Have you ever wondered why some people in our society turn to crime, while others don’t? It’s a question that has puzzled social scientists for decades, and two theories that have tried to answer it are anomie and strain theories. While these two theories might sound similar, they are actually quite different.
Anomie theory argues that deviant behavior arises when people are disconnected from society’s norms and values. In other words, when there is a breakdown in social bonds, people are more likely to engage in criminal activities. Strain theory, on the other hand, contends that deviant behavior occurs when individuals experience strain or stress in their lives. This strain might come from a lack of opportunities, blocked aspirations or frustrations with their position in society.
The key difference between the two theories lies in their focus. While anomie theory emphasizes the importance of social norms and values, strain theory is more concerned with the individual’s subjective experience. In other words, anomie theory suggests that crime is a result of society failing to provide a moral compass, while strain theory sees it as a response to individual distress. So, now that we know the difference between these two theories, let’s take a closer look at each one and see how they’ve influenced our understanding of criminal behavior.
Definition of Anomie and Strain Theories
When it comes to understanding and explaining deviant behavior in society, two theories that often come up in criminology and sociology are anomie and strain theories. While these two theories may share some similarities, they also have their own distinct characteristics that set them apart from one another.
At the core of anomie and strain theories is the idea that social structures and cultural norms play an important role in shaping individual behavior. They both seek to explain why some individuals are more likely to engage in deviant actions, such as crime, than others.
- Anomie Theory: Developed by French sociologist Emile Durkheim, anomie theory suggests that deviant behavior is a result of a breakdown in the social norms and values that guide individuals’ behavior. According to Durkheim, anomie occurs when the cultural goals of a society become disconnected from the means that individuals have to achieve those goals. In other words, when there is a gap between what people want and what they are able to attain, they may feel frustrated and turn to deviant behavior as a means of achieving their goals. In this context, crime and deviance are seen as symptoms of deeper social problems, rather than just individual failings.
- Strain Theory: Strain theory, on the other hand, was developed by American sociologist Robert Merton. The theory suggests that deviant behavior is a result of a strain caused by the gap between cultural goals and the means available to achieve them. Merton argued that social structures in modern society create a discrepancy between cultural goals, such as achieving wealth and success, and the limited means available to most individuals. This creates a sense of strain or frustration, which can lead some individuals to engage in deviant behavior as a way to cope with their situation. Unlike anomie theory, strain theory focuses on the individual-level factors that lead to deviance, rather than broader social problems.
While both theories recognize the important role that social structures and cultural norms play in shaping behavior, the key difference between them lies in their focus. Anomie theory emphasizes the role of society in creating a disconnection between goals and means, while strain theory emphasizes the individual-level factors that contribute to deviant behavior.
History of Anomie and Strain Theories
Anomie and strain theories are two of the most commonly used theories in sociology to explain why people engage in deviant behavior. Both theories have a rich history and have evolved over the years through various scholars and researchers, making them important sources of knowledge for students and practitioners alike. This section will explore the history of anomie and strain theories, including their origins, development, and influential contributors.
- Origins of Anomie Theory: The concept of anomie was first introduced by French sociologist, Emile Durkheim, in his seminal work, “The Division of Labor in Society” (1893). Durkheim argued that anomie was a state of normlessness that resulted from a breakdown in social solidarity and that it was a root cause of suicide. Durkheim’s concept of anomie was later developed further by Robert Merton and other American scholars in the mid-20th century.
- Development of Anomie Theory: Robert Merton’s version of anomie theory, also known as strain theory, focused on the relationship between socially accepted goals and the legitimate means for achieving them. Merton argued that when the goals are not achievable through legitimate means, individuals experience strain or pressure to engage in deviant behavior. Merton’s work was influential in shaping the field of criminology and his theory remains a popular explanation for deviance.
- Origins of Strain Theory: Strain theory is rooted in anomie theory and was developed mostly by American sociologists in the 1950s and 1960s. The earliest work in this area was done by Robert K. Merton, Albert Cohen, and Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin. Strain theory posits that the strain or pressure to engage in deviant behavior is caused by the gap between culturally prescribed goals and the means to achieve them.
Over time, anomie and strain theories have continued to evolve and have been applied to various fields such as sociology, psychology, and criminology. They remain important theories for understanding why people engage in deviant behavior and have been used to inform both policy and practice. As such, they continue to be essential components of the social sciences and are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future.
In conclusion, both anomie and strain theories have rich histories that have contributed to the development of sociology and criminology. Their origins, development, and influential contributors are important to understand in order to appreciate the ongoing relevance of these theories today.
| Anomie Theory | Strain Theory |
|---|---|
| Developed by Emile Durkheim in the late 19th century to explain suicide rates in industrial societies. | Developed by Robert Merton in the mid-20th century to explain crime rates in urban areas of the United States. |
| Focuses on the breakdown of social norms and values, leading to feelings of normlessness and confusion. | Focuses on the strain or pressure to engage in deviant behavior that results from an individual’s inability to achieve culturally prescribed goals through legitimate means. |
Despite their differences, both theories continue to be used to understand why people engage in deviant behavior and help inform policy and practice aimed at reducing such behavior. Understanding the history of these theories can help us appreciate their ongoing relevance to the social sciences.
Key Theorists of Anomie and Strain Theories
Both Anomie and Strain theories are sociological perspectives used to understand deviant behavior among individuals. Although they share some similarities, they differ in their approach towards explaining deviance. Here are some of the key theorists of anomie and strain theories:
- Emile Durkheim: Durkheim was the first person to develop the concept of anomie. He argued that anomie was a state of normlessness that occurs when society fails to regulate the behavior of its members. In his view, anomie leads to feelings of disorientation, confusion, and frustration.
- Robert Merton: Merton was the primary proponent of Strain theory. According to his theory, crime occurs as a result of the gap between the culture’s goals and the means available to achieve them. Individuals who lack access to legitimate means of achieving their goals may turn to illegitimate means, such as theft or drug dealing.
- Albert Cohen: Cohen was one of the pioneers of the subcultural theories of deviance. He developed the concept of status frustration, which refers to the frustration experienced by individuals who are unable to achieve status within conventional society. According to Cohen, delinquent subcultures emerge as a way for individuals to achieve status within their peer group.
The Differences Between Anomie and Strain Theories
Both anomie and strain theories attempt to explain crime and deviance within society. However, they differ in their approach towards understanding deviance and the social conditions that lead individuals to engage in deviant behavior.
Anomie theory argues that deviant behavior arises when individuals are unable to find their place in society due to a lack of norms and values. Strain theory, on the other hand, suggests that deviant behavior is a response to the gap between the cultural goals and the means available to achieve those goals.
The Similarities Between Anomie and Strain Theories
Despite their differences, anomie and strain theories share some similarities in their understanding of crime and deviance. Both theories suggest that individual behavior is influenced by social structures and institutions within society. Furthermore, they assert that individuals engage in deviant behavior as a response to specific social conditions, such as poverty or inequality.
The Table
| Anomie Theory | Strain Theory | |
|---|---|---|
| Key Theorists | Emile Durkheim | Robert Merton |
| Robert K. Merton | Albert Cohen | |
| Basic Concept | Anomie is a state of normlessness that occurs when society fails to regulate the behavior of its members. | Deviant behavior arises from the gap between the cultural goals and the means available to achieve those goals. |
| Central Idea | The absence of social norms leads to deviant behavior. | Deviant behavior is a product of economic and social inequality. |
In conclusion, anomie and strain theories provide a unique insight into why individuals engage in deviant behavior. While both theories share some similarities in their premise, they differ in their approach towards understanding the causes of deviance. Nevertheless, the theories’ insights can be integrated to have a more comprehensive understanding of the causes of deviance and can help in the development of effective policies and strategies to curb deviant behavior within society.
Similarities between Anomie and Strain Theories
Despite having different origin stories, there are notable similarities between Anomie and Strain theories. Both focus on the breakdown of social norms and values, leading to deviant behavior. In both theories, external factors such as poverty, inequality, and cultural conflict are considered primary generators of deviance. Both theories highlight that criminal behavior is a result of an individual’s response to social pressure.
Commonalities between Anomie and Strain Theories
- Both theories explain social deviance.
- Both theories identify that an individual’s reaction to their social environment plays a significant role in their transition into deviance.
- Both theories emphasize socialization and the role of culture and cultural conflict in the deviant behavior of individuals.
External Factors and Deviant Behavior
Anomie and Strain theories share the view that societal problems, such as inequality, poverty, and cultural conflict, lead to crime. Both theories believe that the breakdown of social norms created by such factors can lead to a state of normlessness, which manifests in deviant behavior.
Robert K. Merton’s Strain Theory emphasizes the role of blocked opportunities, created by the social structure, that lead to norm-breaking behaviors. For example, when someone feels denied the means to succeed through legal channels, they are left, feeling helpless, and may turn to criminal acts as an alternative.
Emile Durkheim’s Anomie Theory also focuses on the negative effects of rapid societal change, which leads to a disrupted social stability and a lack of community cohesion. People feel isolated and disjointed from society, leading to a sense of normlessness or anomie.
The Role of Socialization, Culture, and Conflict
Anomie and Strain theories view the role of socialization, culture, and cultural conflict in deviant behavior in a similar way. Stephen Messner and Richard Rosenfeld’s Institutional Anomie Theory posits that cultural values surrounding economic success have obscured other social values, causing failure to conform to traditional values. Consistent with Durkheim’s Anomie Theory, it also observes how “normlessness” or anomie occurs when there is a breakdown of collective values resulting in social chaos.
Karl Marx, whose concepts provided the foundation for Strain Theory, believed that social conflict emerged when one segment of society distinguished themselves from another by class or wealth. This notion of class struggle, and class culture, is a shared determinant between the Anomie and Strain theories.
| Anomie Theory | Strain Theory |
|---|---|
| Focuses on a breakdown of social norms and values, leading to deviant behavior. | Focuses on the external factors such as poverty, inequality, and cultural conflict that lead to deviant behavior. |
| Views rapid societal change as a major contributor to deviance. | Maintains that blocked opportunities, created by the social structure, lead to norm-breaking behaviors. |
| Considers the lack of cohesion, instability, and isolation created by societal problems as key causes of deviant behavior. | Involves the experience of failure in achieving goals through conventional means. |
| Highlights the importance of socialization, culture, and cultural conflict in shaping deviant behavior. | Emphasizes class struggle and the role of social conflict as primary determinants of deviance. |
In conclusion, while Anomie and Strain theories have divergent roots, they share overlapping perspectives on how societal problems lead to deviant behavior through the loss of social norms and values. Both theories highlight the importance of a person’s response to social pressure in shaping behavior, and underscore the relationship between poverty, inequality, and cultural conflict in deviant behavior. Additionally, both theories refer to the role of socialization, culture, and cultural conflict in shaping deviance.
Differences between Anomie and Strain Theories
While anomie and strain theories share some similarities in terms of their focus on societal factors that contribute to deviant behavior or crime, there are also significant differences between the two perspectives.
Here are some of the key differences:
- Causes of deviance/crime: Anomie theory posits that deviance arises from a sense of normlessness or lack of moral regulation that characterizes modern societies. In contrast, strain theory suggests that deviance is a response to the structural disjunction between cultural goals and institutional means to achieve them.
- Types of deviance/crime: Anomie theory is more focused on non-utilitarian forms of deviance, such as drug use or gambling, which do not have a clear economic motive. Strain theory, on the other hand, is more concerned with utilitarian crimes, such as theft or fraud, which are motivated by the desire for material gains.
- Individual vs. societal-level factors: While both theories acknowledge the significance of structural factors in shaping deviant behavior, anomie theory emphasizes individual-level factors, such as disordered personality or weak social ties, as crucial mediators of the effects of social structure. Strain theory, in contrast, places more emphasis on structural factors, such as poverty or inequality, as the primary drivers of deviance.
It is important to note that these are not mutually exclusive perspectives, and there is often overlap between anomie and strain theories in terms of the factors they consider relevant to understanding deviance. Additionally, both theories have been subject to criticism and refinement over time, and there are many variants of each perspective that may differ in their specific assumptions and predictions.
Wrap-up
In summary, while anomie and strain theories share some commonalities in their emphasis on societal factors in shaping deviant behavior, they differ in their underlying assumptions about the causes and types of deviance, as well as the relative importance of individual versus structural factors. Understanding these differences can help us gain a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which social structure affects human behavior, and can inform efforts to address the root causes of deviance and crime.
Criticisms of Anomie and Strain Theories
Although anomie and strain theories have provided invaluable contributions to criminology and sociology, they are not without their criticisms. Some of the most common criticisms include:
- Blaming the individual: One of the main criticisms is that these theories place too much emphasis on the individual’s inability to cope with their environment and fail to take into account the impact of larger societal factors such as poverty, racism, and inequality.
- Overlooking white-collar crime: Both anomie and strain theories tend to focus on street-level crime and neglect to consider white-collar and corporate crimes, which are largely committed by individuals in positions of power and privilege.
- Lack of empirical evidence: Critics argue that both theories are not well-supported by empirical evidence, with studies producing mixed results and failing to provide strong causal links between anomie, strain, and crime.
In addition to these criticisms, there is also debate about the validity of Merton’s original assumptions about the prevalence of mainstream values and his conception of success.
Conclusion
Despite these criticisms, anomie and strain theories continue to be influential and important concepts in criminology and sociology. While they may not be perfect or all-encompassing, they have generated important discussions and debates about the underlying causes of crime and deviance, contributing to our understanding of the complex relationship between individual and societal factors.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Provide useful frameworks for understanding the relationship between societal factors and crime | Place too much emphasis on individual-level factors and neglect the influence of larger societal factors |
| Highlight the role of cultural goals and expectations in shaping criminal behavior | Not well-supported by empirical evidence, with mixed results and weak causal links |
| Offer insights into the ways in which inequality and social disorganization may lead to criminal behavior | Focus primarily on street-level crime and overlook white-collar and corporate crimes |
Overall, it is important to continue critically examining and refining these theories to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that contribute to criminal behavior.
Contemporary Applications of Anomie and Strain Theories
Anomie and strain theories, both rooted in sociology and criminology, remain relevant and widely studied concepts in contemporary society. They provide insight into the root causes of various forms of deviant behavior, crime, and social disorganization. Here are some of the contemporary applications of these theories:
- Predictive role in crime prevention: Anomie and strain theories are both effective in identifying individuals who are at risk of engaging in criminal activities. For instance, individuals who have a strong sense of anomie or feel a significant amount of strain may exhibit certain deviant behaviors, such as theft, aggression, or substance abuse. Identifying such individuals through sociological and psychological testing can help prevent potential incidents of crime.
- Addressing social inequality: Anomie and strain theories highlight the impact of institutional social structures on individuals’ behavior and attitudes. They demonstrate that individuals’ engagement in deviant behavior can be a result of the absence of opportunities or the presence of blocked opportunities. Thus, addressing social inequality can, in turn, decrease crime rates.
- Exploring the impact of cultural norms: Anomie theory has helped scholars to explore the impact of cultural norms and values on individuals’ behavior within different societies. Adherence to the social norms of a given society can reduce the level of anomie that individuals may experience, which, in turn, can reduce the likelihood of engaging in deviant behavior.
In addition, sociologists have also used qualitative methods, such as ethnography, to explore the contemporary application of anomie and strain theories. Through such studies, they have gained insight into the societal factors that contribute to deviant behavior, such as poverty, social exclusion, and discrimination.
Comparative Analysis of Anomie and Strain Theories
While anomie and strain theories share similarities in focusing on social disorganization and individuals’ deviant behavior, they also differ in several ways. The following table provides a brief comparative analysis of the two theories.
| Criteria | Anomie Theory | Strain Theory |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Focus | Social disorganization | Stress and adaptations to social structures |
| Cause of Deviance | Absence of societal norms and values | Blocked opportunities in the society |
| Emphasis on Structural Factors | Primarily emphasized | Emphasized, but to a lesser extent than anomie theory |
| Impact on Social Policies | Less impact as it focuses on general social disorganization | Significant impact as it identifies specific social factors affecting individuals |
Overall, anomie and strain theories remain relevant in contemporary society as they provide valuable insights into the root causes of deviant behavior. Their continued relevance highlights the importance of sociology and criminology in understanding society and developing strategies for preventing crime and promoting social well-being.
FAQs: What is the Difference Between Anomie and Strain Theories?
Q: What is anomie theory?
Anomie theory is a sociological theory that believes societal norms breakdown, leading to feelings of confusion and lack of purpose.
Q: What is strain theory?
Strain theory is a sociological theory that suggests there are social factors that motivate individuals to commit crimes, such as a lack of economic opportunities.
Q: How do these theories differ?
Anomie theory focuses on the breakdown of societal norms and values, and the consequent lack of purpose and meaning in individuals’ lives. Strain theory, on the other hand, focuses on the strain caused by a person’s inability to achieve a desired goal or success.
Q: What do these theories have in common?
Both theories suggest that societal factors play a role in shaping individual behavior, and that criminal behavior can be a result of environmental factors rather than inherent qualities of individuals.
Q: How can these theories be applied in practice?
Anomie and strain theories can be used to explain patterns of criminal behavior among certain populations, and can be used to develop strategies to prevent crime by addressing social and economic factors that contribute to criminal behavior.
Closing Thoughts
Thanks for reading about the differences between anomie and strain theories. Understanding these sociological theories can help us better understand the societal factors that influence criminal behavior, and help us develop effective strategies to prevent crime. Don’t forget to visit us again for more informative articles!