Evaluation of differential association hypothesis as an
explanation for offending
Farrington et al (2006): Conducted a longitudinal study looking into development of offending and
antisocial behaviour in 411 males aged 8-50. They were all living in a working-class deprived inner-city
area of South London. Found that 41% of PP’s had at least one conviction. The most significant risk
factors for offending were: family criminality, daring/risk taking, low school grades, poverty and bad
parenting. (Supports Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory)
S Osborne and West (1982): Studied the sons of convicted criminals. Found 41% also had convictions by
age 18 compared to only 13% in the control group (sons of fathers who did not have convictions)
Walmsley et al (1992): Found that a third of the prison population in the UK also had relative in prison
too.
Akers et al (1979): Surveyed 2500 male/female adolescents. Found that differential association
accounted for 68% of variance in marijuana use and 65% in alcohol use.
Can help to develop anti-crime attitudes:
- This can be done by removing prisoners from prison population to get them away from people with pro
crime attitudes.
P - This can also be done by developing group programmes for those who want to stop committing crime.
This can allow criminals to associate themselves with people who want to stop committing crime.
- Boy in Preston wasn’t allowed to hang out with his siblings as they were involved in gang crimes.
Beta bias: Farrington et al and Osborne and West only conducted study on males and generalised it to
females.
I
- Strongly supported by behaviourism
- Supported by SLT
A
Dispositional and genetic explanations
C
✔Objective and quantitative measures
✘ASPD: Those with ASPD are ego centric and will not stop committing crimes when they experience the
same disregard. This can in fact cause them to retaliate due to poor emotional regulation
E ✘Ignores dispositional factors: Ignores temperament and personality. People who have internal locus of
controls will be more likely to conform.
✘Cannot explain impulsive crimes
✘Group therapy (practical application) is costly
Determinist: States that crimes are mainly influenced by differential associations
Nurture: Shows environment influences crime
D Reductionist
Nomothetic
explanation for offending
Farrington et al (2006): Conducted a longitudinal study looking into development of offending and
antisocial behaviour in 411 males aged 8-50. They were all living in a working-class deprived inner-city
area of South London. Found that 41% of PP’s had at least one conviction. The most significant risk
factors for offending were: family criminality, daring/risk taking, low school grades, poverty and bad
parenting. (Supports Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory)
S Osborne and West (1982): Studied the sons of convicted criminals. Found 41% also had convictions by
age 18 compared to only 13% in the control group (sons of fathers who did not have convictions)
Walmsley et al (1992): Found that a third of the prison population in the UK also had relative in prison
too.
Akers et al (1979): Surveyed 2500 male/female adolescents. Found that differential association
accounted for 68% of variance in marijuana use and 65% in alcohol use.
Can help to develop anti-crime attitudes:
- This can be done by removing prisoners from prison population to get them away from people with pro
crime attitudes.
P - This can also be done by developing group programmes for those who want to stop committing crime.
This can allow criminals to associate themselves with people who want to stop committing crime.
- Boy in Preston wasn’t allowed to hang out with his siblings as they were involved in gang crimes.
Beta bias: Farrington et al and Osborne and West only conducted study on males and generalised it to
females.
I
- Strongly supported by behaviourism
- Supported by SLT
A
Dispositional and genetic explanations
C
✔Objective and quantitative measures
✘ASPD: Those with ASPD are ego centric and will not stop committing crimes when they experience the
same disregard. This can in fact cause them to retaliate due to poor emotional regulation
E ✘Ignores dispositional factors: Ignores temperament and personality. People who have internal locus of
controls will be more likely to conform.
✘Cannot explain impulsive crimes
✘Group therapy (practical application) is costly
Determinist: States that crimes are mainly influenced by differential associations
Nurture: Shows environment influences crime
D Reductionist
Nomothetic
