Introduction

There are many reasons as to why people commit a crime or engage into deviance. Prominent sociologists such as Emile Durkheim, Robert Agnew, and Robert Merton have tried to study crime causation. Many theories have been posed by different scholars to explain the reasons behind people engaging in deviance and crime. However, some of the theories have been pushed aside given the evolution of crime and deviance. Deviance and crime have a wide scope and as such some theories have fallen short of providing adequate explanations as to the cause of crime (Hay 2003, pp. 109). Robert Agnew Theory had been pushed aside, but due to the new developments, it has gained a new life in criminology. Nevertheless, these theories provide valuable insight as to the causes of crime and even extend to the prevention of crime in the society. As such, this paper will explore the reasons why people engage in crime or deviance by examining Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory and Robert Merton’s Structural Strain Theory.

Robert Agnew General Strain Theory

Robert Agnew came up with a new theory that he called general strain theory. This theory introduces new aspects to a theory that had been written a few decades ago. This theory defines measurements of strain and the major examples of strains (Paternoster & Mazerolle 1994, pp. 238). It further defines the links between crime and strain. Additionally, the theory defines some of the coping strategies of strain and the determinants of non-delinquent and delinquent behavior. This theory has been used to explain the differences that exist between the different groups such as the females and males. Though this theory requires more research to be conducted, it provides vast improvements as compared to its predecessor theory.

According to Robert Agnew, strains and stressors tend to increase negative emotions such as frustrations and anger. These emotions then create pressure that influences some coercive actions. Crime is an example of the response that emanates from that pressure. Crime tends to be a way of reducing emotions. General Strain Theory is founded on earlier strain theories and therefore borrows heavily from them by pointing out certain strain categories such as loss of stimuli and the presentation of a negative stimulus. Agnew argues that strain is the relationship where others do not treat individuals in a manner they would like to be treated (Agnew 2001, pp. 320). He describes some types of strains that may lead to crime. These events include goal blockage, presentation of negative stimuli and loss of positive stimuli. Agnew says that strain is likely to lead a person into committing a crime if that person lacks skills to cope with that strain in a manner that is legitimate (Agnew 2001, pp. 320). Here are the major types of strain that causes one commit crime according to general strain theory.

Goal Blockage

According to Agnew, failure by an individual to achieve those goals that are positively valued amount to strain. He noted that there existed three types of goals. The first type of these goals is money which is a cause of strain if it is not available to a person through legal means. The monetary strain according to him is associated with crime in a limited way. Many delinquents attempt to acquire a large quantity of money (Agnew, Brezina, Wright & Cullen 2002, pp. 48). When individuals fail to achieve monetary goals they resort to crime. The other type of strain that General Strain Theory put forward is that of respect and status. This is particularly so important to the masculine status. This goal, however, differs in terms of culture. So that individuals can prove their status they may result in criminal activities.

The third goal is autonomy which defines power over oneself. The strain that is usually induced by this goal mainly affects the youth and those who belong to the lower class given their position in the society. The desire for autonomy leads to crime and delinquency as individuals attempt to assert this autonomy and relieve anger and frustration against those over them (Paternoster & Mazerolle 1994, pp. 238). All these goals as mentioned will turn to strain if a person faces disjunctions in life. The strain will then force an individual attempt to retrieve what has been lost, seek revenge over those who have removed the positive stimuli and in this context commit crime.

The Presentation of Negative Stimuli

Agnew in his theory argues that certain negative events in life will tend to cause individuals in engaging in deviance and crime. Some of the negative stimuli a child receives such as abuse, adverse relations with teachers and parents, neighborhood problems, negative experiences in schools, homelessness and chaos, for instance, may lead to delinquent behavior (Agnew, Brezina, Wright & Cullen 2002, pp. 48). This strain has even found an application outside the youth realm as it has been found that certain companies violate rules so that they can escape harsh economic situations. Agnew asserts that those individuals that are subjective to repetitive strain are likely to commit delinquent acts and crime more easily than those who are not. An increase in strain leads to increased anger that eventually leads to crime according to this theory.

Loss of Positively Valued Stimuli

Robert Agnew in his General Strain Theory also argued that removal of stimuli that is positive would cause strain. This removal can be manifested through broken friendship and relationship, theft of a certain object t that is valued and death of a family member or a friend. According to Agnew these events lead to strain that influences an individual into committing delinquent acts in an attempt to recover what had been lost and prevent that loss (Agnew, Brezina, Wright & Cullen 2002, pp. 48). These three major types of strain that Agnew put forward are the main reasons as to why individuals engage in crime and delinquent acts.

Structural Strain Theory by Robert Merton

On his part, Robert K. Merton came up with the Structural Strain Theory. This theory is regarded as an extension of the functionalist theory of crime and deviance. It has its origin rooted to the tensions caused by some gap that exists between cultural goals and methods that individuals have to achieve these goals. Robert Merton argues that society consists of both social and cultural structure (Hay 2003, pp. 109). Culture is the one that establishes the societal goals while social structure provides the methods of achieving these goals. It may, however, fail to provide those means. If a society is comprehensively integrated, individuals within a society will use the appropriate means in achieving these goals.

Merton came up with the aspect of anomie to explain the imbalance that exists between cultural goals and the institutionalized means. According to him, any imbalance between the social structure and cultural structure resulted to anomie. Anomie according is the tension or strain between the means and the goals to be achieved. This would lead to unsatisfied aspirations (Marwah & Deflem 2006, pp. 58). When a person is faced with a gap between these goals and the means of achieving them, the strain will occur. Once faced with strain individuals have several ways of adapting. One of these ways to adapt is conformity where an individual pursues cultural goals through legal means. The second way is through innovation where an individual uses conventional or socially approved means to obtain cultural goals. An example here is theft to gain financial security. The third way of adapting according to Merton in the case of strain is ritualism where an individual uses means that are approved by the society to achieve modest goals. The fourth way is through retreatism where a person tends to reject those cultural goals and means and then work out a way of escaping the strain. The final way of adapting to strain is through rebellion where an individual rejects these goals and means and instead work to see them being replaced (Marwah & Deflem 2006, pp. 58).

Merton believed that a society may be structured in a way that encourages much deviance. He argued that if the norms and goals of a society are not achieved, pressure will build on an individual so that person can conform to those norms (Marwah & Deflem 2006, pp. 58). This is through an individual working within the determined societal structure or through deviance. Merton was concerned with certain societies such as the American society that fails to provide means of achieving cultural goals. The gap that exists for failure of providing these goals makes a person being strained. That person in an endeavor to cope with the strain will definitely conform or deviate. More so, Merton asserts that some of the social structures have been exerting great pressure on individuals of the society to engage in nonconformist conducts instead of encouraging them to engage in conformist conduct. Like Agnew, Merton holds a belief that societies tend to provide a strain that instigates crime due to the exertion of the pressure of some unattainable goals that they pose to members of the society.

Conclusion

Both Robert Agnew on General Strain Theory and Robert K. Merton on Structural Strain Theory do concur that society is one of the leading causes of deviance and crime through creating unattainable goals and not providing appropriate means to achieving these goals. Robert Merton through his theory can provide the five ways through which individuals tend to cope with the strain. On his part, Robert Agnew has provided cognitive, behavioral and emotional adaptations that can minimize negative outcomes of strain. Consequently, through these adaptations, Agnew can demonstrate how crime can be minimized. While no any theory by itself can explain all forms of deviance and crime, General Strain Theory by Robert Agnew and Structural Strain Theory by Robert K. Merton cover broad relationships, influences, behaviors and aspects about crime and deviance.

References

Agnew, R., 2001. Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 38(4), pp. 319-361.

Agnew, R., Brezina, T., Wright, J.P. and Cullen, F.T., 2002. Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology, 40(1), pp. 43-72.

Hay, C., 2003. Family strain, gender, and delinquency. Sociological Perspectives, 46(1), pp. 107-135.

Marwah, S. and Deflem, M., 2006. Revisiting Merton: Continuities in the theory of anomie-and-opportunity-structures. Sociological theory and criminological research: Views from Europe and the United States, pp. 57-76.

Paternoster, R. and Mazerolle, P., 1994. General strain theory and delinquency: A replication and extension. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 31(3), pp. 235-263.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?