Robert Agnew’s general strain theory was introduced back in 1992, as a way to define social relationships and delinquent state of mind (Agnew, 1992). The background of general strain theory is that the previous version was based on valued goals. Robert Agnew decided that strain was a negative relationship with negative emotions
a. Use Strain Theory to define and explain the following: i. The theft of a loaf of bread by a hungry person Using strain theory, the theft of a loaf of bread by a hungry person can be explained as a situation where an individual employs different means of success of getting fed, one that is against the agreeable ways in the society of getting money and feeding themselves. ii. Alcoholics Using strain theory, an alcohol has ultimately rejected the society’s goals of conforming to the societal values such as happiness and a stable job, such an individual essentially rejects the goals because they have been ultimately been unable to live up to the society’s standards.
In his strain theory, Agnew identifies several other sources of strain besides Merton’s disjunction between goals and means (Hemmens & Walsh, 2014). In this perspective, strain includes the negative emotions that arise from social relationships. According to Agnew, strain occurs when from the removal of positively valued stimuli such as the loss of a romantic partner, the presentation of negative stimuli such as negative school experiences and the prevention or a threat to prevent an individual from obtaining a positively valued goal (Hemmens & Walsh, 2014). In the case of Lafeyette, his strain came from all three sources. The removal of positively valued stimuli for him was losing Terrence to prison and his two friends to death (Kotlowitz, 1991).
Criticism of Merton’s Strain Theory One critique of the strain theory is how it overemphasis the position of the social class in regards to crime and deviance. As we know, the strain theory applies mainly to the American lower class as they struggle the most. Our lower class are faced with the lack of resources to help them reconcile their goals. However, by looking at the variation of deviant and criminal behavior, the strain theory does not adequately account for any type of crimes besides the normal street or neighborhood crimes. Additionally, crimes that are considered as being white collar, in which they are known in our middle and upper-classes.
His areas of study are Juvenile delinquency, Youth violence and Criminological theory. The main argument of the source is that General strain theory provides and explanation of crime and delinquency and that it is the latest and broadest form of strain theory. General Strain Theory represents a revision and extension of prior strain theories. “General strain theory is distinguished from other criminological theories by the central role it assigns to negative emotions in the etiology of offending. It is also distinguished by the emphasis it places on particular strains, especially strains involving negative social relations “ (Brezina, 2018).
Strain Theory could guide and present a strong influence on a youth’s lifestyle and be used as the theory explaining on why the juveniles have deviated towards delinquency instead of a lawful direction of adulthood. The following essay will be introducing a belief on why Strain Theory is one of the foremost concepts leading to misbehavior in adolescents. The Strain Theory could be explained as a person who has finally reached their boiling point, and it was time for them to release some pressure. Nevertheless, some resort to keep the pressure internal, allowing for it to brew a little longer. “Crime may be used to reduce or escape from the strain, seek revenge against the source of strain or related targets, or alleviate negative emotions”
Empirical background After Robert Agnew introduced the General Strain theory in 1992, he received several support from researchers regarding of his theory including himself. Broidy and Agnew (1997) conducted a study on why the crime rate is higher among males and why also females engage in crime. Broidy and Agnew (1997) hypothesized that males are always subject to different types of strain that would result to serious crime and also males are always subject to financial strain and interpersonal conflict that would lead into violence. Broidy and Agnew (1997) found that females commit crime when they are restricted of conversation, physical and emotional expression, social life and others. Years later, Agnew (2001) examined the characteristics of strainful events and conditions that influence their relationship to crime and he found out that strains are most likely to result in crime when they are seen as “unjust, high in magnitude, associated with low social control, and create some pressure or incentive to engage in criminal coping.” Agnew et.al (2002) used data from the National Survey of Children to examine on which certain major personality traits condition to affect strain.
General strain theory was developed by Robert Agnew. There are three major categories in the types of General strain theory: Failure to achieve positively valued goals, the loss of positively valued stimuli, and the presentation of negative stimuli. A positively valued goal has three sorts and those are money/economic success, status and respect. Lack of money causes strain because it is not obtainable through legitimate means. Strain will result from the lack of autonomy disproportionately affecting adolescents and the poor because of their lower position in society.
The theory that best relates to this movie is Agnew’s General Strain Theory. I will be describing in detail the general strain theory, giving a brief summary of the film and relating the theory to the crimes showcased in the movie. I also will be talking about the other behaviors that are seen in the movie and their corresponding theory. Robert Agnew’s General Strain
The theory looks at many aspects of the family such as atmosphere, constellation, and goals, plus, respect is given to both children and adults. In this system interventions are suggested for children and adults. The limitations of the Family Systems Theory are, too much is focused on homeostasis at the expense of change and patterns at the expense of unpredictability. Moreover, on the system at the expense of the individuals. A positivistic intellectual tradition that puts the researcher outside the system in search of strengths and limitations of the theory of the family (Turner & West, 1998).