Open Access Research Article
NAVIGATING THE SHADOWS: UNRAVELLING THE WEB OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME THROUGH DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION THEORY AND STRAIN THEORY BY: KARNIKA SINGH & JHANVI JAIN
Published Paper
Article Details
NAVIGATING
THE SHADOWS: UNRAVELLING THE WEB OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME THROUGH DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION THEORY AND
STRAIN THEORY
AUTHORED
BY: KARNIKA SINGH
CO-AUTHORED
BY: JHANVI JAIN
AFFILIATED
BY: KIIT, SCHOOL OF LAW
Abstract
This paper explores the
intricate dynamics of white collar crime through the lens of two prominent
criminologists being Edwin Hardin Sutherland who coined differential
association theory and Merton who came up with the Strain theory, that explains
the criminal behaviour.
White collar crime
happens to come out as a serious issue in our society. As white collar crimes
are indirect in nature and they do not cause direct physical harm to the
individuals it is regarded or perceived as a less harmful offence by the
society as compared to the traditional or street offences. But as a matter of
fact, as per the routine information provided by Federal Bureau of
Investigation the loss caused by white-collar crimes are considerably much more
than that caused by traditional ones. Moreover, unlike the street crimes that
affects hardly one or two victims, white collar crime creates a bigger impact
on the society comprising of large number of victims.
White collar crimes are
considered to be financially motivated offences, non-violent in nature and to
be done by people possessing “high-respectability and social status” which has
continued to be a notable challenge for the law enforcement agencies.
This study seeks to
unravel the complex motivations and societal influences that underlie white-collar
criminal behaviour. By bridging the gap between these two influential theories,
this paper contributes to a more holistic framework for comprehending the
motivations and mechanisms behind white-collar criminal behaviour.
Keywords: White collar crime; High respectability; societal
influences; motivations
INTRODUCTION
What
is crime? As the traditional definition says ‘an act can be considered as a
crime if its forbidden or punishable by law’ so despite the fact that there is
no comprehensive or statute specific definition of the term ‘crime’ or a ‘criminal’ or how can
one differentiate a crime from a tort, we can come to a conclusion that an act
can be considered to be a crime only if that particular act has been so
specified as crime by law and in order to curb the same the law comes up with
sanctions and criminal prosecutions. In addition to the flaw in the definition,
its vitally important to keep in mind that an act maybe absolutely
unjustifiable, indefensible, vicious or depraved but it’s absolutely
unimportant and irrelevant, as it cannot be a called as crime if it is not
written in the black and white letters of the statute[1].
White
collar crime was first introduced by the father of American Criminology ‘Edwin
Hardin Sutherland’, in 1939.[2] He
defined it as “Crime which is committed by a person who is having high social
status and also having respectability which is acquired by him in the course of
his occupation”.[3] As the name white-collar
crime itself suggests crime committed by the white-collar people i.e. people
who are wealthy enough due to their skill sets (excluding the manual labour)
and highly paying jobs. The two unobtrusive areas of crime are corporate crime
and white collar crime because of the very nature of it. As both the crimes can
be committed in a private space by an individual or by an organization without
any kind of violence, public interference or any kind of physical injury to any
person.
CHALLENGES FACED BY ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
Due
to the tendency of these crimes being associated with the occupational work it
gets difficult to catch hold of the criminals. Most of the times, victims are
unaware of the crime as its not immediately apparent and they discover it at
the later stage when it gets really complex to find out the criminal due to the
sophisticated schemes used by them to conceal their identity behind such
cover-ups. Also a major reason behind the invisibility of white collar crime
and corporate crimes is media as media coverage plays a vital role in
unearthing and exposing various kinds of crime and helps in spreading awareness
regarding the same. Due to lack of political and social interest, the complex
nature of it and powerful lobbying faction, media doesn’t find it newsworthy or
headline grabbing which is why it doesn’t publish the same unlike the
publication of traditional or street crimes. Despite being the most serious
crime, as it affects the society at large and at once, due to lack of media
coverage people see it as less serious.[4]
The
paper deals with the question what leads a person to commit a white collar
crime?
It’s
even more difficult to track down why do people take part in such activities.
Is it because of some genetically or biological factors or physical-mental
illness or socio-economic conditions of an individual or influence of peer
groups or other facets or a fusion of all the above facets that makes a person
commit a criminal act?
There
are various American sociologists like Edwin Hardin Sutherland and Merton who
have come up with theories like ‘Differential Association theory’ and ‘Strain
theory’, describing various reasons behind such criminal act or criminality.
DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION THEORY
This generally
deals with the concept of learning of criminal behaviour from intimate peer
groups by way of interactions or communication. Sutherland came up with a
detailed analysis of such kind of learning. According to him criminal behaviour
develops from the learning that takes place out of personal interactions with
peer groups. Such a learning involves techniques that are being used to commit
an offence, their perspectives, the rationalizations or reasoning given by
people to justify such a behaviour and their values which influences, a person,
enough to commit a crime. According to his theory committal of a crime also
depends on the quantum of interaction that individual has with people who
support or approve deviance/ criminal behaviour and on the quantum of
association of that individual with criminal activities. In a nutshell a person
pursues criminal activity if he discovers that plethora of enumerations
favourable to violation of law overweighs the enumerations unfavourable to
violation of law.[5] Also the frequency,
priority, intensity and duration of interactions either regarding approval of the
criminal behaviour or violation of law or regarding disapproving the criminal
behaviour, may affect the criminal activity. i.e. to say frequency of exposure
to any kind of behaviour is directly proportional to the effect of the same on
an individual. According to him not all associations or interactions are equal,
some definitions or rationalizations may have a higher level of influence on a
person and some may not such as interactions having a longer duration and
consistency are more likely to give birth to a criminal as compared to the
interactions or associations which are irregular or infrequent having a lesser
impact on the individual. Associations and interactions with people for whom
one holds in high regard are more likely to have an influence on that
individual as compared to interactions with people for whom one has low
regards.[6]
This series of social interactions through which such behaviours and
definitions are extracted is known as “Sutherland’s Differential Association
Theory”. He further stated that an individual learns criminal behaviour in the
same way as he learns any other non-criminal behaviour. Sutherland's theory
focused on the premise that white-collar crime is fundamentally a learned
behaviour. According to him, individuals involved in white-collar criminal
activities not only acquire the knowledge of how to execute such offenses but
also develop the necessary skills, motives, and attitudes through the process
of social learning. In essence, Sutherland argued that the commission of white-collar
crimes is not merely a result of chance or circumstance but is rooted in a
systematic acquisition of both the techniques and the underlying rationale for
engaging in such illicit activities.[7]
Criticism
of the theory
Although
Sutherland’s theory of differential association has made valuable contributions
towards the perspectives and reasons behind the criminal behaviour, it is not
without its criticisms. And it is of paramount importance to assess these
criticisms and acknowledge that criminal behaviour is influenced by a multitude
of complex factors and not social learning alone.
The
limitations of this theory were:
Ø Lacks explanation behind the non-criminal behaviour: the theory deals
with factors such as learning from peer groups about the criminal behaviour and
their rationalizations and motives towards the same, leading to criminality but
fails to address why some individuals who even after getting exposed to such
differential associations do not engage themselves in criminal behaviour or while
some individuals who are least exposed to such differential associations become
criminals.
Ø
Lacks preventive mechanisms: the theory has
very well addressed the reasons behind criminal behaviour but didn’t mention
about how to prevent such criminal behaviour i.e. the theory failed to address
rehabilitative approach.
Ø
The theory explains that someone who has
associates with criminals learns how to commit crime and become offenders but
doesn’t address the fact that why in the first place does an individual associate
to such criminals.
Ø
Neglects the biological and psychological factors:
the theory has categorically mentioned that criminal behaviour is learned and
fails to explain the biological and psychological factors such as mental
illness, personal life problems, impulsivity, genetical predispositions that
may play a major role in criminality.
Ø
Neglects structural and societal factors: the
theory only talks about the learning of criminal behaviour and its
rationalizations that takes place in peer groups but doesn’t mention about the
societal factors such as poverty, inequality, racism that can significantly lead
to criminal behaviour[8].
STRAIN THEORY
This
theory was first coined by Merton as ‘classical strain theory’ in an article
published in American Sociological review as “Social Structure and Anomie” in
1938. His theory specifically deals with the mental stress and strain which
leads a person to commit crime. According to him, crime happens to be an
outcome of the pressure or the burden which is termed as ‘stress’ which arises
due to the goals/ standards set by the society and due to the absence and
unavailability of reasonable opportunities to attain those goals. The mental
stress occurs due to imbalance in the societal standards, the socio-economic
factor and the contemplation of high financial status as definition of success.
And as per Merton, all of these factors results in ‘Anomie’ i.e. “normlessness”
wherein people tend to disregard the norms and values which were being followed
by the society.[9] According to the theory an
individual commits crime to attain economic success i.e. the ‘American
Dream’. A set of standards such as
Wealth, prosperity, ownership, equality of opportunity constituted to the ‘American
Dream’[10].
The
theory stems from four postulates:
Ø
Society establishes culturally approved goals
that its members are encouraged to strive for. These goals often include
success, wealth, and social status.
Ø
Alongside cultural goals, society provides
institutionalized means or socially accepted methods to achieve those goals.
These means typically include education, employment, and other conventional
avenues for success.
Ø
The postulate of conformity suggests that the
majority of individuals in society will conform to both the cultural goals and
the institutionalized means. Conformists accept and pursue success through the
approved channels
Ø
The central concept in Merton's theory, strain
arises when there is a disjunction between culturally approved goals and the
legitimate means available to achieve them. This strain occurs when individuals
face barriers or limitations in achieving success through approved channels.[11]
As
per Merton’s Strain Theory there are total 5 approaches of people by which they
try to curb out the economic gap or imbalance in societal standards and those
are enlisted here-in below:
The
very first approach is the Conformist
approach wherein an individual conform to the economic goals stipulated by
the society and look forward to lawful as well as reasonable means to
successfully attain those goals.
For
ex: In order to achieve financial stability and match the societal standards, I
worked really hard to improve my programming skills.
The
second approach is the Innovator approach
wherein an individual conform to the goals stipulated by the society but
look forward to unlawful and unreasonable means to attain those goals.
For
ex.: In order to achieve financial stability and match the societal standards,
I started dealing into drugs.
The
third approach is the Ritualist Approach
wherein people do not conform to the goals stipulated by the society but follow
the lawful and socially acceptable means to attain the goals.
For
ex.: a student with no inclination towards music and with no career plans
related to the music industry, enrolled for the music course as that’s what the
entire batch did.
The
fourth approach is the Retreatist
Approach wherein people who neither conform to the goals stipulated by the
society nor do they follow lawful or socially acceptable means to achieve those
goals.
For
ex.: an alcoholic who doesn’t wish to do a normal job to earn livelihood rather
prefer sitting at home unemployed.
The
fifth and the last approach is the Rebel
Approach wherein people discard the option of conforming to the financial
goals and the means of attaining it which is stipulated by the society and
interchange or swap the same with their goals and their ways of attaining it.
For ex.: a terrorist who has nothing to do with the financial success and the
society made goals rather prefer creating terror in people and achieving
political power by doing so.[12]
Criticism
of strain theory
Indubitably
Merton’s strain theory has made valuable contributions towards explaining the
reasoning behind criminality but like any other theory Merton’s theory also had
certain limitations and faced criticisms and those were:
Ø Ignores non-financial goals: The theory emphasizes on the financial
goals and economic success and the means to achieve the same but neglects the
non-financial goals such as personal happiness, community involvement etc which
may lead to criminality.
Ø
Merton’s theory categorically talks about criminal
behaviour arising out of imbalance in societal standards and the means to
achieve it. But the theory fails to explain other forms of deviance such as
malicious and symbolic crimes. The theory only focuses on the crimes that are
being committed to achieve economic success.
Ø
Merton’s theory fails to address about the how
individuals are socialized into accepting the goals that are being set by the
society or how the norms and values are transmitted across generations.
Ø
Merton’s theory focuses and categorically
explains about the problem of strain resulting into crime but doesn’t talk
about any preventive measures or doesn’t recognise rehabilitative approach.
Ø
Merton’s theory fails to address that not
every individual has equal opportunity to achieve the goals set by the society
by opting for lawful or reasonable means. And the factors of inequality in
opportunity are socio-economic status, race and discrimination.
Ø
The theory oversimplifies the multiplexity of
criminal behaviour and neglects other factors that may lead to criminality such
as vengeance, thrill-seeking, depression or personal satisfaction.[13]
CONCLUSION
How
both the theories explain criminality better
The
decision making processes of white collar criminals are shaped by an
integration of both the theories. As per Merton, American dream is the goal of
society and individuals choose varying means to achieve the same and as per
Sutherland, crime is result of social learning that takes place in peer groups
when such groups regard unethical behaviours.
Individuals
who are exposed to groups/associations that support criminal behaviour and
disregarding the law may at the same time encounter strain due to societal
pressure and competitive nature of their occupational environments, increasing
the probability of them opting for criminal attitudes. Such conjunction of
influences can lead to the motivations and rationalization of white-collar
crime as a viable solution to cope up with strain and pressures they face. By
identifying the interplay between learned behaviours and external pressures,
this approach contributes to a better understanding of why individuals in
respected positions may opt to participate in illicit activities for financial
gain within their professional environment.
[2] White-collar crimes and
contribution of professor Sutherland in the development of the white-collar
crimes Legal Service India - Law, Lawyers and Legal Resources,
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7541-white-collar-crimes-and-contribution-of-professor-sutherland-in-the-development-of-the-white-collar-crimes.html
(last visited Nov 16, 2023)
[3] (Sutherland 1949, p. 9)
[6] Differential Association
theory in criminology and sociology Criminology Web, https://criminologyweb.com/differential-association-theory-sutherlands-sociology-and-criminology-of-deviance-explained/
(last visited Nov 16, 2023)
[7] Differential Association theory
StudySmarter UK, https://www.studysmarter.co.uk/explanations/psychology/forensic-psychology/differential-association-theory/
(last visited Nov 16, 2023)
[8] Some popular criticisms of
Differential Association SpringerLink,
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-9015-2_5 (last visited Nov
16, 2023)
[9] Katherine S. Williams, Anomie,
Strain and Juvenile Subculture, in Textbook on criminology
[10] Merton’s strain theory of deviance
ReviseSociology,
https://revisesociology.com/2016/04/16/mertons-strain-theory-deviance/ (last
visited Nov 16, 2023)
[11] Chapter 4 distribute - sage india,
https://in.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-assets/76592_book_item_76592.pdf
(last visited Nov 16, 2023)
[12] Merton’s strain theory |
definition, typology & examples - study.com,
https://study.com/academy/lesson/mertons-strain-theory-definition-examples-quiz.html
(last visited Nov 16, 2023)
[13] Criticism of Merton’s strain
theory: A sociological ... - owlcation,
https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/Sociology-Essay-Strain-Theory-and-the-Functionalist-theory-of-Deviance-and-Crime-A-Critique-of-Mertons-Strain-Theory
(last visited Nov 16, 2023)
Article Information
NAVIGATING THE SHADOWS: UNRAVELLING THE WEB OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME THROUGH DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION THEORY AND STRAIN THEORY BY: KARNIKA SINGH & JHANVI JAIN
Authors: KARNIKA SINGH, JHANVI JAIN
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/01/10
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.