STRAIN THEORY AND HOW IT EXPLAINS CRIME

Abstract

Strain theory proposes that pressure from social factors like a lack of income or education drives a person to commit a crime. The focus of most strain theories is disadvantaged groups where they struggle to attain common aspirations like realizing the American dream. The inability of these individuals to achieve common goals is considered the driving factor behind the crime. Some stressors increase the likelihood of crime. According to strain theory, crime will only occur when there are not enough legitimate opportunities for individuals to achieve normal success in society. A strain occurs when the goals and the means of achieving those goals are not in line leading the individual to crime. The American dream encourages people to work hard to achieve financial success. However, the means used by the individuals to achieve success are rarely in focus. The result is that people will do everything in their power to ensure they gain the success needed to achieve the American dream.

In reality, highly educated career professionals are admired in the same way thieves are admired for their successful robberies. People even feel bad when a thief is caught, yet they know the thief did an illegal act. Therefore, society mainly focuses on an individuals success and rarely focuses on the means used to gain that success. Strain theory gives people five ways to adapt: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. The adaptations are individualist, and a person can pick either to overcome the strain they face. In this paper, the focus is on strain theory by Robert Merton, and we have linked the adverse effects of strains on the development of criminal behaviors. The paper has also focused on the criticism of strain theory and its inability to explain white-collar crime fully.

Strain Theory and How It Explains Crime

Social inequality will create a situation where people experience tension or strain between societys goals, like financial success and their legitimate means of meeting those goals (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). Strain theory is a criminology and sociology theory developed by Robert Merton in 1938. Strain theory states that society will pressure an individual to achieve socially acceptable goals, though they lack the means to achieve those goals. The individual experiences strain that leads them to commit crimes like becoming a prostitute, selling drugs, or stealing to gain financial security. Strain could be structural or individual. Structural strain refers to the processes at the societal level, filtering down and affecting how an individual perceives their needs. Individual strain refers to the pains and frictions experienced by individuals seeking ways to satisfy their needs. Overall, strain theory denotes that if the goals society has placed on an individual become too significant to the individual, how they achieve those goals is not more important than the means adopted to achieve the goals (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). With the focus on achieving the goals, the individual no longer cares if what they are doing is legal or illegal. Care is thrown out of the window, and the individual will do all they can to ensure they meet the goals placed on them by society.

There are different motivators for crime, and strain theory explains them all as being caused by particular tensions experienced by the individual. A person might engage in crime to reduce or escape from the strain they are experiencing (Agnew & Brezina, 2019). For example, a person might steal to reduce financial problems, may engage in violence to stop the harassment they undergo from others, or they might run away from home to escape abusive parents. A person can engage in the crime of illicit drug use to feel better (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

Mertons Theory

Robert Merton was an American sociologist who indicated society could profoundly encourage deviance. Merton believed socially accepted goals put undue pressure on people to conform and achieve those goals. Mertons strain theory stems from a vital question he had on why crime rates were so different among different societies (Agnew, 2017). His initial assumption was that there could be deviance where there was a clear difference between how success is defined and the right way to achieve said goals. However, he discovered the United States was the best example of high levels of deviance due to the high social value of achieving monetary success. Employees who have a college degree are respected, and robbers who steal for their money were also admired, demonstrating success is viewed as more vital than the means used to achieve success. The structural organization of the United States was not equal, meaning minority groups struggled to acquire a good education, and when they could, they still struggled to get a respectable living, yet the same high standard for success is placed on everyone regardless of their means to satisfy the standards (Agnew, 2017). These contradictions led Merton to develop the strain theory denoting societys high reverence for success.

The concept of anomie is described as the imbalance between institutionalized means and cultural goals. Merton argued that this imbalance produces anomie, a strain between the goals and the means producing unsatisfied aspirations.

Strain develops when access to the goals is blocked to entire groups of people, resulting in deviant behavior characterized by retreat, rebellion, innovation, ritualism, or conformity, as outlined by Merton (Agnew, 2017). Crime develops out of innovation. Conformity refers to pursuing cultural goals using socially approved means. When in conformity, the individual follows societal goals using legitimate means. Although the conformists might never achieve the societal goal, they have faith in society and opt to follow the legitimate means of achieving the goals.

A good example is an employee advancing their career by going to school. The employee follows the American cultural value of success using the approved means of education. The hopeful poor is the term used to describe individuals who choose conformity to respond to strain.

Innovation refers to accepting societys goals but coming up with other ways of achieving them. In most cases, using socially unacceptable means (crime). An innovative individual will share the cultural goals of society, but they will reach those goals using illegitimate means. They focus on achieving success and choose crime to meet the cultural goals placed on them by society. Thieves do share in the cultural goal of obtaining wealth. However, they obtain wealth by breaking the law.

Ritualism refers to using the same socially acceptable means to achieve the less elusive goals (Teijn-Alcal & Birkbeck, 2019). A ritualist is an individual who has given up on the hope they will achieve the goals approved by society, but they still operate based on societys approved means. A factory worker who does the same work for years has accepted they will never progress, but they still stay in the same position doing the same work each day is considered a ritualist.

Retreatism refers to rejecting the cultural goals...

…and make ends meet since they have fewer opportunities than those in higher strata to achieve cultural goals (Pedalono & Frailing, 2018). We can understand why crime seems to be primarily associated with individuals coming from poor backgrounds or disadvantaged backgrounds. We tend to wonder why a corporate executive would risk their high social strata and participate in a crime, but the underlying reason is they are seeking far higher strata than they currently have, meaning they are willing to risk it all to experience or move up the ranks.

Another analogy that could explain white-collar crime is that the executive has been blocked through a lack of opportunities. These opportunities are class, gender, or ethnic bias. Other strains could be the higher one rises in the career ladder, the more competition they face denying them the opportunities for promotion. When individuals are desperate enough for a promotion or to rise the corporate ladder, they experience a strain related to their career, leading them to yearn for a higher status. The yearning motivates the executive to commit a crime to increase their opportunity for a promotion (Pedalono & Frailing, 2018). Insider stock trading results in a client receiving higher profits, demonstrating to the company directors that the executive is a high performer and will likely promote them since they do not want to lose such an employee. However, when the truth comes out, the employee could lose all they have accumulated. The risk seems lower than the rewards received by the executive, resulting in them seeing the illegal act as a viable option (Thaxton & Agnew, 2018).

Criticisms of Strain Theory

Trying to use strain theory on higher-class individuals is difficult. In most cases, the theory applies best to lower classes where individuals do not have enough resources or face systemic discrimination leading to criminal activities. White-collar crimes are rampant among middle and upper-classes where strain theory would struggle to explain the reasoning behind the crimes. There are different motivators behind white-collar crimes, where strain theory would not apply. Strain theory does not explain the greed of highly-educated officials who embezzle money, thinking they would not be caught. These officials have all the wealth they need, and the additional wealth they acquire through illegal means is due to their greed. From the perspective of the lower class, strain theory is best applied because it focuses on the struggles they face and the limited resources for obtaining their goals. Crimes based on gender inequality cannot be explained using strain theory. While there is some strain faced when a person is discriminated against due to their gender, it is difficult to explain this using strain theory. Determining that the pressure is caused by gender is complex, and the individual could have other motivators for committing the crime.

Deviance is a social contract. Therefore, using it as the central concept of the theory is questioned by some sociologists (Thaxton & Agnew, 2018). The illegal behavior used to obtain economic success could be the norm for those individuals due to their circumstances if a person grows up in an area with limited resources that get used to taking things by force for their survival. These individuals are not aware of the legal or illegal means of getting resources. They are used to struggling to get what they need, and for them, it might be the law of the jungle. Using strain theory on such individuals would be discriminatory because they…