Criminological Controversies by John L Hagan

Author:John L Hagan [Hagan, John L]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Social Science, Sociology, General
ISBN: 9780813310831
Google: i1a7oQEACAAJ
Publisher: Avalon Publishing
Published: 1996-05-30T03:36:04+00:00

Combining Structure and Culture

Subcultural theories have had an impact on structural theories in criminology that focus mainly on economic conditions as the cause of crime. Albert Cohen’s (1955) version of strain theory, for example, is a mixed model incorporating elements of both cultural deviance theory and anomie theory. Recently, however, subcultural theories have become much less popular and influential in criminology than processual and individual level explanations such as social learning theory. Processual and individual level theories tend to focus on correlates of crime such as reinforcement and imitation of deviance; such theories tend to ignore structural factors that may affect crime such as social class, gender, and age.

One of the fundamental problems with subcultural theories may have been their failure to incorporate effectively structural factors into an explanation of crime and delinquency. The notion of combining structure and culture in a single explanatory framework is not new. Toby (1950) argued that ethnic values and economic opportunity structures may both be causes of crime. This combined perspective dates back at least to Weber, who argued that the intersection of culture (the Protestant ethic) and structure (urbanism, the accumulation of wealth, banking innovations, and so on) influenced the rise of capitalism in western Europe.

In a recent essay, Wilson (1991) has advocated an integrated structural and cultural theoretical approach to the study of social dislocations among the ghetto underclass. He asserts that analyses framed in terms of a forced and simplistic choice between cultural and structural factors have not increased our understanding of social problems among the urban poor. Wilson distinguishes between the unemployed living in blue collar or working class neighborhoods and the unemployed who live in ghetto neighborhoods with high rates of poverty. While structural factors may restrict opportunities for the former, the unemployed in the slums are also affected by cultural factors of learning and community influence. In particular, Wilson argues that frustration created by the inability to control one’s life chances will, in turn, create a sense of futility and lack of self-confidence. Thus, self-efficacy is reduced by what Wilson terms “weak labor-force attachment,” which is influenced by the attitudes and beliefs of others in the ghetto.

The transmission of these attitudes and beliefs among peers and neighbors is part of a cultural process which, according to Wilson, merits further study. In The Truly Disadvantaged (1987), he describes “concentration effects” of the cultural impact of living in ghetto communities, where the role models and reference groups may develop a sense of fatalism. The absence of conventional role models is produced and compounded in its effects not only by the lack of stable jobs, but also by poor schools and the absence of desirable partners for marriage (Wilson, 1991: 11). Hagan (1993) summarizes several recent ethnographic studies that depict increasingly limited structural or economic opportunities for urban youth, who seem to be turning to a deeper subcultural commitment to gangs.

When structure and culture have been combined in criminological theories, there may have been an overemphasis on the structural factor of social class in subcultural explanations.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.