The second and final version of the differential association theory, completed in 1947, focuses on the source of individual criminal behavior. Through the associations with intimate others, we learn techniques for committing crime and the values, attitudes, and motives- referred to as definitions- for or against such criminal behavior that will cause us to either commit crime or to be law-abiding. When the definitions for criminal behavior outweigh the definitions against it, an individual will commit a crime. 

Something that is neglected in some literature on this subject is critiques of the differential association theory. In part, it leaves me unsure whether or not this was a completely accurate theory because there could be exceptions or facts to disprove part of Sutherland’s theory. Instead of just the information about the differential association theory, it would be useful to audiences interested in this topic to see examples supporting or opposing the theory so that they can truly see how it would look in real life and understand different views on it. It should be noted how personality might change the effectiveness of this theory. Certain individuals may be more susceptible to the influence of those around them than others. Further still, some people choose not to associate with family or peers. People who do not form intimate relationships with others generally seem to have a higher tendency of committing criminal acts or expressing delinquent behavior. Although Sutherland’s theory of differential association does not touch on this point, it is important that it is at least briefly discussed and noticed.

It is important to include how this theory could be adapted based on the changes that have occurred in society. For example, one key aspect of the differential association theory is that a relationship must exist between people in order for skills and definitions to be transferred. However, this part of the theory seems obsolete now because the media is so prevalent in today’s society that it influences individuals almost as much as human interaction itself. People can acquire the techniques and motives for or against crime through video games, television, movies, books, and other sources that were not popular or available in the time period that Sutherland’s theory was created. Future literature on the subject should have information regarding possible updates to the differential association theory that would be more appropriate in today’s society- one that is surrounded by endless sources of motivation and influences. 

The differential association theory was one of the first theories of criminology to deny the traditional ways of looking at crime. It remains one of the most important perspectives on criminal behavior today.