An Overview of General Strain Theory Essay

In modern criminological inquiry and debate, commonplace gillyflower possibleness (GST) remains at the forefront. The aim of this musical composition is to discuss general pipeline conjecture (GST), what it is, and how it came to be. Details on specific research regarding general strain theory, however, lie beyond the scope of this writing. This paper leave alone instead focus on GSTs stern among other criminological theories, and why it stands where it is today. Therefore, to get a proper perspective on this theory, it is prudent to get going with an oerview on its origins. General strain theory sprang from the standard strain theory developed in the after-hours 19th and early 20th centuries (Ag new, 1992). Up until the wane of the 1960s, strain theory had become the preeminent theory on deviance. As the 70s rolled through, however, various differential-association theories, as well as friendly learning and social control theories, replaced strain theory and left it in n ear ignominy.There it remained, for the about part, until the rise of GST (Cole, 1975). But what, then, is strain theory? Stemming from the lap up of mile Durkheim and Robert Merton, strain theory revolves around the concepts of anomy and, of course, strain. The central idea is that, while society in general may share common goals of self-direction and wealth, the means to achieve those goals is limited by socioeconomic class. The disparity mingled with what is expected and what is possible, and the resulting strain, leads to anomie, a offer of normlessness, where the standard of conduct becomes skewed and self-regulatory values are rejected (Featherstone & Deflem, 2003). endeavor is said to drive the deprive into following a life of deviance as a means to achieve otherwise impossible goals. An individual under strain might also replace those goals with something more readily achievable, such(prenominal) as toughness or respect. While there are variations on standard strain theory, they largely tend toward this central concept. As more and more research was conducted throughout the late 20th century, it became pee-pee that, while strain theory could develop numerous graphic symbols of crime, it couldnt explain everything, such as why crime occurs within affluent circles where there is little strain of this type.Empirical conduct for traditional strain theory became weaker and weaker, and, as stated, it fell out of favorby the 1970s, replaced by theories that concentrated more on delinquency being a socially learned behavior. But not everyone disregarded the old theory. passim the 1980s, young sociologist Robert Agnew wrote several papers discussing and critiquing traditional strain theory. One of his papers written in 1985 suggested a new take on strain theory, in which Agnew introduced blockage of pain-avoidance as an additional cause of strains in the lead to deviant behavior. These works showed that there could be other ways that strain st ub cause deviance, desquamation hope for a newer, more encompassing brand of strain theory. At the start of the following decade, Robert Agnews studies finally culminated into a criminological milestone. In 1992, Robert Agnew published a detailed paper formally outlining the new general strain theory which, instead of following the traditional focus on broader subculture perceptions and financial objectives, had an emphasis on the individual and his or her immediate social environment.This new theory expanded on the monetary goals outlined in strain theory to include personal goals in general, such as getting good grades or having many an(prenominal) friends. Additionally, Agnew introduced the removal of positively valued stimuli as a type of strain, including the perception of unfairness originating from a lack of praise, or insufficient compensation for extra work. The third inauguration of strain presented was the presence of negative stimuli such as child-abuse or similar st ressful events. Interestingly enough, these ternion new facets of strain were inspired by research in fields outside traditional criminology, such as psychology and sociology (Agnew, 1992). Utilizing these new definitions of strain, Agnew could give a theoretical basis for many different types of crime, many more than was possible using traditional strain theory. An important aspect of Agnews theory was that he not only listed tact of strain but also outlined connections between various strains, and the manners through which they might push an individual to delinquency, in new ways that allowed for greater empirical support than traditional strain theory had been able to obtain.Agnews work quickly captured the interests of the criminological community, and in the decades since its debut, general strain theory has continued to gain popularity across the world. Research continues to be performed on GST, and the results generally front favorable for this relatively young theory (Sun g Joon & Johnson, 2003). As data continuesto be gathered, general strain theory is continually refined and further defined, and Agnew still studies, modifies, and writes about his theory (Baron, 2007). Numerous studies taken all over the globe have given much additional support and expansion to GST throughout the years, but the unspoiled depth of GSTs applications has not yet been fully explored (Froggio & Agnew, 2007). Still, general strain theory has been used to explain many aspects of crime, such as terrorism, drug abuse, and differences in crime rates between social classes, between racial groups, and between genders (Agnew, 2010) (Kaufman, Rebellon, Thaxton, & Agnew, 2008).General strain theory has indeed gained much support, and can explain many aspects of crime, but, as Agnew himself noted, it does not account for strains caused through non-social means such as by accident or illness (1992). In its current state, GST is more of a framework for determining likelihoods of dev iance rather than an accounting of when and how crimes may be committed (cite). These and other aspects will have to be accounted for and tested before GST can become a full alternative to other theories. Certainly, examination for such a broad spectrum of strains and responses as currently presented in general strain theory already presents a complicated challenge to the scientific community.There is some speculation that the current support shown for GST in many studies has been garnered using inaccurate testing methods (Froggio, 2007). There is also research that indicates that while strain may cause certain types of criminality, it is not immediately responsible for any nonaggressive delinquency. In short, GST is still just an unproven theory, with much room for probe and expansion. It certainly appears to possibly answer many issues on the nature of crime, but it requires much more research before any conclusions can be made about its veracity and about its potential. Agnews work revitalized a dying interest in strain and its impacts on deviant behavior. Time will tell whether this theory can live up to the praise it has garnered in these early stages. While its emerging seems bright, general strain theory for now remains merely a foundation for many succeeding(a) investigations and studies.ReferencesAgnew, R. (1985). A Revised Strain possible action of depravity. Social Forces, 64(1), 151-167. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for aGeneral Strain Theory of law-breaking and Delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47-87. Agnew, R. (2010). A general strain theory of terrorism. Theoretical Criminology, 14(2), 131-153. inside10.1177/1362480609350163 Aseltine Jr., R. H., Gore, S., & Gordon, J. (2000). Life Stress, Anger and Anxiety, and Delinquency An Empirical Test of General Strain Theory. journal of Health & Social Behavior, 41(3), 256-275. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Baron, S. W. (2007). Street Youth, Gender, Financial Strain, and Crime Exploring Broidy and Agnews Extension to General Strain Theory. Deviant Behavior, 28(3), 273-302. inside10.1080/01639620701233217 Cole, Stephen. (1975). The Growth of Scientific Knowledge Theories of optical aberration as a Case Study. The Idea of Social Structure Papers in Honor of Robert K. Merton, 175-220 emended by Lewis Coser. New York Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Featherstone, R., & Deflem, M. (2003). Anomie and Strain Context and Consequences of Mertons Two Theories. Sociological Inquiry, 73(4), 471-489. doi10.1111/1475-682X.00067 Froggio, G. (2007). Strain and Juvenile Delinquency A Critical Review of Agnews General Strain Theory. Journal of Loss & Trauma, 12(4), 383-418. doi10.1080/15325020701249363 Froggio, G., & Agnew, R. (2007). The relationship between crime and objective versus subjective strains. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35(1), 81-87. doi10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2006.11.017 Kaufman, J. M., Rebellon, C. J., Thaxton, S., & Agnew, R. (2008). A General Strain Theory of Rac ial Differences in Criminal Offending.Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology (Australian schoolman Press), 41(3), 421-437. doi10.1375/acri.41.3.421 Sung Joon, J., & Johnson, B. R. (2003). Strain, Negative Emotions, and Deviant Coping Among African Americans A Test of General Strain Theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19(1), 79. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.