Criminology Theory: Anomie and Strain Theory
The purpose of this report is to offer a critique of a criminology theory, specifically anomie and strain theory, characterized by Akers and Sellers (2004) as reflective of the belief that some forms of social disorganization so impact upon individuals that social cohesion, solidarity and integration are insufficient to eliminate crime and deviance. Anomie, also known as strain theory, proposes that social order, stability, and integration are conducive to conformity, while disorder and malintegration are conducive to crime and deviance.
Among the sociological explanations of deviance is Robert MertonÆs theory of anomie, which assumes that there is a shared value system that emphasizes success which is embraced by most members of society (Akers & Sellers, 2004). Individual adaptation to this value system and its attendant behavioral norms and expectations takes one of five forms: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion.
Rebellion and certain types of retreatism and/or innovation all present potentially criminal modes of adaptation. Anomie theory assumed, says Merton, that higher crime rates will prevail among lower socioeconomic groups where the institutionalized means for achieving cultural goals are not available. Recently, research suggests that the failure of anomie theory to account for gender differentials in criminal and delinquent behavior makes this sociological explanation of crime inadequate. Given that there are gender differences in offending û with respect to both rates of offense and types of offense û it is necessary to construct an etiological theory that encompasses both males and females (Akers & Sellers, 2004).
Strain theory was developed by Robert K. Merton in 1938. It proposes five modes of adaptation to society, including conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. The degree to which individuals a...