case study of general strain theory

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Corrections
Crime, Media, and Popular Culture
Criminal Behavior
Criminological Theory
Critical Criminology
Geography of Crime
International Crime
Juvenile Justice
Prevention/Public Policy
Race, Ethnicity, and Crime
Research Methods
Victimology/Criminal Victimization
White Collar Crime
Women, Crime, and Justice
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

General strain theory.

Timothy Brezina Timothy Brezina Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.249
Published online: 27 February 2017

General strain theory (GST) provides a unique explanation of crime and delinquency. In contrast to control and learning theories, GST focuses explicitly on negative treatment by others and is the only major theory of crime and delinquency to highlight the role of negative emotions in the etiology of offending. According to GST, the experience of strain or stress tends to generate negative emotions such as anger, frustration, depression, and despair. These negative emotions, in turn, are said to create pressures for corrective action, with crime or delinquency being one possible response.

GST was designed, in part, to address criticisms leveled against previous versions of strain theory. Earlier versions of strain theory have been criticized for focusing on a narrow range of possible strains, for their inability to explain why only some strained individuals resort to crime or delinquency, and for limited empirical support. GST has been partly successful in overcoming these limitations. Since its inception, the theory has received a considerable amount of attention from researchers, has enjoyed a fair amount of empirical support, and has been credited with helping to revitalize the strain theory tradition. The full potential of GST has yet to be realized, however, as the theory continues to evolve and further testing is required.

general strain theory
criminological theory
delinquency

General strain theory (GST) is the latest and broadest version of strain theory (Agnew, 2006 ). GST represents a revision and extension of prior strain theories, including the classic strain theories of Merton ( 1938 ), Cohen ( 1955 ), and Cloward and Ohlin ( 1960 ). To understand the development of GST, it is helpful to review the classic strain theories because GST was developed, in part, to address the limitations of these theories.

Classic Strain Theories

Robert Merton ( 1938 ) offered the first modern version of strain theory, which attempted to explain social class differences in offending. Merton observed that, in the United States, the cultural ethos of the “American Dream” encourages all individuals, regardless of circumstance, to strive for personal success, with an emphasis on the accumulation of monetary wealth. At the same time, however, opportunities for achieving monetary success are distributed unevenly in society. As Merton recognized, pervasive inequalities in the United States create serious barriers to success for many lower-class individuals. This particular configuration of culture (the culturally prescribed goal of monetary wealth) and social structure (inequality of opportunity) is said to generate strain. In particular, large segments of the population internalize the American Dream ethos but lack the legal or legitimate means to attain monetary wealth, which contributes to goal blockage and frustration (see Agnew, 1987 ). (Note: the work of Merton also suggests that strain contributes to anomie, or a sense that the traditional rules no longer apply. When individuals accept the goal of monetary success but lack the legal means to attain it, they may lose faith in the value of “hard work” or “playing by the rules” [see Messner & Rosenfeld, 1994 ].) Although Merton outlined several possible ways individuals may cope with strain, one response is to pursue monetary success through illegitimate or illegal means, such as drug sales or theft.

Merton’s explanation of crime emphasized the utilitarian, goal-oriented nature of deviant adaptations. In contrast, Cohen ( 1955 ) observed that most juvenile offending is non-utilitarian in nature. Gang fights, vandalism, and other such delinquencies do not seem to be directed toward the achievement of conventional success goals. To make strain theory more applicable to juvenile delinquency, Cohen offered a revised version of the theory, which placed less emphasis on monetary success.

Cohen highlighted the fact that many lower-class boys enter school without the knowledge or skills necessary to “measure up” to middle-class expectations. As a result, they are prone to failure at school, are frequently labeled as problems by school officials and middle-class peers, and ultimately are denied legitimate pathways to middle-class status and success. Cohen theorized that this inability to live up to middle-class expectations creates status frustration. To cope with this frustration, status-frustrated boys tend to band together and rebel against middle-class expectations. They do so by creating their own alternative status system, which emphasizes goals they can readily achieve, such as toughness and fighting prowess.

Cloward and Ohlin ( 1960 ) were also interested in the subcultural adaptions of juvenile gangs. Yet, whereas Cohen emphasized the rebellious nature of much juvenile delinquency, Cloward and Ohlin highlighted the variety of adaptations that can be observed across neighborhoods. For example, in some neighborhoods, delinquent gangs are said to cope with goal blockage by retreating into drug use. In other neighborhoods, strained youth specialize in violent behavior or in money-oriented crimes. This variation was said to be function of criminal opportunity. In certain neighborhoods, for instance, strained youth have access to illegal markets and exposure to experienced criminals (criminal “role models”). This type of access increases the likelihood that such youth will specialize in money-oriented crimes as opposed to drug use or violence.

The strain theories of Merton, Cohen, and Cloward and Ohlin were influential throughout much of the 20th century and helped to inspire antipoverty efforts. By the 1970s, however, strain theory began to fall out of favor. Over time, strain theories came under attack for their failure to adequately explain why only some strained individuals resort to crime, for their failure to explain offending by middle-class individuals, for their neglect of goals other than monetary success or middle-class status, and for their lack of empirical support. For example, in empirical tests, the experience of strain or goal-blockage did not prove to be a strong predictor of delinquency. Although some criminologists argue that these tests were flawed (see Agnew, Cullen, Burton, Evans, & Dunaway, 1996 ), such research diminished the influence of strain theory.

The Development of GST

Agnew ( 1992 ) developed GST, in part, in response to the criticisms leveled against classic strain theories. Drawing on the stress literature, Agnew ( 2006 ) broadened the definition of strain to include “events or conditions that are disliked by individuals” (p. 4). Although this definition encompasses the types of strain highlighted by classic strain theorists, it also includes a wide array of stressors that were not considered in earlier versions of strain theory. It includes, for example, stressors that could be experienced by both lower-class and middle-class individuals.

Under this broad definition, GST delineates three major types of strain. The first major type of strain involves the inability of individuals to achieve their goals , or “goal blockage.” Although classic strain theories also focused on goal blockage, they tended to focus on a single type of goal blockage; namely, a disjunction between aspirations and expectations. For instance, it was argued that individuals experience strain when they aspire to achieve monetary success but do not expect to attain it, because they perceive the goal of success to be out of reach. Agnew ( 1992 ), however, argues that other types of goal blockage are important and may have a stronger relationship to crime and delinquency. After all, aspirations typically involve ideal goals or outcomes and are somewhat utopian in character. For this reason, unfulfilled aspirations may not be a key source of strain or frustration. GST recognizes that the experience of goal blockage can also result from the failure to achieve expected outcomes (e.g., the failure to receive an expected income) as well as the failure to achieve fair and just outcomes (e.g., the failure to receive a “deserved” income). These latter types of goal-blockage, in turn, are expected to have a stronger association with the experience of disappointment and dissatisfaction.

It should be noted that, in GST, the goals and outcomes that are important to individuals are no longer limited to income or middle-class status. Goal blockage may include the inability to achieve other valued goals, such as respect and masculine status (e.g., the expectation that one be treated “like a man”), autonomy (e.g., the desire to achieve a certain amount of personal independence), and the desire for excitement. Such goals are especially important to young males and the inability to achieve these goals is thought to be an important source of strain. GST, then, greatly expands the notion of goal-blockage and recognizes that individuals pursue a variety of goals beyond economic success or middle-class status.

The second major type of strain involves the presentation of noxious or negatively valued stimuli . This type of strain includes experiences in which the individual is exposed to undesirable circumstances or is the recipient of negative treatment by others, such as harassment and bullying from peers, negative relations with parents and teachers, or criminal victimization.

The third major type of strain involves the loss of positively valued stimuli . This type of strain involves the loss of something valued and encompasses a wide range of undesirable events or experiences, such as the theft of valued property, the loss of a romantic relationship, or the withdrawal of parental love.

These broad categories encompass literally hundreds of potential strains. This fact complicates the testing of GST because not all strains are created equal. Some strains may have a relatively strong relationship to crime, while others have a weak relationship to crime. For example, being bullied by peers on a frequent basis is a type of strain that is expected to have a relatively strong relationship to delinquency. This type of strain is likely to be experienced as highly noxious and is likely to generate anger and desires for revenge. Further, the victim of bullying may believe that striking back at the source of strain will help to end or alleviate the strain. In contrast, strains that involve accidents, illness, that are due to natural causes, or that are associated with prosocial activities are expected to have a weak relationship to offending (see also Felson, Osgood, Horney, & Wiernik, 2012 ). These strains may involve one-time events, are not likely to be blamed on others, are not easily resolved by engaging in crime, and thus generate little pressure for criminal coping. (Note: empirical tests of GST often measure strain in terms of stressful life events, even though many such events would not be expected to have a strong relationship to offending.)

Following the initial statement of GST (Agnew, 1992 ), Agnew ( 2001 ) further specified the theory and identified those strains that are said to be most relevant to offending. These include strains that are high in magnitude (severe, frequent, of long duration, or involving matters of high importance to the individual), are seen as unjust and associated with low social control, and they can be readily resolved through crime. Strains that meet these conditions include parental rejection and abuse, harsh or excessive parental discipline, negative experiences in school (e.g., failing grades or negative relations with teachers), being the victim of bullying or other peer abuse, criminal victimization, marital problems (e.g., verbal or physical abuse), persistent unemployment or under-employment; racial discrimination, homelessness, residence in economically deprived neighborhoods, and the inability to satisfy strong desires for money, excitement, and masculine status. Research indicates that most of these strains are related to crime (for an overview, see Agnew, 2006 ).

Explaining the Relationship Between Strain and Offending

At least some of the strains listed in the preceding paragraph have been the focus of other criminological theories because they are thought to be associated with low social control (e.g., negative school experiences) or the social learning of crime (e.g., exposure to abuse or harsh physical punishment). According to GST, however, the primary reason these strains are related to crime and delinquency is because they increase the likelihood that individuals will experience negative emotions, such as anger, resentment, anxiety, and depression. These emotions are said to generate pressures for corrective active, with offending behavior being one possible response. Strained individuals may resort to crime or delinquency because it allows them to address the source of strain or because it allows them to alleviate the negative emotions that tend to accompany strain (even though criminal or delinquent responses may cause more problems in the long run). For example, individuals may attempt to escape environments that are associated with strain (e.g., running away from home or skipping school), they may attempt to satisfy desires for retaliation or revenge by striking back at the source of strain, or they may attempt to alleviate negative emotions through delinquent means, such as illicit substance use.

GST, then, is distinguished from other criminological theories by the central role it assigns to negative emotions in the etiology of offending (Agnew, 1995a ). It is also distinguished by the emphasis it places on particular strains, especially strains involving negative social relations. Certain strains that fall into this category—such as racial discrimination—have been neglected by other theories.

The emotion of anger plays a special role in GST because it is believed to be especially conducive to crime and violence. Although crime and delinquency may occur in response to other negative emotions, anger is somewhat unique in that it tends to occur when strain is blamed on others. Further, the experience of anger tends to reduce one’s tolerance for injury or insult, lowers inhibitions, energizes the individual to action, and creates desires for retaliation and revenge (Agnew, 1992 ).

Although GST highlights the role of negative effect, the experience of strain is thought to have other consequences of a criminogenic nature. The experience of chronic or repeated strain, in particular, may weaken relationships with conventional others and therefore result in low social control. It may also foster beliefs favorable to crime (e.g., the belief that crime is justified), increase the appeal of delinquent peer groups (such groups may be seen as a solution to strain), and contribute to certain traits that are conducive to crime, such as negative emotionality and low self-control (Agnew, 2006 ; Agnew, Brezina, Wright, & Cullen, 2002 ).

Explaining Differential Responses to Strain

A key criticism of classic strain theories is that they do not fully explain why only some strained individuals resort to criminal or delinquent adaptations. GST was developed with this criticism in mind (Agnew, 1992 ). The theory recognizes that strain does not automatically lead to offending behavior and that such behavior is only one possible response to strain. Typically, strained individuals pursue legal coping strategies, such as filing a complaint, turning to a friend for emotional support, or hoping for a better future. Under certain conditions, however, criminal or delinquent responses to strain are more likely to occur. GST specifies conditions that are said to increase the likelihood of deviant coping, including a lack of coping resources, a lack of conventional social support, few opportunities for conventional coping, ample opportunities for criminal coping, the existence of low social control, and a strong predisposition for crime.

To illustrate, these conditions are often faced by adolescents, which may help to explain why adolescents exhibit high rates of offending relative to other age groups in the population (Agnew & Brezina, 2015 ). Adolescents often lack conventional coping skills and resources, such as money, power, and social skills. Relative to adults, they have limited life experience to draw upon, which results in coping skills that are not fully developed. As result, adolescents are more likely to respond to strain in an immature and ineffective manner. Certain categories of youth may lack conventional sources of social support, especially young people who have poor relationships with their parents and teachers. Lacking access to caring adults, such youth may have difficulty dealing with the emotional consequences of strain in a productive manner. In the face of strain that originates in families, schools, or neighborhoods, adolescents have fewer opportunities for legal coping. Unlike adults, juveniles generally do not have the legal ability to remove themselves from these environments, nor do they have the same access to legal resources. At the same time, adolescents frequently encounter opportunities for delinquent coping, such as exposure to delinquent peers. Further, during the period of adolescence, young people experience a number of biological and social changes that are believed to reduce their levels of social control (Agnew & Brezina, 2015 ). For example, their ties to parents and teachers may weaken as a result of disputes regarding curfews, dress, homework, and privileges. As a result, they have less to lose by engaging in delinquent responses to strain. Finally, certain youth are predisposed to cope in a delinquent manner because they possess certain traits that are conducive to offending, such as being impulsive, easily upset, and quick to anger (Agnew et al., 2002 ).

Beyond Individual Differences in Offending

GST was designed primarily to explain why individuals differ in their levels of crime and delinquency. Nevertheless, Agnew and his colleagues have extended and elaborated GST in many ways, showing how the theory can also be used to explain patterns of crime over the life course, gender differences in crime, and community-level differences in crime.

Explaining Persistent Offending Across the Life Course

Although most young offenders “age out” of crime as they enter adulthood, some individuals maintain high levels of offending throughout much of the life course. These chronic, high-rate offenders typically exhibit highly aggressive behavior as young children, engage in high levels of delinquency during adolescence, and persist in serious offending as they grow older (Moffitt, 1993 ). It is important to explain this pattern of offending, as such offenders commit a disproportionate share of serious crime.

To explain persistent offending, some criminologists highlight the role of stable personality traits, such as low intelligence, impulsivity, or hyperactivity (Moffitt, 1993 ). Such traits are said to interfere with the development of strong attachments to conventional others and other stakes in conformity. These traits are linked to failure in school, unstable work histories, association with criminal and delinquent peers, and ultimately a pattern of persistent offending. GST offers a similar explanation of life-course-persistent offending but focuses special attention on the trait of “aggressiveness” (Agnew, 1997 ). Aggressive individuals can be described as having a difficult temperament—they are irritable and have a low tolerance for frustration. The trait of aggressiveness may result, in part, from chronic strains experienced in childhood, such as harsh or erratic parental discipline.

According the GST, the trait of aggressiveness helps to fuel persistent antisocial behavior for at least three reasons. First, aggressive individuals have a propensity to interpret any given situation as frustrating and to blame others for their frustration. As a result, compared to non-aggressive individuals, aggressive individuals are more likely to respond to various situations with anger and delinquent coping. Second, given their difficult temperament, aggressive individuals often provoke negative reactions from others. For example, aggressive children often frustrate their parents and are at risk of emotional and physical abuse, especially when raised by unskilled parents. Aggressive children may also frustrate their peers and teachers, leading to social rejection.

Third, aggressive individuals tend to sort themselves into environments characterized by high levels of strain. As a result of their difficult temperament, aggressive individuals have difficulty maintaining stable relationships and employment. They may end up in poor quality marriages and jobs that prove to be sources of chronic strain, and which further promote persistent high-rate offending (Agnew, 1997 ).

Explaining Gender Differences in Crime

Males are much more likely than females to engage in crime and delinquency, with the gender difference in offending being greatest for serious offenses. A variety of explanations have been offered to account for this gender gap in offending. Some criminologists argue that, relative to males, females have less freedom or opportunity to offend. For example, females are subject to higher levels of parental supervision, have higher levels of commitment to family and school, and are less likely to associate with delinquent peers. These factors are said to constrain females, limiting their ability to engage in crime. Other theorists emphasize the role of socialization, arguing that males are more likely to engage in crime because they have internalized “masculine” values that are conducive to crime and violence, such as competition and aggressiveness (Agnew & Brezina, 2015 ).

General strain theorists recognize these factors, but they offer two additional reasons for the gender gap in crime and delinquency (Broidy & Agnew, 1997 ). First, they argue that the gender gap in crime is related, in part, to the different types of strain that are experienced by males and females. The evidence in this area suggests that, on average, males and females experience the same overall level of strain. But males are more likely to experience those particular types of strain that are strongly related to crime and delinquency, such as harsh parental discipline, negative school experiences, criminal victimization, and homelessness.

Second, certain data suggest that the response to strain is gendered, with males being more likely to cope with strain in a criminal or delinquent manner. Although the reason for this gendered response is not yet clear, several possibilities exist. It is possible, for example, that males are more likely to engage in delinquent coping because they have a greater tendency to associate with delinquent peers, or because they have lower levels of conventional social support. Another possibility is that males are more likely to react to strain with emotions that are conducive to offending, such as moral outrage. It has been suggested that, in response to strain, females are more likely to blame themselves or worry about possible harm to interpersonal relationships. Females still get angry but may also have a high propensity to experience the emotions of depression and anxiety simultaneously. So females may react to strain with a complex combination of emotions that, together, are less conducive to offending.

Explaining Community Differences in Crime

GST is primarily a social psychological theory, focusing on the relationship between the individual and his or her immediate social environment. Yet Agnew ( 1999 ) argues that processes related to social psychological strain can be used to explain patterns of crime appearing at the level of schools, neighborhoods, and larger communities.

Why, for example, do some communities have especially high rates of crime and violence? Variation in crime across macro-level social units is typically explained in terms of deviant subcultures or breakdowns in social control. According to subcultural accounts, the characteristics of high crime communities (especially economic disadvantage) foster the development of subcultural orientations, including attitudes and values that are conducive to crime (e.g., Anderson, 1999 ). According to social disorganization theories, these communities have the lost the ability to control their members due, in part, to the inadequate supervision of young people (e.g., Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997 ).

In addition to subcultural orientations and breakdowns in social control, GST asserts that high-crime communities tend to suffer from a relatively high proportion and angry and frustrated residents (Agnew, 1999 ). This anger and frustration is thought to be an important source of deviant motivation and is said to be a function of severe and persistent strains. For example, young people in poor inner-city communities experience high levels of family disruption, abuse and neglect, exposure to community violence, school problems, persistent poverty, unemployment, under-employment, and struggle to achieve goals related to money and status (Brezina & Agnew, 2013 ). They also face much class and racial/ethnic discrimination, including negative experiences with the police and other representatives of the larger society (see Bernard, 1990 ).

Young people in inner-city communities may also have a tendency to cope with strain in a delinquent manner, given both a lack of coping resources and limited options for legal coping. In particular, they often lack coping resources that are available to those in wealthier communities, such as money, power, and conventional social support. They generally have less control over their lives, having difficulty removing themselves from adverse environments, and have fewer opportunities for legal coping, given poor schools and limited job opportunities. At the same time, inner-city youth often encounter numerous opportunities for criminal coping, such as gang membership and drug selling (Brezina & Agnew, 2013 ).

Furthermore, the high density of strained individuals in such communities is said to generate much interpersonal friction. It increases the likelihood that residents will interact with others who angry, upset, and potentially hostile. It also increases the likelihood that angry and frustrated individuals will encounter each other, contributing to elevated rates of crime and violence (Agnew, 1999 ).

The Empirical Validity of GST

Hundreds of studies have been published that test some aspect of GST or that apply GST to crime, delinquency, or other deviant behaviors. It is beyond the scope of this article to consider every relevant study. Instead, an attempt is made to highlight areas of research that speak to the overall validity of GST, that point to important problems or issues in the specification of the theory, or that suggest new directions for the future development of the theory.

Evidence Linking Strain to Offending

Initial tests of GST produced promising results, showing a relationship between various strains and delinquent behavior. Following the initial statement of GST (Agnew, 1992 ), Agnew and White ( 1992 ) examined the effects of various strains on delinquency, based on a large sample of adolescents. In longitudinal analyses, a summary measure of strain predicted future delinquency, even after controlling for measures of social control, delinquent peer associations, and prior delinquent behavior. The summary measure of strain indexed such factors as stressful life events, life hassles, and fights with parents. In the longitudinal analyses, however, strain did not predict drug use (although the effect was significant in cross-sectional analyses).

In another early test of GST, Paternoster and Mazerolle ( 1994 ) used data from the National Youth Survey to examine the effect of strain on a measure of general delinquency. The results are generally supportive of GST. In longitudinal analyses that controlled for levels of social control, delinquent peers, and prior behavior, they find that delinquency is predicted by negative life events, negative relations with adults, school/peer hassles, and neighborhood problems. A measure of traditional strain, which indexed the respondent’s perceived chances of going to college and getting a good job, failed to exert a significant effect on future delinquency.

Numerous additional tests of GST have produced similar results, indicating a relationship between various strains and offending behavior (for an overview, see Agnew 2006 ). Further, certain data indicate that adolescents may resort to delinquency because it allows them to alleviate the negative emotional consequences of strain, at least in the short run (Brezina, 1996 , 2000 ; Novacek, Raskin, & Hogan, 1991 ). Over the long run, however, delinquent responses to strain are likely to exacerbate problems with parents, teachers, and conventional peers.

Most empirical tests of GST have been conducted in the United States and are based on data from adolescent surveys. Several tests, however, indicate that the central propositions of GST apply to youth in other parts of the world (e.g., Bao, Haas, & Pi, 2007 ; Moon, Morash, McCluskey, & Hwang, 2009 ; Sigfusdottir, Kristjansson, & Agnew, 2012 ; but see Botchkovar, Tittle, & Antonaccio, 2009 ) and to adult populations (e.g., Jang & Johnson, 2003 ; Morris, Carriaga, Diamond, Piquero, & Piquero, 2012 ; Ostrowsky & Messner, 2005 ; Swatt, Gibson, & Piquero, 2007 ). Also, while early tests of GST typically examined the relationship between strain and general delinquency, the theory has since been applied to a variety of specific deviant behaviors. Evidence has accrued, for example, linking the experience of strain to aggressive behaviors in school, workplace violence, prison inmate misconduct, substance abuse, suicidal ideation, self-harm, and eating disorders (Brezina, Piquero, & Mazerolle, 2001 ; Hay & Meldrum, 2010 ; Hinduja, 2007 ; Morris et al., 2012 ; Piquero, Fox, Piquero, Capowich, & Mazerolle, 2010 ; Sharp, Terling-Watt, Atkins, Gilliam, & Sanders, 2001 ; Swatt et al., 2007 ).

Despite these positive results, most tests of GST have employed rather simple measures of strain. Few studies have assessed the qualities of particular strains as they are experienced by the individual. Although certain strains may be universally stressful or frustrating (e.g., hunger, homelessness, physical pain), most strains have a subjective component. Whether or not a given event or circumstance is subjectively defined as adverse is dependent on the meaning the individual attaches to it (Polizzi, 2011 ). A particular adverse event may cause intense distress for some individuals but not others, depending on their beliefs, values, life situations, and the techniques at their disposal for minimizing the emotional or cognitive significance of the event (see Leban, Cardwell, Copes, & Brezina, 2016 ).

As stated earlier, the strains that are said to be most relevant to crime and delinquency tend to be those seen as unjust and high in magnitude (severe, frequent, of a chronic nature, and of central importance to the individual). Certain data indicate that the subjective experience of strain is an important consideration in understanding the relationship between strain and offending, but studies in this area have produced mixed results. In comparison to objective measures of strain, Froggio and Agnew ( 2007 ) find that subjective measures of strain are more strongly related to offending. Highlighting the subjective evaluation of fairness, Rebellon and colleagues ( 2012 ) observe that the perceived injustice of social relations is a potent predictor of delinquency (see also Scheuerman, 2013 ). Jang and Song ( 2015 ) observe that subjective strain fully mediates the impact of objective strain on the delinquency of middle-school students. Other research, however, does not find the distinction between objective and subjective measures of strain to be consequential (Lin & Mieczkowski, 2011 ). Clearly, additional research on this issue is needed.

Evidence on Intervening Processes

As predicted by GST, a number of studies indicate that the relationship between strain and offending is partly mediated by anger, and this is especially true of studies that focus on violent behavior (e.g., Aseltine, Gore, & Gordon, 2000 ; Agnew, 1985 ; Brezina, 1998 ; Broidy, 2001 ; Hay & Evans, 2006 ; Jang & Johnson, 2003 ; Mazerolle & Piquero, 1997 , 1998 ; Mazerolle, Piquero, & Capowich, 2003 ; Moon et al., 2009 ). As described earlier, Agnew ( 2006 ) identifies other possible links between strain and offending. In addition to the generation of anger, strain is likely to have other consequences of a criminogenic nature. Strain may lead to other negative emotions, foster beliefs favorable to crime, reduce social control, and increase attraction to delinquent peers. These alternative links, however, have received less attention.

There is some evidence that negative emotions other than anger may help to account for the relationship between strain and offending, at least for certain deviant outcomes (e.g., Bao, Haas, & Pi, 2007 ; Ganem, 2010 ; Hay & Meldrum, 2010 ; Jang & Johnson, 2003 ; Kaufman, 2009 ; Piquero et al., 2010 ). Based on a national sample of African American adults, Jang and Johnson ( 2003 ) find that strain-induced anger best predicts aggression, while strain-induced depression is more strongly associated with substance use. A study by Ganem ( 2010 ) highlights the potential complexity of the linkage between strain and offending, indicating that different types of strain may produce different types of negative emotions. Further, emotions such as anger appear to promote criminal tendencies, while emotions such as anxiety and fear appear to inhibit these tendencies (see also Aseltine et al., 2000 ; Piquero & Sealock, 2004 ).

An additional level of complexity has been introduced by studies that distinguish between situation-based emotions and trait-based emotions. Theoretically, strain should generate negative emotions that arise in direct response to adverse events or situations. At the same time, certain strains—especially chronic strains experienced in early childhood—may promote the trait of aggressiveness, leading individuals to possess an angry and irritable temperament that transcends particular situations (Agnew, 1997 ). Limited evidence suggests that situation-based and trait-based emotions may operate differently, with situation-based emotions playing a larger role in mediating the relationship between recent strains and offending (Mazerolle, Piquero, & Capowich, 2003 ; Moon et al., 2009 ). In contrast, trait-based emotions—especially “angry disposition” or “negative emotionality”—may play a stronger role in moderating the relationship between strain and offending; that is, individuals who possess these traits seem more likely than others to respond to strain with antisocial behavior (see Agnew et al., 2002 ; Eitle, 2010 ). Consequently, tests of GST that fail to distinguish between situation- and trait-based emotions could be problematic.

Relatively few studies have examined intervening processes that involve factors other than emotions. Based on a national sample of adolescents, Paternoster and Mazerolle ( 1994 ) find that the effect of strain on delinquency is partly mediated by social control and association with delinquent peers. In particular, strain appears to reduce social control and increase involvement with delinquent peers, thereby resulting in elevated rates of offending (see also Brezina, 1998 ). Jang and Rhodes ( 2012 ), however, find that the effects of strain are partly mediated by social bonds and self-control, but not delinquent peers.

A study by Brezina ( 2010 ) highlights the fact that strain may have both emotional and cognitive consequences of a criminogenic nature (see also Konty, 2005 ). In a national sample of male adolescents, it was observed that angry arousal exerts both direct and indirect effects on violent behavior. Chronic anger tends to foster attitudes that favor aggression, which in turn increase the likelihood of violent offending. These findings support previous theoretical arguments that linked angry arousal to cognitive processes that promote aggression. According to Bernard ( 1990 ), angry/frustrated individuals often have difficulty trusting others, attribute hostile motives to strangers, and view aggression as appropriate or justifiable in many different circumstances (see also Agnew, 2006 ).

Evidence on Conditioning Factors

People differ in their response to strain and only some strained individuals—perhaps a small percentage of strained individuals—respond with offending behavior. According to the initial statement of GST (Agnew, 1992 ), the likelihood of a deviant response to strain is shaped or conditioned by the individual’s coping skills and resources, availability of social support, association with criminal/delinquent peers, social control, beliefs about crime, and possession of certain traits such as self-control. However, research on the conditioning effects of these factors has produced mixed results.

According to some studies, delinquent peer associations, deviant beliefs, low self-control, and other factors increase the likelihood that strain will lead to deviant outcomes (e.g., Agnew & White, 1992 ; Keith, 2014 ; Mazerolle & Maahs, 2000 ). Other studies, however, fail to observe the predicted conditioning effects (e.g., Hoffmann & Miller, 1998 ; Mazerolle & Piquero, 1997 ; for an overview, see, Agnew, 2006 ). In hindsight, these mixed results may not be surprising. As Agnew ( 2013 ) observes, the coping process is very complex:

[The] examination of the coping process is difficult. There are hundreds of coping strategies; individuals often employ several strategies, contemporaneously and over time; the strategies they employ often vary, depending on the stressors they experience and other factors. (p. 660)

To address the mixed body of results produced by empirical studies, Agnew ( 2013 ) has further specified the conditions under which a deviant response to strain is more or less likely. Given the complexity of the coping process, he now argues that a single factor examined in isolation—such as social support or association with delinquent peers—is not likely, by itself, to shape the likelihood of deviant coping. Rather, deviant responses to strain are most likely when multiple factors converge: “The choice of a coping strategy such as crime is likely influenced by the convergence of several factors, including the characteristics of the individual, the characteristics of the stressor, the appraisal of the stressor, and the circumstances surrounding the stressor” (Agnew, 2013 , p. 660).

In particular, criminal coping is said to be most likely when highly criminogenic strains are experienced by individuals who have a strong overall propensity to offend and who are in circumstances or situations in which the opportunities for legal coping are limited (Agnew, 2013 ). This population could include, for example, individuals who are low in social and self-control, belong to gangs, are strongly committed to street culture or live on the street. To advance research in this area, Agnew ( 2013 ) now recommends that quantitative studies be based on samples that contain a sizable number of individuals who possess a strong propensity to offend. In contrast, most studies that have examined conditioning factors are based on general population samples. These samples are likely to comprise mostly individuals who have a low overall propensity to offend—individuals who would be unlikely to respond to strain with crime regardless of their standing on particular variables (but see Baron, 2004 ; Leban et al., 2016 ; Morris et al., 2012 ).

In addition, Agnew ( 2006 , 2013 ) recommends that future studies make an effort to measure the overall standing of individuals on dimensions related to deviant coping, including overall availability of coping resources, total opportunities for legal coping, and general disposition to crime. Lin and Mieczkowski ( 2011 ) constructed a composite measure to index the overall standing of young people on various conditioning factors, including moral beliefs, delinquent peer associations, self-control, and self-esteem. The results of study were mixed, as this composite measure conditioned the impact of certain strains on delinquency but not others. Similar findings are reported by Jang and Song ( 2015 ) and Ousey, Wilcox, and Schreck ( 2015 ). It should be noted, however, that all three studies were based on samples of students in middle school. It is possible that these samples contained few individuals with a strong propensity to offend.

Evidence on Strain and Persistent Offending

Limited evidence indicates that GST has some potential to explain continuity and change in offending behavior. Giordano, Schroeder, and Cernkovich ( 2007 ) follow a sample of adolescents into adulthood and observe that changes in trait-based anger are associated with changes in offending even after controlling for social bonds, prior behavior, and other variables. Based on another longitudinal sample of adolescents, Eitle ( 2010 ) finds that increases in strain over time are associated with an increase in future offending, while decreases in strain promote desistance from crime. Further, the association between strain and future offending appears to be especially strong for individuals who possess an angry disposition.

Slocum ( 2010 ) examines longitudinal data on substance use and finds partial support for the GST explanation of continuity and change. The data indicate that children who obtain high scores on a combined measure of negative emotionality/low constraint tend to report elevated levels of illicit drug use during adolescence and adulthood, controlling for other relevant variables. Further, individuals who possess this trait are more likely than others to respond to strain with depression and substance use. Substance use, in turn, appears to exacerbate problems. It is associated with higher levels of stress, which promotes more substance use in the future. According to GST, negative emotionality/low constraint is partly of function of harsh or erratic parenting. In addition, GST predicts that individuals who possess this trait will tend to provoke negative reactions from others, leading to elevated levels of strain. However, these predictions were not supported.

Evidence on Gender Differences

Numerous studies have examined gender differences in the experience of strain and its emotional and behavioral consequences (e.g., Baron, 2007 ; Cheung & Cheung, 2010 ; De Coster & Zito, 2010 ; Francis, 2014 ; Hay, 2003 ; Hoffmann & Su, 1997 ; Jang, 2007 ; Jennings, Piquero, Gover, & Pérez, 2009 ; Kaufman, 2009 ; Mazerolle, 1998 ; Morash & Moon, 2007 ; Piquero et al., 2010 ; Piquero & Sealock, 2004 ). Evidence indicates that males are more likely than females to experience certain strains conducive to crime, such as violent victimization, and that this difference partly explains gender differences in offending (e.g., Hay, 2003 ).

Further, as predicted by Broidy and Agnew ( 1997 ), most studies in this area conclude that the reaction to strain is gendered. Males and females appear to react differently to strain or to the emotional consequences of strain. These differences, in turn, are linked to the gender gap in delinquent involvement. However, the exact nature of the observed gender differences varies across studies. This outcome could reflect the different populations that have been sampled across studies, which include adolescents in the general population, justice-involved youth, and adults.

Piquero and Sealock ( 2004 ) analyze data from a small sample of justice-involved youth and find that males and females generally experience the same amount of overall strain. Unexpectedly, they observe that the females in their sample exhibit higher levels of anger and depression. Strain predicted anger in both males and females, but it predicted depression in males only. Strain also predicted violence and property crime among males but not among females. Jennings and colleagues ( 2009 ) report similar results based on a study of Mexican American adolescents. They examine various individual strains and conclude that some strains affect males and females differently (see also Hay, 2003 ; Jang, 2007 ). For example, females are more likely than males to react to academic problems with anger and depression.

In contrast, based on a sample of students in middle school, De Coster and Zito ( 2010 ) find that males and females exhibit similar levels of anger, although females exhibit higher levels of depression (see also Kaufman, 2009 ). They also find that the co-occurrence of anger and depression is more common among females. In addition, they observe that the combined effects of anger and depression have criminogenic consequences but in ways not predicted by GST. Whereas Broidy and Agnew ( 1997 ) predicted that depression mitigates the criminogenic effect of anger, thereby suppressing female delinquency, DeCoster and Zito ( 2010 ) find no such mitigating effect. Among females, depression does not alter the effect of anger. Among males, however, depression exacerbates the criminogenic effect of anger. According to the authors of this study, the differential impact of emotions across gender likely reflects cultural norms regarding the proper display of emotions. In comparison to their female counterparts, angry and depressed males are more likely to engage in delinquency because the outward expression of anger and depression is consistent with masculinity norms.

Evidence Linking Strain to Community-Level Differences

Can GST explain why some communities (or other macro-level social units) have high rates of problem behavior? Only a handful of studies have tested the macro-level implications of GST, with mixed results. Consistent with GST, Brezina et al. ( 2001 ) find that schools harboring a relatively high percentage of angry students tend to have high rates of aggressive behavior, especially fights between students. They also find support for the “interpersonal friction” argument, noting that, in such schools, students in general (not just angry students) have an elevated risk of becoming involved in fights. In another multilevel study of problem behavior in schools, de Beeck, Pauwels, and Put ( 2012 ) find that a school-level measure of strain, based on negative future prospects, predicts violence but not other delinquencies. Other school-context variables (such as mean level of negative affect) exhibit little or no relationship to problem behavior. Likewise, a study by Hoffmann and Ireland ( 2004 ) produced mixed results regarding the impact of school-context variables on delinquency. Certain school-level measures (such as perceived fairness) predicted delinquency at the individual level, but others did not (such as school problems). Measures of individual-level strain, however, exerted significant effects on delinquent behavior.

Warner and Fowler ( 2003 ) assessed the ability of GST to account for rates of violence across neighborhoods. Several findings from this study are noteworthy. First, they find that neighborhood disadvantage and instability are associated with elevated levels of neighborhood strain. Second, neighborhood-level strain exerted a significant effect on violence in communities characterized by a low level of social support. Although it was anticipated that strain would have a stronger effect on violence in neighborhoods characterized by low social control, the findings did not support such a pattern. Hoffmann ( 2003 ) examined delinquent behavior across census tracks in the United States and found limited empirical support for the role of strain. In particular, rates of poverty and male joblessness predicted delinquent behavior in urban communities. Moreover, in urban communities with high rates of male joblessness, the effect of individual-level stress on delinquency was magnified.

Summary of Empirical Findings

Overall, empirical tests of GST are generally supportive of the theory’s core propositions. Measures of strain typically predict crime and delinquency, even after factoring in variables from rival crime theories. Moreover, many studies—especially those focusing on aggression—find that the effect of strain is partly mediated by anger. Research on other aspects of the theory, however, has produced inconsistent results. These mixed findings may reflect methodological challenges and the limitations of individual studies (see Mazerolle & Maahs, 2000 ). They may also reflect a need for greater theoretical specification.

It is important to recognize that GST is an evolving theoretical framework. In response to inconsistent empirical findings, Agnew ( 2001 , 2013 ) has further specified the types of strain that are relevant to offending as well as the factors that are said to condition the effects of strain on crime. The full potential of these revisions has yet to evaluated, as few studies have fully incorporated the recommended specifications. Tests of GST, however, point to other areas where further specification may be required. For instance, different types of strain may have distinct emotional consequences, leading to distinct behavior outcomes (Ganem, 2010 ). Likewise, the gender gap in offending may reflect gender differences in the experience of, and reaction to, strain, but unanticipated findings in this area of research suggest that the gendered pathways may be more complex than originally specified (De Coster & Zito, 2010 ). And initial research suggests that the application of GST to other areas of scholarly inquiry is likely to be fruitful, including, for example, research on racial/ethnic differences in crime (Brezina & Agnew, 2013 ; Kaufman, Rebellon, Thaxton, & Agnew, 2008 ) and terrorism (Agnew, 2010 ). These and other issues provide opportunities for further theoretical development and are likely to stimulate additional research on GST.

It is important to develop a more complete understanding of the relationship between strain and crime because such research may guide crime-control efforts. To the extent that strain contributes to crime, it may be possible to prevent or reduce crime by alleviating the strains that promote offending behavior, by equipping individuals with the skills they need to avoid such strains, or by reducing the likelihood that individuals will cope with strain in a criminal or delinquent manner. Examples of interventions that may have potential in this area include parenting and anger-management programs (for overviews, see Agnew, 1995b , 2006 ).

Review of the Literature and Further Sources

To fully understand GST, it is helpful to review the multiple publications that span the development and growth of the theory. A precursor to GST was published by Agnew ( 1985 ) under the title, “A Revised Strain Theory of Delinquency,” in which strain was conceptualized as the blockage of pain-avoidance behavior. A longitudinal test of the revised theory was also published (Agnew, 1989 ). This test is important because it assessed the possibility of a reciprocal relationship between strain and delinquency. The findings of the study suggest that the main direction of the casual relationship flows from strain to delinquency.

The initial statement of GST (Agnew, 1992 ), which constituted a more fully developed version of the revised theory, was published several years later under the title, “Foundation for a General Strain Theory of Delinquency.” This initial statement was followed by several revisions and extensions of GST, including articles that specified gender differences in response to strain (Broidy & Agnew, 1997 ), the macro-level implications of GST (Agnew, 1999 ), the types of strain that are most relevant to crime (Agnew, 2001 ), and that further specified the conditions under which strain will have a greater or lesser effect on crime (Agnew, 2013 ). These articles provide researchers with many helpful suggestions for testing GST. Further, familiarity with these works will help to ensure that researchers have knowledge of the latest developments in GST.

In addition, Agnew ( 2006 ) published Pressured into Crime: An Overview of General Strain Theory . This book provides a useful summary of GST, although it no longer reflects the latest developments in the formulation or testing of the theory. Readers may also be interested in a book chapter titled, “Controlling Delinquency: Recommendations from General Strain Theory” (Agnew, 1995b ), which provides an in-depth discussion of the policy implications of GST.

Agnew's general strain theory reconsidered: a phenomenological perspective

2011, International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology

Since its inception, strain theory has attempted to explore the dynamic evoked between the process of goal identification and the process of goal acquisition as this relates to subsequent criminal behavior. Over the years of its development, strain theorists have attempted to broaden the initial scope of this perspective. Robert Agnew with his general strain theory has sought to introduce a variety of other factors relative to the experience of strain and the capacity they represent concerning subsequent criminal activity. However, these recent developments have not addressed until recently, and only in somewhat limited ways, the theoretical and methodologic implications and limits of this theoretical approach. This article proposes that the way in which Agnew's formulation of general strain, particularly in its most recent conceptualization as story lines, fundamentally transforms the theoretical and methodological grounding of this approach but fails to offer a clearly articul...

Related Papers

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

robert agnew

International Journal of Business and Social Science

Gokhan Koca

Extending the studies of Merton (1938; 1957), Cohen (1955), Cloward and Ohlin (1960), Criminologist Robert Agnew has given a new impetus to a fading theory of strain. He brought a new perspective to the science of criminology by analyzing psychological literature and including the components of research on stress. Rather than focusing only on discrepancies of cultural norms, Agnew not only utilized from sociology, but also from the psychology literature. In this sense, Agnew's strain theory of crime and delinquency is not purely structural in nature. Rather, it appeals to a blend of different levels of analysis. In Agnew's opinion, the causes of strain may be found outside the structural and cultural characteristics of society. More precisely, strain does not always stem from the blockage of monetary success and achievement of middle-class status. Rather, it may also develop from social-psychological causes such as removal of a positive stimulus or presentation of a negative stimulus. As such, he showed that the causes of delinquency cannot be attributable to a particular factor. His analysis of the variables of other theories prove that the complex nature of crime and delinquency should be examined both in the social and psychological levels (Maxim, Whitehead, & Nettler, 1998).

Journal of Criminal Justice

Christopher J Schreck , Graham Ousey

ABSTRACT Important facets of the association between violent crime victimization and criminal offending remain unsettled. Drawing on key aspects of General Strain Theory, this study examined whether violent crime victimization affects overall offending proclivity as well as the character—violent vs. nonviolent—of criminal behavior. Additionally, it tested a recent theory extension positing that larger effects of violent victimization will be found among individuals with a greater confluence of criminogenic risk factors.

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

Ekaterina Bochkovar , Anastasia Kuptsevych-Timmer

Drawing on general strain theory of crime, the study employs the survey data from a random sample of 600 school students in Lviv, Ukraine, to examine how sanction risks and social bonds mediate and moderate the relationship between strain and adolescent delinquency. Findings from negative binomial regressions and the KHB decomposition procedure demonstrate that fear of sanctions and levels of social control mediate the relationships between strain and delinquency to a different degree, depending on the type of strain experienced. Results concerning conditioning effects are mixed, with only parental monitoring found to be a moderator of the strain-delinquency link. However, the direction of the interaction effect is unexpected. Future research needs to improve the specification of strain models and evaluate them in other sociocultural contexts.

Marcin Jurczyk, Ph.D.

The main aim of this work was to explore the existing correlation between variables in the scope of the strain (its types), social control, differential associations and illegal and anti-social behaviors demonstrated by youth offenders and high school students’. In total 266 young people were assessed in the age of 16 to 18 years old. This research involved two groups of adolescents: youth offenders and high school students. The results show that strain as the presentation of negative stimuli the most significantly predict an increase in the intensity of behavior violating legal and social norms among youth offenders. Data provide qualified support for the theory. The results could be used in the prevention of criminal behavior, therapy, social rehabilitation, and in criminal and social policy.

John Cochran

Ryan Spohn , Egbert Zavala

Numerous studies have documented a relationship between criminal offending and violent victimization. That is, people who commit criminal behavior are also more likely to be victimized. As such, criminological theories traditionally used to explain criminal behavior have now been applied to explain victimization. The current study examines whether Agnew’s general strain theory can explain the offender-victim overlap using a nationally representative sample of males. Results show that vicarious strain is positive and significant in predicting both victimization and perpetration. Anticipated strain was found only to be significant and positive in predicting victimization, but not perpetration. The study’s limitations and future research are discussed.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology

Since 1992, General Strain Theory (GST) has earned strong empirical support and has been applied to several key correlates of crime (e.g., age, sex, community), but researchers have yet to fully consider how GST may aid in explaining racial differences in offending. While most explanations focus on macro level and macro-micro control processes, we argue that GST complements these explanations by highlighting the emotional and motivational social psychological processes that underlie criminal behaviour, thereby filling an important theoretical gap. In particular, we argue that African-Americans are likely to experience more and qualitatively unique types of strain compared to Whites, and that these strains in turn lead to higher levels of negative emotions among African-Americans. Further, we argue that the unique social conditions in which many African-Americans live may disproportionately lead them to cope with strain and negative emotions through crime. We believe these theoretica...

Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Thomas McNulty

Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work

Thomas H Nochajski

RELATED PAPERS

Grosir Pakaian Anak Dan Dewasa

Human Reproduction

Chiara Dobrinja

María Josefina Yafar

Maja Rogulj

Claudia Pedone

Applied Vegetation Science

Fabio Attorre

Papillomavirus Research

Salud Publica Mex

Rosario Valdez-Santiago

Journal of Surgical Research

Sally Jolles

Advances in Electronic Government, Digital Divide, and Regional Development

Jonas Oliveira

Non-Destructive Testing

Francesco Bertoncini

Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics

María Pilar de Lara-Castells

dorina vereau

Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General

Nasser SAAD

Journal of Philosophy of Education

Alexis Gibbs

The Professional Medical Journal

Sumair Anwar

Molecular cancer therapeutics

The Australian journal of emergency management

Prem Chhetri

Subjectivity

Anna Hickey-Moody

BMC Public Health

Ulrike Igel

European Spine Journal

Riccardo Cecchinato

HIV/AIDS - Research and Palliative Care

Gopal Tamang

Methods of information in medicine

Yashika Tyagi

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Līga Plakane

5 Sociological Theories of Crime: Strain Theories

Tracy Meehan; Lucy Forrester; and Jaana A. Haaja

Learning Objectives

Explain the fundamental concepts of traditional strain theory and their connection to society.
Identify how traditional strain theories were adapted into General Strain Theory and be able to explain the fundamental concepts of GST.
Assess the relevance of strain theory in understanding modern social issues, such as juvenile delinquency and the strain experienced in First Nations communities.

Before You Begin

Do you think different communities have different ways to measure success? Give some examples of your thinking.
What is your idea of a ‘good life?’ How will you know that you have ‘made it’ in your life?
How do you deal with stress or disappointment? What things make you feel better?

INTRODUCTION

It will come as no surprise to you that our culture has a very specific idea of what success is: an education, a good career, a house, and a family. Maybe even a pet and an annual vacation. And all of this should be attainable with a strong work ethic, by following the rules of society. This is a standard westernised idea of success, but it is one that has become shared by many cultures all over world. Individuals may hold different values but most of our social institutions are designed to support this very narrow definition. After all, you are most likely reading this because you are a student in a university degree, hoping to graduate and find a fulfilling career that will allow you to have the kind of life you want. And there’s no shame in that; most of us fall into this category.

But what happens when society is set up in such a way that certain groups cannot achieve the agreed version of success, no matter how hard they try? How do we explain that? Classical theories of criminology, like deterrence, put much of the blame on individual level decision making. But sociologists in the 1920s and 1930s started asking how our wider cultural norms contribute to criminal behaviour. This school of criminological soon led to several new theoretical perspectives. In this chapter, we will discuss the perspectives known as strain theories. The two main theories in this chapter are: traditional strain theory, often known as anomie theory; and General Strain Theory (GST).

Traditional strain theory is a macro -level theory. This means that it strives to explain the impact of social structure and institutions on social phenomena, like crime. It is not intended to explain the experience of individuals, but rather of society. General Strain Theory is a micro -level theory. This means that it strives to explain the behaviour of individuals. It is the more common form of strain theory that we test and apply today.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Traditional strain theory is a macro-level theory, which means that it aims to provide an explanation for social level phenomena, like crime rates. It was developed by American sociologist Robert K. Merton in the early 20th century, it emerged as a ground-breaking perspective within the field of criminology. The theory itself took shape in the 1930s and 1940s, a period marked by the Great Depression and the aftermath of World War II (Akers, 1998, 2000). Merton sought to understand the relationship between societal structures and deviant behaviour, departing from earlier criminological theories that predominantly focused on individual pathology.

Born in 1910, Merton was influenced by the social and economic transformations in the United States during his youth (Akers, 1998; 2001; 2006). Merton sought to understand the relationship between societal structures and deviant behaviour. Drawing inspiration from Émile Durkheim’s concept of anomie , Merton’s strain theory revolves around the idea that social structure exerts pressure on individuals, leading to a disconnect between cultural goals and the legitimate means available to achieve them. Anomie is a term that refers to a condition of dysregulation, or breakdown of the rules, that happens in society. When this breakdown happens, people do not know the expectations and a form of social chaos can ensue (Durkheim & Coser, 1984).

In post-World War II America, there was a prevailing cultural emphasis on the “American Dream [1] ,” promoting the pursuit of material success through hard work and dedication (Durkheim, 1989; Broidy, 2001 & Agnew, 2006). This material success could be considered a cultural goal . But Merton observed that not everyone had equal access to the approved or legitimate means for achieving success. After all, not everyone can attend a prestigious school or afford a fancy car. Traditional strain theory is Merton’s explanation of what will happen to various types of societies when this breakdown occurs.

Strain theory has been influential in shaping criminological thought and has been applied to various social contexts to analyse the relationship between societal pressures, cultural expectations, and deviant behaviour. But it did not help scholars understand why individuals committed crime. Many criticised it as being too deterministic and pointed out that plenty of people in a society that is dysregulated will still follow the law. In the late 1970s, sociologist Robert Agnew [2] It is here that we see the extension of General Strain Theory, which proposed that individuals who experienced certain types of strain may commit crime.

Each of these theories is explained in detail below.

Table 5.1: Strain Theory – Timeline

Theory description, traditional strain theory.

Traditional strain theory emphasises the role of social structure in influencing individual behaviour. It underscores how unequal access to opportunities and resources can lead to strain, pushing individuals toward various forms of deviance (Agnew, 1985, 1992, 2006). Social structure, including factors like socioeconomic status, education, and employment opportunities, plays a crucial role in shaping the ways that societies or subcultures react to this unequal access. Merton proposed five reactions, or adaptations , that societies could have. Each adaptation is a way to deal with the disconnect, or disjuncture , between cultural goals and the legitimate means for achieving those goals.

Each adaptation is a response to society expectations. Figure 5.1 presents the five adaptations. The five adaptations are: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion (Akers, 1998; Agnew, 2006). Each on represents a relationship between the acceptance ( ) or rejection (-) of cultural goals and legitimate means.

Figure 5.1: Five Reactions to Anomie

Conformity is the adherence to both cultural goals and legitimate means. In a society where opportunities are readily available and accessible, individuals are more likely to conform and pursue the culturally prescribed goals through approved means. Conformity is the most prevalent response when the alignment between goals and means is intact (Agnew, 2001).

Ritualism occurs when individuals abandon the pursuit of cultural goals but continue to rigidly adhere to the institutionalised means. These individuals may follow societal norms and rules diligently, even though they no longer harbour aspirations for the original cultural goals (Kaufman et al., 2010; Akers, 2001).

When individuals face a strain between societal expectations and the means available, they may turn to innovation to achieve cultural goals. Innovation involves accepting culturally approved goals but rejecting or modifying the means to reach them. This can lead to deviant behaviours, such as engaging in criminal activities or adopting unconventional strategies to attain success (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990).

Retreatism involves rejecting both cultural goals and institutionalised means, leading individuals to withdraw from conventional societal structures. Substance abuse and vagrancy are examples of retreatist behaviours, where individuals disengage from societal norms altogether (Henry & Lukas, 2009).

Rebellion is a more proactive response to societal strain. Individuals who rebel against the existing cultural goals and means seek to replace them with alternative values and structures. This can take the form of social or political movements that challenge the established order (Agnew, 2001; Lilly & Cullen, 2007). Rebellion represents an effort to create a new system that aligns more closely with the values and goals of the dissenting group.

This video from ShortcutsTV demonstrates the five modes of adaptation.

General Strain Theory

Because traditional strain theory is a macro-level theory, it can be difficult to test or interpret. Traditional strain theory mainly focused on blocked paths to success and was mainly applied to criminal behaviour among low socioeconomic status, mostly male offenders. Critics argued that traditional strain theory was oversimplified and early research did not have empirical support (Froggio & Agnew, 2007). General Strain Theory [3] (GST) addresses these weaknesses.

In contrast to Merton’s classical strain theory, GST takes a micro-level approach. GST shifted the focus of strain from a structural explanation of crime to one rooted in the psychosocial understanding of strain (Broidy, 2001). Consequently, GST expanded the understanding of strain past just thwarted opportunities to encompass a wider range of stressors linked to strain. This perspective no longer assumes a universal cultural of shared goals, making GST more adaptable to individual variations in goals, as well as differences in class, culture and gender (Broidy, 2001). Furthermore, GST enhanced the versatility of applying strain to outcomes that include criminal behaviour and factors outside of crime and delinquency.

The heart of GST is the impact of negative relationships and the resulting psychological distress they induce. These connections may involve individuals or societal frameworks, yet in both scenarios, individuals feel they are being treated in a way that goes against their desires (Froggio & Agnew, 2007).

Agnew (1992) outlined three primary routes where negative relationships can exert influence (p. 47):

strain stemming from the actual or expected failure to achieve positively valued goals.
strain arising from the actual or anticipated loss of valued stimuli.
strain originating from the actual or anticipated exposure to undesirable stimuli.

When individuals experience these strains, one outcome is negative emotion . Negative emotion then leads individuals to come up with coping mechanisms to help alleviate those negative feelings. Coping mechanisms can be positive or negative, but one potential outcome is that people engage in crime and antisocial behaviour to deal with the negative emotion that they are feeling.

The intensity , duration , recentness , and centrality of strain play crucial roles in shaping its effects. The more severe a strain in terms of intensity, the stronger the potential impact. Particularly intense strains may reduce the perceived costs of resorting to criminal behaviour for coping (Baron, 2004). Persistent strain (duration) that occurs over an extended period (chronic stressors) or tend to exert more influence than occasional ones, especially if the ongoing or frequent strains persist without resolution (Agnew, 2001).

A white man with his hands over his head in distress. This is a black and white photo.

APPLICATIONS OF THEORY

Strain theory and offending.

Examples of strains include parental abuse, excessive parental discipline and rejection, adverse school experiences that can include failing grades or strained relationships with teachers, victimisation by bullying or peer mistreatment, experiences of criminal victimisation, marital conflicts, unemployment or underemployment, racial discrimination, residing in economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods, homelessness and the inability to fulfil the desires for wealth, excitement, and social status (Agnew, 1992, 2001; 2006).

According to GST, the stress resulting from experiencing negative emotions due to strain serves as a catalyst for engaging in antisocial behaviours as a coping mechanism (Baron, 2004; Broidy, 2001; Froggio & Agnew, 2007). Individual resources such as self-esteem, self-worth, and self-efficacy, along with personal characteristics affecting coping abilities such as intelligence, creativity, and problem-solving skills, may shape the link between strain and antisocial outcomes (Agnew, 1992; Broidy, 2001).

Strains and Adaptations: Merton’s Framework in First Nations Disadvantage

Merton’s Strain Theory provides one framework for examining the complexities of disadvantage experienced by First Nations people in Australia. This perspective enables an in-depth examination of the historical and contemporary societal factors that contribute to the challenges faced by these communities. The theory illuminates the strains experienced by First Nations individuals in Australia and the various ways in which they adapt in response. Merton’s emphasis on using legitimate means to achieve culturally accepted goals is particularly relevant for First Nations communities, whose norms and aspirations revolve around preserving cultural identity, traditions, and community well-being (Smith, 2012). However, the imposition of colonial policies and enduring effects of historical trauma have disrupted the alignment between these cultural goals and the available means for their realisation.

The history of First Nations people is characterised by dispossession, violence, and cultural assimilation, with colonial policies leaving a lasting impact on cultural continuity (Cunneen & Tauri, 2019). This historical trauma creates significant strain, disconnecting culturally accepted goals from viable means for attainment.Cultural marginalisation further compounds this strain as First Nations people navigate a society that often dismisses or misunderstands their cultural practices (Cunneen & Tauri, 2019). This strain becomes evident in the clash between cultural identities and societal expectations, compelling individuals to navigate the complexities of conforming to mainstream norms while preserving their Indigenous heritage.

Socioeconomic disparities compound these strains, as evidenced by high unemployment rates, educational and healthcare inequities, inadequate resources, lack of community connectedness, and over-representation in the criminal justice system (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2022; Dockery, 2010; Marmot, 2011).

In this context, anomie may occur because of a disjunction between culturally prescribed societal goals and the limited access to legitimate means available to First Nations communities. Anomie manifests as a complex social phenomenon, reflecting the struggles of First Nations communities in reconciling cultural identity within social structures that perpetuate disadvantage.

The interplay of these factors creates a web of strains that individuals navigate through conformity, rebellion, innovation, retreatism, and ritualism.

Case Study: General Strain Theory and Intimate Partner Violence Prevention

Eriksson and Mazerolle (2013) suggest General Strain Theory (GST) as a valuable framework to better understand the perpetration and non-perpetration of intimate partner homicide (IPH). By assessing gender-specific strains, negative emotions toward strains, and conditional factors of strains, GST not only provides insight into why men are overrepresented as perpetrators of IPH but also why some women resort to such violent acts.

Gender-Specific Strains: Men and women experience different strains leading up to an IPH. Strain experienced by male perpetrators of IPH include challenges to their control or authority, loss of the relationship (separation), forms of legal actions such as protection orders or arrest, and infidelity. For female perpetrators of IPH, strains often involve enduring abuse, restricted freedom, and threats to themselves or their children.
Negative Emotions to Strain: There are distinct differences in the emotional responses to strain between male and female perpetrators of IPH. Male perpetrators are more likely to respond to strain with negative emotions of jealousy, intense anger, and abandonment-rage, whereas female perpetrators often act out of fear or desperation. Gender-specific negative emotions stemming from strain play a crucial role in mediating the path towards violent behaviour, particularly in the context of (IPH).
Conditional Factors of Strain : Male and female perpetrators of IPH are influenced by different conditional factors that either exacerbate or mitigate the pathway from strain to violence. For male perpetrators of IPH, factors such as impulsivity, sensitivity to perceived threats, and connections with criminal peers exacerbate strain. For female perpetrators, negative reactions to strain are increased by a perceived lack of social support and limited access to essential resources.

Recognising the distinct experiences of strain that lead male and female perpetrators to commit IPH is essential for developing effective prevention strategies.

GST highlights the necessity of developing prevention programs that cater to the specific experiences and needs of men and women. By focusing on the specific strains and emotional processes that lead to violence, these intervention aims to address some of the underlying causes of IPH, fostering safer and healthier relationships.

Enhancing access to social support and legal assistance plays a pivotal role in how individuals cope with strain, making it imperative for IPH prevention initiatives to bolster community support systems, and improve access to legal and social services. Educating practitioners and the public about the relational strains that can escalate into IPH can assist in the early identification of those at risk.

Finally, the application of GST to IPH calls for ongoing research to further understand the complex interaction of strain, emotions, and violence within intimate relationships. Policymakers can use these insights to develop targeted strategies for IPH prevention, focusing on reducing strains.

THEORY CRITICISMS

Critics argue that traditional strain theory places too much emphasis on economic success as the primary goal in society. It may not fully account for individuals who have different goals or aspirations, such as achieving social recognition, personal satisfaction, or community involvement, which may not align with conventional success as defined by society (Bernard, 1984). They also argue that it does not adequately address cultural variations in goals and means as different cultures could have different definitions of success, and what constitutes strain and deviance can also vary significantly across societies (Briody, 2002; Jensen, 2020).

Another criticism is that strain theories offer a simplistic explanation for deviant behaviour. While GST explains how individuals might turn to deviance when they cannot achieve success through legitimate means, the theory does not account for the diversity of deviant behaviours or the complex motivations behind them (Briody, 2002). Merton’s Strain Theory assumes a universal pursuit of success and conformity to cultural goals. There is the argument that these theories primarily focus on explaining street-level crimes and neglect aspects of white-collar crimes and elite deviance. It does not account for how individuals with privileged access to resources may engage in deviant behaviours or evade punishment (Bernard, 1984; Kornhauser, 1978).

THE FUTURE OF THE THEORY

As with many criminological theories, strain theories will be put to the test with emerging technologies and emerging crimes that come as the result of these new ways to communicate and interact. Recent research with cybercriminals (Dearden et al., 2021) found that high levels of anomie was correlated with increased cybercrime activity. Even in cyberspace, economic strain continues to affect individuals’ behaviours and choices.

Many people have raised concerns that the post-COVID world has led to more loneliness and relationship breakdown. Could this be a sign of increased anomie? As economic stress takes its toll on younger generations, will new structural goals emerge? What will they be?

Strain theories provide a framework to understand the complex relationship between societal pressures and criminal behaviour. They suggest that individuals may resort to deviance when confronted with a disjuncture between societal expectations and the legitimate means available to achieve them, leading to a state of anomie. By identifying structural strains as catalysts for criminal conduct, traditional strain Theory sheds light on the societal roots of deviant behaviour. General Strain Theory offers an explanation for how these strains may affect individuals and individual decision making. These theories provide ongoing explanations about the interplay of societal structures and individual responses to strain, contributing significantly to our understanding of the dynamics of criminal behaviour within a broader sociological context.

Check Your Knowledge

Discussion questions.

How does the concept of “anomie” relate to Merton’s Strain Theory, and why is it important in understanding deviance?
Merton’s theory suggests that American society places a high value on success and the “American Dream.” How do you think this holds up in modern day Australia?
What is the relationship between negative emotion and crime/delinquency? Can you think of examples of negative emotions that you think would be more likely to lead to antisocial behaviour?

Agnew, R. (1989). A longitudinal test of the revised strain theory. J ournal of Quantitative Criminology , 5 (4), 373–387.

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology , 30 (1), 47–88.

Agnew, R. (1997). S tability and change in crime over the life course: A strain theory explanation. In T. P. Thornberry (Ed.), Developmental theories of crime and delinquency (Vol. 7, pp. 101–132). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 38(4), 319–361.

Agnew, R. (2006). Pressured into crime: an overview of general strain theory (1st ed.). Roxbury Pub.

Akers, R. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance . Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Akers, R. (2000). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, and application. Los Angeles: Roxbury.

Baron, S. W. (2004). General strain, street youth and crime: A test of Agnew’s revised theory, Criminology , 42(2), 457-483.

Bernard, T. J. (1984). Control Criticisms of Strain Theories: An Assessment of Theoretical and Empirical Adequacy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21 (4): 353–372. doi : 10.1177/0022427884021004005

Broidy, L. M. (2001). A test of general strain theory. Criminology . 39( 1): 9–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00915.x. ISSN 0011-1384

Broidy, L. M., & Agnew, R. (1997). Gender and crime: A general strain theory perspective. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34 (3), 275–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427897034003001

Cunneen, C., & Tauri, J. M. (2019). Indigenous peoples, criminology, and criminal justice. Annual Review of Criminology , 2 , 359–381

Dearden, T. E., Parti, K., & Hawdon, J. (2021). Institutional anomie theory and cybercrime—cybercrime and the American dream. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , 37 (3), 311–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/10439862211001590

Dockery, A. M. (2010). Culture and wellbeing: The case of Indigenous Australians. Social Indicators Research , 99 , 315-332.

Durkheim, É., & Coser, L. A. (1984). The division of labor in society . (W. D. Halls, Trans.). Free Press.

Durkheim, É., Spaulding, J. A., & Simpson, G. (2002). Suicide: a study in sociology (Ser. Routledge classics). Routledge.

Eriksson, L., & Mazerolle, P. (2013). A general strain theory of intimate partner homicide. Aggression and violent behavior , 18 (5), 462-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2013.07.002

Froggio, G., & Agnew, R. (2007). The relationship between crime and “objective” versus “subjective” strains. Journal of Criminal Justice , 35 (1), 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2006.11.017

Jensen, G. F. (2020). Salvaging structure through strain: A theoretical and empirical critique. In The legacy of anomie theory (pp. 139–158). Routledge.

Kaufman, J. M., Agnew, R., & Henry, S. (2010). Anomie, strain and subcultural theories of crime . Taylor and Francis.

Kornhauser, R. (1978). Social sources of delinquency: an appraisal of analytic models . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T., & Ball, R. A. (2007). Criminological theory: context and consequences (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Marmot, M. (2011). Social determinants and the health of Indigenous Australians. Medical Journal of Australia , 194 , 512–513. doi: 10.5694/j .1326-5377.2011.tb03086.x

Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies (2nd ed.). Zed Books.

The American Dream as a term has become a reflection of many of the goals that occupy Westernised society, including things like financial security, a house in the suburbs, and a stereotypical family. ↵
Interested in learning more about Professor Robert Agnew and his contributions to criminology? Check out his interview with Professor Timothy Brezina as part of the Oral History Project of the American Society of Criminology . ↵
For an in-depth discussion about General Strain theory given by Professor Agnew, check out a recent lecture at the University of Tampa. ↵

a condition of instability resulting from a breakdown of standards and values or from a lack of purpose or ideals.

Developed by Robert Agnew, General Strain Theory (GST) states that individuals engage in criminal behaviour due to experiences of strain or stress. GST identifies several sources of strain, including the failure to achieve positively valued goals, the removal of positively valued stimuli, and the presentation of negative stimuli. These strains lead to negative emotions, which may prompt individuals to engage in crime as a coping mechanism.

Perspectives that focus on large-scale social processes, structures, or phenomena. Macro-level studies might examine how societal-level factors, such as economic conditions, cultural norms, or legal systems, contribute to crime rates or patterns of deviance.

small scale, involving small quantities; when used in the social sciences, usually referring to individual level descriptions

The objectives, values, and interests that a society or culture deems desirable and worthy of pursuit. In the context of strain theories, the emphasis is often on material success and wealth as primary cultural goals.

The socially approved ways or methods of achieving cultural goals, such as education and employment. Strain theories often discuss the accessibility or availability of legitimate means to all members of society.

The ways individuals respond to the strain resulting from the disjuncture between cultural goals and the availability of legitimate means to achieve them. Robert Merton outlined five modes of adaptation: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion.

The gap or misalignment between cultural goals and the legitimate means available to achieve them, leading to strain and potentially prompting deviant responses.

An adaptation where individuals accept both the cultural goals and the legitimate means of achieving them, even when they experience strain.

Ritualism occurs when individuals abandon the cultural goals but rigidly adhere to the legitimate means, often out of a sense of obligation or habit.

Innovation involves accepting cultural goals but using illegitimate or socially unapproved means to achieve them, often associated with criminal behaviour.

Retreatism describes rejecting both cultural goals and legitimate means, leading to withdrawal from societal expectations, which can manifest in drug addiction or vagrancy.

Rebellion involves rejecting both existing cultural goals and means and substituting them with alternative goals and means, aiming to create societal change.

A central concept in General Strain Theory, referring to the adverse feelings (such as anger, frustration, or depression) that result from experiencing strain.

The strength or magnitude of the strain experienced by an individual, which can influence the likelihood of resulting in criminal behaviour.

The length of time an individual is exposed to strain, with prolonged exposure potentially increasing the risk of deviance.

How recently strain has been experienced by an individual, with more immediate strains having a potentially greater impact on behaviour.

How central or significant the source of strain is to the individual's life, with more central strains having a stronger effect on behaviour.

Strategies or methods individuals use to deal with strain and negative emotions. Effective coping can reduce the likelihood of engaging in criminal behaviour as a response to strain.

Introduction to Criminology and Criminal Justice Copyright © 2024 by Tracy Meehan; Lucy Forrester; and Jaana A. Haaja is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

PSYCH 424 blog

Applying strain theory to the crime epidemic in chicago.

In recent years, incidences of violent crime and homicide in Chicago, Illinois have risen exponentially. According to the Chicago Police Department (2017), during the past 12 months 27,719 violent crimes have been reported, including 705 homicides. During 2016, the rate of homicide rose nearly 50 percent, with 90 murders in the month of August alone (Davey, 2016). The United States Census Bureau (n.d.) reports that the number of individuals living in poverty during 2011 through 2015 in Chicago was 22.3% and that the area is densely populated with 11,841.8 people per square mile in the city. As of 2016, over 50% of Chicago residents are minorities (Suburban Stats, n.d.). The significance of this information will be discussed through the lens of strain theory.

CHICAGO, IL. USA. September 2014

The premise of strain theory is that a something or someone in a person’s life is causing the strain that leads them to commit a crime in order to alleviate that strain (Agnew, 2001). One such strain is real or perceived injustice . Whether the unjust situation is a result of their own actions or hundreds of years of systematic oppression, a person who engages in criminal behavior may rationalize their actions by considering that they themselves have been mistreated. Though the days of slavery are in the past and we are no longer living in the Civil Rights Era of the 1960s, racial injustice continues to exist and is a source of discontent for many people in Chicago and other areas, including criminals.

Another factor is the magnitude of the strain, which refers to how impactful the crime is in comparison to the consequences of not committing that crime (Agnew, 2001). For example, robbing an individual may seem like a low-level crime that isn’t likely to have a lasting effect on that person but, without the money that the criminal obtains from the robbery, they may lose their homes, vehicles, ability to care for their children, or something else that will have long-term consequences for them. As mentioned earlier, 22.3% of Chicago lives in poverty (United States Census Bureau, n.d.), which means that financial strain is a major, long-lasting strain on many individuals. The criminal may feel that financial strain can be remedied, at least in the short-term, by committing robbery or theft.

Low social control is another element of strain theory, which concerns individual circumstances that a person has little or no control over, such as lack of job opportunities and available housing (Agnew, 2001). As previously stated, poverty levels in Chicago are high, and the city is densely populated. One can surmise that, with many people vying over available and affordable living spaces in such a small area, there will be some who are cannot obtain a residence. The average cost of rent per year is approximately $11,580 and home mortgages cost $22,308, while the average income is $29,486. The discrepancy between income and cost of living, which are largely out of a person’s control, are likely to cause strain that cannot easily be alleviated through legal means. The notion that meritocracy, defined by Schneider, Gruman, and Coutts (2012) as the notion that hard work will yield equal and fair results for all who work hard, is simply not accurate all of the time. Therefore, this type of strain could motivate an individual to commit crimes such as robbery and theft in order to get money to pay for the cost of living when their occupations fail to provide enough financial stability.

The final strain is pressure or incentive to engage in criminal activity in order to cope . Anderson (2009, as cited in Agnew 2001), suggests that inner-city communities may engage in criminal coping as a response to conflicts within the community and with police. In such a situation, law enforcement may not be able to help these individuals solve this problem through legitimate channels, so they take matters into their own hands. For them, criminal coping is the only way to deal with this problem. The matter of disrespectful treatment harkens back to topics of injustice and high-magnitude strains, since the situation involves unjust treatment with highly impactful consequences. Therefore, people may engage in criminal activity in order to resolve the issue of someone mistreating them by violently attacking or even killing another.

In the city of Chicago, violent crime is an extensive problem that most certainly needs to be addressed. One obvious solution is incarceration, but it is expensive and often ineffective. Prisons, jails, probation, and parole services cost the United States $81 billion annually (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017). Additionally, in the United States, up to 58 percent of violent offenders are arrested for a similar crime within 5 years of being released from prison, with the highest incidence of reincarceration being African American males (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2014). Recent reports show that number is even higher in the city of Chicago, with over 87 percent of murder offenders having been arrested prior to committing homicide (Chicago Police Department, 2012). If incarceration is not effective, what other courses of action may be taken to deter violent crime in Chicago?

Considering Agnew’s (2001) strain theory, there are several potential strains that are complex, and there will be no simple solutions. Poverty, low job and housing availability, and institutionalized racial oppression are not problems that can be solved overnight, if ever at all. The strain of pressure or incentive to engage in criminal activity, particularly the unwillingness to contact police about disputes, may be dealt with in several ways. First, law enforcement officials may benefit from diversity training both prior to employment and periodically throughout their tenure. They may also gain the confidence of residents by interacting with them outside of regular police calls. Contact hypothesis (Schneider, Gruman & Coutts, 2012) suggests that prejudice can be remedied when two groups work together, as equals, to achieve a common goal. Police and neighborhood residents could take part in fund raisers to help pay for improvements in their community that would benefit regular citizens as well as law enforcement, so they would be cooperating with one another to achieve a common goal. Since the perception of equality is sufficient, law enforcement could dress in civilian clothing for fund raisers and act as partners rather than authority figures. These positive interactions could help them understand one another better and foster unity between law enforcement and residents. Additionally, if Chicago residents feel confident that law enforcement will work with them rather than having to rely on resolving conflicts on their own, this may help to alleviate some of the strain of perceived racial injustice.

The rate of violent crime in Chicago is staggering, and the loss of life is great. Through understanding and implementing appropriate strategies, perhaps progress can be made.

References:

Chicago Police Department CLEARMAP – Crime Summary. Retrieved March 10, 2017, from http://gis.chicagopolice.org/CLEARMap_crime_sums/startPage.htm#

Davey, M. (2016, September 1). Chicago Has Its Deadliest Month in About Two Decades. New York Times. Retrieved March 10, 2017, from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/02/us/chicago-august-homicides.html

United States Census Bureau QuickFacts: Chicago city, Illinois. (n.d.). Retrieved March 11, 2017, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/IPE120215/1714000

Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency . Journal of research in crime and delinquency , 38(4), 319-361.

Suburban Stats: Population Demographics for Chicago, Illinois in 2016 and 2017 (n.d.). Retrieved March 9, 2017, from https://suburbanstats.org/population/illinois/how-many-people-live-in-chicago

Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2012). Applied social psychology: understanding and addressing social and practical problems. Los Angeles: Sage.

Wagner, P., & Rabuy, B. (2017, January 25). Following the Money of Mass Incarceration. Retrieved March 10, 2017, from https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/money.html

Bureau of Justice Statistics: 3 in 4 Former Prisoners in 30 States Arrested Within 5 Years of Release. (2014, April 22). Retrieved March 11, 2017, from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rprts05p0510pr.cfm

Chicago Police Department 2011 Chicago Murder Analysis. (2012). Retrieved March 10, 2017, from http://home.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/2011-Murder-Report.pdf

Ortiz, C. J. (2014). [Untitled photo of Chicago, IL. USA]. September 2014. Retrieved from http://projects.aljazeera.com/2014/chicago-homicides/ortiz_photos.html

[Untitled photo of police fundraiser]. Retrieved from https://www.pinterest.com/pin/316870523753045552/

This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 15th, 2017 at 6:31 pm and is filed under Uncategorized . You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment , or trackback from your own site.

I really liked reading your post! Last year or so, when there was a lot of news coverage of the often violent and destructive protests after the string of police shootings of black citizens, my mom commented on how “stupid” the people participating were. She couldn’t understand why anyone would engage in that behavior. I didn’t know about string theory then, but what I explained to her was very similar in nature. First I examined why we think people might act in that manner– well, they were angry. When I’m angry or frustrated, my first thought is that I want to get violent. Luckily, I am lucky enough to have many other healthy, legal options of releasing my anger. If I didn’t have those options, what kind of behavior would I engage in? What if I wasn’t raised in an environment where I learned that violence is wrong? Many of the people who were protesting were raised that violence solves problems, and when they are angry or sad or feeling any other type of emotion that is not positive, they allow their anger to get the best of them and behave in a way that my family can’t understand. They can’t understand because they have never been in a position where their loved ones were being killed in senseless acts of violence, whether it was by others in the neighborhood or police officers. Police officers in my neighborhood are friends. Police officers in their neighborhoods are not.

Even things we take for granted, like calling the police if we fear we are in danger, are not realistic options to others because it may be the police they are in danger of. Or they will be called a snitch and put themselves, their families and children, in even more danger by “just calling the police.”

We don’t expect someone raised in another country to arrive here and know how to speak English– they weren’t raised around that language so how could they know it? In the same sense, we can’t expect people raised in different cultures to tackle all obstacles the same way. Just as we can’t teach others to learn English without first being able to speak their language, we can’t help others who are not as fortunate* without attempting to understand their lives and then dealing with the problems they face in that context.

*I’m using fortunate to mean related to poverty and socioeconomic status, not race or any other marker.

Wow! This is a well written and well thought out post. I was interested in Strain theory after reading your post and I did a little research. I found that strain theory is not just applied to the criminal justice system, it can be applied to many other aspects of our daily lives. A 2015 study of Korean adolescents found that academic stress was positively associated with internet addiction and negative emotions. They found that higher stress levels led to more intense negative emotions which correlated with higher rates of internet addiction. This follows the model of strain theory where stress causes negative emotions which causes problem behaviors. It is interesting to see that this does not just apply to deviant or criminal behavior, it can apply to something as mundane as academics and school work. This can help us understand the emotions felt by those who commit crime as a result of stress like those mentioned in your post.

A 2017 study of Korean adolescents found that regardless of whether the strain is being measured as subjective or objective, teacher’s punishment, gender discrimination and victimization have a positive effect on delinquent behavior. Interestingly, the study found no effect of situational anger or depression on delinquency. This finding is in direct opposition to Agnew’s findings as stated in your post. Researchers noted that this potentially means that the three measured variables (teacher punishment, gender discrimination and victimization) do have their own independent effects on delinquency separate from negative emotion. The findings did however support Agnew’s finding that the number of overall risk factors do have a significant effect on delinquency. This study can also help us understand delinquent behavior in places like Chicago especially under situations of low social control.

I would also like to draw a parallel between the points you made in your post and my previous blog post on Hurricane Katrina. I spoke about social mobility. In the case of the Ninth Ward in New Orleans, before Katrina, there were extremely low levels of social mobility. This meant that people who were born in that neighborhood were extremely likely to live in that neighborhood once they became independent of their parents. There were very few residents who became upwardly mobile. These circumstances can increase the feeling of injustice among the community and the magnitude of the strain. As you pointed out, low social control increases motivation for deviant behavior.

I agree that incarceration is not the solution, rehabilitation should be the goal. The high recidivism rate alone shows that incarceration does not work. Unfortunately the concept of rehabilitating criminals is so broad that it is hard to tell where to start. Should we find them jobs? Educate them? Something else? Unfortunately the rise of the prison-industrial complex and lack of funding for social programs makes any sort of change difficult of not impossible. I do like your suggestions about diversity training and building rapport with residents. Those seem like reasonable and easy to implement interventions. It seems like such a small step but every small step counts towards a bigger goal.

Jun, S., & Choi, E. (2015). Academic stress and Internet addiction from general strain theory framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 282-287. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.001

Byongook, M., Morash, M., (2017). A Test of General Strain Theory in South Korea. Crime & Delinquency, doi: 10.1177/0011128716686486

As a resident in downtown Chicago, I very much appreciate your post. I live on the north side of Chicago, which has lower rates of crime, particularly violent crime than in other more marginalized areas of the city, but it is still prevalent. In the last week, there has been three instances of sexual assault and robbery with a weapon within a mile radius of where I live. It is something that has made the women in my area fearful, as one of the attacks happened at 8:30 PM on a Thursday evening. Aside from the very real racial injustice, as shown by the police shooting of Laquan McDonald, I have even seen peers experience racial injustice. One of my old high school classmates is a minority, but he is also an upstanding citizen and fairly successful in business. Regardless of the fact that he has nothing on his record, he has been pulled over twice in the suburbs of Chicago for seemingly ridiculous reasons. The first time, he was pulled over because the police suspected him of stealing a car. It was his own car. The second time he had picked up some money that his nephew owed him for red light camera fines that were issued to my friend’s car. The policeman originally explained that he was pulling him over for turning off his turning signal too early during a lane change, but then shifted into explaining that he witnessed him exchanging something for money. My guess is the policeman had fallen victim to confirmation bias in that he had seen some evidence of “exchanging something for money,” except for the fact that there was never an exchange. The policeman never noticed that my friend never gave anything to his nephew. That would disconfirm his hunch. The police officer then proceeded to search my friend’s car, only to turn up with nothing, and then dismiss my friend by telling him to be more careful when changing lanes because he did not give other motorists enough of an indication that he was changing lanes. I wish this was embellished, but it isn’t. My friend had the entire interaction on camera. Just from these instances, I can fully understand how the strain theory you present does a good job of explaining how people could rationalize criminal actions.

Along with your intervention suggestions aimed at increasing the perceived equality between police and Chicago residents, I believe it would also be beneficial to incorporate intervention and prevention efforts focusing on youth who live in at-risk areas for crime in Chicago. One such intervention is BAM. BAM, or Becoming a Man, is a cognitive behavioral therapy program that has been carried out in Chicago (Heller, Shah, Guryan, Ludwig, Mullainathan, & Pollack, 2015). The intervention uses activities which focus on increasing the ability to “slow down and reflect” on “automatic thoughts” (Heller et al., 2016). The program has reduced total arrests, violent-crime related arrests, readmission rates to juvenile detention facilities, and increased graduation rates. I believe part of the reason these interventions have shown promise is by breaking down associative pathways in the brain (Schneider et al., 2012). Since injustice, low social control, and coping with criminal activity are all linked to mental strain which increases criminal activity, those factors can serve as priming agents to criminal behavioral outcomes. For example, we can say a memory of injustice is a node that is related to criminal behavior. If that node is activated beyond its threshold, which is likely to be intense in Chicago based on the frequency and prevalence of injustice, then the node will fire and increase the likelihood of criminal behavior to occur. By using cognitive behavioral therapy to consider “whether a situation could be construed differently,” the person is disrupting the associative pathways in the brain (Heller et al., 2015).

Heller, S. B., Shah, A. K., Guryan, J., Ludwig, J., Mullainathan, S., & Pollack, H. A. (2015). Thinking, Fast and Slow? Some Field Experiments to Reduce Crime and Dropout in Chicago. The National Bureau of Economic Resources. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w21178

Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., and Coutts, L. M. (Eds.) (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Applying Social Psychology to the Media (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN 978-1412976381

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Merton’s Strain Theory of Deviance and Anomie in Sociology

Charlotte Nickerson

Research Assistant at Harvard University

Undergraduate at Harvard University

Charlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

On This Page:

Key takeaways

Social inequality can create situations where people experience tension (or strain) between the goals society says they should be working toward (like financial success) and the legitimate means they have available to meet those goals.
According to Merton’s strain theory, societal structures can pressure individuals into committing crimes. Classic Strain Theory predicts that deviance is likely to happen when there is a misalignment between the “cultural goals” of a society (such as monetary wealth) and the opportunities people have to obtain them.
Responding to heavy criticism of Classic Strain Theory, sociologists Robert Agnew, Steven Messner, and Richard Rosenfeld developed the General Strain Theory. This predicts that various strains (such as violence and discrimination) create negative feelings which, when there are no other viable options for coping, lead to deviance.
Modern strain theories evolved from studies of “anomie,” or normlessness. The French sociologist Emile Durkheim was the first to write about anomie. In his works, The Division of Labor in Society (1893) and Suicide (1897), Durkheim hypothesized that groups and social organizations are primary drivers of misconduct.
Principally, Durkheim claimed that a breakdown in societal norms — a result of rapid social change — made it so that societal institutions could no longer regulate individuals well.
For example, in a society where economic norms become unclear — there are weak or non-existent authorities to tell workers what they can or cannot do — aspirations become limitless, and anomie and deviant behavior (such as crime) result.

An image of the flag of the USA with a portion torn off at the bottom where the words 'American Dream' are found

Merton’s Theory of Deviance

Building off of Durkheim’s work on anomie , Merton (1957) was the first person to write about what sociologists call strain theory. To Merton, anomie was a condition that existed in the discrepancy between societal goals and the means that individuals have to achieve them.

Merton noticed that American society had high rates of crime and proposed that this was because the achievement of the American Dream — wealth attainment — was deeply ingrained by Americans, even those for whom factors such as race and class had made it highly improbable that they would ever achieve large monetary success.

Holding this cultural value in high regard, they turn to illegitimate means of obtaining wealth, becoming criminals in the process. The discrepancy or strain between the aspirations and the means of achieving them became known as “strain theory.”

Implicit in Robert Merton’s approach is that the factors that lead to order and disorder in a society (such as crime versus the order of social norms) are not mutually exclusive and that cultural values that have desirable functions often contain or produce undesirable consequences (Hagen & Daigle, 2018).

Five Responses to Strain

“The extreme emphasis on the accumulation of wealth as a symbol of success in our own society militates against the completely effective control of institutionally regulated modes of acquiring a fortune. Fraud, corruption, vice, crime, in short the entire catalogue of proscribed behavior becomes increasingly common…” (Merton, 1938, p.59).

Society’s emphasis on financial success and materialism through the mythology of the “American Dream” can be stressful for those whose chances of realizing that dreams are limited (Messner & Rosenfeld, 2012).

The rewards of conformity are available only to those who can pursue approved goals through approved means. Any other combination of means and goals is deviant in one way or another.

Merton argued that individuals at the bottom of society could respond to this strain in a number of ways. Different orientations toward society’s goals and differential access to the means to achieve those goals combine to create different categories of deviance.

Conformity : individuals are following a societal goal through legitimate means. Although a conformist may not necessarily achieve the societal goal, he has enough faith in society to follow legitimate means.

For example, a student who is going to school to advance a professional career is conforming, as he is following the American cultural value of success through an approved means (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey 2016).

Innovation : the individual shares the cultural goal of the society but reaches this goal through illegitimate means. Thieves – who share the cultural goal of wealth obtainment but do so through breaking the law (such as drug dealing or embezzlement), are innovators.

Ritualists : individuals who have given up hope of achieving society’s approved goals but still operate according to society’s approved means. A member of middle management, for example, who accepts that they will never progress but stays in their position is a ritualist.

Retreatists (like dropouts or hermits): individuals who have rejected both a society’s goals and the legitimate means of obtaining them and live outside conventional norms altogether.

Drug addicts and figures such as Chris McCandleless — an Emory University graduate found dead in Alaska after attempting to reject capitalism, hitchhike north, and live off the land — a retreat from both societal rule and societally-approved means (Krakauer 2018).

Rebellion exists outside of Merton’s system altogether. Rebels aim to replace societal goals with those of their own and devise their own means of achieving them.

The most obvious examples of rebellion are terrorist organizations, which attempt to advance a goal, typically political, through means such as violence (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey 2016)

Criticism of Merton’s Strain Theory

Merton’s strain theory became the basis of much criminal sociology in the 1950s and 1960s but received substantial and damaging criticism.

Writers such as Hirschi (1969), Johnson (1979), and Kornhauser (1978) have argued that Merton’s theory is not supported empirically; however, others (such as Farnworth and Lieber, 1989) argue that it does.

Direct evidence for Merton’s strain theory, though sparse, is conflicting. Some research finds that there are not particularly high delinquency rates between those with the greatest gap between aspirations and expectations — those with low aspirations and low expectations had the highest offense rates.

However, others have shown support for this hypothesis (Agnew et al. 1996; Cullen & Agnew 2003).

Outside of empirical measurement, criticisms of Merton’s strain theory emphasize Merton’s assumption that the U.S. uniformly commits to materialistic goals when, in reality, the U.S. has highly pluralistic and heterogeneous cultural values (people tend to set themselves a variety of goals).

For example, people might prioritize helping others less fortunate than themselves (such as teachers or nurses) or striving for a healthy work-life balance over material success (Valier, 2001).

Sociologists have also criticized Merton’s emphasis on criminality in lower classes, failing to examine why elites break laws, such as corporate and white-collar criminals (Taylor et al., 1973).

Lastly, the theory emphasizes monetary and not violent crimes and brings up the question: If Merton is correct, why does the U.S. have lower property crime rates than many other developed countries? (Hagen & Daigle, 2018).

Some have attempted to revise Merton’s strain theory. One such revision introduces the concept of “relative deprivation” — those who have less in comparison to those around them have higher rates of criminality.

Others have argued that adolescents pursue a variety of non-monetary goals, such as popularity, grades, athletic prowess, and positive relationships with parents (Agnew et al., 1996; Cullen & Agnew, 2003; Hagen & Daigle, 2018).

Agnew’s General Strain Theory

General Strain Theory’s core is that individuals who experience stress or stressors often become upset and sometimes cope with crime (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

According to General Strain Theory, strain increases crime because it leads to negative emotions such as anger, frustration, depression, and fear.

Individuals want to do something to correct these emotions, and their circumstances may make it so that committing a crime is an individual’s most accessible option for coping (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

These negative emotions may also lower the barriers to crime. For example, angry people often have a strong desire for revenge (Agnew 2006).

Agnew (1985) argues that delinquency is most common among those experiencing negative life events , such as divorce or financial problems (Hagen & Daigle, 2018).

He also argues that delinquency comes from an inability to avoid painful environments – such as a school environment where there are interaction problems with teachers.

This creates negative affect, and delinquency becomes a means of obtaining what one has been prevented from obtaining (instrumental), retaliation, or escapism (Hagen & Daigle 2018).

Consequently, there are three types of strain, according to Agnew (Agnew & Brezina, 2019):

Strain from people losing something they value. For example, their money could be stolen, a friend may die, or a romantic partner may leave them.
Strain from being treated in an adverse or negative way, such as being verbally or physically abused.
Strain from people being unable to achieve their goals: for example, being unable to obtain the money or respect that they want.

General Strain Theory differentiates between strains on two different axes: objective vs. subjective strain and experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strains.

Objective strain happens because of events and conditions that most people in a given group dislike, while subjective strain results from events and conditions disliked by one particular person or the particular persons being studied. This is an important distinction because the negativity of an experience can differ radically between individuals.

For example, one person may call divorce the worst experience of their life, while another may consider it a cause for celebration (Agnew & Brezina, 2019; Agnew, 2006).

Most researchers ask about objective levels of strain — whether or not individuals have experienced events that researchers assume are negative — however, it is important to consider that some so-called negative events can be positive to certain individuals and vice-versa (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

Agnew (2002) also differentiates between experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strain. Experienced strains are strains directly experienced by someone. Vicarious strains are strains experienced by others, often those that the individual feels protective toward.

Finally, anticipated strains are strains that individuals expect to experience, especially in the near future.

Examples of Strain

However, General Strain Theory does not consider negative emotions to be the only factor that increases crime in trained individuals.

Strain can reduce levels of social control, such as how much someone values conformity and the belief that crime is wrong.

When strain comes from negative treatment from those in authority — such as parents, teachers, employers, and the police — this can decrease the individual’s stake in conformity and conventional society.

Rather than conforming to traditional ideas of social controls , strained individuals tend to adopt a values system that minimizes concern for others and prioritizes self-interest (Agnew & Brezina 2019; Brezina & Agnew 2017; Konty, 2005).

Strain can also encourage the social learning of crime. A student who is bullied can be regularly exposed to models of aggression, and chronically employed individuals living in communities where there is little room for economic opportunity may belong to groups that believe theft and drug dealing are acceptable.

The strains most likely to result in crime are those that are high in magnitude, that are seen as unjust, strains associated with low social control — such as parental rejection — and strains that create a pressure or incentive to cope criminally — such as a desperate need for money (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

Many sociologists have researched which strains are the most likely to cause crime (such as Arter, 2008, Baron & Hartnagel, 1997, and Ellwanger, 2007), and Agnew (2002) compiles a list of these strains:

Familial : parental rejection, child abuse and neglect, marital problems, use of humiliation, threats, screaming, and physical punishments.
School : low grades, negative student-teacher relationships, bullying, and otherwise abusive peer relationships.
Economic : Work that involves unpleasant tasks, little autonomy, low pay, low prestige, and limited opportunities for advancement; unemployment; homelessness (which combines a desperate need for money with frequent conflicts and criminal victimization); residence in poor urban areas.
Being the victim of a crime
Discrimination based on factors such as race, gender, and religion

Some sociologists, such as De Coster and Kort Butler (2006) have found that strains in certain life domains — such as family, school, and peer groups — are especially related to delinquency in that domain (Agnew & Brezina, 2019).

Langton (2007) found that general strain theory is able to explain certain types of upper-class “white-collar crimes” (such as tax fraud) but that Agnew’s theory cannot generalize to all corporate crimes.

Indeed, Langton suggests, the types of strain and negative emotions experienced by white-collar workers may differ from those of other populations.

Not all individuals respond to stress with crimes.

For example, someone can cope with living in a poor urban area by moving away, a lack of financial resources by borrowing money, or low grades by studying more effectively.

Nonetheless, General Strain Theory outlines a few factors that make criminal coping more likely (Agnew & Brezina 2019):

Poor conventional coping skills.
Resources to commit crimes, such as physical strength and fighting ability
Low financial and emotional support and direct help in coping.
Low control by society, holding little belief in conformity.
Criminal peers. Beliefs that favor criminal coping.
Negative emotions and low constraint.
Situations where the costs of crime are low and the benefits high.

Institutional Anomie Theory

Steven Messner and Richard Rosenfeld, in their book Crime and the American Dream (2012), extend Agnew’s General Strain Theory into “Institutional Anomie Theory.”

In this view, society is made up of social institutions (such as family, religion, and economic structure), and greater rates of crime result when one institution — the institution of economic structure — trumps all others.

People in this society begin to try to accumulate material wealth at the cost of all else, and a lack of control and authority by noneconomic institutions institutionalized anomie.

Bullying and Self-Harm in Adolescents

Hay & Meldrum (2010) examined self-harm in 426 adolescents in the rural United States from the perspective of Agnew’s General Strain Theory.

They emphasized two seldom spoken-about areas of strain and deviance: self-harm as deviance and bullying as strain. Self-harm, according to Hay & Meldrum, is an internalized deviant act (as it usually only affects oneself) and can result from strainful relationships with peers (such as bullying).

Hay & Meldrum hypothesized three things. Firstly, bullying is significantly and positively associated with self-harm. Secondly, this self-harm is mediated by the negative emotional experiences of those who are bullied — such as anxiety, depression, and low self-worth.

Thirdly, prosocial, authoritative parenting and high levels of self-control would be associated with lower levels of self-harm. Hay & Meldrum considered authoritative parenting to be a “moderating variable” because it indicates high access to family support.

Ultimately, the researchers found that General Strain Theory did align with the behavior they observed. Adolescents who experienced bullying, in-person or over the internet, had more negative emotions.

These negative emotions were especially high among females, people of color, those living in immigrant or non-intact households, and those low in self-control.

And those who had more negative emotions but few avenues to “mediate them” (such as through strong, prosocial family support) had higher levels of self-harm (Hay & Meldrum, 2010).

Many researchers have attempted to create theories of terrorism by accounting for particular types of strain — such as poverty — but they consider all of the factors that could lead to terrorism (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey, 2016).

Terrorism is likely to result from a group or collective experiencing “collective strains” (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey 2016). These strains can be because of several factors, such as race and ethnicity, religion, class, politics, or territorial groups.

However, the strains mostly resulting in terrorism are high in magnitude with civilian victims, unjust, or caused by more powerful others (Agnew 1992).

For example, case studies of terrorist organizations such as the Tamil Tigers, Basque Homeland and Liberty, Kurdistan Workers Party, and the Irish Republican Army reveal that the strains faced by these groups involved serious violence — such as death and rape — threats to livelihood, large scale imprisonment and detention, and attempts to eradicate ethnic identity (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey, 2016).

These strains happened over long periods and affected many people, largely civilians (Callaway and Harrelson-Stephens 2006, Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey 2016).

Members of terrorist groups that do not seem to have experienced high-magnitude strains still report experiencing high-magnitude strains (Hoffman 2006).

For example, some right-wing terrorists in the United States believe in a “Zionist Occupation Government,” which threatens their values (Blazak, 2001; Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey, 2016).

These strains must be seen as unjust — for example, if they violate strongly held social norms or values or if they differ substantially from how members of the collective have been treated in the past.

These strains lead to strong negative emotions — such as anger, humiliation, and hopelessness, and make it difficult to cope legally and militarily, leaving terrorism as one of the few viable coping options (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey 2016).

They also reduce social control and provide models for and foster beliefs favorable to terrorism (Inderbitzen, Bates, & Gainey 2016).

As a result, following General Strain Theory, terrorist groups resort to deviance in the form of collective violence.

Agnew, R. (1985). A revised strain theory of delinquency. Social Forces, 64 (1), 151-167.

Agnew, R. (2002). Experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strain: An exploratory study on physical victimization and delinquency. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 603-632.

Agnew, R., & Brezina, T. (2019). General Strain Theory. In M. D. Krohn, N. Hendrix, G. Penly Hall, & A. J. Lizotte (Eds.), Handbook on Crime and Deviance (pp. 145-160). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Agnew, R., & Brezina, T. (2019). General strain theory. In Handbook on crime and deviance (pp. 145-160): Springer.

Agnew, R., Cullen, F. T., Burton Jr, V. S., Evans, T. D., & Dunaway, R. G. (1996). A new test of classic strain theory. Justice Quarterly, 13 (4), 681-704.

Baron, S. W., & Hartnagel, T. F. (1997). ATTRIBUTIONS, AFFECT, AND CRIME: STREET YOUTHS”REACTIONS TO UNEMPLOYMENT. Criminology, 35 (3), 409-434.

Blazak, R. (2001). White boys to terrorist men: Target recruitment of Nazi skinheads. American Behavioral Scientist, 44 (6), 982-1000.

Brezina, T., & Agnew, R. (2017). Juvenile delinquency and subterranean values revisited. Delinquency and Drift Revisited, 73-97.

Callaway, R. L., & Harrelson-Stephens, J. (2006). Toward a theory of terrorism: Human security as a determinant of terrorism. Studies in conflict & terrorism, 29(8), 773-796.

Cullen, F. T., & Agnew, R. (2003). Criminological theory. Past to present.

De Coster, S., & Kort-Butler, L. (2006). How general is general strain theory? Assessing determinacy and indeterminacy across life domains. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43 (4), 297-325.

Durkheim, E. (2000). The division of labor in society (1893): Blackwell.

Durkheim, E. (2005). Suicide: A study in sociology : Routledge.

Ellwanger, S. J. (2007). Strain, attribution, and traffic delinquency among young drivers: Measuring and testing general strain theory in the context of driving. Crime & Delinquency, 53(4), 523-551.

Farnworth, M., & Leiber, M. J. (1989). Strain theory revisited: Economic goals, educational means, and delinquency. American Sociological Review , 263-274.

Hagan, F. E., & Daigle, L. E. (2018). Introduction to criminology: Theories, methods, and criminal behavior: Sage Publications.

Hay, C., & Meldrum, R. (2010). Bullying Victimization and Adolescent Self-Harm: Testing Hypotheses from General Strain Theory. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39 (5), 446-459. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9502-0

Hirschi, T., & Stark, R. (1969). Hellfire and delinquency. Social Problems, 17 (2), 202-213.

Hoffman, B. (2006). Insurgency and counterinsurgency in Iraq. Studies in conflict & terrorism, 29(2), 103-121.

Inderbitzin, M., Bates, K. A., & Gainey, R. R. (2018). Perspectives on deviance and social control: Sage Publications.

Johnson, R. E., & Johnson, E. E. (1979). Juvenile delinquency and its origins: An integrated theoretical approach: CUP Archive.

Konty, M. (2005). Microanomie: The cognitive foundations of the relationship between anomie and deviance. Criminology, 43 (1), 107-132.

Kornhauser, R. R. (1978). Social sources of delinquency: An appraisal of analytic models.

Krakauer, J. (2018). Into the wild (Vol. 78): Pan Macmillan.

Langton, L., & Piquero, N. L. (2007). Can general strain theory explain white-collar crime? A preliminary investigation of the relationship between strain and select white-collar offenses. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35(1), 1-15. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2006.11.011

Ménard, K. S., & Arter, M. L. (2013). Police officer alcohol use and trauma symptoms: Associations with critical incidents, coping, and social stressors. International journal of stress management, 20(1), 37.

Merton, R.K. (1938). Social structure and anomie . American Sociological Review 3(5) , 672–682.

Merton, R.K. (1949). Social structure and anomie: revisions and extensions. In: Anshen, R.N. (Ed.), The Family: Its Functions and Destiny . Harper, New York, pp. 226–257.

Merton, R.K. (1957). Social structure and anomie. In: Merton, R.K. (Ed.), Social Theory and Social Structure . The Free Press, New York, pp. 185–214.

Merton, R.K. (1957). Continuities in the theory of social structure and anomie. In: Merton, R.K. (Ed.), Social Theory and Social Structure . The Free Press, New York, pp. 215–248.

Messner, S. F., & Rosenfeld, R. (2012). Crime and the American dream: Cengage Learning.

Messner, S. F., Thome, H., & Rosenfeld, R. (2008). Institutions, anomie, and violent crime: Clarifying and elaborating institutional-anomie theory. International Journal of Conflict and Violence (IJCV), 2 (2), 163-181.

Valier, C. (2001). Criminal detection and the weight of the past: critical notes on Foucault, subjectivity and preventative control. Theoretical Criminology, 5(4), 425-443.

What is the difference between Merton’s Strain Theory and role strain?

Merton’s Strain Theory deals with broader societal structures and the consequent deviance, while role strain focuses on difficulties experienced in meeting multiple expectations of a single societal role. For example, a working mother might experience role strain in balancing job responsibilities with parental duties.

Election 2024
Entertainment
Newsletters
Photography
Personal Finance
AP Investigations
AP Buyline Personal Finance
AP Buyline Shopping
Press Releases
Israel-Hamas War
Russia-Ukraine War
Global elections
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Middle East
Election Results
Delegate Tracker
AP & Elections
Auto Racing
2024 Paris Olympic Games
Movie reviews
Book reviews
Personal finance
Financial Markets
Business Highlights
Financial wellness
Artificial Intelligence
Social Media

A medical report on soccer legend Maradona’s death aims to undercut homicide case against medics

FILE - Argentina’s national soccer team coach Diego Maradona attends a news conference in Caracas, Venezuela, Tuesday, Jan. 27, 2009. A medical examiner’s report into the death of Maradona injected uncertainty Monday, April 29, 2024, into a case of criminal negligence brought against eight medical workers involved in his care, raising new questions just a month before the staffers are set to stand trial for homicide. (AP Photo/Carlos Hernandez, File)

FILE - Former soccer great Diego Maradona acknowledges fans below at the Casa Rosada government house after his meeting with Argentine President Alberto Fernandez in Buenos Aires, Argentina, Thursday, Dec. 26, 2019. A medical examiner’s report into the death of Maradona injected uncertainty Monday, April 29, 2024, into a case of criminal negligence brought against eight medical workers involved in his care, raising new questions just a month before the staffers are set to stand trial for homicide. (AP Photo/Marcos Brindicci, File)

Copy Link copied

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — A medical examiner’s report into the death of Argentine soccer legend Diego Maradona injected uncertainty Monday into the criminal negligence case brought against eight medical workers involved in his case a month before they are set to stand trial for homicide.

A forensic expert conducted the study at the behest of one of the main defendants, Maradona’s neurosurgeon Leopoldo Luque, in an effort to challenge the 2021 medical examination that held Luque and other doctors responsible for what it described as the soccer star’s otherwise avoidable death. The defendants have denied any violations or irregularities in Maradona’s treatment.

Maradona, famous for leading Argentina to victory in the 1986 World Cup and back to the final four years later, died from a heart attack in 2020 while recovering from brain surgery.

His death at age 60 stunned and devastated a generation of soccer fans and sent all of Argentina into mourning. Within days, the country became consumed by questions about his final, perplexing hours, a frenzy of suspicion that intensified as police officers raided his doctors’ homes and offices and Maradona’s family pressed the judiciary to intervene.

FILE - Exterior view of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2022. Israeli officials sound increasingly concerned that the International Criminal Court could issue arrest warrants for the country's leaders more than six months into the Israel-Hamas war. (AP Photo/Peter Dejong, File)

Prosecutors ultimately charged the eight medical workers with homicide — a serious accusation that leaves open the possibility of presumed intent and carries possible prison sentences from eight to 25 years. The trial is set to start June 4.

Medical examiner Pablo Ferrari’s report, released Monday, concluded that Maradona’s rapid, erratic heartbeat was either of natural origin or stemmed from an “external” factor, possibly a drug like cocaine that Maradona was known to have abused in the past. Ferrari said he couldn’t do a toxicology report based on Maradona’s insufficient urine sample.

The findings contradict those of a 20-member medical panel appointed to investigate Maradona’s death .

That 2021 report accused Maradona’s medical team of acting in an “inappropriate, deficient and reckless manner,” leaving the soccer player in agony and without help for more than 12 hours before his death.

Ferrari’s report disputed the severity of that episode, contending the arrhythmia could not have triggered agony for more than “a few minutes or at most a few hours.”

“This marks a radical turn in the case,” Vadim Mischanchuk, the defense lawyer representing Maradona’s psychiatrist, Agustina Cosachov, told local media. “The account goes from being a cardiac event that lasts many days to one that lasts minutes.”

The prosecutor’s office criticized the expert’s report as hastily cobbled together in 72 hours and accused Ferrari of neglecting four years of evidence in favor of “a minimal slice of evidence offered by the defense.”

“There is no twist in the case,” prosecutors said.

General Strain Theory and Cybercrime

Living reference work entry
First Online: 12 June 2019
Cite this living reference work entry

Carter Hay 3 &
Katherine Ray 3

659 Accesses

2 Citations

An important priority in cybercrime research is to use theory to better understand and organize information on cybercrime offending. Recent efforts in this area have informatively applied theories such as social learning, self-control, and routine activities, but there is room to apply additional theories. Agnew’s general strain theory (GST) provides an appealing possibility for this by emphasizing key causal variables that are neglected in other theories. Specifically, it hypothesizes that strainful social relationships and events give rise to negative emotional states that, in turn, are catalysts for aggressive and criminal behavior. This chapter describes how these arguments can be applied to cybercrime to better understand the causes of cyberoffending and the consequences of cybervictimization. For both areas, the relevant theoretical arguments and empirical evidence are described. The chapter concludes with a discussion of key priorities for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Agnew, R. (1985). A revised strain theory of delinquency. Social Forces, 64 (1), 151.

Article Google Scholar

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30 , 47–87.

Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38 , 319–361.

Agnew, R. (2010). A general strain theory of terrorism. Theoretical Criminology, 14 (2), 131–153.

Agnew, R., & White, H. R. (1992). An empirical test of general strain theory. Criminology, 30 , 475–499.

Agnew, R., Brezina, T., Wright, J. P., & Cullen, F. T. (2002). Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology, 40 , 43–72.

Ak, S., Ozdemir, Y., & Kuzucu, Y. (2015). Cybervictimization and cyberbullying: The mediating role of anger, don’t anger me! Computers in Human Behavior, 49 , 437–443.

Back, L. (2002). Aryans reading Adorno: Cyber-culture and twenty-first century racism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25 (4), 628–651.

Baron, S. W. (2004). General strain, street youth and crime: A test of Agnew’s revised theory. Criminology, 42 , 457–483.

Bennett, D., Guran, E., Ramos, M., & Margolin, G. (2011). College students’ electronic victimization in friendships and dating relationships: Anticipated distress and associations with risky behaviors. Violence and Victims, 26 (4), 410–429.

Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2005). Cyber-harassment: A study of new method for an old behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32 , 265.277.

Google Scholar

Bonanno, R. A., & Hymel, S. (2013). Cyber bullying and internalizing difficulties: Above and beyond the impact of traditional forms of bullying. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 42 (5), 685–697.

Brezina, T. (1996). Adapting to strain: An examination of delinquent coping responses. Criminology, 34 (1), 39–60.

Brezina, T. (1998). Adolescent maltreatment and Delinquency: The question of intervening processes. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35 (1), 71–99.

Broidy, L. M. (2001). A test of general strain theory. Criminology, 39 (1), 9–36.

Broidy, L. M., & Santoro, W. A. (2018). General strain theory and racial insurgency: Assessing the role of legitimate coping. Justice Quarterly, 35 (1), 162–189.

Capowich, G. E., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (2001). General strain theory, situational anger, and social networks: An assessment of conditioning influences. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29 , 445–461.

Cassidy, W., Fauchner, C., & Jackson, M. (2013). Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice. School Psychology International, 34 (6), 575–612.

Christofides, E., Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2009). Information disclosure and control on Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12 (3), 341–345.

Cloward, R. A., & Ohlin, L. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity: A theory of delinquent gangs . New York: Free Press.

Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys; the culture of the gang . New York: Free Press.

Cohen-Almagor, R. (2015). Netcitizenship: Addressing cyberrevenge and sexbullying. Journal of Applied Ethics and Philosophy, 7 , 14–23.

Craig, J. M., Cardwell, S. M., & Piquero, A. R. (2017). The effects of criminal propensity and strain on later offending. Crime and Delinquency, 63 (13), 1655–1681.

Elmer, N. (1991). What do children care about justice? The influence of culture and cognitive development. In R. Veemunt & H. Steensma (Eds.), Social justice in human relations (Societal and psychological origins of justice, Vol. 1). New York: Plenum.

Forester, T., & Morrison, P. (1994). Computer ethics: Cautionary tales and ethical dilemmas in computing . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Gerson, R., & Rappaport, N. (2011). Cyber cruelty: Understanding and preventing the new bullying. Adolescent Psychiatry, 1 (1), 67–71.

Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime . Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

Halder, D., & Jaishankar, D. (2013). Revenge porn by teens in the United States and India: A socio-legal analysis. International Annals of Criminology, 51 (1–2), 85–111.

Hay, C., & Evans, M. (2006). Violent victimization and involvement in delinquency: Examining predictions from general strain theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34 , 261–274.

Hay, C., & Meldrum, R. (2010). Bullying victimization and adolescent self-harm: Testing hypotheses from general strain theory. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39 , 446–459.

Hay, C., Meldrum, R., & Mann, K. (2010). Traditional bullying, cyber bullying, and deviance: A general strain theory approach. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 26 (2), 130–147.

Henson, B., Bradford, R. W., & Fisher, B. S. (2013). Fear of crime online? Examining the effect of risk, previous victimization, and exposure on fear of online interpersonal victimization. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 29 (4), 475–497.

Higgins, G. E., Marcum, C. D., Freiburger, T. L., & Ricketts, M. L. (2012). Examining the role of peer influence and selfcontrol on downloading behavior. Deviant Behavior, 33 (5), 412–423.

Hinduja, S. (2012). General strain, self-control, and music piracy. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 6 (1), 951–967.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2009). Bullying beyond the schoolyard: Preventing and responding to cyberbullying . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14 (3), 206–221.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Hoffmann, J. P., & Cerbone, F. G. (1999). Stressful life events and delinquency escalation in early adolescence. Criminology, 9 , 33–51.

Hoffmann, J. P., & Miller, A. S. (1998). A latent variable analysis of strain theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14 , 83–110.

Holfeld, B., & Leadbeater, B. J. (2018). The interrelated effects of traditional and cybervictimization on the development of internalizing symptoms and aggressive behaviors in elementary school. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 64 (2), 220–247.

Holt, T. J. (2012). Exploring the intersections of technology, crime, and terror. Terrorism and Political Violence, 24 (2), 337–354.

Holt, T. J., & Bossler, A. D. (2014). An assessment of the current state of cybercrime scholarship. Deviant Behavior, 35 , 20–40.

Holt, T. J., Burruss, G. W., & Bossler, A. M. (2010). Social learning and cyber-deviance: Examining the importance of a full social learning model in the virtual world. Journal of Crime and Justice, 33 (2), 31–61.

Holt, T. J., Chee, G., Ng, E. A. H., & Bossler, A. M. (2013). Exploring the consequences of bullying victimization in a sample of Singapore youth. International Criminal Justice Review, 23 (1), 25–40.

Holt, T. J., Freilich, J. D., & Chermak, S. M. (2017). Exploring the subculture of ideologically motivated cyber-attacks. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 33 (3), 212–233.

Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., & Pratt, T. (2008). Low self-control and fraud: Offending, victimization, and their overlap. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37 (2), 188–203.

Hood, M., & Duffy, A. L. (2018). Understanding the relationship between cyber-victimisation and cyber-bullying on social network sites: The role of moderating factors. Personality and Individual Differences, 133 , 103–108.

Jang, H., Song, J., & Kim, R. (2014). Does the offline bully-victimization influence cyberbullying behavior among youths? Application of general strain theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 31 , 85–93.

Kellerman, I., Margolin, G., Borofsky, L. A., Baucom, B. R., & Iturralde, E. (2013). Electronic aggression among emerging adults: Motivations and contextual factors. Emerging Adulthood, 1 , 293–304.

Leung, A. N. M., Wong, N., & Farver, J. M. (2018). Cyberbullying in Hong Kong Chinese students: Life satisfaction, and the moderating role of friendship qualities on cyberbullying victimization and perpetration. Personality and Individual Differences, 133 , 7–12.

Li, T., Li, D., Li, X., Zhou, Y., Sun, W., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2018). Cyber victimization and adolescent depression: The mediating role of psychological insecurity and the moderating role of perceived social support. Children and Youth Services Review, 94 , 10–19.

Lianos, H., & McGrath, A. (2018). Can the general theory of crime and general strain theory explain cyberbullying perpetration? Crime & Delinquency, 64 (5), 674–700.

Lyndon, A., Bonds-Raacke, J., & Cratty, A. D. (2011). College students’ Facebook stalking of ex-partners. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 14 , 711–716.

Maier-Katkin, D., Mears, D. P., & Bernard, T. J. (2009). Towards a criminology of crimes against humanity. Theoretical Criminology, 13 (2), 227–255.

Mason, K. L. (2008). Cyberbullying: A preliminary assessment for school personnel. Psychology in the Schools., 45 (4), 323–348.

Mazerolle, P., & Maahs, J. (2000). General strain and delinquency: An alternative examination of conditioning influences. Justice Quarterly, 17 , 753–778.

Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1997). Violent responses to strain: An examination of conditioning influences. Violence and Victims, 12 , 323–343.

McCuddy, T., & Esbensen, F. A. (2017). After the bell and into the night: The link between delinquency and traditional, cyber, and dual-bullying victimization. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54 (3), 409–441.

McLoughlin, L., Spears, B., & Taddeo, C. (2017). The importance of social connection for cybervictims: How connectedness and technology could promote mental health and wellbeing in young people. International Journal of Emotional Education, 10 (1), 5–24.

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3 , 672–682.

Meško, G. (2018). On some aspects of cybercrime and cybervictimization. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law, and Criminal Justice, 26 (3), 189.

Miller, L. L., Martin, L. T., Yeung, D., Trujillo, M., & Timmer, M. J. (2014). Information and communication technologies to promote social and psychological well-being in the Air Force: A 2012 survey of airmen . Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M., & Finkelhor, D. (2007). The relative importance of online victimization in understanding depression, delinquency, and substance use. Child Maltreatment, 12 (4), 314–324.

Moon, B., & Jang, S. J. (2014). A general strain approach to psychological and physical bullying: A study of interpersonal aggression at school. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29 (12), 2147.

Morris, R. G., & Higgins, G. E. (2009). Neutralizing potential and self reported digital piracy: A multitheoretical exploration among college undergraduates. Criminal Justice Review, 34 (2), 173–195.

Müller, K. & Schwarz, C. (2018). Fanning the flames of hate: Social media and hate crime (May 21, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3082972 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3082972 .

Newsweek. (2017). Online hate crimes to be taken just as seriously as offline offenses in England, Wales. By Stay Ziv, published on August 21, 2017.

Nobles, M. R., Reyns, B. W., Fox, K. A., & Fisher, B. S. (2014). Protection against pursuit: A conceptual and empirical comparison of cyberstalking and stalking victimization among a national sample. Justice Quartely, 31 (6), 986–1014.

Paez, G. R. (2018). Cyberbullying among adolescents: A general strain theory perspective. Journal of School Violence, 17 (1), 74–85.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2011). Traditional and nontraditional bullying among youth: A test of general strain theory. Youth and Society, 43 (2), 727–751.

Paternoster, R., & Mazerolle, P. (1994). General strain theory and delinquency: A replication and extension. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 31 (3), 235–263.

Pauwels, L., & De Waele, M. (2014). Youth involvement in politically motivated violence: Why do social integration, perceived legitimacy, and perceived discrimination matter? International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 8 (1), 134–153.

Perry, B., & Olsson, P. (2009). Cyberhate: The globalization of hate. Information & Communications Technology Law, 18 (2), 185–199.

Piquero, N. L., & Sealock, M. D. (2000). Generalizing general strain theory: An examination of an offending population. Justice Quarterly, 17 (3), 449.484.

Pollitt, M. M. (1998). Cyberterrorism: Fact or fancy? Computer Fraud and Security, 2 , 8–10.

Pronk, R. E., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J. (2010). It’s “mean,” but what does it mean to adolescents? Relational aggression described by victims, aggressors, and their peers. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25 (2), 175–204.

Ray, L., & Smith, D. (2002). Hate crime, violence and cultures of racism. In P. Iganski (Ed.), The hate debate . London: Profile Books.

Rebellon, C. J., Manasse, M. E., Van Gundy, K. T., & Cohn, E. S. (2012). Perceived injustice and delinquency: A test of general strain theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40 (3), 230.

Schenk, A. M., & Fremouw, W. J. (2012). Prevalence, psychological impact, and coping of cyberbully victims among college students. Journal of School Violence, 11 , 21–37.

Sirianni, J. M. (2015). Bad romance: Exploring the factors that influence revenge porn sharing amongst romantic partners . New York: State University of New York.

Smischney, T. (2016). Examining the impact of cyberbullying victimization in a postsecondary institution: Utilizing general strain theory to explain the use of negative coping mechanisms . East Lansing: Michigan State University.

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2014). White homicide worldwide. By Heidi Beirich, published March 31, 2014.

Teo, K., Nasi, M., Oksanen, A., Rasanen, P. (2016). Online hate and harmful content: Cross-national perspectives. Routledge Research in Information Technology and Society Volume 200 of Routledge Advances in Sociology: Routledge.

Varjas, K., Talley, J., Meyers, J., Parris, L., & Cutts, H. (2010). High school students’ perception of motivations for cyberbullying: An exploratory study. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 11 (3), 269–273.

Wall, D. S. (2001). Cybercrimes and the internet. In D. S. Wall (Ed.), Crime and the internet (pp. 1–17). New York: Routledge.

Walters, M. A. (2011). A general theories of hate crime? Strain, doing difference and self control. Critical Criminology, 19 (4), 313–330.

Wright, M. F. (2018). Cyberstalking victimization, depression, and academic performance: The role of perceived social support from parents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 21 (2), 110–116.

Wright, M. F., & Li, Y. (2013). The association between cybervictimization and subsequent cyber aggression: The moderating effect of peer rejection. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 42 , 662–674.

Wright, J. P., Cullen, F. T., Agnew, R. S., & Brezina, T. (2006). “The root of all evil”? An exploratory study of money and delinquent involvement. Justice Quarterly, 18 (2), 239–268.

Ybarra, M. L., Espelage, D. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2007). The co-occurrence of internet harassment and unwanted sexual solicitation victimization and perpetration: Associations with psychosocial indicators. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41 (6), S31–S41.

Zweig, J. M., Dank, M., Yahner, J., & Lachman, P. (2013). The rate of cyber dating abuse among teens and how it relates to other forms of teen dating violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42 , 1063–1077.

Zweig, J. M., Lachman, P., Yahner, J., & Dank, M. (2014). Correlates of cyber dating abuse among teens. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43 (8), 1306–1321.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

Carter Hay & Katherine Ray

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carter Hay .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Hay, C., Ray, K. (2019). General Strain Theory and Cybercrime. In: The Palgrave Handbook of International Cybercrime and Cyberdeviance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90307-1_21-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90307-1_21-1

Received : 06 March 2019

Accepted : 29 March 2019

Published : 12 June 2019

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-90307-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-90307-1

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Law and Criminology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

IMAGES

[PDF] General Strain Theory for LGBQ and SSB Youth
Robert Agnew's General Strain Theory
General Strain Theory by Ryan Karn on Prezi
General Strain Theory
Albert Fish Case Study of General Strain Theory
(PDF) General Strain Theory and Delinquency

VIDEO

GENERAL STRAIN THEORY BY ROBERT AGNEW
Strain theory
General Strain Theory Presentation
Case Study
Succession Planning Case Study: General Electric
CA INTER LAW May 24 LIVE INTERACTION & INSTRUCTION, RTP, CHAPTER WISE REVISION, CASE STUDY, GENERAL

COMMENTS

PDF Agnew's General Strain Theory: Context, Synopsis, and Application Blake
In either case, the negative feelings induced by these ... Other studies, using a similar approach, built upon the research of Tittle et al. and yielded even ... Agnew's general strain theory to be applicable to members of all social classes rather than just the poor. For instance, a strain such as the failure to find a suitable marriage ...
ACEs and Angst: Adverse Childhood Experiences, General Strain Theory
General strain theory explains why certain kinds of strain/ACEs increase the chances of violence against others and suicidal behaviors, and under what conditions. "General Strain Theory is based on a simple idea: if you treat people badly, they may respond with violence" (Agnew & Moon, 2018). The same logic applies in ACEs research.
General Strain Theory
Journal of Criminal Justice, 31 (6), 511-521. General strain theory (GST) provides a unique explanation of crime and delinquency. In contrast to control and learning theories, GST focuses explicitly on negative treatment by others and is the only major theory of crime and delinquency to highlight the role of negative emotions in the etiology ...
An Examination of Robert Agnew's General Strain Theory
The main focus of this study was to "draw on general strain theory and to examine how specific forms of strain may lead to crime" (Barn & Tan, 2012, p. 212) in adolescents, and more specifically, those who have been through foster care. Recent similar studies had "helped us to understand the representation of foster youth in crime ...
General Strain Theory
General strain theory (GST) posits that crime and delinquency are caused by the presence of negative emotion (s), such as fear, disappointment, depression, anger, and frustration, resulting from an array of strains (Agnew, 1992 ). In turn, these negative feelings lead to a need to cope, with one potential coping mechanism being crime and/or ...
General Strain Theory
The establishment of Agnew's General Strain Theory served both as a resurgence in interest in the strain paradigm and also as a clear line between Mertonian classical strain theories and more modern extensions.As a doctoral student originally studying creativity, Agnew found that classical strain theories identified one type of strain that could be considered criminogenic: the inability to ...
Strain Theory and Violent Behavior (Chapter 25)
Building on the foundation of general strain theory: ... (2002). Experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strain: An exploratory study focusing on physical victimization and delinquency. Justice Quarterly, ... Edited by Alexander T. Vazsonyi, University of Kentucky, Daniel J. Flannery, Case Western Reserve University, Ohio, Matt DeLisi, Iowa ...
General Strain Theory
Strain, otherwise known as stressors, refer to social structures evident in society that may pres-sure someone to commit crime. One of the leading theoretical paradigms in criminology is strain theory (Lilly et al., 2019). Strain theories argue that strain and stressors increase the likelihood of criminal behavior.
General Strain Theory
Overview. General strain theory (GST) states that strains increase the likelihood of crime, particularly strains that are high in magnitude, are seen as unjust, are associated with low social control, and create some pressure or incentive for criminal coping. Examples include parental rejection, criminal victimization, a desperate need for ...
General Strain Theory and Delinquency: A Replication and Extension
Strain theory has recently been reformulated into a theory of broader scope. In this revitalized version, called general strain theory, strain is hypothesized to have three distinct sources; (a) blockage of desired goals, (b) withdrawl or loss of valued objects, and (c) introduction of negative stimuli.
Life Stress, Anger and Anxiety, and Delinquency
ses of general strain theory have not been ade-quately tested. The present study examines the central hypotheses in Agnew's general strain theory of deviance, focusing in particular on three core issues. First, we examine the gener-ality of general strain theory by drawing on multiple measures of life stresses and relation-
Foundation for A General Strain Theory of Crime and Delinquency
This paper presents a general strain theory of crime and delinquency that is capable of overcoming the criticisms of previous strain theories. In the first section, strain theory is distinguished from social control and differential association/social learning theory. In the second section, the three major types of strain are described: (1 ...
(PDF) Agnew's general strain theory reconsidered: a phenomenological
Drawing on general strain theory of crime, the study employs the survey data from a random sample of 600 school students in Lviv, Ukraine, to examine how sanction risks and social bonds mediate and moderate the relationship between strain and adolescent delinquency. ... The individual in this case study will be identified as "C." The ...
Sociological Theories of Crime: Strain Theories
Case Study: General Strain Theory and Intimate Partner Violence Prevention. Eriksson and Mazerolle (2013) suggest General Strain Theory (GST) as a valuable framework to better understand the perpetration and non-perpetration of intimate partner homicide (IPH). By assessing gender-specific strains, negative emotions toward strains, and ...
A general strain theory of terrorism
Agnew, Robert ( 2001) 'Building on the Foundation of General Strain Theory: Specifying the Types of Strain Most Likely to Lead to Crime and Delinquency', Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 38 (4): 319-61. Google Scholar. Agnew, Robert ( 2002) 'Experienced, Vicarious, and Anticipated Strain: An Exploratory Study Focusing on ...
General Strain Theory
Agnew's general strain theory (GST) has been widely tested in the literature for greater than two decades, and this body of research has generally supported the ability for GST to explain a small to moderate amount of variation in a number of different types of offending (see Agnew 2010, 2012; Jennings et al. 2009).A potential limitation of this area of research is that the majority of the ...
Applying Strain Theory to the Crime Epidemic in Chicago
The premise of strain theory is that a something or someone in a person's life is causing the strain that leads them to commit a crime in order to alleviate that strain (Agnew, 2001). One such strain is real or perceived injustice . Whether the unjust situation is a result of their own actions or hundreds of years of systematic oppression, a ...
General Strain Theory, Persistence, and Desistance Among Young Adult
Background. In response to studies that had failed to support traditional strain theory's core proposition that the inability to achieve desired goals such as middle-class status or economic success would motivate adolescents to engage in delinquency, Agnew (1992) extended classic strain theory by focusing on other possible sources of strain (defined as events or conditions that are disliked ...
Street youth, strain theory, and crime
In contrast, similar to work on general strain theory (see Agnew, 2001), there appears to be more limited support for the expected conditioning effects of peers, values, and attributions. This leaves open for question the importance of these types of interactions. ... It is also the case that this study had only examined the effects of strain ...
Experiences, General Strain Theory, and journals.sagepub.com/home/sgo
This study examines the effects of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) on violence against others and on suicidal behaviors of adolescent boys (ages 13-18) with a history of troubled behaviors. Agnew's (2006) general strain theory has been offered as theoretical explanation for the effects of ACEs on suicide (Sharp et al., 2012),
Merton's Strain Theory of Deviance and Anomie in Sociology
General Strain Theory differentiates between strains on two different axes: objective vs. subjective strain and experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strains. ... For example, case studies of terrorist organizations such as the Tamil Tigers, Basque Homeland and Liberty, Kurdistan Workers Party, and the Irish Republican Army reveal that the ...
Childhood Abuse and Criminal Behavior: Testing a General Strain Theory
This article draws on general strain theory (GST) to develop and test a model of the childhood abuse-crime relationship. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), 1 we find that early childhood physical and sexual abuse are robust predictors of offending in adolescence, for the full sample and in equations disaggregated by gender.
Maradona's death: Report injects uncertainty into homicide case
FILE - Argentina's national soccer team coach Diego Maradona attends a news conference in Caracas, Venezuela, Tuesday, Jan. 27, 2009. A medical examiner's report into the death of Maradona injected uncertainty Monday, April 29, 2024, into a case of criminal negligence brought against eight medical workers involved in his care, raising new questions just a month before the staffers are set ...
General Strain Theory and Cybercrime
Abstract. An important priority in cybercrime research is to use theory to better understand and organize information on cybercrime offending. Recent efforts in this area have informatively applied theories such as social learning, self-control, and routine activities, but there is room to apply additional theories.