soc305 crime & society instructor week 1 quiz

R ob

er t H

ub er

m an

/S up

er st

oc k.

Learning Objectives

• Understand the difference between the key concepts “crime,” “criminology,” and “law.”

• Recognize crime as a social construct.

• Understand the complex relationship between crime and society.

• Discuss the main criminology schools and perspectives.

• Examine the strengths and weaknesses of different methods to measure and research crime.

Criminology, Crime, and the Law

1

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 1 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.1 Overview of Criminology CHAPTER 1

In a small, upstate New York Suburb, 50-year-old Samuel Friedlander lived in a beau-tiful three-story colonial home with his wife and his two children, ages 8 and 10. He was a successful attorney with his own private practice, and it seemed that he had achieved what many might consider the perfect life—except that Friedlander and his wife were in the midst of a divorce. Without warning, in the early morning hours of Tuesday, October 18, 2011, Friedlander removed one of the legs from a piece of furniture and used it to beat his wife to death. Then he shot his two children and covered each with a blanket (Schweber, 2011). He then shot and killed himself. Friedlander had never been in trouble with the law, and his friends, neighbors, and family generally considered him to be a nice person. People in the community were shocked when they learned that he was the perpe- trator of such a gruesome murder and struggled to make sense of such a senseless crime.

1.1 Overview of Criminology

When a violent crime is committed, experts often look to culture, biology, and environment, as well as the stress level of the perpetrator, to try to explain the criminal behavior. They also employ criminology, or the scientific study of the nature, extent, causes, consequences, social reaction, and control of criminal behavior. The field of criminology focuses primarily on the origins of criminal behavior. However, criminologists also investigate the law-making process, how crime impacts society as a whole, as well as specific social groups. From this perspective, crime is a social construct, meaning its definition may change over time and is largely determined by the norms and values of a given society. Powerful individuals and groups also tend to dispropor- tionately influence the definition of crime. Recognizing crime as a social construct makes defining crime challenging since it is embedded with a series of moral, philosophical, and legal issues.

Many criminologists, therefore, rely on the legalistic approach (Tappan, 1947), which defines crime as any action that intentionally violates the law. As an interdisciplinary science, criminology is shaped by a number of disciplines including anthropology, biol- ogy, economics, law, philosophy, political science, psychology, and most predominantly sociology. Modern criminology benefits from this rich tradition, as those who work in the criminal justice profession can draw from a legacy of theory, research methods, and evi- dence to better understand the relationship between crime and society.

Origins of Modern American Law

The first sets of written rules were established by the Babylonian King Hammurabi (1792– 1750 BCE), in the Mesopotamia area (i.e., southern Iraq). The Code of Hammurabi con- tained 282 clauses, 50 of which dealt with crime and subsequent punishment. This code established what was known as lex talonis or the “eye for an eye” philosophy on crime and punishment, a philosophy that was also a prominent feature in Judaic law. Judaic law was the dominant code roughly 500 miles west of Mesopotamia in Canaan and became known as The Law of Moses. Elements of modern American criminal law can be traced back to these early written rules. Many of the behaviors outlawed in Judaic culture, for example, murder, rape, and robbery are also outlawed in many Westernized nations.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 2 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.1 Overview of Criminology CHAPTER 1

The defining characteristics of the modern American legal system, however, were adopted from English common law, which was developed during the rule of Henry II as King of England (1154–1189) when royal judges started to publish case decisions. Judges were required to defer to judge-made law established in pre- vious cases, known as precedents. Once judges pub- lished their decisions regularly, a written body of laws was created and expanded upon over time. These legal rulings and precedents produced by the common law system became a central feature in the English Consti- tution, which eventually became the foundation of the American judicial process.

Under common law, crimes were divided into two dis- tinct categories: mala en se and mala prohibitum. Mala en se crimes denote evil behavior, such as murder, rape, and kidnapping, or other crimes considered morally unjust regardless of whether there was a law prohibiting that behavior. Mala prohibitum are illegal behaviors because a law passed stating that such behavior is forbidden. Since crime and law are both social constructs, all members of society may not agree that a given behavior is unjust or morally wrong. Indeed, the legal status of marijuana use, abortion, gay marriage, and alcohol prohibition have changed over time depending on cultural norms.

The distinction between mala en se or mala prohibitum, therefore, has influenced other aspects of criminal law in the United States. For example, English common law is evident in modern American criminal law, which distin- guishes between misdemeanors and felonies. A misde- meanor is a less serious crime, like drug possession or petty theft, which carries a maxi- mum punishment of 1 year in jail. A felony is a serious crime, such as murder or rape, which carries a minimum punishment of 1 year in prison.

American criminal law is further divided into substantive law and procedural law. Sub- stantive law, established by the United States legislature, defines standards of societal conduct. It specifies behaviors that are prohibited by law and describes the corresponding punishments. Substantive law, for instance, requires that premeditation, or planning, is a necessary element for first-degree, as opposed to second-degree, murder. In contrast, procedural law outlines the steps the state must legally follow when enacting, implement- ing, or enforcing the law. Procedural law attempts to ensure that the state enforces laws in accordance with Constitutional standards. One example of procedural law requires that police officers have probable cause in order to arrest a suspect.

The Bridgeman Art Library/Thinkstock

The Code of Hammurabi, preserved on the ancient stele seen here, was the first set of rules to be recorded in writing.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 3 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.2 Main Criminological Schools and Perspectives CHAPTER 1

Interdisciplinary Approaches to the Study of Crime

Understanding the origins and types of modern American criminal law is a necessary step in addressing one of the most important questions in all of criminology: Why do individu- als commit crime?

With the goal of preventing crime in mind, criminologists tackle this question by investi- gating how institutional concerns like the economy, education, health care, nutrition, the environment, genetics, and family dynamics all interact to affect crime, criminals, and victimization. In addition, experts who study crime recognize that the political process and public opinion affects definitions of crime and how criminals are punished. Criminol- ogists further collect and critically analyze data that describes how crime and punishment affects different demographics, including racial and ethnic groups, genders, and social classes. This information creates a multifaceted picture of crime and society that informs elected officials, criminal justice policymakers, and citizens when they make decisions about crime control policy.

1.2 Main Criminological Schools and Perspectives

Over time, different perspectives on the origins of criminal behavior have defined the main schools of thought in criminol- ogy. During the medieval period (1200s to the 1600s), many people believed crime was the result of possession by demons, evil spirits, or the devil (Tibbetts, 2012). Most punishments were brutal, cruel, and involved torture, such as the pressing boards, drawing and quartering, or being eaten by wild animals. It was not until the 1700s that many started to believe that people, not outside supernatural forces, might be responsible for their own behavior; understanding these behaviors increasingly involved the scientific method.

The Age of Reason

The ideological origins of the discipline of crimi- nology can be traced back to the mid-17th cen- tury when thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes (1588–1769) investigated issues of governance and social control. Challenging the conventional wisdom of previous eras, Hobbes and other influ- ential thinkers of the era believed human beings were rational actors. Individuals could exercise their innate free will to make informed decisions

after carefully considering the costs and benefits of various options. The doctrine of free will had significant implications for many aspects of human behavior, including crime.

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

In the mid-17th century influential thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes explored the concept of free will.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 4 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.2 Main Criminological Schools and Perspectives CHAPTER 1

During the mid-18th century, philosophers started to seriously consider the origins of crime and criminal behavior. This period, known as the Enlightenment Era or the Age of Reason, focused on art, philosophy, and science. Problem solving took a secular turn, as society became a more intellectual, a more civilized, and a more evolved society.

The Classical School of Criminology

One of the first philosophers to write about crime was Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794), who some consider to be the founding father of criminology. Beccaria wrote On Crimes and Punishments (1764/1986), which was the foundation for what would become the Classical School of Criminology. The Classical School was one of the earliest philosophical perspec- tives on crime that argued for more humane punishment and uniform, just treatment of criminals. The thinking was that as society was becoming more civilized, so too, should criminal punishments. Thus, torture and capital punishment, Beccaria argued, should be banned. Beccaria also advocated for consistency in the criminal justice system and sug- gested a series of due process reforms, such as the elimination of secret criminal justice proceedings, the right of the accused to confront witnesses, and the right for the accused to be judged by a group of one’s peers instead of a single judge.

Beccaria also advocated for using the criminal justice system to prevent crime. According to Beccaria, punishment could deter crime when it was swift, certain, and severe. Swift punishment takes place soon after a crime is committed. Thus, an efficient criminal justice system that also protects the rights of the accused is essential. The certainty of punishment refers to the likelihood that the state will catch and punish a criminal for a given criminal act. Certainty depends on the effectiveness of law enforcement to catch criminals. Lastly, punishments need to be appropriately severe in order to serve as a deterrent. In other words, the punishment had to outweigh the benefits of committing a crime. Beccaria’s work had global impact and contributed to the large-scale reform of the criminal justice systems of many nations. In addition, these fundamental notions of justice and fairness set the stage for other influential theoretical developments.

Utilitarianism

The philosophy of utilitarianism was developed and promoted by a series of influential thinkers including Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stewart Mill (1806–1973) and built directly from the core elements of the Classical School of Criminology. In essence, utilitarianism is a philosophical perspective that judges actions in accordance with their contributions to the “Golden Rule of Utilitarianism,” which attempts to provide the great- est good for the greatest number of people. Building public policy attempting to achieve the “greatest good” was operationalized using the principles of pain and pleasure.

Utilitarians posited that human beings wanted to pursue pleasure and avoid pain; pleasure was inherently good and pain inherently bad. From a criminal justice system perspective, punishment causes pain and is thus inherently bad. However, using the metric of the “Golden Rule,” punishment might have an overall positive effect on society if crime can be prevented as a result of the imposition of punishment; the pain of punish- ment was justifiable only if it prevents future crimes, future crime victims, and thus future suffering. Therefore, deterrence was also a central feature of a utilitarian perspective on punishment and criminal justice policy.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 5 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.2 Main Criminological Schools and Perspectives CHAPTER 1

Guided by the Golden Rule, utilitarians seek a balance between the pain of the punishment inflicted and the deterrent value of that punishment. A deterrent value can be achieved if the individual presently being punished is prevented from committing additional future criminal acts, or if potential offenders in society are deterred from future criminal acts by virtue of having a punishment system in place more generally. According to Bentham, medieval punishments in particular were in opposition to utilitarian goals because of the severity of the pain produced (1907). Utilitarians argued that punishment must be under- stood in terms of its overall utility or usefulness to society and did not need to be cruel in order to be effective.

Utilitarianism has been criticized on a variety of fronts. Most notably, the emphasis on deterrence suggests that utilitarians might treat the punishment of human beings as a mechanism to reach a goal, instead of the goal itself. If the punishment of an innocent per- son prevented a series of more significant crimes, would a utilitarian support that punish- ment? Some argue that the goals of punishment should focus on the individual who broke the law, not on the predicted outcome of punishment on society.

Both the Classical School and utilitarianism have been very influential on the study of crime; however, it was not until 1885 that Italian law professor Raffaele Garofalo actually coined the term criminology. The fundamental assumptions of these perspectives, notably that human beings have free will and actively make decisions about behavior, were chal- lenged by the next era of criminological theorizing.

The Positivist School of Criminology

The Positivist School of Criminology is a broad perspective that emphasizes factors other than free will in determining human behavior. Various branches of the positivist school have emphasized biology, genetics, psychology, and the environment external to the individual in creating crime.

Positivist School and Biology Biological positivism is a major subtype within the larger positivist school. Early biologi- cal positivists used crude methods to identify potential criminals by measurable physical characteristics. Often these early attempts reflected the racially biased ideology of the time and on not reliable, objective science. Globally, the early to mid-19th century was a period of colonization, eugenics movements, and reliance on slave labor. The early positivist per- spectives often reinforced these unfounded beliefs of racial and national supremacy.

Early scientists called physiognomists and phrenologists made some of the first attempts to understand criminality from a biological positivistic perspective. Physiognomists stud- ied one’s facial appearance by measuring the distance between various facial features as well as the shapes of the facial features themselves to determine one’s propensity for criminal behavior. Phrenologists studied the shape and bumps on the skull to determine various aspects of behavior, including criminality. They believed that the shape of the skull was related to the shape of the brain. Thus, abnormalities in the shape of the skull reflected brain abnormalities that contributed to criminality and other antisocial behav- iors. Over time, neither perspective proved to be good science. In particular, these early studies often determined that powerful majority groups were superior and less criminal

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 6 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.2 Main Criminological Schools and Perspectives CHAPTER 1

than marginalized racial and ethnic groups. However, these early biological positivists reinforced the potential of science as a means for understanding criminal behavior and thus contributed to the evolution of the positivistic perspective.

Positivist School and Psychology The positivist school emphasized psychology by examining the relationship between factors such as IQ, personality, mental illness, mood disorders, and the learning process and its correlation with criminal behavior. During the 19th century, Gabriel Tarde (1903), a learning theorist, believed that people learned from one another through the art of imita- tion. Imitation was particularly powerful in intimate relationships. Later, Charles Goring examined the relationship between defective intelligence and criminal behavior by study- ing English convicts. He linked low intelligence, mental illness, and epilepsy to criminal behavior. Yet, the most famous psychologist of all time was Sigmund Freud.

Case Study: Cesare Lombroso: The Founding Father of Criminology The most famous criminological positivist was Cesare Lombroso (1835–1909). Lombroso, a biological positivist, maintained that behav- ior was a product of genetics. He strongly rejected the classical school’s teachings and the notion that human beings possessed free will. Rather, criminal behavior was the result of external factors outside of one’s control. From Lombroso’s perspective, biological inheritance determined behavior and possibly the larger destiny of individual human beings (Lombroso, 2006).

Under the assumptions of biological positivism, Lombroso studied the cadavers of dead Italian prisoners. He measured the length of their arms, legs, and the circumference of their skulls. He meticulously studied their body shapes and facial features. Based on his studies, he determined that genetic inheritance determined serious criminal behavior. More specifically, criminal offenders had a series of observ- able and measurable biological markers.

Lombroso determined that these offenders could be distinguished by their physical characteristics, and he coined them “atavists.” Atavists, or born criminals, suffered from “stigmata” or abnormal physical characteristics. In line with Darwin’s theory of evolution, criminals were a throwback to an earlier evolutionary form. Somehow, they were stuck on the evolutionary scale, and many possessed characteristics similar to the characteristics of our earliest ancestor, the chimpanzee. They had large jaws, big foreheads, robust canine teeth, and most were hairier than the average person.

Lombroso also attempted to explain female criminality (Lombroso, 1920). He posited that women were inferior to men and of lesser intelligence. Lombroso argued that feminine characteristics and a woman’s inferior physiology tended to shield her from criminal behavior and predispose her toward living a very boring and insipid lifestyle. Those that did commit crime tended to possess more male than female physical characteristics, such as unwarranted body hair, moles, wrinkles, or crow’s feet. Although Lombroso’s stern view of biological determinism is no longer regarded as credible among the scientific community, his studies contributed to the evolution of criminology as science. Thus, Lombroso is widely considered the founding father of criminology.

Courtesy Everett Collection

Cesare Lombroso (1835–1909)

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 7 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.2 Main Criminological Schools and Perspectives CHAPTER 1

Sigmund Freud developed the psychodynamic or psychoanalytical perspective. He argued that the human personality is comprised of three components: the id, the ego, and the superego. The id is the primitive part of the personality and is present at birth. It is our innate drive for food, sex, love, and other base elements of self-satisfaction. The ego understands that others outside of our self exist and have their own needs and wants. The superego then develops in early childhood, around 5 to 6 years of age. The superego is our conscience and contains the moral standards of behavior that we learned from our families and our communities. In order for human beings to mature normally into adult- hood, all three parts of the personality must be in balance and work in harmony with one another. According to Freud, criminality is produced by the domination of the id and a failure of the other psychological elements to effectively regulate it. Despite the inability to support this theory with direct evidence, Freud’s theory remains widely influential in the field of psychology (Freud, 1910).

The Positivist School in Modern Criminology The core elements of the positivistic tradition continue to influence modern criminology. While modern science has discounted the early findings of Lombroso and others, the influ- ence of biological, genetic, and psychological factors remain important in the study of crime. Notable studies of families, identical and fraternal twins, adoption, chromosomal makeup, brain functioning, hormones, and the functioning of the central nervous system have contributed to a rich and ongoing understanding of crime. Some very popular con- temporary theories of crime are built in part on some elements of the positivistic tradition.

Control theories have become very influential in the study of crime and are loosely grounded in the positivist tradition. Reminiscent of Freud, control theories assume that some human beings have an innate desire for rule breaking, crime, and deviance. Tra- vis Hirschi’s (1969) early version of control theory argued that society needs to control individuals via four types of social bonds: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. In 1990 Hirschi partnered with Michael Gottfredson to craft A General Theory of Crime (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990), which focused on what they coined “low self con- trol.” According to this theory, some individuals will exhibit behaviors indicative of low self-control including thrill seeking, risk taking, a desire for immediate gratification, and a lack of concern for the feelings of others. Low self-control could also produce criminal behavior. They assumed that crime is relatively easy to commit, requires very little skill or planning, and is thus essentially available to anyone. Individuals with low self-control will often fall victim to their own innate desires for quick and easy gratification by engag- ing in criminal behavior without considering the consequences or its impact on other people and society. While this is not a traditional positivistic perspective, the core assump- tions of the theory contain elements of the positivistic tradition.

Biological, genetic, and psychological factors are undeniably important in the study of crime. However, the most powerful explanations for criminal behavior likely involve a combination of individual and structural factors. More specifically, biology, psychology, and genetics exist in the context of one’s environment and social experiences—perspec- tives that combine both the “nature” and the “nurture” factors in determining human behavior. Throughout the 20th century, the role of society, social learning, and groups became critically important in the study of crime; these are the core elements of the field of sociology, which had a profound and enduring impact on the modern era of criminology.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 8 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime

Examining social structure, the large-scale institutional arrangements in society, has been critically important to the develop- ment of criminological thought. Examining how social structure impacts individuals and groups in society has been the focus of the discipline of sociology. Renowned sociologist C. Wright Mills (1959) encouraged the development of the socio- logical imagination, or an understanding of how larger social forces impact the lived experiences of individuals, both private and public. An empha- sis on social structure, groups, and social learning has been critically important to the study of crime.

Early Sociological Perspectives

Throughout the 19th century, much of the Western world was experiencing large-scale social change. The labor demands of the Industrial Revolution led rural residents to flock to cities, creating new opportunities and new social problems. Emile Durkheim (1858–1916) is considered a classical sociological theorist who was very influential in

Fritz Goro/Getty Images

Sociologist C. Wright Mills encouraged the development of the sociological imagination.

Web Field Trip: Are You a Criminal? As society changes over time, illegal behaviors and activities may become socially acceptable, but laws are not immediately changed. For example, in many parts of California, marijuana usage is socially acceptable, but those who use it for nonmedicinal reasons are still considered criminals. Many people who would not consider themselves criminals engage in activities like marijuana usage, which they see as socially and morally acceptable. The following activity will help you determine if you engage in socially acceptable but illegal behaviors. Although all of the questions in this quiz are concerning criminal behavior, most law-abiding citizens have done at least one of these things.

Instructions: Even if you’ve never been arrested, you may still be guilty of committing a felony or misdemeanor. Take this 10-item quiz to find out. Visit the website http://www.360degrees.org/ perspectives.html for 360 Degrees, an organization that encourages reflection on the criminal jus- tice system. Take the quiz “Have you ever committed a felony or a misdemeanor?” here: http:// www.360degrees.org/ddata/felonQuiz/index.php.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. The legal status of many behaviors is often changing according to social norms. Should laws be changed or loosened to legalize any of the behaviors in the quiz?

2. Is it possible to legalize any of these behaviors without falling onto a slippery slope and allow- ing more dangerous behaviors?

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 9 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

the understanding of many of these issues including labor, crime, and how individuals bond together in social groups.

Durkheim’s (1893/1964) dissertation, The Division of Labor in Society, explored issues of industrialization and its ramifications for society. Of paramount importance was how economic changes may contribute to anomie, a state of normlessness when society’s norms, values, and expectations are unclear. He argued that before the Industrial Revolu- tion, societies were bound together by what he coined mechanical solidarity. These were typically small, primitive, hunting and gathering societies that had a very simple, often gender-based, division of labor. In societies characterized by mechanical solidarity, the collective norms and values of the people—what Durkheim called the collective con- science—would be very strong.

Violations of this collective conscience, including crime, would yield a passionate, repres- sive response from the community and the legal system. In contrast, more modern indus- trial societies would be characterized by organic solidarity. These societies were larger and had very complex divisions of labor. While individuals and groups depended on one another economically, the collective conscience of the society was less clear and less pow- erful. Violations of the collective conscience in societies characterized by organic solidar- ity were far less passionate. Rather, law had the responsibility to support the cooperative business practices necessary in a complex society. Law intended to repair whatever harm was caused in hopes of continuing the smooth interdependence of individuals and groups in a highly specialized society. While Durkheim’s dissertation focused primarily on indus- trialization and labor, he contributed extensively to a structural understanding of crime.

Durkheim theorized extensively about social cohesion and how crime might contribute and detract from it. Durkheim argued that crime was a normal and unavoidable com- ponent of society. He also felt that crime served several important functions. From this perspective, crime helps create and continually redefine the core norms and values of society. Thus, crime will contribute to social change as laws are continually challenged and reassessed. Similarly, crime helps social cohesion by bonding people together against a common enemy. Some criminals have challenged these core norms and values and have thus distinguished “us” (the good, the moral, and the virtuous) from “them” (the bad and the immoral). More practically, Durkheim also highlighted that crime would serve the function of creating jobs. Durkheim’s work linking social-structural changes to human behavior remains important in the modern study of crime and also laid the groundwork for subsequent structural theorizing about crime.

Strain Theory

Building from Durkheim’s work, Robert Merton (1938) coined ritualists, which became a pillar of criminological thought. As an American sociologist in the early 20th cen- tury, Merton witnessed the stock market crash and subsequent Great Depression. Eco- nomic dynamics became a central piece in Merton’s theory of crime. Merton argued that every society has culturally prescribed goals. In America, these goals often emphasize, and possibly overemphasize, financial and material success. In addition, every society

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 10 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

has culturally prescribed means, or common methods and approaches, to achieving the culturally prescribed goals. Strain is produced when the culturally prescribed goals are unachievable via the culturally prescribed means, or access to the culturally prescribed means is blocked. For example, for some groups in society, education is the traditional path to economic success. However, for many, underperforming schools do not provide adequate training for jobs in the modern economy. Poor education thus creates strain. Like Durkheim, Merton also used the term anomie. But, for Merton, anomie referred to the disconnect between society’s prescribed goals and the available means to reach those goals. He theorized that faced with strain, individuals would adapt.

Merton coined five modes of adaptation that are possible responses to anomie and strain (see Figure 1.1). The most common mode of adaptation is conformity. Despite the obsta- cles, conformists will continue with traditional expectations, earning an education and working hard, in hopes of eventually achieving material success. Ritualists accept the prescribed means of society but reject the culturally prescribed goals. Faced with strain, ritualists just “go through the motions,” generally satisfied with their current social and financial position, without a firm commitment to career or financial advancement. Both conformity and ritualism are noncriminal adaptations to strain.

Figure 1.1: Robert K. Merton’s deviance typology

From Giddens, A., Duneier, M., Appelbaum, R., & Carr, D. (2011). Essentials of Sociology, (3rd ed.). New York, NY: WW Norton & Company, Inc. Reprinted by permission.

Merton’s Strain Theory outlines five modes of adaptation. As illustrated in the figure, each mode of adaptation is defined by its relationship to the prescribed goals in society and the means available to reach those goals.

Institutionalized Means

C u

lt u

ra l G

o a

ls

accept reject

a c c e p

t re

je c t

Conformity Innovation

Ritualism Retreatism

Rebellion

n e w

g o

a ls

new means

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 11 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

Merton’s Strain Theory outlines three modes of adaptation that can be criminal. An inno- vator accepts the culturally prescribed goals of society but chooses nontraditional, and often criminal, means to achieve the goals. Innovation is the most prevalent criminal adaptation to strain, although not all innovators are criminals. Drug dealers and mem- bers of organized crime may be described as innovators. Retreatists have rejected both the culturally prescribed goals and means of society. Many retreatists have withdrawn from society and may have adopted a unique system of norms and values. Hardcore drug addicts and the chronic homeless may be described as retreatists. Finally, individuals may adapt via rebellion and reject both society’s prescribed goals and the means to reach those goals. Unlike the retreatist, the rebel actively wants to change the current social order and redefine the goals and means entirely. Members of social movements and activists of vari- ous political ideologies may be described as rebels.

Subsequent scholars have used Merton’s foundation to build more contemporary ver- sions of Strain Theory. Albert Cohen (1955) used fundamental notions of strain to create a theory of gang membership and a typology of gang members. Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin (1960) also used Strain Theory to create a typology of gangs. According to their theory, a lack of availability of traditional legal means to success contributed to the gang problem and also to the types of gangs formed in a community. They also empha- sized the “differential opportunity” or relative availability of both legal and illegal means to traditional success. Robert Agnew (1985) coined “general strain theory,” a perspective that connected crime with the stress and anger produced from the presence or absence of negative and positive stimuli in everyday life.

Durkheim and Merton represent social structural approaches to understanding crime that have left an enduring legacy on modern criminology. Moreover, they laid the ideological groundwork for additional perspectives on criminological thought that are heavily influ- enced by sociology.

The Chicago School and Social Disorganization

In the early 1900s, sociologists at the University of Chicago conducted a series of ground- breaking studies that created cornerstone theories about crime. Robert Park, Ernest Burgess (1925) and their colleagues were urban sociologists that studied the effect of the environment on crime. They applied an ecological model to the city, arguing that like different species of plants, different groups of people compete in a particular geo- graphical area.

Park and Burgess’s research suggested that the city could be organized into five concentric circles, or zones, that each had its own distinct characteristics (see Figure 1.2). This theory of urban development and crime was appropriately named concentric zone theory. Zone one was the city center that served as the economic, social, and political hub of the city. Zone two was the area immediately surrounding the city center that contained industrial factories. The factories provided nominal employment for some residents in zone two, but working conditions were harsh. Zone two was characterized by poverty, instability, poor education, poor living conditions, and consistent high rates of crime. In this zone, there was little sense of community in part because the populations tended to be transient due to the large influx of immigration at the time. Thus, they coined zone two as the zone in transition. Zone three was modest, working-class communities. Zone four was an upper- class area with fairly expensive residential districts. And zone five was a mix of rural

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 12 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

areas and upper-class suburban districts where many commuted into the city for employ- ment. By emphasizing the criminogenic effect of the environment and communities, the Chicago School challenged the belief that crime was due to biological or psychological traits. Crime was the result of poor economic and social conditions, and those that lived in disadvantaged areas were more likely to become criminals. Subsequent sociologists from the University of Chicago would build on this model of urban development and crime.

Figure 1.2: The concentric zone model

Based on a model by Bruce Hoffman, http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/200/socdisor.html. Used by permission of Bruce Hoffman.

The research of the Chicago School suggested that the city could be organized into five concentric circles, or zones, that each had its own distinct characteristics. As illustrated in the figure, zones radiate outward from the city center. In terms of crime and deviance, zone two, the zone in transition, is of critical importance.

Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay (1942) further investigated the characteristics of zone two and how they related with crime. They concluded that over time, zone two areas, in which factories invaded and destabilized residential communities, had consistently high rates of crime regardless of the racial and ethnic composition of the community. Shaw and McKay argued that many of the characteristics of zone two—high residential turnover, poverty, unemployment and underemployment, poor housing, poor living conditions, pollution—led to a breakdown of social norms and the social organization of the community. They coined their theory of crime “social disorganization” to describe these communities with a lack of informal social control. Social disorganization remains a powerful and popular explanation of crime, and the Chicago School left a lasting impression on criminology as a discipline.

1. Central Business District

2. Transitional Zone

3. Working Class Zone

4. Residential Zone

5. Commuter Zone

**Recent Immigrant Groups • Deteriorated Housing • Factories • Abandoned Buildings

• Single Family Tenemets

• Single Family Homes • Yards/Garages

• Suburbs

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 13 7/5/13 4:15 PM

Section 1.3 Sociological Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

Social Learning Theories

Over the last century, social learning theories have been central to the study of crime. This perspective highlights the role of socialization, or the lifelong process of learning norms, values, and behaviors from other individuals and groups in society. By making social learning central, this perspective challenges the classical school and notions of human free will and rational decision making. Learning theories also challenge the positivistic tradition and its emphasis on genetics, biology, and external forces.

One of the earliest and most influential learning theorists was Edwin Sutherland (1883–1950). Sutherland (1939) created differential association theory, which argues

Case Study: In Search of Respect In the late 1980s and early 1990s, anthropologist Philippe Bourgois immersed himself in a crack-dealing network in poverty-stricken East Harlem, New York. For several years, he lived in the community, interviewed and observed drug dealers and their families, and connected his fieldwork with theories of poverty and crime. This community existed in the shadow of New York’s city center, just outside one of the hubs of the world economy. Its residents faced a series of disad- vantages including segregation, dilapidated housing, overbur- dened public schools, and poverty.

The subjects of the study, disproportionately first- or second- generation immigrants from Puerto Rico, vividly described their experiences attempting to achieve the American Dream. Bourgois argued that these individuals have been socialized to embrace traditionally masculine notions of hard work and providing for one’s family. In previous decades, young men in this com- munity were able to earn a livable wage via manufacturing jobs in the region’s factories. However, as manufacturing increasingly was outsourced to other countries, it was replaced by service-oriented jobs that required different skill sets. The subjects’ education and work experience made working in the legitimate service-sector economy challenging. They often could find employment only in the most vulnerable and lowest-paying office jobs, like working as messengers and making copies.

Given their exclusion from the mainstream economy, these subjects often dealt crack because they were “In Search of Respect” (Bourgois, 1995). This profession, while illegal and often dangerous, provided an opportunity for dignified employment in one’s own community. Bourgois and others argued that this study reveals the tragic reality of some poverty-stricken communities—that the drug trade attracts the most motivated young men in communities where other legitimate educational and economic opportunities do not exist. For more information about “In Search of Respect,” visit http://philippebourgois.net/

Critical Thinking Questions

1. Why is dignity important in the world of work? 2. What social policies would you create based on the results of Bourgois’ study?

Stephen Ferry/Getty Images

Philippe Bourgois connected his fieldwork in East Harlem with theories of crime and poverty.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 14 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.4 Critical Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

that criminal behavior is learned through the process of interacting and communicating with other individuals and groups. In order for crime to occur, individuals must learn both the techniques for actually committing the crime and the motivations and rationalizations that help justify criminal behavior. From this perspective, human beings did not have free will or make rational decisions about their own behavior. Thus, crime is produced when individuals experience, “an excess of definitions favorable to violations of the law over definitions unfavorable to violations of law” (Sutherland & Cressey, 1974, p. 75).

According to differential association theory, certain types of learning experiences are more influential than others on behavior. For example, learning experiences that are longer in duration or occur more frequently will have a more significant impact on the “excess of definitions favorable . . . or unfavorable to violations of law” (Sutherland & Cressey, 1974, p. 75).

Similarly, learning experiences that involve very important individuals in one’s life (a parent, sibling, or close friend for example) will also have a more significant impact. And last, interactions and learning experiences that take place earlier in life will also have a disproportionate impact on behavior.

Sutherland’s differential association theory has been criticized on a variety of fronts. First, by emphasizing social learning this perspective downplays the free will and rationality of individuals. Critics contend that differential association frames human beings as passive accepters of information who are highly influenced by others. In addition, differential association has an origination issue. If all criminal behavior is learned, how did the first act of crime take place? From whom did the first criminal learn to commit crime? Despite these critiques, Sutherland’s differential association theory is considered groundbreaking, and social learning theories have become a major artery in criminological thought.

In 1957, Gresham Sykes and David Matza (1957) created a criminological learning theory focused on juvenile delinquency called techniques of neutralization. They argued that juve- niles do not make a wholehearted commitment to delinquency or conforming behavior. Rather individuals “drift” between abiding by society’s norms and values and breaking them. In order for more serious and longstanding criminality to take place, individual juve- nile delinquents must learn rationalizations and justifications for their criminal behavior called techniques of neutralization. Their original model had five individual techniques. A series of scholars later expanded the number of techniques and focused the theory beyond only juvenile delinquency. Heavily influenced by sociology, learning theories are a major perspective in modern criminology.

1.4 Critical Perspectives on Crime

The 1960s and 1970s witnessed a proliferation of critical perspectives on crime, including perspectives based on conflict, labeling, and feminism. Likely inspired by the series of social movements advocating for civil rights, gender and racial equality, the discipline of criminology became more critical of the state and the existing social order.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 15 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.4 Critical Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

Conflict Criminology

Conflict criminology was inspired by the work of Karl Marx (1818–1883). Marx was very critical of the oppression he felt was built into capitalist economic systems. Capitalism is defined by the production and exchange of wealth being conducted through private individuals or corporations. Marx theorized that two classes made up a capitalistic soci-

ety, defined by their respective relationship to the modes of production. The modes of production are things like factories, or entities that create goods, services, and wealth in a society. The bour- geoisie are the relatively small number of elites who actually own and control the modes of pro- duction. In contrast, the proletariat are the large masses of workers who have only their labor to offer to the capitalist marketplace. Marx theorized that under capitalism, exploitation and class con- flict were inevitable and that this class conflict produced crime (Marx, 1906).

According to Marx, under capitalism the law does not protect all citizens equally. Rather, those in power create laws to protect their own interests. The bourgeoisie control the definitions of crime, and they determine and influence how the crimi- nal justice system will enforce the law. Crimes of the poor, like theft out of economic necessity, will likely be punished very harshly. While many of the inhumane and exploitative business practices of the affluent ownership class are likely not even defined as crime in the first place. Marx argued that only a fundamental change in the economic structure of society could solve crime and other

social problems. This economic shift would require that the modes of production be distributed more equitably among individuals and groups in society, dramatically decreasing class conflict and crime. Marx’s work was tremendously influential in a series of critical perspectives of the late 20th century.

The Labeling Perspective

The labeling perspective was heavily influenced by cornerstone Marxist notions of power and inequality. Labeling theorists fundamentally focus on perception, both how individuals perceive themselves and how individuals are perceived by society. Building from Marxism, labeling theorists argue that the powerful elite class in society create and enforce laws. Through the enforcement of laws, the elite class is able to control the labeling process by targeting marginalized individuals and groups. Howard Becker, an influential labeling theorist argued, “Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infrac- tion constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people . . .” (Becker, 1963, p. 9). The lower class becomes officially stigmatized as criminal, in part so the upper class can maintain its position of power and privilege.

Photos.com/Thinkstock

Karl Marx theorized that crime was the result of class conflict.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 16 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.4 Critical Perspectives on Crime CHAPTER 1

Labeling theory divides criminal and deviant behavior into two distinct categories: pri- mary and secondary deviation. Primary deviation is relatively low level and less signifi- cant rule breaking and criminal behavior. Labeling theorists argue that almost everyone in society commits acts of primary deviation. Primary deviation is much less significant compared to what they call secondary deviation, which becomes the most important part of the theory.

Secondary deviation is further, more serious criminal and deviant acts that are a product of the formal labeling process. Individuals commit low-level deviance and crime; some become officially labeled as deviant, and this labeling process actually creates second- ary deviation. The labeling process, and the stigma it produces, actually produces more serious criminal and deviant acts. According to labeling theory, the stigmatizing labeling process leads individuals to internalize a deviant self-concept. The stigmatized individual may cut off ties with positive social groups and seek out peers who are also deviant. Stigmatized individuals may truly believe that they are “bad” people, and thus seek out opportunities to do bad things. Thus, perception and self-identity are key components of the labeling perspective.

Labeling theorists argue that the poor, people of color, and other marginalized groups are targeted by the dominant members of society for labeling. In contrast, the criminal justice system largely ignores crimes of the affluent, like white-collar crimes. These notions of stigma, identity, and discrimination are also central to feminist perspectives on crime.

Feminist Perspectives

Feminist perspectives generally emphasize the role of gender inequality in the under- standing of crime. Under the umbrella term feminism are many diverse perspectives. Many argue that traditional criminological theories have focused overwhelmingly on crime committed by men and boys. As a result, society and policy makers understand very little about the origins of crime for women and girls and how these dynamics may be similar to, or different from, their male counterparts. Our understanding of crime would benefit tre- mendously from a better understanding of why females are consistently and significantly less likely to perpetrate crime compared to males (Daly & Chesney-Lind, 2002).

Meda Chesney-Lind’s (1989) “Girls’ Crime and Woman’s Place: Toward a Feminist Model of Female Delinquency” is an example of feminist criminology in action. This study exemplifies how gender differences matter in the criminal justice system and thus should be a prominent part of the study of criminology. This piece examines nationwide arrest rates for adolescent males and females between 1977 and 1986 for status offenses. A sta- tus offense is an act committed by a juvenile that is criminalized by virtue of the age of the perpetrator. Common status offenses are truancy from school or running away from home. Chesney-Lind’s analysis shows that juvenile girls are more than three times more likely to be arrested for status offenses compared to juvenile boys. The arrest rates are much higher for juvenile girls, despite that research shows girls are not more likely than boys to commit status offenses. Chesney-Lind determined that parents are more likely to encourage the arrest of juvenile girls, as opposed to juvenile boys for the same offense. Theories of crime that focus overwhelmingly on crimes committed by men are unlikely to adequately describe how the female gender experiences crime and criminality.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 17 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.5 Measuring Crime CHAPTER 1

More recent studies have reaffirmed that an understanding of gender is central to the study of crime and criminology. Cheryl Maxson, a professor of Criminology, Law & Society at the University of California at Irvine, is a nationally recognized expert on street gangs. In a recent study, Maxson (2011) critically examined the two main methods of documenting gang members and gang prevalence in communities: law enforcement reports and com- munity surveys. Law enforcement reports on street gangs are often based on crime reports, arrest data, and information reported by individual police officers. In contrast, community reports refer to surveys and interviews with both juveniles and adults in communities. These surveys and interviews ask community residents themselves about the problem of gangs and gang membership in their communities. According to Maxson, these two sources paint dramatically different pictures of the gang issue in America. “Depictions of youth who join gangs vary radically according to whether information is gathered from law enforcement or directly from youth” (Maxson, 2011, p. 163). Law enforcement reports overrepresent gang members who are older, members of racial minority groups, and men. According to law enforcement reports, approximately 6% of gang members nationwide are female. In contrast, according to community-based data, approximately one fourth to one third of all gang members nationwide are female. A feminist perspective on crime would encourage an understanding of these gender differences: Why is law enforcement less likely to contact, suspect, and/or report female gang members?

Since the first philosophies about crime in the early 1700s, the major schools of thought in criminology have evolved considerably. Contemporary criminologists are armed with an array of theoretical perspectives on the origins of crime that serve as powerful analytical tools. One of the chief tasks of the discipline is to apply to these theoretical tools evidence about crime and criminal behavior. In order to achieve this goal, an understanding of the different methods of measuring and gathering data about crime is essential.

1.5 Measuring Crime

Criminology as a social science relies on gathering and analyzing trustworthy data about crime. There are three main ways that criminologists measure criminal behav-ior: the Uniform Crime Report, victimization surveys, and self-report studies. Each of these sources of crime data has advantages and disadvantages, and no single method produces a wholly accurate version of the crime picture. Understanding the assumptions, nuances, strengths, and weaknesses of each method is essential to becoming an adequate criminologist.

The Uniform Crime Report (UCR)

The Uniform Crime Report is the most extensively used source of crime data in the coun- try (Tibbetts, 2012) and is considered “official” crime data. The Bureau of Investigation (the modern day Federal Bureau of Investigation or FBI) began the UCR in the 1930s under the guidance of its director J. Edgar Hoover. The FBI was in part responding to The Inter- national Association of Chiefs of Police, who promoted the benefits of a nationally based archive for crime data. Individual law enforcement agencies from across the country and every level of government voluntarily report crime data, which is then complied at the state level and relayed to the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, n.d.; Tibbetts, 2012).

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 18 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.5 Measuring Crime CHAPTER 1

The UCR uses a relatively simple categorization system to classify crimes across vari- ous agencies and jurisdictions. The UCR highlights four violent crimes (criminal homi- cide, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) and four property crimes (burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson). Together, these eight crimes are called Part I offenses, or index offenses. The UCR reports all Part I offenses known to police. The UCR also collects data on 21 additional crimes that are called Part II offenses or nonindex crimes. Part II offenses include felonies and misdemeanors that the FBI considers less seri- ous than index crimes. Part II offenses include financial crimes like fraud and embezzle- ment and some violent crimes like simple assault. Unlike Part I offenses, nonindex crimes are only reported in the UCR if an arrest is made for that crime. The data presented by the UCR is longstanding, systematic, and readily available. While limited in many ways, the UCR presents valuable data on crime in the United States.

There are a number of important limitations of the UCR. Most importantly, the UCR is constructed based only on crimes known to the police. As will be discussed in more depth, the data demonstrates that a significant amount of crime is unknown to law enforcement. Law enforcement resources are limited. Thus, police may be less likely to uncover crime in areas that they patrol less frequently. In addition, victims may not report crime for a series of reasons. They may believe the crime is not serious enough to warrant law enforce- ment attention. They may feel that their case is unlikely to be solved. The victim may be involved in crime him or herself. In addition, many institutions like businesses and schools have a vested self-interest in not reporting crime to avoid tarnishing their public image. Moreover, several significant and harmful crimes are not included in the UCR such as some types of white-collar crime.

The Hierarchy Rule further compromises the accuracy of the UCR. According to the FBI,

The Hierarchy Rule requires that when more than one Part I offense is classi- fied, the law enforcement agency must locate the offense that is highest on the hierarchy list and score that offense involved and not the other offense(s) in the multiple-offense situation. (FBI, 2004, p. 10)

That means if multiple index crimes are committed during the same criminal event at the same location, the UCR only records the single most serious index crime.

The UCR fails to capture a significant amount of crime in America. Research shows that the UCR might miss as much as 70% to 80% of all index crimes (Tibbetts, 2012). Other experts report that 57% of crimes against persons and 66% of property crimes are not reported to police (Berger, Free, & Searles, 2005). In addition, other methods of measur- ing crime consistently show higher rates of crime compared to the UCR. The difference between the prevalence of crime in society and the rates of crime measured by researchers is often called “the dark figures of crime.” In part as a result of the shortcomings of the UCR, law enforcement developed a more contemporary and nuanced approach to mea- suring crime.

The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) was initiated in 1982 in an attempt to be more inclusive and accurate than the UCR. First, NIBRS measures a wider variety of crimes. Forty-six crimes are included and divided into two categories: Group A and Group B. NIBRS corrects one of the most obvious issues with the UCR—the hierarchy rule—by including all criminal acts that take place in a single criminal event. Moreover,

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 19 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.5 Measuring Crime CHAPTER 1

NIBRS records more comprehensive data on the perpetrators and victims of the crimes (Walsh, 2012).

The major shortcoming of NIBRS is the scope of the data included. In 2009, 31 states were participating in NIBRS, and only approximately 25% of the population of the United States would be represented in the report. Moreover, like the UCR, NIBRS does still rely on crimes known to police, so likely much of the “dark figures of crime” will be missed by NIBRS as well (Walsh, 2012).

All methods of measuring crime in America fail to capture a 100% accurate picture of the reality of crime, thus the dark figures of crime apply to all three major methods of crime data gathering. However, some of the shortcomings of the UCR and NIBRS may be addressed by other methods, such as victimization surveys.

The National Crime Victimization Survey

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is a robust measure of crime that also suffers from several shortcomings. In the 1960s the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice urged the criminal justice system to better understand the nature of crime victimization. These recommendations contributed to the first NCVS in 1973 administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The contemporary version of the survey is administered to a nationally representative sample of households. Each included household is surveyed once every 6 months for 3 years.

In 2008, the NCVS surveyed over 42,000 households and nearly 80,000 individuals (Rand, 2009). Participants in the survey must be at least 12 years old and are asked a series of questions about their own crime victimization for both property and violent crimes, regardless if those crimes were ever reported or otherwise brought to the attention of law enforcement. Many criminologists believe that the NCVS is a more accurate measure of crime compared to the UCR. According to some experts, the NCVS shows approximately three times the amount of crime compared to the UCR. Thus, the NCVS likely includes some of the “dark figures of crime” missed by other crime measures.

The NCVS also has a series of significant shortcomings. The survey targets individuals at least 12 years old within a nationally representative sample of American households. By definition, this approach is going to fail to include homeless and transient populations in the data collection. The survey is also going to fail to include young children who are the victims of crime. Similarly, the NCVS is not going to gather victimization data from busi- nesses and other types of commercial establishments. In combination, these individuals and locations that are outside the scope of the survey contribute to dark figures of crime of the NCVS. In addition, the accuracy of the NCVS depends on the memories, descriptions, and interpretations by individuals about their own crime victimization. Subjects may mis- understand or misinterpret the questions being asked. The memories of the subjects will likely be accurate in some cases and not others. They may intentionally or unintentionally misrepresent events. Finally, the NCVS will not measure murder, since one cannot inter- view a murder victim.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 20 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.5 Measuring Crime CHAPTER 1

Self-Report Studies

Self-report studies ask respondents to disclose and describe their own criminal behavior. Some self-reports attempt to measure a fairly broad range of criminal behaviors, while others are focused on certain types of crime, like drug use or petty theft. Self-reports take various forms but typically rely on anonymous questionnaire-based methods. These studies target a variety of subject populations, although studies of students at the high school and college levels are common. Self-report studies typically are most effective at measuring less serious crime and other delinquent behaviors. Conversely, they are not good measures of serious criminality, primarily because they rely on the willingness of subjects to be both forthcoming and honest. Given the common structure of self-report studies, they are providing rich windows into certain types of crime but are not designed to produce encompassing and depth-oriented accounts of all crime and criminal behavior.

The NCVS will likely also fail to capture so-called “victimless crimes.” A victimless crime is a crime with no averse victim; all participants in that criminal act are willing, if not enthusiastic, to engage in that crime. Crimes like drug use, underage drinking, and prostitution cause various harms to individuals and society, but they are not predatory and thus they are characterized as victimless crimes. It seems unlikely that a subject in the NCVS would voluntarily disclose their participation in victimless crimes. Many of the advantages and disadvantages of collecting crime data directly from individuals are also applicable to self-report studies of crime.

Web Field Trip: Prostitution: A Victimless Crime? A victimless crime is one in which there is no adverse victim and only willing participants in a criminal act. Victimless crimes include public drunkenness, gambling, adultery, drug use, and prostitution. The legality of some victimless crimes can vary from permissible crimes like adultery and gambling to jail time for hard drug use. For example in Las Vegas, prostitution is more socially acceptable than in many other parts of the country, and in fact some people do not realize it is illegal there. Prostitu- tion is not considered predatory and thus characterized as a victimless crime, but its status is widely debated. There is no cultural consensus either completely accepting or condemning prostitution.

Go to http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/opinion/12farley.html to read about the possible vic- tims in this crime. A defense for its status and a call to legalize it completely can be found here http:// www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2012/03/15/victimless-crimes-would-jane-austen-approve- of-legal-prostitution/.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. The article in support of legalization of prostitution is written by a man, while the one con- demning its status as a victimless crime is written by a woman. Do you think it is common that men consider prostitution victimless while women do not? Does the fact that men outnumber women in politics have anything to do with its status as a victimless crime?

2. Do you think prostitution should be considered a victimless crime? 3. What other victimless crimes might be falsely identified as such?

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 21 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.6 Research Methods CHAPTER 1

In combination, the UCR, NCVS, and self-report studies provide criminologists a multi- faceted and relatively powerful depiction of crime in America. Whenever possible, it is beneficial to intertwine various types of crime data with active reflections about how they compliment and contradict each other. When conducting research in criminology, it is important to critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the respective data sources used in the study.

1.6 Research Methods

Criminology is a social science that utilizes the scientific method. Centuries of social- science research have produced and refined a series of research methods that when used properly can yield the most valid and reliable results. A fundamental under- standing of the basic types of data and established research methodologies is essential for the scientific study of crime.

Types of Data

Two broad types of data exist in social-science research. Quantitative data is numerical and is often displayed in charts, graphs, and tables. Qualitative data is data that cannot and should not be turned into numbers. It takes the form of narrative descriptions and is more journalistic in nature. The best research studies use a mixed-methodology approach that combines both quantitative and qualitative data.

Criminologists begin the research process by asking a question. Based on that area of inquiry, background research is conducted and a hypothesis is formulated. A hypothesis is a testable prediction, typically regarding the relationship between certain variables (i.e., factors or components). Data can then be gathered in various ways.

Surveys and questionnaires are likely the most common methods of criminological research. These research instruments can be distributed to a wide variety of subjects by mail, electronically, or in person. The language used in surveys is particularly important. The researcher must be sure to be as neutral as possible when writing individual items. With well-written questions, surveys can be compiled and analyzed to provide insight into virtually any criminological research question.

Interviews are another method by which criminologists gather data about the social world. Interviews like the NCVS can be conducted over the phone or in person. The presence of the researcher may influence interview subjects. This is often referred to as the Hawthorne Effect. Interviews can take many forms but can be divided by the rigidity of the interview itself. Structured interviews required that the researcher(s) ask the questions, in the same order, using the same language to all subjects. Unstructured interviews provide the inter- viewer a series of broad topics and introductory questions, but the interviewer reacts to the responses of the subjects and follows up accordingly. Lastly, a semistructured inter- view is a compromise between both approaches.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 22 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.7 Textbook Outline CHAPTER 1

Researchers may engage in participant observation and go to a research site and observe behavior first hand. During overt participant observation, the researcher and the research study are known to the subjects. During covert participant observation, however, the researchers do not disclose that they are actively engaged in social science research. Docu- menting participant observation requires the researcher to write detailed and rich field notes that then can be relied on throughout the analysis and reporting of the research findings.

Participant observation is a critical component of another research method, ethnography. Ethnography is conducted when the researcher embeds him or herself in the cultural scene of interest for some time and becomes part of the daily lives of the subjects. This method raises a series of ethical and sometimes safety concerns for both the researcher and the subjects. Criminology has benefitted from a series of powerful ethnographies of active criminal groups including Sudhir Venkatesh’s (2008) study of a Chicago crack- dealing street gang, Patricia Adler’s (1985) study of high-level drug smugglers, and Rafik Mohamed and Erik Fritsvold’s (2010) study of affluent college drug dealers.

Finally, criminologists may use experimental designs modeled after traditional laboratory sciences like chemistry. Experiments offer a controlled setting for observing and manipu- lating behavior. Typically, subjects are divided into two groups, an experimental group that receives the treatment/stimulus and a control group that does not. Criminological experiments have been used to study juries, the impact of media on the perception of crime, the relationship between violent media and violent behavior, and a series of other important issues.

Each research method and type of data has a series of advantages and disadvantages. The discipline of criminology requires that we use appropriate and well-designed research studies, reliable crime data, and criminological theory in our study of crime and related social problems. These are the required core tools of the criminologist to best educate and advise the public, policy makers, and law enforcement about the nature of crime.

1.7 Textbook Outline

The following chapters provide a criminology student with a scientific look into an array of critical issues in criminology and provide an understanding of criminologi-cal theory, data sources, and research methods throughout the analyses. The forth- coming section of the book examines a series of issues central to the study of the American correctional system. We will critically reflect on the size and scope of the correctional sys- tem, its effect on crime and public safety, and what happens to offenders once they leave the correctional system and reenter our communities.

The next major section of the book examines due process, inequality, and the criminal justice system. The evidence will show that the criminal justice system does not impact all groups equally: Social class, race, ethnicity, age, and gender are all important factors in understanding the crime problem and the effectiveness of the criminal justice system. Equality and fairness is a major theme in the American legal system. This section examines how the contemporary criminal justice system supports and does not support this theme.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 23 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.7 Textbook Outline CHAPTER 1

The final major section of the text explores a series of particular types of crimes: crimes in interpersonal relationships, crimes against strangers, and crime in the workplace and in school. Finally, the last chapter of the book is dedicated to evaluating possible reforms to the current criminal justice system. We will identify some major areas of potential reform and look at possible ways to improve them. As a capstone to the text, exploring potential reforms through the lens of social science reminds us of the importance of studying crime and criminal justice. Understanding criminological theory and research methods is not an abstract exercise. Rather, we hope to understand these issues to empower our society, to prevent crime, and to make our communities safer.

Using the Sociological Lens: What Can Explain Today’s Low Crime Rate?

Throughout the Great Recession, poverty and unemployment rates increased, but crime rates declined. How can this be explained?

Conventional wisdom traditionally pairs poverty with crime and economic downturns with increased violent criminal activity. When the U.S. crime rate fell throughout the 1990s, many criminologists attributed the decline to a healthy, booming economy: Jobs keep people from desperation, it was believed; high wages and low unemployment keep multiple types of crime at bay. Accordingly, when signs of a recession started to appear in 2007 and 2008, criminologists, statisti- cians, and other experts warned that an upswing in murder, rape, theft, and other serious crime was likely on the horizon.

To their astonishment, the Great Recession did not herald an increase in crime. On the contrary, crime rates dropped even further. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (2011a), which com- piles data on criminal activity and arrests, found that over a 30-year period (1980–2009), the adult arrest rate for murder fell 57%. Juvenile murder was down too: The juvenile arrest rate for murder fell 44%. Moreover, the decline was a national trend. In 2009, murders were down in Minneapolis by 67% over the previous year, by 47% in Seattle, 31% in New York, and 17% in Los Angeles.

By 2010, despite the loss of more than 7 million jobs, the FBI reported that violent crime had fallen to its lowest levels since the 1960s. The decline continued—in 2012, the National Center for Health Statistics reported that homicide was no longer a leading cause of death in the United States. In fact, murder had declined so much it was no longer in the top 15 causes, which include heart disease (the number 1 cause of death), accidents (the number 5 cause), and suicide (the number 10 cause).

Criminologists were nothing short of baffled. “The crime decline of 2008 to 2010 comes at a really inconvenient time for the conventional wisdom, in two respects,” says Franklin Zimring, criminologist and the author of The City That Became Safe. “One, the economy is going to hell, and two, this is the first time in forty years that we are not removing more prisoners from the streets than we’re sending back” (quoted in Verini, 2011). “It is deeply puzzling,” agrees Richard Rosenfeld, a criminologist with the University of Missouri, St. Louis. “During past economic recessions, with high unemployment and stagnant incomes, we saw increases in crime. That has not been the case this time” (quoted in Rubin, 2012). Explanations abound for why the crime rate has continued to decline even as (continued)

AFP/Getty Images

Criminologists analyze whether low crime rates are the result of increased incarceration of criminals or whether they are tied to a particular political factor.

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 24 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Section 1.7 Textbook Outline CHAPTER 1

Using the Sociological Lens: What Can Explain Today’s Low Crime Rate? (continued) unemployment, poverty, and other social ills have gone up, and the following articles offer two very different perspectives.

More Prisons, Longer Sentences

In the following article, David Von Drehle suggests that an increase in the number of prisoners sub- stantially reduced crime over the last decade and is responsible for continuing to keep America’s streets criminal free. He argues the crime decline is because the United States has more prisons, more inmates, and is handing out more, and harsher and longer, sentences than in eras past.

Prisons and prison inmate populations did increase among the decades that saw a significant crime decline. In 2012 there were five times as many state and federal prisoners than there had been in 1977; in that year, there were about 300,000 total inmates, but by 2010, there were more than 1.6 million (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2012a). In fact, the United States has the world’s highest incar- ceration rate: The Pew Research Center reports that 1 in 31 Americans are either incarcerated or on parole or probation, and about 1 in 100 Americans are behind bars at any given time (Pew Research Center [PEW], 2009).

For some, such as Heather Mac Donald, editor at City Journal and a contributor to the Wall Street Journal, the decline in crime, if truly the result of increased incarceration and sentencing, proves the inefficacy of traditionally liberal approaches to crime and punishment, such as rehabilitation rather than incarceration, and decriminalization rather than harsh sentencing. As Mac Donald has put it, “The recession of 2008–09 has undercut one of the most destructive social theories that came out of the 1960s: the idea that the root cause of crime lies in income inequality and social injustice” (2010, para. 1). Mac Donald, Von Drehle, and others argue the best way to keep America’s crime rates low is to continue high incarceration rates.

David Von Drehle, “U.S. Crime Rate Drops: Why There are Fewer Murders,” Time, February 22, 2010. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1963761,00.html

The Obama Effect

Numerous social explanations have been offered for why the crime rate has declined even as poverty and unemployment have gone up. Economist Steven Levitt famously suggested that the legalization of abortion in 1973, and subsequent abortions that took place in the 1970s and 1980s, led to the crime decline of the 1990s (the rationale being that unwanted children were more likely to fall crimi- nal, so abortion meant that future criminals were simply not being born).

Another theory has been put forth by Ohio State law professor Douglas Berman, who suggests tech- nological advancements such as high-definition televisions could account for the trend. According to Berman, high-def TVs and other gadgets keep people inside their homes, rather than outside where they could be victimized. Technology in the form of car alarms, burglar alarms, tasers, and other devices may also play a role in thwarting or preventing crime.

Social scientist James Q. Wilson, before his death in 2012, suggested a medical explanation for the low crime rate: a decline in lead poisoning among American children. “For decades, doctors have known that children with lots of lead in their blood are much more likely to be aggressive, violent and delinquent,” explained Wilson (2011, para. 14), who pointed out that the Environmental Protection Agency put limits on the use of lead in 1974, leading to a widespread decline in lead levels in peoples’ blood. “Tests have shown that the amount of lead in Americans’ blood fell by (continued)

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 25 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Chapter Summary CHAPTER 1

Chapter Summary

Criminology is the scientific study of crime. Criminologists seek to understand the nature, extent, causes, consequences, social reaction, and control of criminal behavior. This chapter presented a sketch of the origin and major types of Ameri- can criminal law. This historical overview demonstrates that crime and the law are social constructs, or products of the social norms of a given society.

A series of important perspectives on the origins of crime and criminal behavior have shaped the discipline of criminology. The Classical School was the first systematic phi- losophy of crime. It emphasized the free will of human beings, utilitarian goals, and a fair and equitable criminal justice system. The positivistic tradition emphasized genetics, biology, and factors external to the individual to determine human behavior including crime. Sociology has had an enduring impact on the field of criminology, as evident by the series of important sociological perspectives on crime. Early sociological theories focused

Using the Sociological Lens: What Can Explain Today’s Low Crime Rate? (continued) four-fifths between 1975 and 1991. . . . The reduction in gasoline lead produced more than half of the decline in violent crime during the 1990s in the U.S. and might bring about greater declines in the future” (Wilson, 2011, para. 15). The fact that certain violent mental disorders are diagnosed earlier, and treatable with medication, could also account for the reduction in crime, suggests Wilson and other social scientists.

In the following perspective, James Verini explores a different theory for why the crime rate contin- ues to fall. He suggests the election of African American Barack Obama revitalized peoples’ stake in the American system, discouraging some from committing crime and encouraging others to support the communal and social values that thwart crime.

James Verini, “The Obama Effect: A Surprising New Theory for the Continuing Crime Decline Among Black Americans,” Slate.com, October 5, 2011. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ politics/crime/2011/10/the_obama_effect_a_surprising_new_theory_for_the_continuing_ crim.html

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions

1. Given what you know on the topic, what do you think is the most likely cause of the crime decline of the 1990s? What about from 2008 to 2012?

2. Data repeatedly confirm that the Great Recession coincided with a decline in criminal activity, especially violent crime such as murder. Yet conventional wisdom perpetuates the notion that economic downturns spur increases in criminal activity. Why do you think this notion persists among the general public, despite evidence to the contrary?

3. Von Drehle and others suggest the United States’ high incarceration rate deserves credit for the drop in crime. Yet the fact that 1 in 100 Americans are behind bars is responsible for multiple other social problems. What are some of the problems associated with a high incarceration rate? Do these negatives outweigh the positives, in your opinion?

4. Why do you think it is so difficult for criminologists to isolate and agree upon the factors that contribute to declines in crime?

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 26 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Chapter Summary CHAPTER 1

anomie (Durkheim) A state of normless- ness when society’s norms, values, and expectations are unclear.

anomie (Merton) The disconnect between society’s prescribed goals and the available means to reach those goals.

Classical School of Criminology One of the earliest philosophical perspectives on crime that argued for more humane pun- ishment and uniform, just treatment of criminals.

Code of Hammurabi One the world’s first set of written rules established by the Babylonian King, Hammurabi (1792–1750 BCE) in Mesopotamia.

common law Developed during the rule of Henry II as King of England (1154–1189) when royal judges started the process of publishing their case decisions and relying on the rule of precedent.

concentric zone theory Theory of urban development and crime created by Park and Burgess of the Chicago school that argued the city could be organized into five concentric circles, or zones, that each had its own distinct characteristics.

crime Any action that intentionally vio- lates criminal law.

criminology The scientific study of the nature, extent, causes, consequences, social reaction, and control of criminal behavior.

differential association theory Criminal behavior is learned through the process of interacting and communicating with other individuals and groups.

felony A serious crime that carries a mini- mum punishment of 1 year in prison.

free will The belief that human beings make informed decisions about their own actions after carefully considering the costs and benefits of various options.

hypothesis A testable prediction, typically regarding the relationship between certain variables.

labeling perspective Argues that the powerful elite class in society create and enforce laws. Through the enforcement of laws, the elite class is able to control the labeling process by targeting marginalized individuals and groups.

on how large-scale dynamics, the economy in particular, impacts individuals and their propensity for crime. Subsequent sociological perspectives focused on urban sociology, the criminogenic effect of the environment, and later socialization and social learning. The contemporary era of criminology added a series of more critical perspectives including conflict, labeling, and feminist theories of crime.

Measuring crime is complex and imperfect. This section examined the advantages and disadvantages of the three major methods to gather data about crime: the UCR, the NCVS, and self-report studies. Similarly, we briefly explored the major types of crime data and the social-science research process. The goal of this chapter was to provide the student a fundamental understanding of criminological theory, data, and research methods that can then be applied to a series of important issues in criminology.

Key Terms

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 27 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Chapter Summary CHAPTER 1

misdemeanor A less-serious crime than a felony; carries a maximum punishment of 1 year in jail.

Positivist School of Criminology A broad perspective on the origins of crime that emphasizes biology, genetics, psychology, and the social environment in determining criminal behavior.

precedent The judicial process of defer- ring to judge-made law established in previous cases.

quantitative data Numerical data often displayed as charts, graphs, and tables.

qualitative data Narrative, journalistic- type data that cannot and should not be turned into numbers.

social construct An entity in society, like crime or law, that is not fixed and is con- tinually defined and redefined by societal norms and values.

socialization The lifelong process of learn- ing norms, values, and behaviors from other individuals and groups in society.

sociological imagination An understand- ing of how larger social forces impact the lived experiences of individuals, both private and public.

utilitarianism A philosophical perspec- tive that judges actions in accordance with their contributions to the “Golden Rule of Utilitarianism,” which attempts to provide the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

victimless crime A crime with no averse victim.

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions

1. Crime and the law are products of a society’s social norms. Describe an example of this statement that you have read about or experienced yourself.

2. What, in your opinion, are the primary weaknesses of the positivistic view on the origin of criminal behavior?

3. If you were to compose your own theory of criminal behavior, what would that be?

4. Which one of the three main data-gathering methods discussed in the text has the most advantages, in your opinion? What about the most disadvantages? Explain your reasoning.

5. How did the doctrine of free will change society’s view of crime? 6. Durkheim and Merton arrived at different definitions of anomie. Give an example

of each in today’s society. 7. Which method of criminal data collection do you think is most likely to include

more “dark figures of crime”?

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 28 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Chapter Summary CHAPTER 1

In the Field: Experts Weigh in on the Study of Crime and Society The definition of crime changes as society changes its norms and values. Such changes also impact social responses to crimes. Experts comment on the study of crime, how crime impacts groups they work with, and different crime response and intervention methods.

Erik Fritsvold

Why is it important to study crime from a sociological point of view? It is important to study crime issues from an interdisciplinary perspective. Tangible progress requires a team of individuals from lots of different back- grounds who work together to address issues we face as a country. As sociol- ogists, we want to know that our research will help society understand details about crime issues and will positively influence crime intervention and pre- vention efforts.

Why is it important to examine relationships among crime and factors such as race, class, gender, and age? Sociologists might wonder why the incarcerated population looks so different and then study the dis- connections between the general population and the incarcerated population. This raises sub-ques- tions. Is it that this group commits more crimes? Is this group more likely to come to the attention of law enforcement? For example, we can learn more about these relationships by examining social class and the legal system—how some benefit from having the resources to hire private attorneys. It’s impossible to study crime without looking at the larger scale stratification and inequality issues.

Noah Fritz

Can you please tell us a little bit more about crime analysis and what factors are considered? In a traditional model there are three types of crime analysis: tactical, strategic, and administrative. Also, under intelligence-led policing, there is a sister-type analysis that we are trying to integrate with theses three types of analyses.

The primary task of tactical crime analysis, which is also referred to as crime series analysis, is to use available information to identify possible serial crimi- nals. The first function of this type of analysis is pouring through police reports. Any characteristics, whether they’re demographics, race, height, ethnicity, gender, etc., or how the crime is commit- ted might link different instances of crimes together. We can put this information, these instances, together, and we can begin to build a profile, this series. This pattern is different from a generic crime pattern. Generic crime pattern might be different people committing similar crimes. This is different from a true crime series. In a true crime series it’s believed the same person or persons is responsible for the different instances.

There are a number of different dimensions to consider, but the first is to identify the series and pro- duce an offender profile. Then this profile is released to those who need the information depending on the nature of the case. Then we use this same profile to search known-offender databases to see if we have any investigative leads—to see if there is someone who had a similar pattern. (Is it a new offender?) We create a list of investigate leads and provide this list to officers. The next goal is to predict and forecast when and where the next crime is going to occur and then we can do things like conducting surveillance and educating the potential victims about how to not be prone to this crime. To do this forecasting we use geographic information systems, crime mapping (continued)

Courtesy of Erik Fritsvold

Courtesy of Noah Fritz

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 29 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Chapter Summary CHAPTER 1

In the Field: Experts Weigh in on the Study of Crime and Society (continued) capabilities, to predict when and where this next crime may occur. The primary goal, ultimately, is to arrest or make an apprehension and then possibly clear other cases.

Strategic crime analysis deals more with developing strategies. Generally, this is about developing law enforcement or crime prevention strategies to address crime. And administrative crime analysis has more to do with budgets, a broader scale. The sister-type crime analysis is intelligence-led analy- sis. This tends to focus more on organizations or organized crime. This could be gangs, drug cartels, human trafficking, or other issues such as this. They focus on very specific disciplines. What we are learning under this area of analysis is that we can’t study crimes without also studying the criminals or study criminals without studying the crimes. We are working to integrate these two areas so that no one works in a vacuum. Applied criminology—the study of crimes, the study of criminals, and the study of how people react to the crime—is an important dimension of a larger understanding for what it is that we do.

Joshua Gryniewicz

CeaseFire’s approach to crime intervention and prevention is based on dis- ease control methods used in public health fields. Can you please tell us more about this method? The model is a scientifically validated approach to violence prevention based on public health, behavior change, and epidemic control. CeaseFire seeks to interrupt transmission of risk events, and change the social norms and behav- iors that perpetuate violence by concentrating intervention and outreach on those individuals who are at the highest risk to be shot or to shoot some- one else in communities disproportionately impacted by violence. In 2000,

in collaboration with faith leaders, community organizations, and law enforcement, the CeaseFire program was launched in West Garfield, one of the most disproportionately violent communities in Chicago. When you have the right approach, behavior change happens fast, and the program was quick to produce results, reducing shootings in the community by 67%.

Crucial components of the CeaseFire team are the violence interrupters. Can you please tell us more about these individuals and their roles? Interruption is a crucial part of the model. These individuals are composed of former higher-ups in various gangs. They used to be shot-callers, influencers, and they know the people still involved in the life, those making the same decisions today. They are “credible messengers” meaning they get in where most people don’t have access. Interrupters and Outreach Workers use a team approach, so the best way to think about it is that the Interrupters handle the immediate crisis, the flair up, while the Outreach Worker does the sort of longer-term follow-up. Outreach provides support to those who have turned a corner and want to change their lives. So the two positions work together in a partnership. Best way to look at it is that Violence Interrupters function as the sort of first line of defense; they are sort of emergency responders. (continued)

Courtesy of Joshua Gryniewicz

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 30 7/5/13 4:16 PM

Chapter Summary CHAPTER 1

In the Field: Experts Weigh in on the Study of Crime and Society (continued)

David Cowan

The Prison University Project has several goals, one of which is to raise aware- ness about the practice of incarceration. Why is this particular goal important? Above all, PUP raises awareness about the practice of incarceration each time it brings a new instructor into the prison, and that person has the opportunity to really get to know a group of people who are incarcerated. Raising pub- lic awareness about the practice of incarceration is important for many rea- sons. How a society protects the human rights of its prisoners says something about how civilized it truly is. Raising awareness also causes us to reevalu- ate current methods of incarceration and question whether they result in increased public safety. It can also increase support for providing the incar- cerated with educational and recovery opportunities to develop themselves before reentering society.

Courtesy of Jody Lewen

Courtesy of David Cowan

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 31 7/5/13 4:16 PM

coL82305_01_c01_001-032.indd 32 7/5/13 4:16 PM