Contextualizing Ruth Kornhauser

• In Event: The Future of Criminology can be Found in its Past

Abstract

Since Kornhauser’s (1978) influential critique of cultural deviance theories, differential association theory (DA) has been criticized as a macrolevel criminological framework that assumes: (1) human nature is tabula rasa; (2) membership and socialization into subcultural groups are complete; and (3) deviant behavior is a product of conformity to subcultural group norms. We argue Kornhauser’s position is ahistorical and fundamentally inaccurate. Drawing from sources contemporaneous with Edwin Sutherland’s education and career, this paper resituates DA as a theoretical extension of the social psychology of Cooley, Dewey, and Mead, as communicated to Sutherland through the teachings and theoretical contributions of W. I. Thomas. This study thereby illustrates how a realistically contextualized DA viewed the learning of subcultural values as a developmentally processual characteristic of human nature. When viewed as a theoretical extension of the Chicago School of Sociology, DA can therefore be more accurately understood as a predecessor to the analytical modes of theorizing presupposed by Kornhauser. Consequently, differential association theory should instead be understood as an early effort at scientific theorizing in criminology rather that a complete theory that conforms to modern standards of theory construction.

Authors

• K. Ryan Proctor, Avila University

• Joshua Ellsworth, Indiana University