June 2024.
Outline two reasons why punishment may not be effective in controlling crime. [4]
Punishment of offenders may lead to labelling; the stigma attached to being seen as a
criminal may lead to a deviant career.
Criminals may learn to commit more crime while being punished; prisons can be seen as
‘universities of crime’ where prisoners learn additional criminal techniques.
Outline three reasons for ethnic differences in patterns of crime. [6]
Marginalisation of some ethnic groups; feelings of powerlessness may lead some ethnic
groups to commit crime.
Crime may be a form of protest or political act; some ethnic groups may engage in crime
as a form of resistance to a racist and white-dominated society.
Institutional racism within the police; some ethnic groups are more likely to be stopped and
searched leading to higher recorded patterns of crime.
Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways that social control may explain gender
differences in patterns of crime. [10]
Point: As stated in Item A, informal social control involves restricting people to their role
expectations.
Evidence: Parsons asserts that due to their biology and the way they are socialised,
women are nurturing and therefore are incapable of and / or do not want to commit crime.
Explain: This means that from an early age, girls are encouraged to adopt caring roles and
to conform to behaviour that aligns with femininity, such as passivity and obedience. This
limits their exposure to potentially deviant subcultures and risk-taking behaviour often
associated with crime. As a result, women are subjected to greater informal social control
within the family and community, which deters criminal activity.
Link: Therefore, informal social control through gender role socialisation helps to explain
why women are statistically less likely to commit crime compared to men, as their
behaviour is more tightly regulated from a young age.
Point: As also stated in Item A, formal social control includes the criminal justice system.
Evidence: Messerschmidt argues that masculinity is an accomplishment that men
constantly work at constructing and presenting to others. They assert this through
committing crime.
Explain: When men lack legitimate means of demonstrating traditional masculinity - such
as success, toughness, or dominance - they may turn to crime as an alternative way of
expressing these traits. The criminal justice system may overlook or even reinforce these
gendered expectations, as men are more likely to be perceived as naturally aggressive or
deviant. Thus, formal mechanisms may fail to effectively deter male crime or may treat
male and female offenders differently.
Link: This shows how formal social control can both reflect and reinforce gender norms,
helping to explain why men are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour and why
gender differences in crime persist.
,Applying material from Item B and your knowledge, evaluate the contributions of realist
explanations of crime. [30]
Introduction: Realist explanations of crime, including both left and right realist
perspectives, provide contrasting but complementary understandings of why people
commit crime. Left realists focus on social structures and inequalities, while right realists
emphasize individual responsibility and deterrence. This essay will explore the key
contributions of both perspectives, evaluating their usefulness and limitations in explaining
criminal behavior.
Point: As stated in Item B, Left Realists argue that the causes of crime are structural, and
that an unequal society produces feelings of relative deprivation and marginalisation.
Evidence: Lea and Young assert that relative deprivation leads to crime. People who are
deprived resent others having more material goods than them and resort to illegitimate
means to achieve the same level of wealth.
Explain: When individuals feel relatively deprived - believing they are unfairly
disadvantaged compared to others - they may experience frustration, which can turn into
criminal behavior. This sense of injustice is exacerbated by marginalisation, where
individuals or groups lack clear goals and means to achieve them, often leading to
antisocial or criminal behaviour as an expression of frustration.
Evaluation: A strength of this explanation is that it considers the social context and the
feelings of exclusion that many working-class and minority individuals experience, offering
a more nuanced view than theories that blame individuals alone. However, critics argue
that not everyone who experiences relative deprivation turns to crime, suggesting that this
theory cannot fully account for why some deprived individuals remain law-abiding.
Moreover, it tends to overemphasise street crime and underplays white-collar and
corporate crime.
Link: Overall, left realism makes a valuable contribution by highlighting how structural
inequalities and subjective feelings of injustice contribute to crime, though it may
oversimplify the link between deprivation and criminal behavior.
Point: As also stated in Item B, right realists argue that crime is caused by rationally
self-interested individuals who choose to commit crime.
Evidence: Herrnstein and Wilson argue that biological differences between individuals
make some people more predisposed to crime. Personality traits such as aggression and
low impulse control lead to a greater risk of offending.
Explain: Right realists like Herrnstein and Wilson argue that criminal behavior is the result
of both individual biological predispositions and a failure of social control. Individuals with
personality traits such as low impulse control or aggressiveness are more likely to offend,
especially in the absence of strong moral guidance. From this view, crime is a result of
poor individual choices rather than social structures.
Evaluation: This explanation is supported by some studies suggesting a correlation
between certain personality traits and criminal behavior, but it faces ethical and
methodological criticisms. It risks promoting biological determinism and can lead to
discriminatory policies. Moreover, it ignores the broader social and economic conditions
that may influence behavior, offering a limited and individualistic explanation.
Link: While right realism provides a clear focus on personal responsibility and deterrence,
its neglect of structural causes weakens its overall explanatory power.
Point: As also stated in Item B, crime can be reduced by increasing the risks of committing
crime.
Evidence: Clarke argues that the decision to commit a crime is based on a rational
calculation of consequences. If perceived rewards outweigh costs, people are more likely
to offend.
, Explain: Clarke's rational choice theory suggests that individuals weigh up the costs and
benefits of criminal activity before deciding to commit a crime. If the risks of being caught
are low and the rewards are high, individuals are more likely to offend. This has led to
practical crime prevention strategies like situational crime prevention, which aim to make
crime more difficult or less rewarding.
Evaluation: This approach has influenced real-world policies such as CCTV surveillance
and zero-tolerance policing, which have shown some success in reducing petty crime.
However, it assumes that all criminals act rationally, ignoring crimes committed impulsively
or under emotional distress. It also fails to tackle the root causes of crime, such as poverty
and lack of opportunity.
Link: Although right realism contributes useful preventative strategies, its overreliance on
deterrence and rationality can overlook deeper social issues driving criminal behavior.
Conclusion: In conclusion, realist theories of crime have contributed significantly to our
understanding of criminal behaviour. Left realism is valuable for acknowledging the role of
inequality and marginalisation, while right realism offers insights into deterrence and
personal responsibility. However, both approaches have limitations, and a more
comprehensive explanation of crime would integrate structural, individual, and situational
factors.
Outline and explain two reasons why some sociologists choose to use official statistics in
their research. [10]
Point: One reason why sociologists choose to use official statistics in their research is
because they may be the only data available in a specific area, e.g suicide statistics.
Evidence: Durkheim argued that statistics such as suicide rates are objective social facts
that reflect real patterns in society.
Explain: This means that for certain areas of research, such as suicide or crime, it would
be difficult or unethical for sociologists to collect their own primary data. Therefore, official
statistics offer a reliable and accessible alternative. Durkheim believed these statistics
could be used to identify social trends and establish correlations, such as the link between
social integration and suicide rates.
Link: This shows how official statistics can be useful in positivist research, where
sociologists aim to uncover general laws of human behaviour using scientific and
quantitative methods.
Point: Another reason why sociologists may choose to use official statistics in their
research is because they are cheap.
Evidence: The Office of National Statistics is easy to access and affordable.
Explain: This is important for sociologists working with limited funding or time constraints,
especially in large-scale research. Since the data has already been collected by
government agencies, researchers can use it without having to conduct time-consuming
surveys or interviews themselves. This also makes large samples possible, increasing the
representativeness of the research.
Link: Therefore, official statistics offer a practical, cost-effective method for sociologists
aiming to carry out large-scale, representative studies, particularly those following a
positivist approach.
Applying material from Item C and your knowledge, evaluate the extent to which Sociology
can be regarded as scientific. [20]
, Introduction: Whether sociology can be regarded as a science is a widely debated topic
within the discipline. While some sociologists argue that the subject can mirror the natural
sciences in method and reliability, others claim that the nature of human behaviour makes
this impossible. This debate largely centres around differing methodological perspectives
such as positivism, interpretivism, and the views of philosophers of science like Popper
and Kuhn.
Point: As stated in Item C, positivists argue that sociology can be regarded as scientific.
Evidence: Durkheim argued that statistics such as suicide rates are objective social facts
that reflect real patterns in society.
Explain: Durkheim believed that studying social facts such as suicide rates through
statistical analysis allowed sociologists to uncover causal relationships and laws governing
human behaviour, much like natural scientists do with the physical world. By collecting
quantifiable data, Durkheim aimed to make sociology objective and reliable.
Evaluation: However, critics argue that statistics may not always reflect social reality, as
they are socially constructed. For example, suicide statistics depend on coroners’ verdicts,
which may be influenced by subjective interpretations, thus undermining their objectivity.
Link: Therefore, although Durkheim attempted to make sociology scientific by using
statistical data, the subjective nature of data collection limits the extent to which sociology
can truly be considered a science.
Point: As also stated in Item C, they argue that society should be studied using the
principles and procedures of the natural sciences.
Evidence: Comte asserts that sociology can be a science, because it can explain how
things relate to one another, using laws of coexistence and succession.
Explain: Comte argued that sociology could establish laws of social behaviour by applying
the methods of natural sciences, such as observation and experimentation. These
methods would allow sociologists to identify patterns and predict future societal
developments.
Evaluation: However, interpretivists reject this idea, arguing that human behaviour is
meaningful and based on free will, unlike the predictable elements studied in the natural
sciences. Thus, applying scientific laws to social life risks ignoring the complexities of
human agency and meaning.
Link: While Comte promoted the use of scientific methodology, the uniqueness of human
consciousness and meaning-making challenges this view and weakens the claim that
sociology is fully scientific.
Point: As also stated in Item C, others argue that scientific methods are not always
suitable for studying human behaviour.
Evidence: Popper believes that for sociology to be a science, it must undergo a process of
falsification. However, it cannot undergo falsification, as many sociological ideas are too
abstract to be tested,
Explain: Popper emphasized that science is defined by the principle of falsifiability -
scientific theories must be testable and able to be proven wrong. He argued that much of
sociology, particularly in theories like Marxism, makes broad claims that cannot be
definitively tested or disproved, making it fall short of true scientific status.
Evaluation: Nonetheless, Popper acknowledged that sociology can still be scientific in its
methods, especially when researchers formulate hypotheses that can be tested
empirically, such as in quantitative studies. Therefore, some areas of sociology may meet
the criteria for science, even if not all of it does.
Link: This suggests that while sociology often fails to meet the strict standards of
falsifiability, parts of it can adopt a scientific approach, indicating that sociology is partially
scientific rather than wholly so.
Outline two reasons why punishment may not be effective in controlling crime. [4]
Punishment of offenders may lead to labelling; the stigma attached to being seen as a
criminal may lead to a deviant career.
Criminals may learn to commit more crime while being punished; prisons can be seen as
‘universities of crime’ where prisoners learn additional criminal techniques.
Outline three reasons for ethnic differences in patterns of crime. [6]
Marginalisation of some ethnic groups; feelings of powerlessness may lead some ethnic
groups to commit crime.
Crime may be a form of protest or political act; some ethnic groups may engage in crime
as a form of resistance to a racist and white-dominated society.
Institutional racism within the police; some ethnic groups are more likely to be stopped and
searched leading to higher recorded patterns of crime.
Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways that social control may explain gender
differences in patterns of crime. [10]
Point: As stated in Item A, informal social control involves restricting people to their role
expectations.
Evidence: Parsons asserts that due to their biology and the way they are socialised,
women are nurturing and therefore are incapable of and / or do not want to commit crime.
Explain: This means that from an early age, girls are encouraged to adopt caring roles and
to conform to behaviour that aligns with femininity, such as passivity and obedience. This
limits their exposure to potentially deviant subcultures and risk-taking behaviour often
associated with crime. As a result, women are subjected to greater informal social control
within the family and community, which deters criminal activity.
Link: Therefore, informal social control through gender role socialisation helps to explain
why women are statistically less likely to commit crime compared to men, as their
behaviour is more tightly regulated from a young age.
Point: As also stated in Item A, formal social control includes the criminal justice system.
Evidence: Messerschmidt argues that masculinity is an accomplishment that men
constantly work at constructing and presenting to others. They assert this through
committing crime.
Explain: When men lack legitimate means of demonstrating traditional masculinity - such
as success, toughness, or dominance - they may turn to crime as an alternative way of
expressing these traits. The criminal justice system may overlook or even reinforce these
gendered expectations, as men are more likely to be perceived as naturally aggressive or
deviant. Thus, formal mechanisms may fail to effectively deter male crime or may treat
male and female offenders differently.
Link: This shows how formal social control can both reflect and reinforce gender norms,
helping to explain why men are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour and why
gender differences in crime persist.
,Applying material from Item B and your knowledge, evaluate the contributions of realist
explanations of crime. [30]
Introduction: Realist explanations of crime, including both left and right realist
perspectives, provide contrasting but complementary understandings of why people
commit crime. Left realists focus on social structures and inequalities, while right realists
emphasize individual responsibility and deterrence. This essay will explore the key
contributions of both perspectives, evaluating their usefulness and limitations in explaining
criminal behavior.
Point: As stated in Item B, Left Realists argue that the causes of crime are structural, and
that an unequal society produces feelings of relative deprivation and marginalisation.
Evidence: Lea and Young assert that relative deprivation leads to crime. People who are
deprived resent others having more material goods than them and resort to illegitimate
means to achieve the same level of wealth.
Explain: When individuals feel relatively deprived - believing they are unfairly
disadvantaged compared to others - they may experience frustration, which can turn into
criminal behavior. This sense of injustice is exacerbated by marginalisation, where
individuals or groups lack clear goals and means to achieve them, often leading to
antisocial or criminal behaviour as an expression of frustration.
Evaluation: A strength of this explanation is that it considers the social context and the
feelings of exclusion that many working-class and minority individuals experience, offering
a more nuanced view than theories that blame individuals alone. However, critics argue
that not everyone who experiences relative deprivation turns to crime, suggesting that this
theory cannot fully account for why some deprived individuals remain law-abiding.
Moreover, it tends to overemphasise street crime and underplays white-collar and
corporate crime.
Link: Overall, left realism makes a valuable contribution by highlighting how structural
inequalities and subjective feelings of injustice contribute to crime, though it may
oversimplify the link between deprivation and criminal behavior.
Point: As also stated in Item B, right realists argue that crime is caused by rationally
self-interested individuals who choose to commit crime.
Evidence: Herrnstein and Wilson argue that biological differences between individuals
make some people more predisposed to crime. Personality traits such as aggression and
low impulse control lead to a greater risk of offending.
Explain: Right realists like Herrnstein and Wilson argue that criminal behavior is the result
of both individual biological predispositions and a failure of social control. Individuals with
personality traits such as low impulse control or aggressiveness are more likely to offend,
especially in the absence of strong moral guidance. From this view, crime is a result of
poor individual choices rather than social structures.
Evaluation: This explanation is supported by some studies suggesting a correlation
between certain personality traits and criminal behavior, but it faces ethical and
methodological criticisms. It risks promoting biological determinism and can lead to
discriminatory policies. Moreover, it ignores the broader social and economic conditions
that may influence behavior, offering a limited and individualistic explanation.
Link: While right realism provides a clear focus on personal responsibility and deterrence,
its neglect of structural causes weakens its overall explanatory power.
Point: As also stated in Item B, crime can be reduced by increasing the risks of committing
crime.
Evidence: Clarke argues that the decision to commit a crime is based on a rational
calculation of consequences. If perceived rewards outweigh costs, people are more likely
to offend.
, Explain: Clarke's rational choice theory suggests that individuals weigh up the costs and
benefits of criminal activity before deciding to commit a crime. If the risks of being caught
are low and the rewards are high, individuals are more likely to offend. This has led to
practical crime prevention strategies like situational crime prevention, which aim to make
crime more difficult or less rewarding.
Evaluation: This approach has influenced real-world policies such as CCTV surveillance
and zero-tolerance policing, which have shown some success in reducing petty crime.
However, it assumes that all criminals act rationally, ignoring crimes committed impulsively
or under emotional distress. It also fails to tackle the root causes of crime, such as poverty
and lack of opportunity.
Link: Although right realism contributes useful preventative strategies, its overreliance on
deterrence and rationality can overlook deeper social issues driving criminal behavior.
Conclusion: In conclusion, realist theories of crime have contributed significantly to our
understanding of criminal behaviour. Left realism is valuable for acknowledging the role of
inequality and marginalisation, while right realism offers insights into deterrence and
personal responsibility. However, both approaches have limitations, and a more
comprehensive explanation of crime would integrate structural, individual, and situational
factors.
Outline and explain two reasons why some sociologists choose to use official statistics in
their research. [10]
Point: One reason why sociologists choose to use official statistics in their research is
because they may be the only data available in a specific area, e.g suicide statistics.
Evidence: Durkheim argued that statistics such as suicide rates are objective social facts
that reflect real patterns in society.
Explain: This means that for certain areas of research, such as suicide or crime, it would
be difficult or unethical for sociologists to collect their own primary data. Therefore, official
statistics offer a reliable and accessible alternative. Durkheim believed these statistics
could be used to identify social trends and establish correlations, such as the link between
social integration and suicide rates.
Link: This shows how official statistics can be useful in positivist research, where
sociologists aim to uncover general laws of human behaviour using scientific and
quantitative methods.
Point: Another reason why sociologists may choose to use official statistics in their
research is because they are cheap.
Evidence: The Office of National Statistics is easy to access and affordable.
Explain: This is important for sociologists working with limited funding or time constraints,
especially in large-scale research. Since the data has already been collected by
government agencies, researchers can use it without having to conduct time-consuming
surveys or interviews themselves. This also makes large samples possible, increasing the
representativeness of the research.
Link: Therefore, official statistics offer a practical, cost-effective method for sociologists
aiming to carry out large-scale, representative studies, particularly those following a
positivist approach.
Applying material from Item C and your knowledge, evaluate the extent to which Sociology
can be regarded as scientific. [20]
, Introduction: Whether sociology can be regarded as a science is a widely debated topic
within the discipline. While some sociologists argue that the subject can mirror the natural
sciences in method and reliability, others claim that the nature of human behaviour makes
this impossible. This debate largely centres around differing methodological perspectives
such as positivism, interpretivism, and the views of philosophers of science like Popper
and Kuhn.
Point: As stated in Item C, positivists argue that sociology can be regarded as scientific.
Evidence: Durkheim argued that statistics such as suicide rates are objective social facts
that reflect real patterns in society.
Explain: Durkheim believed that studying social facts such as suicide rates through
statistical analysis allowed sociologists to uncover causal relationships and laws governing
human behaviour, much like natural scientists do with the physical world. By collecting
quantifiable data, Durkheim aimed to make sociology objective and reliable.
Evaluation: However, critics argue that statistics may not always reflect social reality, as
they are socially constructed. For example, suicide statistics depend on coroners’ verdicts,
which may be influenced by subjective interpretations, thus undermining their objectivity.
Link: Therefore, although Durkheim attempted to make sociology scientific by using
statistical data, the subjective nature of data collection limits the extent to which sociology
can truly be considered a science.
Point: As also stated in Item C, they argue that society should be studied using the
principles and procedures of the natural sciences.
Evidence: Comte asserts that sociology can be a science, because it can explain how
things relate to one another, using laws of coexistence and succession.
Explain: Comte argued that sociology could establish laws of social behaviour by applying
the methods of natural sciences, such as observation and experimentation. These
methods would allow sociologists to identify patterns and predict future societal
developments.
Evaluation: However, interpretivists reject this idea, arguing that human behaviour is
meaningful and based on free will, unlike the predictable elements studied in the natural
sciences. Thus, applying scientific laws to social life risks ignoring the complexities of
human agency and meaning.
Link: While Comte promoted the use of scientific methodology, the uniqueness of human
consciousness and meaning-making challenges this view and weakens the claim that
sociology is fully scientific.
Point: As also stated in Item C, others argue that scientific methods are not always
suitable for studying human behaviour.
Evidence: Popper believes that for sociology to be a science, it must undergo a process of
falsification. However, it cannot undergo falsification, as many sociological ideas are too
abstract to be tested,
Explain: Popper emphasized that science is defined by the principle of falsifiability -
scientific theories must be testable and able to be proven wrong. He argued that much of
sociology, particularly in theories like Marxism, makes broad claims that cannot be
definitively tested or disproved, making it fall short of true scientific status.
Evaluation: Nonetheless, Popper acknowledged that sociology can still be scientific in its
methods, especially when researchers formulate hypotheses that can be tested
empirically, such as in quantitative studies. Therefore, some areas of sociology may meet
the criteria for science, even if not all of it does.
Link: This suggests that while sociology often fails to meet the strict standards of
falsifiability, parts of it can adopt a scientific approach, indicating that sociology is partially
scientific rather than wholly so.
